Specifying and Justifying a Basic Capability Set: Should the International Human Rights Framework be given a more Direct Role?

Self Cite

127

This article examines a new capability‐based measurement framework that has been developed as a basis for equality and human rights monitoring in twenty‐first‐century Britain. We explore the conceptual foundations of the framework and demonstrate its practical application for the purposes of monitoring equality (in terms of the distribution of substantive freedoms and opportunities among individuals and groups) and human rights (in terms of the achievement of substantive freedoms and opportunities below a minimum threshold) in England, Scotland and Wales. The article challenges the sceptical position by suggesting that ‘operationalizing’ the capability approach is both ‘feasible’ and ‘workable’. A new two‐stage procedure for deriving a capability list is proposed. This combines human rights and deliberative consultation and strikes a balance, we contend, between internationally recognized human rights standards and principles on the one hand, and direct deliberation/participation on the other, in the development and agreement of capability lists.Capabilities, Functionings, Treatment, Autonomy, Equality, Human rights, Indicator,

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stage 1: Human Rights-based Capability Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Operationalizing’ the Capability Approach as a Basis for Equality and Human Rights Monitoring in Twenty‐first‐century Britain

Burchardt

Vizard

2011

Self Cite

127

“…(3) According to Polly Vizard, independent capability lists such as those proposed by Nussbaum and Sen are so incompletely specified, compared with human rights declarations and instruments, that it is counterproductive to keep the former independent of the latter. Therefore she proposes a human rights-based CA (Vizard, 2007), in which capabilities that are objects of recognized human rights are imported directly into the lists of valuable capabilities. If we introduce the distinction between first and second levels, which Vizard does not, we discover some reasons for caution regarding her proposal.…”

Section: Human Rights As Justified Entitlements To Specific Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsible Pluralism, Capabilities, and Human Rights

Drydyk

2011

For their effective realization, human rights need to be perceived as culturally legitimate, and this in turn requires that they be justifiable pluralistically, engaging all reliable moral discourses. In so far as a human right calls for a specific capability to be respected, protected, and fulfilled, the capability approach can contribute to this task of pluralistic justification in two ways. First, it abstracts from particular goods to valuable functionings and capabilities in a way that affirms the particular conceptions of the good that value them. However, the model of justification adopted by Nussbaum—Rawls's reflective equilibrium—needs to be replaced by anchoring this discussion in knowledge of care and neglect. Second, Nussbaum proposes that equal entitlement to central capabilities can be justified on grounds of equal human dignity, which, as I read it, means that everyone's striving (or at least responsiveness) towards living well in the company of others matters, and matters equally. This affirmation of equal dignity, however, will be undermined if it is treated (as Nussbaum does) as a ‘purely political’ idea excluding public support from particular moral discourses. An alternative approach, responsible pluralism, enables us to enlist the support of all reliable moral discourses in support of equal dignity, rather than confining them to the background culture or the private realm.Human rights, Capability approach, Care, Dignity, Pluralism,

“…It is surprising that neither Nussbaum nor Sen has seriously considered international human rights instruments as a general list of essential capabilities that is universally applicable. Indeed, Vizard (2007) argues that political and legal consensus forming procedures of the international human rights regime could provide a pragmatic procedure for specifying a list of essential capabilities-or 'human rights based capability sets'-that would command international legitimacy.…”

Section: Specifying Important Entitlements and Obligationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These distinct approaches are complementary and pursuing such questions would open up an important new area of research and analysis in HD/C approach. Vizard (2007) argues that a human rightsbased capability list would incorporate a specification of associated obligations of national governments, international agencies and other duty bearers.…”

Section: Specifying Important Entitlements and Obligationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Metrics of Human Rights: Complementarities of the Human Development and Capabilities Approach

Fukuda‐Parr

2011

Capabilities and human rights are closely related and share common commitments to freedom and justice as central political objectives. Much of the literature on this relationship has focused on defining the overlaps and differences between them as theoretical concepts. This paper explores a different aspect of the relationship, namely the overlaps and differences in their respective measurement approaches. The paper argues that human development indicators that are used to evaluate policies for capability expansion, or human development, cannot substitute for human rights indicators because of the differences in them as concepts as well as the way that these concepts are used and applied. Human rights indicators are used to assess the accountability of the state in complying with the obligations that are codified in international and domestic law. However, the literature of development economics and the methods of empirical analysis and aggregative summary measurements extensively used in the human development and capabilities approach can overcome some of the constraints of conventional methods used in human rights assessments. These possibilities are illustrated in the Economic and Social Rights Fulfillment Index, recently developed by Fukuda-Parr, Lawson-Remer and Randolph that develops an empirical model of 'progressive realization' and provides an empirical basis for setting benchmarks.Capability approach, Human development, Sen, Nussbaum, Human rights indicators, Rights-based approach to development, Progressive realization,