Dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park (
2007)
Copy
BIBTEX
Abstract
International development theorists and practitioners agree that human empowerment is a
necessary part of good development. This agreement is encouraging because attention
and resources are being directed towards the important goal of empowering the
oppressed. It is problematic because the agreement is relatively superficial and masks
some deep and important disagreements about the goals and means of development
theory, policy, and practice.
Chapters One and Two compare the dominant economic growth approach to
development with the capability approach, a relatively new alternative. I determine that
the capability approach offers a more complete and therefore, superior concept of
empowerment. Chapter Three considers Thomas Pogge’s argument for the conclusion
that the praise and attention the capability approach receives cannot be justified. I
explain that Pogge’s argument is based on a misunderstanding of crucial aspects of the
capability approach, including the important role of empowerment.
Chapters Four and Five provide detailed consideration of the role of empowerment within
both Amartya Sen’s and Martha Nussbaum’s versions of the capability approach. I
conclude that although neither scholar consistently uses the term empowerment, the
concept of empowerment – both as agency and as capability-set expansion – plays a
robust role on both versions of the approach. Moreover, I make the controversial
suggestion that many of the differences between Sen and Nussbaum are more a matter of
style than substance.
Chapter Six considers the concern that Sen does not do enough to engage the role of
institutionalized power in generating inequalities that prevent individuals from being
empowered. I conclude that despite valuable contributions, Sen fails to provide a
complete account of empowerment issues. However, this is not a fatal flaw. Considering
both Sen’s contributions, and the fact that the approach is well suited to accommodate a
more complete understanding of institutionalized power and of empowerment for
development (for example, Naila Kabeer’s Social Relations Approach), it is clear that
Sen and the capability approach have offered valuable steps towards a complete concept
of empowerment.