IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jhudca/v23y2022i2p161-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On “Consequentialism” and the Capability Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Mozaffar Qizilbash

Abstract

Amartya Sen defends the capability approach (CA) and the “discipline of consequential evaluation” which suggests that his CA is consistent with some form of “consequentialism”. Yet prominent commentators suggest or imply that Sen’s CA is not “consequentialist”. The resulting confusion is defused by showing that whether Sen’s CA, as a general normative perspective, is consistent with “consequentialism” depends on how “consequentialism” is understood. If “consequentialism” is understood as a moral doctrine, then the CA is not committed to either “consequentialism” or “non-consequentialism”. On a social choice theoretic (SCT) definition a normative framework or view is “consequentialist” if it restricts relevant information to “outcomes”. On this definition, whether the CA is compatible with “consequentialism” depends on whether “outcomes” are understood as “comprehensive” or “culmination” outcomes. Two varieties of “non-welfarist consequentialist” moral theory which restrict information respectively to capability and freedom are compared. Martha Nussbaum’s version of the CA is not a “non-welfarist consequentialist” theory of this sort because it is not a moral doctrine with a maximizing structure. It may, nonetheless, classify as “consequentialist” on the SCT definition if all valued objects in her approach can be included in the description of “outcomes”.

Suggested Citation

  • Mozaffar Qizilbash, 2022. "On “Consequentialism” and the Capability Approach," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 161-181, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jhudca:v:23:y:2022:i:2:p:161-181
    DOI: 10.1080/19452829.2021.1951185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/19452829.2021.1951185
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/19452829.2021.1951185?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jhudca:v:23:y:2022:i:2:p:161-181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJHD20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.