IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v74y2013i1p75-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Making Sen’s capability approach operational: a random scale framework

Author

Listed:
  • John Dagsvik

Abstract

Amartya Sen has developed the so-called capability approach to meet the criticism that income alone may be insufficient as a measure of economic inequality. This is because knowledge about people’s income does not tell us what they are able to acquire with that income. For example, people with the same income may not have the same access to health and transportation services, schools and opportunities in the labor market. Recently, there has been growing interest in empirical studies based on the capability approach. Most of these, however, are only loosely related to quantitative behavioral theory, at least in a concrete and empirically operational way. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the theory of random scale (utility) models offers a powerful theoretical and empirical framework for representing and accounting for key aspects of Sen’s theory. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • John Dagsvik, 2013. "Making Sen’s capability approach operational: a random scale framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 75-105, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:74:y:2013:i:1:p:75-105
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-012-9340-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11238-012-9340-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-012-9340-5?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Anand & Graham Hunter & Ron Smith, 2005. "Capabilities and Well-Being: Evidence Based on the Sen–Nussbaum Approach to Welfare," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 9-55, October.
    2. McFadden, Daniel L., 1984. "Econometric analysis of qualitative response models," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Z. Griliches† & M. D. Intriligator (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 24, pages 1395-1457, Elsevier.
    3. Ingrid Robeyns, 2005. "The Capability Approach: a theoretical survey," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 93-117.
    4. Steinar StrØm & John K. Dagsvik, 2006. "Sectoral labour supply, choice restrictions and functional form," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 803-826.
    5. Daniel McFadden, 2001. "Economic Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 351-378, June.
    6. Sen, Amartya, 1997. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292975, Decembrie.
    7. Sen, Amartya K, 1979. "Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(355), pages 537-558, September.
    8. Van Praag, Bernard, 1971. "The welfare function of income in Belgium: An empirical investigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 337-369.
    9. Dreze, Jean & Sen, Amartya, 2002. "India: Development and Participation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199257492, Decembrie.
    10. Dagsvik, John K, 1994. "Discrete and Continuous Choice, Max-Stable Processes, and Independence from Irrelevant Attributes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1179-1205, September.
    11. Dagsvik, John K. & Strom, Steinar & Jia, Zhiyang, 2006. "Utility of income as a random function: Behavioral characterization and empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 23-57, January.
    12. Kapteyn, Arie & Wansbeek, Tom, 1985. "The individual welfare function : A review," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 333-363, December.
    13. Roberts, Fred S. & Rosenbaum, Zangwill, 1986. "Scale type, meaningfulness, and the possible psychophysical laws," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 77-95, August.
    14. Sugden, Robert, 1993. "Welfare, Resources, and Capabilities: A Review [Inequality Reexamined]," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1947-1962, December.
    15. John K. Dagsvik & Anders Karlström, 2005. "Compensating Variation and Hicksian Choice Probabilities in Random Utility Models that are Nonlinear in Income," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(1), pages 57-76.
    16. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    17. Paul Anand & Cristina Santos & Ron Smith, 2007. "The measurement of capabilities," Open Discussion Papers in Economics 67, The Open University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Economics.
    18. van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1991. "Ordinal and cardinal utility : An integration of the two dimensions of the welfare concept," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 69-89, October.
    19. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    20. Sen, Amartya, 1991. "Welfare, preference and freedom," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 15-29, October.
    21. Flinn, C. & Heckman, J., 1982. "New methods for analyzing structural models of labor force dynamics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 115-168, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andreassen, Leif & Di Tommaso, Maria Laura & Maccagnan, Anna, 2015. "Do Men Care? Men’s Supply Of Unpaid Labour," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201545, University of Turin.
