To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The social welfare function (SWF) framework includes a well-being measure w(∙), for converting outcomes into vectors (lists) of well-being numbers. These well-being numbers are interpersonally comparable. This chapter discusses the construction of the well-being measure. It supposes that w(∙) operates on individual “histories,” a history being a combination of an attribute bundle a and a preference R. That is w(∙) = w(a, R). This setup is quite general. It encompasses preference-based well-being measures (namely those that assign well-being numbers to histories containing different bundles but the same preference in deference to that preference), as well as non-preference based measures. The chapter covers both, although mainly focusing on the former. Here, two approaches are discussed: the “equivalence approach,” whereby an individual’s well-being hinges on her attributes and her ordinal preference; and the “vNM approach,” which uses lottery preferences rather than ordinal preferences.
Oliver E. Williamson, who died on May 21, 2020 at the age of 87, was one of the most influential social scientists of modern times. In 2009, he was co-recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics. As of mid-October 2021, he had been cited an astonishing 317,838 times according to Google Scholar. His measured influence outdistances that of even his fellow Nobel Laureates Elinor Ostrom (230,667), Douglass C. North (187,577) and Ronald H. Coase (123,686). This special issue of the Journal of Institutional Economics brings together a distinguished roster of scholars to remember Williamson, to elucidate some of his key ideas and influences, and to extend the reach of his ideas to new arenas.
We revise Atkinson’s concept of a ‘participation income’ (PI), repositioning it as a form of green conditional basic income that is anchored in a capabilities-oriented eco-social policy framework. This framework combines the capability approach with an ‘ethics of care’ to re-shape the focus of social policy on individuals’ capability to ‘take care of the world’, thus shifting the emphasis from economic production to social reproduction and environmental reparation. In developing this proposal, we seek to address key questions about the feasibility of implementing PI schemes: including their administrative complexity and the criticism that a PI constitutes either an arbitrary and confusing, or invasive and stigmatising, form of basic income. To address these concerns, we argue for an enabling approach to incentivising participation whereby participation pathways are co-created with citizens on the basis of opportunities they recognise as meaningful rather than enforced through strict monitoring and sanctions.
Chapter 2 presents a historical outline of military interventions into Africa by non-colonial actors and uses Qualitative Comparative Analysis to investigate the causes of such interventions. It begins with a historical summary of the sometimes large-scale military interventions taken during the Cold War by the Soviet Union, Cuba, and the United States (US). It then looks at US military intervention on the continent after the end of the Cold War, noting a change in motives following the 9/11 terror attacks in the US. The chapter documents the more covert, but lasting, form that US military intervention took following 9/11 (a phenomenon some have termed “liquid” warfare) and the increasing US use of drone attacks against Islamic terror groups. Following this review of superpower and superpower proxy activity, the chapter outlines the interventionary record of other non-colonial external actors. It examines actions taken by Israel within Africa, the Chinese naval presence off of the Somali coast since 2008, and a handful of small European evacuation and rescue missions. Results from qualitative comparative analysis suggest that combinations of conditions like national role conceptions, rivalry, capabilities and at times mass unrest within the intervening state help to explain many of these external interventions.
This article examines the impact of foreign diasporas on host country firms. It contributes to diaspora research by focusing on the context of emerging market host countries and the specific case of Chinese diaspora in Russia. Drawing on the concepts of organizational capabilities and organizational legitimacy, we explain how the Chinese diaspora can be beneficial for the competitiveness of Russian firms, and how Russian firms can uniquely leverage these potential benefits through engagement with individual Chinese diasporans and diaspora institutions. Our article adds to the diaspora literature in several ways. First, unlike the majority of past research, which tends to focus on the benefits for the diaspora's home country, we highlight the potential impact on host country firms, specifically their capabilities and legitimacy at home and abroad. Second, our model can be viewed as a direct response to the many calls in the literature to study the microfoundations of firms’ capabilities. Third, we add to the legitimacy literature by proposing that engagement with a foreign diaspora can help host country firms establish and maintain their legitimacy both at home and on a global scale. Although our framework is informed by the Chinese diaspora in Russia, we discuss its generalizability to other contexts.
There is growing recognition of the importance of dignity and support with eating as markers of high-quality and older-person-centred hospital services. We use data on these markers from the national Adult Inpatient Survey for England to build up statistical evidence on older people's experiences. We find that poor and inconsistent experiences of being treated with dignity and respect, and of receiving support with eating, affect a substantial proportion of inpatients across the vast majority of acute hospital trusts. There has been remarkably little change over time, although small improvements provide some grounds for optimism relating to policy developments in the period following the Francis Inquiry. Amongst people over 65, the prevalence of inconsistent and poor experiences of dignity and support with eating was higher amongst the ‘oldest of the old’ (inpatients aged over 80), individuals who experience a long-standing limiting illness or disability, and women. The highest rates of prevalence were observed amongst disabled women over 80. Perceptions of inadequate nursing quantity and quality, and lack of choice of food, stand out from logistic regression analysis as having consistent, large associations with lack of support with eating. These factors provide potential policy levers since they are within the control of hospitals to a certain extent. In drawing lessons from our analysis for inspection, regulation and monitoring, we highlight the importance of inequalities analysis – including systematic disaggregation and separate identification of at risk sub-groups (e.g. older disabled women) – rather than relying on a ‘population average approach’.
