Assessing the capability approach as a justice basis of climate resilience strategies

Figures & data

Table 1. Nussbaum's list of basic capabilities.

1. Life. Being able to live to the end of a human life of normal length, not dying prematurely, or before one's life is so reduced as to be not worth living.

2. Bodily health. Being able to have good health, including reproductive health; to be adequately nourished; to have adequate shelter.

3. Bodily integrity. Being able to move freely from place to place; being able to be secure against assault, including sexual assault, child sexual abuse, and domestic violence; having opportunities for sexual satisfaction and for choice in matters of reproduction.

4. Senses, imagination, and thought. Being able to use the senses, to imagine, think, and reason [in] a way informed and cultivated by an adequate education [and] protected by guarantees of freedom of expression […]

5. Emotions. Being able to have attachments to things and people outside ourselves […]. Not having one's emotional development blighted by overwhelming fear and anxiety […]

6. Practical reason. Being able to form a conception of the good and to engage in critical reflection about the planning of one's life. (This entails protection for the liberty of conscience.)

7. Affiliation. (A) Being able to live with and toward others, to recognize and show concern for other human beings, to engage in various forms of social interaction […] (Protecting this capability means […] protecting the freedom of assembly and political speech.) (B) Having the social bases of self-respect and nonhumiliation [and] protections against discrimination on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, caste, ethnicity, or national origin.

8. Other species. Being able to live with concern for and in relation to animals, plants, and the world of nature.

9. Play. Being able to laugh, to play, to enjoy recreational activities.

10. Control over one's environment. (A) Political. Being able to participate effectively in political choices that govern one's life; having the right of political participation, protections of free speech and association. (B) Material. Being able to hold property [and] to seek employment on an equal basis with others; having the freedom from unwarranted search and seizure.

Adapted from Holland (2008). Wolff and de-Shalit’s (2007) six areas of primary focus are highlighted in bold.

Figure 1. The theory of human needs in outline. Reproduced from Gough (2015).

Table 2. Summary of distributive proposals.

Categories of primary interest	More specific conceptualizations	Recommended perspectives	Recommended distributive rule (Acceptability, Tolerability, and Upper Thresholds)
Life	Life expectancy	Functioning	A-T
Health	Medical health	Functionings (also needs)	A-T-U
	Nutrition
	Shelter
	Clothing
Affiliation	Having a family	Functionings	A
	Having a community
	Tele-connections		A-T
	Time in social life
	Free speech	Capabilities, resources	A
	Non-discrimination
Bodily integrity	Security from violence, abuse, assault	Functionings (also needs, resources, subjective reports)	A
	Safe infrastructures, working places and environments		A-T
	Safe childhood, birth control and child bearing		A-T
	Safe and sustainable mobility		A-T-U
Sense, imagination and thought	General education (incl. environmental)	Capabilities, resources	A-T
	Emergency-related education	Functionings	A
	Education about adaptation options		A-T
Control over one's environment	Economic and political freedoms	Capabilities, resources	A-T-U
	Continued command over land and resources	Functionings (also resources, needs)
	Regular use of sustainable energy

Holland, Breena. 2008. “Justice and the Environment in Nussbaum’s “Capabilities Approach”: Why Sustainable Ecological Capacity Is a Meta-Capability.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (2): 319–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907306471.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wolff, Jonathan, and Avner de-Shalit. 2007. Disadvantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 Google Scholar

Gough, Ian. 2015. “Climate Change and Sustainable Welfare: The Centrality of Human Needs.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 39 (5): 1191–1214. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bev039.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar