The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues

Chiara Rambaldi

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

| Peer-Reviewed

The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues

Chiara Rambaldi

Published in International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy (Volume 11, Issue 2)

Received: 15 June 2022 Accepted: 30 June 2022 Published: 12 July 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

While the industrial revolution signaled the start of the Anthropocene epoch in which humans have become the dominant driver of geosphere alterations, a slew of environmental challenges impacting human existence have emerged, both globally and locally. Global warming, desertification, water scarcity, species extinction, water pollution, and other issues necessitate a debate about sustainable development as a means of meeting the needs of human development while also protecting the Earth's biocapacity. While international evaluations on sustainability, environmentalists, and worldwide academic specialists argue that human growth and environmental preservation are inexorably intertwined, the question of whether a successful relationship of environmental, and biodiversity justice is feasible while also aiming towards human socio-economic development arises. With these considerations in mind, this study presents a literature review discussion starting from Amartya Sen, the Capability Approach's founding father, to analyse the major CA philosophers who have contributed to the environmental debate on whether the theoretical framework requires structural reform or if it provides appropriate principles to face sustainability challenges. While M. Nussbaum initiates a theoretical debate about environmental justice for nonhumans by establishing a minimum degree of capacity for everyone, D. Schlosberg expands CA by addressing environmental issues on a more practical and less ethical basis advocating for a more natural relationship between humans and animals. As a result, this paper suggests, via a discussion of practical instances to analyse the capability approach's validation on environmental sustainability, that CA's principles are currently not fulfilling the green challenges the status quo must solve. The paper finishes by stating that a theoretical redesign would allow us to move beyond the contradiction between anthropocentric and nature-centric perspectives, eventually contributing to a productive conversation between capability theory and sustainability challenges.

Published in	International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy (Volume 11, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
Page(s)	47-51
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Freedom, Capability Approach, Environment, Sustainability, Theory