This chapter introduces the idea of an empowering state – one that provides its citizens with protection from vulnerabilities, resources to achieve their potential, and access to full participation in democratic institutions and decision-making. It argues that the last forty years have instead seen a disempowering state with many excluded by poverty and lack of opportunity, while for others active citizenship and participation were stifled. It contrasts the negative liberty of a neoliberal state – in which wealthy people and corporations are accorded freedom from interference and regulation – with the positive freedoms of a nurturing state – one that provides the wherewithal for each individual to achieve their potential.
It elucidates the many strands of an empowering state, beginning with the need for everyone to commit to making a fair contribution, rather than seeking ways to evade responsibility, and setting out the case for a far more progressive tax system than the one we currently have (which is shown to be essentially regressive). It discusses the need for greater democratic accountability and citizen engagement, with examples from pioneering local initiatives. Finally, it argues that protecting our natural environment and mitigating climate change require the support of an empowering state.
Contemporary models of welfare capitalism have frequently been critiqued about their fit-for-purpose in provisioning for people’s basic needs including care, and longer-term ecological sustainability. The Covid-19 pandemic has also exposed the need for better institutions and a new welfare architecture. We argue a post-productivist eco-social state can deliver sustainable well-being and meet basic needs. Arguing Universal Basic Services are an essential building block and prerequisite for a de-commodified welfare state, we focus on examining the form of income support that might best complement UBS. The article develops, from the perspective of feminist arguments and the capabilities approach, a case for Participation Income. This, we argue, can be aligned with targeted policy goals, particularly reward for and redistribution of human and ecological care or reproduction and other forms of socially valued participation. It may also, in the short term, be more administratively practical and politically feasible than universal basic income.
This chapter is a substantive overview of the issues connected with positive freedom. The differing approaches to liberty in this sense are laid out as well as the various positive elements featured in different versions of this notion, specifically referring to the essays to follow as sources for such approaches.
We propose a micro-founded theory of diversified firms. The theory suggests that diversified firms exist because they allow better deployment of factors that, because of sub-additive contracting costs, are hard to trade in fractions. Firms diversify into industries in which these factors are more productive than any alternatives available in the factor market. Like markets, diversified firms allow specialization by enabling factors to be used on a larger scale. The individual businesses making up a diversified firm exhibit specific similarities in behavior.
Freedom is widely regarded as a basic social and political value that is deeply connected to the ideals of democracy, equality, liberation, and social recognition. Many insist that freedom must include conditions that go beyond simple “negative” liberty understood as the absence of constraints; only if freedom includes other conditions such as the capability to act, mental and physical control of oneself, and social recognition by others will it deserve its place in the pantheon of basic social values. Positive Freedom is the first volume to examine the idea of positive liberty in detail and from multiple perspectives. With contributions from leading scholars in ethics and political theory, this collection includes both historical studies of the idea of positive freedom and discussions of its connection to important contemporary issues in social and political philosophy.
This chapter focuses on the theme of dignity as materialism. In this chapter, the relationship between materialism and dignity/karama suggested in the interviews and in some of the protesters’ demands during the 2011 uprisings in Egypt is first set in the context of the political and economic project of development in today’s modern and global societies. Then, the chapter provides a review of some of the critiques of this political and economic project of development in modern societies and in structural adjustments exposed in new models for socioeconomic progress, particularly to provide for an alternative to strict materialism. The chapter points to the context of a rise of human rights and human dignity discourses that support nonmaterial dimensions of wellbeing and confront it to the representations of karama related to materialism seen in the study. This rise has been seen not only in different societies but also in designing new development models that are precisely concerned with more egalitarian economic conditions for more social justice.
Access and allocation firmly ground the concept of human security in the larger context of social justice, posing serious challenges for equitable earth system governance. The focus on capabilities brings together a range of ideas addressed inadequately in traditional approaches to the economics of welfare. The capabilities approach highlights the importance of real freedoms in the assessment of persons’ relative level of advantage, promoting a more realistic balance of materialistic and non-materialistic factors in evaluating human welfare and a concern for the distribution of substantive opportunities within society. Research on access to and allocation of environmental resources in a deliberative system of democratic governance builds on and extends an existing limited research literature on the implications of deliberative democratic practices for environmental justice policy and governance. More equitable access to and allocation of environmental “goods” should be a focus for a next generation of environmental research characterized by improved normative understanding as well as more meaningful and reflexive potential for sustainability transformation.
