Collectivity and the capability approach: survey and discussion

References

• Alkire, S. (2008). Using the capability approach: Prospective and evaluative analyses. In F. Comim, M. Qizilbash, & S. Alkire (Eds.), The capability approach: Concepts, measures and applications (pp. 26–50). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M. (1982). Morphogenesis versus structuration: On combining structure and action. The British Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 455. https://doi.org/10.2307/589357
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archer, M. (2000). Being human: The problem of agency. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M. (2007). The ontological status of subjectivity. In C. Lawson, J. Latsis, & N. Martins (Eds.), Contributions to social ontology (pp. 17–31). Routledge Studies in Critical Realism 15. Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Arrow, K. J. (1994). Methodological individualism and social knowledge. American Economic Review, 84(2), 1–9. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2117792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ballet, J., Dubois, J.-L., & Mahieu, F.-R. (2005). L’autre développement: Le développement socialement soutenable. L’Harmattan.
   Google Scholar
• Ballet, J., Dubois, J., & Mahieu, F. (2007). Responsibility for each other’s freedom: Agency as the source of collective capability. Journal of Human Development, 8(2), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880701371000
   Google Scholar
• Basu, K. (1996, March). Methodological individualism. Economic and Political Weekly. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/3885
   Google Scholar
• Basu, K. (2008). Methodological individualism. In S. N. Durlauf & L. E. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (2nd ed., pp. 586–590). Nature. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230226203.1092
   Google Scholar
• Basu, K. (2010). The moral basis of prosperity and oppression: Altruism, other-regarding behaviour and identity. Economics and Philosophy, 26(02), 189–216. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267110000192
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basu, K. (2013). Group identity, productivity and well-being policy implications for promoting development. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(3), 323–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2013.764854
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cudd, A. E. (2014). Commitment as motivation: Amartya Sen’s theory of agency and the explanation of behaviour. Economics and Philosophy, 30(01), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267114000030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B. (2015, July 1). Agency and the process aspect of capability development: Individual capabilities, collective capabilities, and collective intentions. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2625673.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B. (2007). Identity and commitment. In F. Peter & H. B. Schmid (Eds.), Rationality and commitment (pp. 313–336). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deneulin, S. (2008). Beyond individual freedom and agency: Structures of living together. In F. Comim, M. Qizilbash, & S. Alkire (Eds.), The capability approach: Concepts, measures and applications (pp. 105–124). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deneulin, S., & McGregor, A. (2010). The capability approach and the politics of a social conception of wellbeing. European Journal of Social Theory, 13(4), 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431010382762
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drydyk, J. (2008). Durable empowerment. Journal of Global Ethics, 4(3), 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449620802496354
   Google Scholar
• Drydyk, J. (2013). Empowerment, agency, and power. Journal of Global Ethics, 9(3), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2013.818374
   Google Scholar
• Evans, P. B. (2002). Collective capabilities, culture and Amartya Sen’s development as freedom. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2), 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine, B. (2004). Economics and ethics: Amartya Sen as point of departure. The New School Economic Review, 1, 95–103.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, J. E., & Handy, C. (2009). External capabilities. In K. Basu & S. M. R. Kanbur (Eds.), Arguments for a better world: Essays in honor of Amartya Sen (pp. 1:362–1:374). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gangas, S. (2014). From alienation to capability deprivation: Reconstructing a sociological concept. Social Science Information, 53(1), 54–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018413509910
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gangas, S. (2016). From agency to capabilities: Sen and sociological theory. Current Sociology, 64(1), 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392115602521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasper, D. (2002). Is Sen’s capability approach an adequate basis for considering human development? Review of Political Economy, 14(4), 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/0953825022000009898
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, M. (2007). Collective intentions, commitment and collective action problems. In F. Peter & H. B. Schmid (Eds.), Rationality and commitment (pp. 258–279). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, M. (2015). Joint commitment: What it is and why it matters. Phenomenology and Mind, 9, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.13128/Phe_Mi-18148
   Google Scholar
• Godfrey-Wood, R., & Mamani-Vargas, G. (2016). The coercive side of collective capabilities: Evidence from the Bolivian altiplano. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities (June), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2016.1199169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gore, C. (1997). Irreducibly social goods and the informational basis of Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Journal of International Development, 9(2), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1328(199703)9:2<235::AID-JID436>3.0.CO;2-J
   Google Scholar
• Griewald, Y., & Rauschmayer, F. (2014). Exploring an environmental conflict from a capability perspective. Ecological Economics, 100(April), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakli, R., Miller, K., & Tuomela, R. (2010). Two kinds of we-reasoning. Economics and Philosophy, 26(03), 291–320. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267110000386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, K. M. Q. (2016). Introducing joint capabilities: Findings from a study of development in Honduras’ Garifuna ancestral villages. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities (June), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2016.1199168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heath, J. (2015). Methodological individualism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/methodological-individualism/
   Google Scholar
• Holmwood, J. (2013). Public reasoning without sociology: Amartya Sen’s theory of justice. Sociology, 47(6), 1171–1186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038512470767
   Google Scholar
• Hvinden, B., & Halvorsen, R. (2017). Mediating agency and structure in sociology: What role for conversion factors? Critical Sociology (January). https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920516684541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, S. (2006). From individual to collective capabilities: The capability approach as a conceptual framework for self-help. Journal of Human Development, 7(3), 397–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880600815982
   Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, S. (2008). Collective agency: Wieder freedoms and new capabilities through self-help. In J.-L. Dubois, A.-S. Brouillet, P. Bakhshi, & C. Duray-Soundron (Eds.), Repenser l’action collective: Une approche par les capabilités (pp. 61–81). Harmattan; Réseau IMPACT.
   Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, S. (2013, June). Collective capabilities: What are they and why are they important? (Maitreyee E-Bulletin of HDCA 2013). https://hd-ca.org/publications/maitreyee-june-2013-collectivity-in-the-ca
   Google Scholar
• Ibrahim, S. (2017). How to build collective capabilities: The 3C-model for grassroots-led development. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 18(2), 197–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2016.1270918
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joas, H., & Knöbl, W. (2004). Sozialtheorie: Zwanzig Einführende Vorlesungen. 1. Aufl., Originalausg. Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 1669. Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, E. I. (2011). Public reason as a collective capability. Rutgers Law Journal, 43, 295. http://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/rutlj43§ion=16
   Google Scholar
• Kießling, B. (1988). Die “theorie Der strukturierung”. Zeitschrift Für Soziologie, 17(4), https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-1988-0405
   Google Scholar
• Kremakova, M. I. (2013). Too soft for economics, too rigid for sociology, or just right? The productive ambiguities of Sen’s capability approach. European Journal of Sociology, 54(03), 393–419. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975613000210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, T. (2015). A conception of social ontology. In S. Pratten (Ed.), Social ontology and modern economics (pp. 19–52). Economics as Social Theory, v. 37. Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann, J.-M. (2018). Agency and well-being in self-help groups of the global north. In F. Comim (ed.), Unpublished manuscript, submitted to the proceedings of the 2017 Cambridge Capability Conference, Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann, J.-M., & Prins, B. (2018). The notions of freedom, agency and well-being for self-help groups in the global north (Unpublished manuscript).
   Google Scholar
• Leßmann, O. (2011a). Sustainability as a challenge to the capability approach. In F. Rauschmayer, I. Omann, & J. Frühmann (Eds.), Sustainable development: Capabilities, needs, and well-being (pp. 43–61). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Leßmann, O. (2011b). Freedom of choice and poverty alleviation. Review of Social Economy, 69(4), 439–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2011.577349
   Google Scholar
• Leßmann, O., & Rauschmayer, F. (2013). Re-conceptualizing sustainable development on the basis of the capability approach: A model and its difficulties. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2012.747487
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leßmann, O., & Roche, J. M. (2013, June). Introduction from the editors (Maitreyee E-Bulletin Der HDCA 2013). https://hd-ca.org/publications/maitreyee-june-2013-collectivity-in-the-ca
   Google Scholar
• Martins, N. (2005). Capabilities as causal powers. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 30(5), 671–685. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bel012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, N. (2007a). Ethics, ontology and capabilities. Review of Political Economy, 19(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/09538250601080768
   Google Scholar
• Martins, N. (2007b). Realism, universalism and capabilities. Review of Social Economy, 65(3), 253–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346760701635817
   Google Scholar
• Martins, N. (2009). Rules, social ontology and collective identity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 39(3), 323–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2009.00406.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, N. (2011). Sustainability economics, ontology and the capability approach. Ecological Economics, 72(December), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.09.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, N. (2013). The place of the capability approach within sustainability economics. Ecological Economics, 95(November), 226–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mueller, D. C. (1979). Public choice. Cambridge surveys of economic literature. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, M. (2014). Self-determination as a collective capability: The case of indigenous peoples. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 15(4), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2013.878320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. (1988). Non-relative virtues: An Aristotelian approach. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 13(1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4975.1988.tb00111.x
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. The John Robert Seeley lectures. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Hearn, D. (2009). Amartya Sen’s ‘development as freedom’ ten years later. A Development Education Review, 9. https://www.developmenteducationreview.com/issue/issue-8/amartya-sens-development-freedom-ten-years-later
   Google Scholar
• Oosterlaken, I. (2011). Inserting technology in the relational ontology of Sen’s capability approach. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(3), 425–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2011.576661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelenc, J., Bazile, D., & Ceruti, C. (2015). Collective capability and collective agency for sustainability: A case study. Ecological Economics, 118(October), 226–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelenc, J., Lompo, M. K., Ballet, J., & Dubois, J.-L. (2013). Sustainable human development and the capability approach: Integrating environment, responsibility and collective agency. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2012.747491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peter, F., & Schmid, H. B. (Eds.). (2007). Rationality and commitment. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pettit, P. (2005). Construing Sen on commitment. Economics and Philosophy, 21(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267104000367
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prendergast, R. (2004). Development and freedom. Journal of Economic Studies, 31(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443580410516251
   Google Scholar
• Prendergast, R. (2005). The concept of freedom and its relation to economic development – A critical appreciation of the work of Amartya Sen. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29(6), 1145–1170. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bei081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prendergast, R. (2011). Sen and commons on markets and freedom. New Political Economy, 16(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2010.500720