References

[1]	Alexander, J. M., 2008. Capabilities and Social Justice. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
[2]	Alkire, S., 2005. Valuing Freedoms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[3]	Anand, S., and Sen, A., 2000. Human Development and Economic Sustainability. World Development, 28 12), pp. 2029-2049.
[4]	Anderson, E., 1999. What Is the Point of Equality? Ethics, 109 (2), pp. 287-337.
[5]	Ballet, J., et al., 2011. The social sustainability of sustainable development: from omission to emergence. Developing Worlds, (4), pp. 89-110.
[6]	Ballet, J., et al., 2013. Environment, justice and the capability approach. Ecological Economics, 85, pp. 28-34.
[7]	Crabtree, A., 2012. A Legitimate Freedom Approach to Sustainability: Sen, Scanlon and the Inadequacy of the Human Development Index. The International Journal of Social Quality, 2 (1), pp. 24-40.
[8]	Cripps, E., 2010. Saving the polar bear, saving the world: Can the capabilities approach do justice to humans, animals and ecosystems? Res Publica, 16 (1), pp. 1-22.
[9]	Ki-Moon, B., 2013. The millennium development goals report. United Nations Pubns, 365, p. 366.
[10]	MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment), 2003. Ecosystem and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press.
[11]	Nordhaus, W. D., 2007. A review of the Stern review on the economics of climate change. Journal of economic literature, 45 (3), pp. 686-702.
[12]	Nussbaum, M. C., 2000. Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[13]	Nussbaum, M. C., 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species membership. Cambridge Mass: Belknap Press.
[14]	Pelenc, J., 2010. Crossing Sen’s capability approach with Critical Natural Capital theory: toward a new perspective to reconcile human development and Nature conservation goals. Bienal conference of the International society of ecological economics advancing sustainability in time of crisis.
[15]	Rawls, J., 1993. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
[16]	Robeyns, I., 2006. The Capability Approach in Practice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14 (3), pp. 351–376.
[17]	Schlosberg, D., 2007. Defining environmental justice: Theories, movements and nature. New York: Oxford University Press.
[18]	Schlosberg, D., 2012. Justice, ecological integrity, and climate change. Ethical adaptation to climate change: human virtues of the future, pp. 165-183.
[19]	Sen, A., 1980. Equality of What? In: McMurrin Saint Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[20]	Sen, A., 1984. The Living Standard. Oxford Economic Papers, 36, pp. 74–90.
[21]	Sen, A., 1985. Commodities and Capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
[22]	Sen, A., 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[23]	Sen, A., 2009. The Idea of justice. London: Allen Lan.
[24]	Stern, N., 2006. What is economics of climate change. World Economics, 7 (2), pp. 1–10.
[25]	Stern, N., 2007. The economics of climate change. American Economic Review, 98 (2), pp. 1–37.
[26]	Swiderska, K., et al., 2008. The Governance of Nature and the Nature of Governance: Policy that Works for Biodiversity and Livelihoods. London: IIED.
[27]	Turnbull, C., 1987. The Forest People. London: Simon & Schuster.
[28]	Wolff, J., and De-Shalit, A., 2007. Disadvantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Chiara Rambaldi. (2022). The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues. International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy, 11(2), 47-51. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Chiara Rambaldi. The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues. Int. J. Sustain. Green Energy 2022, 11(2), 47-51. doi: 10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Chiara Rambaldi. The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues. Int J Sustain Green Energy. 2022;11(2):47-51. doi: 10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12,
  author = {Chiara Rambaldi},
  title = {The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues},
  journal = {International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {47-51},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijrse.20221102.12},
  abstract = {While the industrial revolution signaled the start of the Anthropocene epoch in which humans have become the dominant driver of geosphere alterations, a slew of environmental challenges impacting human existence have emerged, both globally and locally. Global warming, desertification, water scarcity, species extinction, water pollution, and other issues necessitate a debate about sustainable development as a means of meeting the needs of human development while also protecting the Earth's biocapacity. While international evaluations on sustainability, environmentalists, and worldwide academic specialists argue that human growth and environmental preservation are inexorably intertwined, the question of whether a successful relationship of environmental, and biodiversity justice is feasible while also aiming towards human socio-economic development arises. With these considerations in mind, this study presents a literature review discussion starting from Amartya Sen, the Capability Approach's founding father, to analyse the major CA philosophers who have contributed to the environmental debate on whether the theoretical framework requires structural reform or if it provides appropriate principles to face sustainability challenges. While M. Nussbaum initiates a theoretical debate about environmental justice for nonhumans by establishing a minimum degree of capacity for everyone, D. Schlosberg expands CA by addressing environmental issues on a more practical and less ethical basis advocating for a more natural relationship between humans and animals. As a result, this paper suggests, via a discussion of practical instances to analyse the capability approach's validation on environmental sustainability, that CA's principles are currently not fulfilling the green challenges the status quo must solve. The paper finishes by stating that a theoretical redesign would allow us to move beyond the contradiction between anthropocentric and nature-centric perspectives, eventually contributing to a productive conversation between capability theory and sustainability challenges.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues
AU  - Chiara Rambaldi
Y1  - 2022/07/12
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
T2  - International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy
JF  - International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy
JO  - International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy
SP  - 47
EP  - 51
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1549
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
AB  - While the industrial revolution signaled the start of the Anthropocene epoch in which humans have become the dominant driver of geosphere alterations, a slew of environmental challenges impacting human existence have emerged, both globally and locally. Global warming, desertification, water scarcity, species extinction, water pollution, and other issues necessitate a debate about sustainable development as a means of meeting the needs of human development while also protecting the Earth's biocapacity. While international evaluations on sustainability, environmentalists, and worldwide academic specialists argue that human growth and environmental preservation are inexorably intertwined, the question of whether a successful relationship of environmental, and biodiversity justice is feasible while also aiming towards human socio-economic development arises. With these considerations in mind, this study presents a literature review discussion starting from Amartya Sen, the Capability Approach's founding father, to analyse the major CA philosophers who have contributed to the environmental debate on whether the theoretical framework requires structural reform or if it provides appropriate principles to face sustainability challenges. While M. Nussbaum initiates a theoretical debate about environmental justice for nonhumans by establishing a minimum degree of capacity for everyone, D. Schlosberg expands CA by addressing environmental issues on a more practical and less ethical basis advocating for a more natural relationship between humans and animals. As a result, this paper suggests, via a discussion of practical instances to analyse the capability approach's validation on environmental sustainability, that CA's principles are currently not fulfilling the green challenges the status quo must solve. The paper finishes by stating that a theoretical redesign would allow us to move beyond the contradiction between anthropocentric and nature-centric perspectives, eventually contributing to a productive conversation between capability theory and sustainability challenges.
VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Chiara Rambaldi