This chapter identifies a number of prescriptions for climate governance that could, alongside other actions being taken worldwide, mitigate the climate crisis. Success in this regard would entail dramatic and quite rapid declines in greenhouse gas pollution globally and successful adaptation to the impacts arising from past pollution. These outcomes would engender greater protection of human interests and substantial reductions in the many injustices arising from climate change, all while enhancing environmental sustainability in the long term. The prescriptions outlined here are intended to address corresponding governance pathologies described in Chapters 3–7. Before these prescriptions can be applied in practice, much more explication would be required. Thus, they are intended to illustrate the kinds of steps that will be required to make climate governance much more effective. All of these prescriptions for climate governance are aspirations: they are proposals for action that will have practical significance for the climate crisis only if they are taken seriously.
Carrying out the innovation creation and delivery plan that was created in the first execution stage is the aim of this final level of The Innovation Pyramid. Launching new innovations has challenges beyond those of a typical internal-company project in that they generally involve collaborators and adopters outside the innovation-creating organization. This means that multiple environments and multiple points-of-view, in addition to the innovation-creator's internal environment and point-of-view, must be appraised. A modification of Drucker's core management-by-objective framework is introduced to assure alignment of all the people and activities associated with the plan's successful implementation.
The remainder of the chapter focuses on performing a post-execution variance evaluation of the plan's implementation. Such a review allows the implementation team to hone in on the learnings attained from carrying out the developed plan. All four aspects of the plan are reviewed: Operations, Delivery, Resources and Risks. A poor plan execution does not automatically mean the implementation team underperformed. The issue may lie with people or environments well beyond the core team.
The notion of responsibility in international law involves the violation of an international obligation for which a State can be held liable. The concept of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) however does not squarely fit within the traditional scenario of state responsibility. Primarily based on the notions of equity and justice and premised in particular upon the principle of intra-generational equity, CBDR, as a structuring principle of the international legal order, hinges upon responsibility in its moral dimension. Its application involves the elaboration of differentiated legal standards and commitments according to both responsibilities and capabilities of States. This chapter argues that because it is premised on the notions of equity and justice, the principle of CBDR necessarily calls for a broadening of the understanding of responsibility in international law, yet, it is suggested that, beyond the moral dimension of responsibility that is referred to, CBDR may still impinge upon the assessment of international responsibility in its purely legal dimension and constitute a standard against which a State’s liability will be evaluated.
There is a growing amount of work applying qualitative methods for capability research with the objective of increasing the participation of ‘respondents’ in the production of knowledge. In this chapter we want to go a step further and illustrate how participatory approaches in research can contribute towards investigating which capabilities are valued, why certain choices are made, how capabilities are achieved and the role policy interventions can play in enhancing and generating capabilities, especially for vulnerable and marginalized groups. By drawing on the literature on participatory action research (PAR), we present our own theoretical framework to analyse and inform PAR processes from a human development and capability perspective. We named it the ‘participatory research capability cube’ due to its multidimensional perspective: (1) the expansion of the capabilities and agency of co-researchers; (2) the transformative characteristics of the knowledge produced; and (3) the democratic processes that PAR could enable both during and beyond the research process. Cross-cutting dimensions in our three-dimensional framework are issues of power and diversity. We then apply this framework to understand a PAR process in Kisumu, Kenya. We will conclude with some considerations on the suitability of our framework for a better understanding of PAR from a human development and capability perspective.
There are two versions of the capability approach, one associated with the work of Amartya Sen and the other with that of Martha C. Nussbaum. The two versions differ substantially in their use of the central concepts and it is not exactly clear how they are related to each other. Drawing on game theory, this chapter presents a framework that synthesizes the two versions of the capability approach. It allows us to give a precise rendition of the contents and scope of capability and also enables us to make a careful distinction between different types of capabilities.
This chapter examines certain connections between Karl Marx and the capabilities approach. It contains a brief discussion of Marx’s influence upon, and reception by, contemporary capability theorists. However, the chapter is primarily concerned with identifying, and reflecting on, certain formal and substantive affinities between Marx’s account of human flourishing and the capabilities approach. Those formal affinities include Marx’s ‘pluralistic’ account of value; his ‘normative individualism’; and his opposition to wholly ‘subjective’ accounts of advantage. Those substantive affinities include the overlap between certain modern accounts of ‘central capabilities’, and the extensive account of the necessary conditions of human flourishing that can be reconstructed from Marx’s writings. In addition to these questions of influence and affinity, the chapter considers whether his work might provide a critical perspective on some contemporary versions of the capabilities approach. Marx’s insistence on the value of fulfilling work and meaningful community, for instance, draws attention to particular capabilities that might be underestimated by others. More generally, Marx’s account of the threshold conditions of the good life suggests that, in pursuing the social and other changes that best promote human flourishing, we should not set our sights too low.