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qizilbash, M. (2014). Are modern philosophical accounts of well-being excessively ‘individualistic’? International Review of Economics, 61(2), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-014-0204-x
   Google Scholar
• Ranis, G., Stewart, F., & Samman, E. (2006). Human development: Beyond the human development index. Journal of Human Development, 7(3), 323–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880600815917
   Google Scholar
• Ranis, G., Stewart, F., & Samman, E. (2007). Country patterns of behavior on broader dimensions of human development (Yale University Economic Growth Center Discussion Paper, no. 958). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1030028
   Google Scholar
• Rauschmayer, F., Polzin, C., Mock, M., & Omann, I. (2018). Examining collective action through the capability approach: The example of community currencies. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 19(3), 345–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2017.1415870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, H. S. (2011). Mapping out improvements in justice: Comparing vs. aiming. Rutgers Law Journal, 43, 211. http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/rutlj43§ion=13
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, I. (2000). An unworkable idea or a promising alternative?: Sen’s capability approach re-examined (CES Discussion Paper 00.30, University of Leuven 2000 (30)). https://feb.kuleuven.be/drc/Economics/research/dps-papers/dps00/dps0030.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/146498805200034266
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, I. (2008). Sen’s capability approach and feminist concerns. In F. Comim, M. Qizilbash, & S. Alkire (Eds.), The capability approach: Concepts, measures and applications (pp. 82–104). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, I. (2017). Wellbeing, freedom and social justice: The capability approach re-examined. Open Book Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Schmid, H. B. (2007). Beyond self-goal choice: Amartya Sen’s analysis of the structure of commitment and the role of shared desires. In F. Peter & H. B. Schmid (Eds.), Rationality and commitment (pp. 211–226). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1985a). Goals, commitment, and identity. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1(2), 341–355. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a036895
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1985b). Well-being, agency, and freedom. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026184
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1987). On ethics and economics. B. Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. C. Nussbaum & A. K. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–53). Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1999a). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1999b). Rational fools: A critique of behavioural foundations of economic theory. In A. K. Sen (Ed.), Choice, welfare, and measurement (Paperback ed., pp. 84–106). Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1999c). Reason before identity. The Romanes lecture for 1998. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2002a). Rationality and freedom. Belknap Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2002b). Response to commentaries. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2), 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686264
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2004). How does culture matter? In V. Rao & M. Walton (Eds.), Culture and public action (pp. 37–58). Stanford University Press: Stanford Social Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2005). What is it like to be a human being? Keynote, Third Forum on Human Development. http://hdr.undp.org/docs/events/global_forum/2005/speeches/sen_keynote_eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2007). Identity and violence: The illusion of destiny. Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A., Muellbauer, J., & Hawthorn, G. (1987). The standard of living. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. L., & Seward, C. (2009). The relational ontology of Amartya Sen’s capability approach: Incorporating social and individual causes. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(2), 213–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452820902940927
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, F. (2005). Groups and capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880500120517
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, F. (Ed.). (2008). Horizontal inequalities and conflict: Understanding group violence in multiethnic societies. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, F. (2009). Horizontal inequality: Two types of trap. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(3), 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452820903041824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, F. (2010). Horizontal inequalities as a cause of conflict. A review of CRISE findings. World Bank. http://web.worldbank.org/archive/website01306/web/pdf/wdr%20background%20paper_stewart.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, F. (2016). Changing perspectives on inequality and development. Studies in Comparative International Development, 51(1), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-016-9222-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, F. (2018). Beyond the individual – The critical role of social institutions and social capabilities. In F. Stewart, G. Ranis, & E. Samman (Eds.), Advancing human development: Theory and practice (1st ed., pp. 158–183). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, F., & Deneulin, S. (2002). Amartya Sen’s contribution to development thinking. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2), 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, C. (1990). Irreducibly social goods. In G. Brennan & C. Walsh (Eds.), Rationality, individualism, and public policy (pp. 45–63). Centre for Research on Federal Financial Relations, the Australian National University : Distributed by ANUTECH.
   Google Scholar
• Tuomela, R. (2007). Cooperation and the we-perspective. In F. Peter & H. B. Schmid (Eds.), Rationality and commitment (pp. 227–257). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Udehn, L. (2002). The changing face of methodological individualism. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1), 479–507. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.140938
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varian, H. R. (1993). Intermediate Microeconomics: A modern approach. W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Volkert, J. (2013, June). Concepts of agency, sustainable human development (SHD) and collective abilities (Maitreyee E-Bulletin of HDCA 2013). https://hd-ca.org/publications/maitreyee-june-2013-collectivity-in-the-ca
   Google Scholar