Arts & Humanities Department, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Chiara Rambaldi. (2022). The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues. International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy, 11(2), 47-51. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Chiara Rambaldi. The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues. Int. J. Sustain. Green Energy 2022, 11(2), 47-51. doi: 10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Chiara Rambaldi. The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues. Int J Sustain Green Energy. 2022;11(2):47-51. doi: 10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12,
  author = {Chiara Rambaldi},
  title = {The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues},
  journal = {International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {47-51},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijrse.20221102.12},
  abstract = {While the industrial revolution signaled the start of the Anthropocene epoch in which humans have become the dominant driver of geosphere alterations, a slew of environmental challenges impacting human existence have emerged, both globally and locally. Global warming, desertification, water scarcity, species extinction, water pollution, and other issues necessitate a debate about sustainable development as a means of meeting the needs of human development while also protecting the Earth's biocapacity. While international evaluations on sustainability, environmentalists, and worldwide academic specialists argue that human growth and environmental preservation are inexorably intertwined, the question of whether a successful relationship of environmental, and biodiversity justice is feasible while also aiming towards human socio-economic development arises. With these considerations in mind, this study presents a literature review discussion starting from Amartya Sen, the Capability Approach's founding father, to analyse the major CA philosophers who have contributed to the environmental debate on whether the theoretical framework requires structural reform or if it provides appropriate principles to face sustainability challenges. While M. Nussbaum initiates a theoretical debate about environmental justice for nonhumans by establishing a minimum degree of capacity for everyone, D. Schlosberg expands CA by addressing environmental issues on a more practical and less ethical basis advocating for a more natural relationship between humans and animals. As a result, this paper suggests, via a discussion of practical instances to analyse the capability approach's validation on environmental sustainability, that CA's principles are currently not fulfilling the green challenges the status quo must solve. The paper finishes by stating that a theoretical redesign would allow us to move beyond the contradiction between anthropocentric and nature-centric perspectives, eventually contributing to a productive conversation between capability theory and sustainability challenges.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Capability Approach's Contribution to the Debate on Environmental Sustainability: A Discussion of Theoretical and Empirical Issues
AU  - Chiara Rambaldi
Y1  - 2022/07/12
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
T2  - International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy
JF  - International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy
JO  - International Journal of Sustainable and Green Energy
SP  - 47
EP  - 51
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1549
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20221102.12
AB  - While the industrial revolution signaled the start of the Anthropocene epoch in which humans have become the dominant driver of geosphere alterations, a slew of environmental challenges impacting human existence have emerged, both globally and locally. Global warming, desertification, water scarcity, species extinction, water pollution, and other issues necessitate a debate about sustainable development as a means of meeting the needs of human development while also protecting the Earth's biocapacity. While international evaluations on sustainability, environmentalists, and worldwide academic specialists argue that human growth and environmental preservation are inexorably intertwined, the question of whether a successful relationship of environmental, and biodiversity justice is feasible while also aiming towards human socio-economic development arises. With these considerations in mind, this study presents a literature review discussion starting from Amartya Sen, the Capability Approach's founding father, to analyse the major CA philosophers who have contributed to the environmental debate on whether the theoretical framework requires structural reform or if it provides appropriate principles to face sustainability challenges. While M. Nussbaum initiates a theoretical debate about environmental justice for nonhumans by establishing a minimum degree of capacity for everyone, D. Schlosberg expands CA by addressing environmental issues on a more practical and less ethical basis advocating for a more natural relationship between humans and animals. As a result, this paper suggests, via a discussion of practical instances to analyse the capability approach's validation on environmental sustainability, that CA's principles are currently not fulfilling the green challenges the status quo must solve. The paper finishes by stating that a theoretical redesign would allow us to move beyond the contradiction between anthropocentric and nature-centric perspectives, eventually contributing to a productive conversation between capability theory and sustainability challenges.
VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download