IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v13y2010i2p137-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing capability instead of achieved functionings in risk analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Colleen Murphy
  • Paolo Gardoni

Abstract

A capability approach has been proposed to risk analysis, where risk is conceptualized as the probability that capabilities are reduced. Capabilities refer to the genuine opportunities of individuals to achieve valuable doings and beings, such as being adequately nourished. Such doings and beings are called functionings. A current debate in risk analysis and other fields where a capability approach has been developed concerns whether capabilities or actual achieved functionings should be used. This paper argues that in risk analysis the consequences of hazardous scenarios should be conceptualized in terms of capabilities, not achieved functionings. Furthermore, the paper proposes a method for assessing capabilities, which considers the levels of achieved functionings of other individuals with similar boundary conditions. The capability of an individual can then be captured statistically based on the variability of the achieved functionings over the considered population.

Suggested Citation

  • Colleen Murphy & Paolo Gardoni, 2010. "Assessing capability instead of achieved functionings in risk analysis," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 137-147, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:13:y:2010:i:2:p:137-147
    DOI: 10.1080/13669870903126259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669870903126259
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669870903126259?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nussbaum, Martha C., 2001. "Symposium on Amartya Sen's philosophy: 5 Adaptive preferences and women's options," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 67-88, April.
    2. Colleen Murphy & Paolo Gardoni, 2006. "The Role of Society in Engineering Risk Analysis: A Capabilities‐Based Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 1073-1083, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paolo Gardoni & Colleen Murphy, 2014. "A Scale of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1208-1227, July.
    2. Boakye, Jessica & Guidotti, Roberto & Gardoni, Paolo & Murphy, Colleen, 2022. "The role of transportation infrastructure on the impact of natural hazards on communities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    3. Kourtit, Karima & Nijkamp, Peter & Banica, Alexandru, 2023. "An analysis of natural disasters’ effects – A global comparative study of ‘Blessing in Disguise’," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    4. Armin Tabandeh & Paolo Gardoni & Colleen Murphy, 2018. "A Reliability‐Based Capability Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 410-424, February.
    5. Paul Mark Mitchell & Tracy E. Roberts & Pelham M. Barton & Joanna Coast, 2017. "Applications of the Capability Approach in the Health Field: A Literature Review," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 345-371, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Armin Tabandeh & Paolo Gardoni & Colleen Murphy, 2018. "A Reliability‐Based Capability Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 410-424, February.
    2. Michael Toze & Julie Fish & Trish Hafford-Letchfield & Kathryn Almack, 2020. "Applying a Capabilities Approach to Understanding Older LGBT People’s Disclosures of Identity in Community Primary Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Isaac G. K. Ansah & Munkaila Lambongang & Samuel A. Donkoh, 2020. "Ghana’s Planting for Food and Jobs Programme: A Look at the Role of Capability in Farmers’ Participation," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 161-182, April.
    4. Brand-Correa, Lina I. & Steinberger, Julia K., 2017. "A Framework for Decoupling Human Need Satisfaction From Energy Use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 43-52.
    5. Viccaro, Mauro & Romano, Severino & Prete, Carmelina & Cozzi, Mario, 2021. "Rural planning? An integrated dynamic model for assessing quality of life at a local scale," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Nicolai Suppa, 2021. "Walls of glass. Measuring deprivation in social participation," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 385-411, June.
    7. Guoqiang Shen & Long Zhou & Yao Wu & Zhiming Cai, 2018. "A Global Expected Risk Analysis of Fatalities, Injuries, and Damages by Natural Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    8. Nancy Folbre, 2012. "Should Women Care Less? Intrinsic Motivation and Gender Inequality," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 50(4), pages 597-619, December.
    9. Lelkes, Orsolya, 2006. "Knowing what is good for you: Empirical analysis of personal preferences and the "objective good"," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 285-307, April.
    10. Lelkes, Orsolya, 2005. "Knowing what is good for you: empirical analysis of personal preferences and the 'objective good'," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6270, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Sollis, Kate & Yap, Mandy & Campbell, Paul & Biddle, Nicholas, 2022. "Conceptualisations of wellbeing and quality of life: A systematic review of participatory studies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    12. Regina Schoell & Claudia R. Binder, 2009. "System Perspectives of Experts and Farmers Regarding the Role of Livelihood Assets in Risk Perception: Results from the Structured Mental Model Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 205-222, February.
    13. Afschin Gandjour, 2010. "Theoretical Foundation of Patient v. Population Preferences in Calculating QALYs," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(4), pages 57-63, July.
    14. Van Ootegem, Luc & Spillemaeckers, Sophie, 2010. "With a focus on well-being and capabilities," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 384-390, June.
    15. Ryan, Jean & Pereira, Rafael H.M., 2021. "What are we missing when we measure accessibility? Comparing calculated and self-reported accounts among older people," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    16. Boakye, Jessica & Guidotti, Roberto & Gardoni, Paolo & Murphy, Colleen, 2022. "The role of transportation infrastructure on the impact of natural hazards on communities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    17. David Bayliss & Wendy Olsen & Pierre Walthery, 2017. "Well-Being During Recession in the UK," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 369-387, June.
    18. Paolo Gardoni & Colleen Murphy, 2014. "A Scale of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1208-1227, July.
    19. David J. Yu & Michael L. Schoon & Jason K. Hawes & Seungyoon Lee & Jeryang Park & P. Suresh C. Rao & Laura K. Siebeneck & Satish V. Ukkusuri, 2020. "Toward General Principles for Resilience Engineering," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(8), pages 1509-1537, August.
    20. Laura LAMOLLA & Conxita FOLGUERA‐I‐BELLMUNT & Xavier FERNÁNDEZ‐I‐MARÍN, 2021. "Working‐time preferences among women: Challenging assumptions on underemployment, work centrality and work–life balance," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 160(3), pages 431-451, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:13:y:2010:i:2:p:137-147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.