Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2017 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 31

Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and A Human Centred Development View

Amartya Sen’in Kapasite Yaklaşımı ve İnsan Merkezli Bir Kalkınma Anlayışı

Pages
91–108
Publication Date
2017-01-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Then, this study includes the investigation of the contents and development of this approach.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Actual development can eventuate only in a society where the focus is enriching human lives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:An approach, which focuses the expansion of income or economic outcomes, is inadequate to explain such a process; a high income by itself was no defense against human deprivation, because many human choices extend far beyond economic well-being.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Then, this study includes the investigation of the contents and development of this approach.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kapasite Yaklaşımı · İnsani Gelişme · İktisadi Kalkınma

Abstract

Actual development can eventuate only in a society where the focus is enriching human lives. An approach, which focuses the expansion of income or economic outcomes, is inadequate to explain such a process; a high income by itself was no defense against human deprivation, because many human choices extend far beyond economic well-being. Amartya Sen’s influential “capability approach” constitutes the philosophical and conceptual foundation of a human centered development view. There, human development approach stands as a considerable progress in development. This approach focuses on people’s basic capabilities and their freedom by putting them in center of its analysis. Then, this study includes the investigation of the contents and development of this approach.

Özet

Gerçek anlamda bir kalkınma ancak, insanların yaşamlarını özgür bir biçimde sürdürebildikleri bir toplum içerisinde gerçekleşebilir. Yalnızca gelir artışının veya çıktı düzeyinin artırılmasını içeren iktisadi bir anlayış, böylesi bir süreci açıklamada yetersiz kalır. Gelir artışı, tek başına insani yoksunluğu açıklayamaz çünkü insanların tercihleri, iktisadi refahın çok ötesindedir. Amartya Sen’in “kapasite yaklaşımı”, insan merkezli bir kalkınma anlayışının felsefi ve kavramsal altyapısını oluşturur. Merkezine insanı alarak, onun temel kapasitelerine ve özgürlüklerine odaklanan insani gelişme yaklaşımı da, bu bağlamda yeni bir kalkınma anlayışının önerilmesinde ve bu kalkınma sürecinde önemli bir yer tutar. Bu çalışma da bu anlayışın gelişimi ve içeriğinin incelenmesini içerir

🔖

Cite This Article

UĞUR, M. S. (2017). Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and A Human Centred Development View. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 31, 91–108. https://ajindex.com/articles/139761

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Alkire, S. (2002a),
  2. Valuing Freedoms, New York: Oxford University Press.
  3. Alkire, S. (2002b), “Dimensions of Human Development”, World Development, 30(2), 181-205.
  4. Alkire, S. & J. Foster & S. Seth & M.E. Santos & J.M. Roche & P. Ballon (2015), Multidimensional Poverty: Measurement and Analysis, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  5. Anand, S. & A. Sen (1994), “Human Development Index: Methodology and Measurement”, Human Development Report Office Occasional Paper 12, New York: UNDP [Later published in S. Fukuda-Parr & A.K.S. Kumar (eds.), Readings in Human Development (2nd ed.) (138- 151), New Delhi: O.U.P. 2005].
  6. Anand, S. & A. Sen (1997), “Concepts of Human Development and Poverty: A Multidimensional Perspective”, Human Development Working Papers, New York: UNDP [Later published in S. Fukuda-Parr & A.K.S. Kumar (eds.), Readings in Human Development (2nd ed.) (228-244), New Delhi: O.U.P. 2005].
  7. Bardhan, P. (1993), “Economics of Development and The Development of Economics”, The Journal Of Economic Perspectives, 7(2) Spring, 129-142.
  8. Booysen, F. (2002), “An Overview and Evaluation of Composite Indices of Development”, Social Indicators Research, 59, 115-151.
  9. Cahill, M.B. (2002), “Diminishing returns to GDP and the Human Development Index”, Applied Economics Letters, 9, 885-887.
  10. Cahill, M.B. (2005), “Is The Human Development Index Redundant?”, Eastern Economic Journal, 31(1) Winter, 1-5.
  11. Clark, D.A. (2006), “Capability Approach”, in: D.A. Clark (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Development Studies, (32-45), Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Fleurbaey, M. (2002), “Development, Capabilities and Freedom”, Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2) Summer, 71-77.
  12. Foster, J. & L.P. Lopez-Calva & M. Szekely (2005), “Measuring the Distribution of Human Development: methodology and an application to Mexico”, Journal of Human Development, 6(1) March, 5-29.
  13. Fosu, A.K. & G. Mwabu (2010), “Human Development in Africa”, Human Development Research Paper 2010/08, June, N.Y.: UNDP. Frank, A.G. (1966), “The Development of Underdevelopment”, Monthly Review, 18(4) September, 17-37.
  14. Fukuda-Parr, S. (2003), “The Human Development Paradigm: Operationalizing Sen’s Ideas on Capabilities”, Feminist Economics, 9(2-3), 301-317.
  15. Fukuda-Parr, S. (2005), “Rescuing The Human Development Concept From the HDI: Reflections on a New Agenda”, in: S. Fukuda-Parr & A.K.S. Kumar (eds.), Readings in Human Development (2nd ed.) (117-124), New Delhi: O.U.P. Gasper, D. (2002), “Is Sen’s Capabilit