The Social Background of Capabilities for Freedoms

Journal of Human Development

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 389-414

  Richardson, Henry S ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Capabilities; Freedom; Liberties; Nussbaum; Sen

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449561950     PISSN: 14699516     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14649880701462213     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Alkire, S., 2002. Valuing Freedoms: Sen's Capability Approach and Poverty Reduction, NY: Oxford University Press.
2. Darwall, S., 2006. The Second‐person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
3. Dowding, K., 2006. ‘Can capabilities reconcile freedom and equality?’. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14: 323–336.
4. Dowding, K., and Van Hees, M., 2003. ‘The construction of rights’. American Political Science Review, 97: 281–293.
5. Gaertner, W., Pattanaik, P. K., and Suzumura, K., 1992. ‘Individual rights revisited’. Economica, 59: 161–177.
6. Hohfeld, W. N., 1978. Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning, Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
7. Horty, J., 2001. Agency and Deontic Logic, NY: Oxford University Press.
8. Hughes, D. M., 2001. ‘The “Natasha” trade: transnational sex trafficking’. National Institute of Justice Journal,: 8–15. January
9. Human Rights Watch. 2003. ‘Women's work: discrimination against women in Ukrainian labor force’. Human Rights Watch,: 1–52.
10. Kenny, A., 1976. “ ‘Human abilities and dynamic modalities’ ”. In Essays on Explanation and Understanding: Studies in the Foundations of Humanities and Social Sciences, Edited by: Manninen, J, and Tuomela, R. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Co.
11. Nussbaum, M. C., 1986. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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: Harvard University Press.
14. Pettit, P., 2000. ‘Democracy, electoral and contestatory’. NOMOS, 42: 105–144.
15. Pettit, P., 2006. ‘Freedom in the market’. Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, 5: 131–149.
16. Pogge, T., 1995. “ ‘Three problems with contractarian‐consequentialist ways of assessing social institutions’ ”. In The Just Society, Edited by: Paul, E. F, Miller Jr., F, and Paul, J. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Pogge, T., 2002. ‘Can the capability approach be justified?’. Philosophical Topics, 30: 167–228.
18. Rawls, J., 1996. Political Liberalism, N.Y: Columbia University Press. revised edition
19. Rawls, J., 1999. A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. revised edition
20. Richardson, H. S., 2002. Democratic Autonomy: Public Reasoning about the Ends of Policy, NY: Oxford University Press.
21. Sen, A. K., 1982. “ ‘The impossibility of a paretian liberal,’ ”. In Choice, Welfare, and Measurement, 285–290. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
22. Sen, A. K., 1984. Collective Choice and Social Welfare, Amsterdam: North‐Holland.
23. Sen, A. K., 1985. ‘Well‐being, agency and freedom: the Dewey lectures 1984’. Journal of Philosophy, 82: 169–221.
24. Sen, A. K., 1992. Inequality Reexamined, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
25. Sen, A. K., 1999. Development as Freedom, N.Y: Random House.
26. Sen, A. K., 2004. ‘Dialogue capabilities, lists, and public reason: continuing the conversation’. Feminist Economics, 10: 77–80.