Individual capabilities are often only realized within groups

Evidence

While the capabilities listed by Sen and by Nussbaum are almost exclusively proposed and examined solely at the individual level, it is clear that many capabilities are either assisted by association with groups or are only satisfied within groups. Stewart (2005: 185), unique among capability theorists, takes this tack, arguing that ā€˜one should analyze and categorize group capabilities as well as individual capabilities’. She posits that groups are important to capabilities in three ways: because groups ā€˜affect people’s sense of well-being’, they are ā€˜important instrumentally in determining efficacy and resource shares’, and because ā€˜groups influence values and choices, and hence the extent to which individuals choose to pursue valuable capabilities for themselves and for others’ (p. 190). Group membership can bring enhanced selfrespect and empowerment to individuals; some bring social goods and needs, others are used for economic purposes. — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 156

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Defines the group-capabilities move — the idea that justice needs a group-level capability analysis, not just individual listings.
  • XREF: Challenges the individual framing of capability lists already extracted in chs 27 and 30 — group membership mediates which capabilities are realized. — connects to: Justice theory must extend capabilities to groups, not just individuals — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 160; A group’s social interconnectedness outweighs individual intelligence in producing innovation — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 694; Group outcomes can exceed or fall short of members’ individual qualities — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 130 (+1 more)

Broader Connections