Several developments in the measurement of justice have drawn on Amartya Sen’s work on capabilities. This article addresses the relationship between Sen’s theoretical work and its interpretation in the measurement of justice, in particular by the United Nations Development Project (UNDP) and by the British Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Equalities Office in its Equality Measurement Framework. It starts with a review of the diverse interpretations of Sen’s work, which range from considering it to be an innovative radical development to locating his work within the liberal tradition. Central to the article is the question of whether it is possible to develop a meaningful operationalization of Sen’s philosophical distinctions, in particular that between capabilities and functionings, so as to inform measurement frameworks. It finds that on both conceptual and methodological grounds it is not possible to sustain this distinction in practice. This is illustrated by an analysis of the changing measurement of justice in frameworks developed by the UNDP and the UK government. Changes in the content of the measurement frameworks in radical or neoliberal directions are not constrained by Sen’s theoretical analysis, despite claims that Sen’s work informs these frameworks. The openness of Sen’s work means that it can be used by forces generated by the neoliberal environment to support their redefinition of justice.
AlkireSabinaBlackRufus. (1997) A Practical Reasoning Theory of Development Ethics: Furthering the Capabilities Approach, Journal of International Development9(2): 263–79.
3.
AlkireSabinaBastagliFrancescaBurchardtTaniaClarkDavidHolderHollyIbrahimSolava. (2009) Developing the Equality Measurement Framework: Selecting the Indicators. Manchester: EHRC.
4.
AlstonWilliam P. (1988) The Deontological Conception of Epistemic Justification, Philosophical Perspectives2: 257–99.
5.
ArnesonRichard. (1989) Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare, Philosophical Studies56(1): 77–93.
6.
BaumanZygmunt. (2005) Liquid Life. Cambridge: Polity.
7.
BeckUlrich. (1992) Risk Society. London: Sage.
8.
BerlinIsaiah. (1969) ‘Two Concepts of Liberty’, in Isaiah Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty. London: Oxford University Press.
9.
BurchardtTania. (2006) Foundations for Measuring Equality: A Discussion Paper for the Equalities Review. London: ESRC Research Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
10.
BurchardtTaniaVizardPolly. (2007) Definition of Equality and Framework for Measurement: Final Recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group on Measurement, Paper 1. London: ESRC Research Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
11.
DeanHartley. (2009) Critiquing Capabilities: The Distractions of a Beguiling Concept, Critical Social Policy29(2): 261–73.
12.
Equalities Review. (2007) Fairness and Freedom: The Final Report of the Equalities Review. London: Department of Communities and Local Government.
Fukuda-ParrSakiko. (2003) The Human Development Paradigm: Operationalizing Sen’s Ideas on Capabilities, Feminist Economics9(2–3): 301–17.
18.
GasperDesvan StaverenIrene. (2003) Development as Freedom – And as What Else?, Feminist Economics9(2–3): 137–61.
19.
GiddensAnthony. (1991) Modernity and Self-identity. Cambridge: Polity.
20.
GoreCharles. (1997) Irreducibly Social Goods and the Informational Basis of Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach, Journal of International Development9(2): 235–50.
21.
HayekFredrich A von. (1960) The Constitution of Liberty. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
22.
Hills, John, Mike Brewer, Stephen Jenkins, Ruth Lister, Ruth Lupton, Stephen Machin et al. (2010) An Anatomy of Economic Inequality in the UK: Report of the National Equality Panel. London: GEO. URL (consulted January 2011): http://www.equalities.gov.uk/pdf/NEP%20Report%20bookmarkedfinal.pdf.
JewsonNickMasonDavid. (1986) The Theory and Practice of Equal Opportunities Policies: Liberal and Radical Approaches, Sociological Review34(2): 307–34.
29.
JohnsonNickTatamJohn. (2009) Good Relations: A Conceptual Analysis. Research Report 42. Manchester: Equality and Human Rights Commission.
30.
KorpiWalterPalmeJoakim. (1998) The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries, American Sociological Review63(5): 661–87.
31.
Lombardo, Emanuela, Petra Meier and Mieke Verloo (eds) (2009) The Discursive Politics of Gender Equality: Stretching, Bending and Policymaking. Abingdon: Routledge.
32.
NozickRobert. (1974) Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
33.
NussbaumMartha. (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
NussbaumMartha. (2003) Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice, Feminist Economics9(2–3): 33–59.
35.
QizilbashMozaffar. (1997) A Weakness of the Capability Approach with Respect to Gender Justice, Journal of International Development9(2): 251–62.
36.
RawlsJohn. (1978) A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University.
SardenbergCecilia MB. (2008) Liberal vs. Liberating Empowerment: A Latin American Feminist Perspective in Conceptualising Women’s Empowerment, Special Issue,‘Reclaiming Feminism: Gender and Neoliberalism’, edited by Andrea Cornwall, Jasmine Gideon and Kalpana Wilson, IDS Bulletin39(6): 18–27.
39.
SenAmartya. (1977) Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioural Foundations of Economic Theory, Philosophy and Public Affairs6(4): 317–44.
40.
SenAmartya. (1981) Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
41.
SenAmartya. (1984) Resources, Values and Development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
42.
SenAmartya. (1992) Inequality Reexamined. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43.
SenAmartya. (1999) Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
SenAmartya. (2004) Capabilities, Lists, and Public Reason: Continuing the Discussion, Feminist Economics10(3): 77–80.
45.
SenAmartya. (2009) The Idea of Justice. London: Allen Lane.
46.
Taylor, Charles (1979) ‘What’s Wrong with Negative Liberty’, in A. Ryan (ed.) The Idea of Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
WalbySylvia. (1999) The European Union and Equal Opportunities Policies, European Societies1(1): 59–80.
54.
WalbySylvia. (2005) Gender Mainstreaming: Productive Tensions in Theory and Practice, Social Politics12(3): 321–43.
55.
WalbySylvia. (2009) Globalization and Inequalities: Complexity and Contested Modernities. London: Sage.
56.
WalbySylviaArmstrongJo. (2010) Measuring Equality: Data and Indicators in Britain, International Journal of Social Research Methodology13(3): 237–49.
57.
WalbySylviaArmstrongJoHumphreysLes. (2008) Review of Equality Statistics. Manchester: EHRC.
58.
WilkinsonRichardPickettKate. (2009) The Spirit Level: Why Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. London: Allen Lane.
59.
ZimmermannBénédict. (2006) Pragmatism and the Capability Approach: Challenges in Social Theory and Empirical Research, European Journal of Social Theory9(4): 467–84.