    2. L. Andreassen & M. L. Tommaso, 2018. "Estimating capabilities with random scale models: women’s freedom of movement," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(4), pages 625-661, April.
    3. Andreassen, Leif & Dagsvik, John & Di Tommaso, Maria Laura, 2013. "Measuring capabilities with random scale models. Women’s freedom of movement," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201334, University of Turin.
    4. Paul Mark Mitchell & Samantha Husbands & Sarah Byford & Philip Kinghorn & Cara Bailey & Tim J. Peters & Joanna Coast, 2021. "Challenges in developing capability measures for children and young people for use in the economic evaluation of health and care interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 1990-2003, September.
    5. Bat-hen Nahmias-Biran & Yoram Shiftan, 2020. "Using activity-based models and the capability approach to evaluate equity considerations in transportation projects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2287-2305, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John K. Dagsvik, 2012. "Making Sen's capability approach operational. A random scale framework," Discussion Papers 710, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Dagsvik John K., 2010. "Making Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach Operational: A Random Scale Framework for Empirical Modeling," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201005, University of Turin.
    3. Dagsvik, John K, 2017. "Invariance Axioms and Functional Form Restrictions in Structural Models," Memorandum 08/2017, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    4. Dagsvik, John K., 2018. "Invariance axioms and functional form restrictions in structural models," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 85-95.
    5. John Dagsvik & Stine Røine Hoff, 2011. "Justification of functional form assumptions in structural models: applications and testing of qualitative measurement axioms," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 215-254, February.
    6. Dagsvik, John K. & Strom, Steinar & Jia, Zhiyang, 2006. "Utility of income as a random function: Behavioral characterization and empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 23-57, January.
    7. Martin Binder, 2014. "Subjective Well-Being Capabilities: Bridging the Gap Between the Capability Approach and Subjective Well-Being Research," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 1197-1217, October.
    8. John K. Dagsvik & Zhiyang Jia, 2006. "Labor Supply as a Choice among Latent Job Opportunities. A Practical Empirical Approach," Discussion Papers 481, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    9. Dagsvik, John K. & Strøm, Steinar & Locatelli, Marilena, 2021. "Marginal compensated effects in discrete labor supply models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    10. Hamid Hasan, 2019. "Confidence in Subjective Evaluation of Human Well-Being in Sen’s Capabilities Perspective," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 1-17, January.
    11. Nicolai Suppa, 2012. "Does Capability Deprivation Hurt? – Evidence from German Panel Data," Ruhr Economic Papers 0359, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    12. John K. Dagsvik & Zhiyang Jia, 2008. "An Alternative Approach to Labor Supply Modeling. Emphasizing Job-type as Choice Variable," Discussion Papers 550, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    13. Suppa, Nicolai, 2012. "Does Capability Deprivation Hurt? – Evidence from German Panel Data," Ruhr Economic Papers 359, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    14. repec:zbw:rwirep:0359 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Sung-Geun Kim, 2016. "What Have We Called as “Poverty”? A Multidimensional and Longitudinal Perspective," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 129(1), pages 229-276, October.
    16. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Bernard Van Praag, 2003. "Income Satisfaction Inequality and its Causes," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 1(2), pages 107-127, August.
    17. Vizard, Polly, 2005. "The contributions of Professor Amartya Sen in the field of human rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6273, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Dagsvik, John K. & Strøm, Steinar & Locatelli, Marilena, 2013. "Compensated Discrete Choice with Particular Reference to Labor Supply," Memorandum 20/2013, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    19. Marley, A. A. J., 2002. "Random utility models and their applications: recent developments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 289-302, July.
    20. Jürgen Volkert & Friedrich Schneider, 2011. "The Application of the Capability Approach to High-Income OECD Countries: A Preliminary Survey," CESifo Working Paper Series 3364, CESifo.
    21. John K. Dagsvik & Zhiyang Jia & Tom Kornstad & Thor O. Thoresen, 2014. "Theoretical And Practical Arguments For Modeling Labor Supply As A Choice Among Latent Jobs," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 134-151, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Capability approach; Random scale; Discrete choice; Welfare function; C25; C35; D31; D63;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:kap:theord:v:74:y:2013:i:1:p:75-105. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.