IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/sticas/case142.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Developing and agreeing a capability list in the British context: What can be learnt from social survey data on ‘rights’?

Author

Listed:
  • Polly Vizard

Abstract

The paper examines what can be learnt about the 'valuation' of freedoms and opportunities (or capabilities) using a general population social survey data source on values. On the assumption that rights can be understood as protecting underlying critical freedoms and opportunities, social survey data on public attitudes towards the rights that people "should have" is interpreted as providing empirical evidence on the 'valuation' of freedoms and opportunities by individuals and groups. The paper addresses the extent to which data of this type provides empirical evidence of the 'valuation' of the 10 domains of freedom and opportunity that are specified in the capability lists for adults and children that have been developed and applied in previous projects (namely, Life; Health; Physical security; Legal security; Standard of living; Education and learning; Productive and valued activities; Individual, family and social life; Identity and self-respect; Participation, influence and voice). Particular emphasis is put on moving beyond the 'legalistic' methodology for deriving a 'human rights-based capability list' applied in previous projects, and examining whether empirical research on values provides an alternative, overlapping or supplementary informational base for deriving a list of this type. The research findings can be interpreted as providing broad empirical underpinnings for the 'valuation' of nine out of the ten domains of freedom and opportunity specified in the capability lists that have been developed and applied in previous projects. The Life domain was effectively not covered by the research exercise, since the underlying social survey data did not include questions on public attitudes towards the right to life.

Suggested Citation

  • Polly Vizard, 2010. "Developing and agreeing a capability list in the British context: What can be learnt from social survey data on ‘rights’?," CASE Papers case142, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
  • Handle: RePEc:cep:sticas:case142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/CASEpaper142.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Anand & Graham Hunter & Ian Carter & Keith Dowding & Francesco Guala & Martin Van Hees, 2009. "The Development of Capability Indicators," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 125-152.
    2. Crocker,David A., 2008. "Ethics of Global Development," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885195, October.
    3. Ingrid Robeyns, 2005. "Selecting Capabilities for Quality of Life Measurement," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 191-215, October.
    4. Polly Vizard, 2007. "Specifying and Justifying a Basic Capability Set: Should the International Human Rights Framework be given a more Direct Role?," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 225-250.
    5. J. Scott Long & Jeremy Freese, 2006. "Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, edition 2, number long2, March.
    6. Polly Vizard, 2010. "What do the public think about economic and social rights? Research Report to Inform the Debate about a Bill of Rights and a Written Constitution," CASE Reports casereport61, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    7. Polly Vizard, 2010. "What do the public think about economic and social rights," CASE Briefs 28, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    8. Sarah Smith, 2004. "Can the retirement consumption puzzle be solved?," IFS Working Papers W04/07, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Mario Biggeri & Renato Libanora & Stefano Mariani & Leonardo Menchini, 2006. "Children Conceptualizing their Capabilities: Results of a Survey Conducted during the First Children's World Congress on Child Labour," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 59-83.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Vizard, Polly, 2010. "Developing and agreeing a capability list in the British context: what can be learnt from social survey data on ‘rights’?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 43866, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Graham, Carol & Nikolova, Milena, 2015. "Bentham or Aristotle in the Development Process? An Empirical Investigation of Capabilities and Subjective Well-Being," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 163-179.
    3. Fernando Bucheli, 2021. "Before Entering Adulthood: Developing an Index of Capabilities for Young Adults in Bogota," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(3), pages 965-1002, June.
    4. Lessmann, Ortrud, 2012. "Applying the Capability Approach Empirically: An Overview with Special Attention to Labor," management revue. Socio-economic Studies, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 23(2), pages 98-118.
    5. Karen Hofmann & Dominik Schori & Thomas Abel, 2013. "Self-Reported Capabilities Among Young Male Adults in Switzerland: Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of a German, French and Italian Version of a Closed Survey Instrument," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 723-738, November.
    6. Sabina Alkire, 2018. "The Research Agenda on Multidimensional Poverty Measurement: Important and As-yet Unanswered Questions," OPHI Working Papers ophiwp119_3.pdf, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    7. Francesco Burchi & Pasquale Muro & Eszter Kollar, 2018. "Constructing Well-Being and Poverty Dimensions on Political Grounds," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 441-462, June.
    8. Sophie Mitra & Kris Jones & Brandon Vick & David Brown & Eileen McGinn & Mary Alexander, 2013. "Implementing a Multidimensional Poverty Measure Using Mixed Methods and a Participatory Framework," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 1061-1081, February.
    9. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Vassilis Tselios, 2019. "Well-being, Political Decentralisation and Governance Quality in Europe," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 69-93, January.
    10. Biagi, Bianca & Ladu, Maria Gabriela & Meleddu, Marta, 2018. "Urban Quality of Life and Capabilities: An Experimental Study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 137-152.
    11. Martin Binder & Alex Coad, 2011. "Disentangling the Circularity in Sen’s Capability Approach: An Analysis of the Co-Evolution of Functioning Achievement and Resources," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 327-355, September.
    12. Bladimir de la Hoz-Rosales & José A. Camacho-Ballesta & Ignacio Tamayo-Torres, 2019. "Effects of innovative entrepreneurship and the information society on social progress: an international analysis," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(2), pages 782-813, December.
    13. Fernández-Baldor, Álvaro & Boni, Alejandra & Hueso, Andrés, 2012. "Technologies for Freedom: Una visión de la tecnología para el desarrollo humano /Technologies for Freedom: A Technological Approach to Human Development," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 30, pages 971-996, Diciembre.
    14. Jinsuk Yang & Qing Hao & Mahmut Yaşar, 2023. "Institutional investors and cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The 2000–2018 period," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 553-583, September.
    15. Prabhir Poruthiyil, 2013. "Weaning Business Ethics from Strategic Economism: The Development Ethics Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 116(4), pages 735-749, September.
    16. Gregory Thompson & Jeffrey Brown & Torsha Bhattacharya, 2012. "What Really Matters for Increasing Transit Ridership: Understanding the Determinants of Transit Ridership Demand in Broward County, Florida," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(15), pages 3327-3345, November.
    17. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    18. Seung-Whan Choi & James A. Piazza, 2017. "Foreign Military Interventions and Suicide Attacks," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(2), pages 271-297, February.
    19. Clara Berridge & Yuanjin Zhou & Julie M. Robillard & Jeffrey Kaye, 2023. "AI Companion Robot Data Sharing: Preferences of an Online Cohort and Policy Implications," Journal of Elder Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 19-54, June.
    20. Mikael Svensson & Fredrik Nilsson & Karl Arnberg, 2015. "Reimbursement Decisions for Pharmaceuticals in Sweden: The Impact of Disease Severity and Cost Effectiveness," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(11), pages 1229-1236, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Capability approach; capability lists; human rights; public attitudes; values;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cep:sticas:case142. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/case/_new/publications/ .

    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.