Justice environnementale et approche par les capabilités

Nous montrons que l'approche par les capabilités offre de sérieuses pistes pour donner tout son sens à la justice environnementale abordée sous l'angle de la justice comparative. L'approche des capabilités permet de prendre en compte les trois enjeux que soulève la justice environnementale : la distribution des bénéfices et des nuisances liés à l'environnement, les enjeux de participation des populations dans l'élaboration des régulations environnementales, la reconnaissance des identités collectives. Cependant, cela suppose d'une part de donner une priorité à la liberté de processus sur la liberté d'opportunités, d'autre part l'introduction du concept de capabilité collective

Combining the capability approach and Max-Neef’s needs approach for a better assessment of multidimensional well-being and inequalities: a case study perspective with vulnerable teenagers of the region of Paris (France)

Few works have tried to articulate the Capability Approach originally developed by Amartya Sen and the Fundamental Human Needs approach developed by Manfred Max-Neef. The goal of this paper is precisely to combine those two approaches in order (i) to build a truly multidimensional framework for assessing well-being and inequalities and (ii) to capture the complexity of human well-being from freedom of choice to needs satisfaction. To test this new framework we have conducted an empirical experimentation with vulnerable teenagers (15-17 years old) living in the suburbs of Paris (Dammarie-les-Lys, France) who suffer strong social exclusion and education difficulties. We have organized participatory workshops and then a questionnaire survey with the vulnerable groups and with a control group in order to assess subjective well-being inequalities. The results clearly demonstrate that the group of vulnerable teenagers suffers inequalities in all dimensions of well-being that we tested. These dimensions correspond to the nine axiological needs (Subsistence, Protection, Affection, Understanding, Participation, Leisure, Creation, Identity, Freedom) and the four existential needs (Being, Having, Doing, Interacting) that Max-Neef identifies in his matrix. Addressing inequalities in all of these dimensions clearly help to operationalize multidimensional well-being assessment. Regarding the theoretical side, on the one hand, our tentative for articulating the two approaches allows us to introduce the two categories of axiological and existential capabilities, to better link the concepts of capabilities, functionings, satisfiers and needs and finally to debate further the idea of a list of well-being dimensions by offering a matrix of ten capabilities. Moreover, the fundamental human approach is complemented by integrating freedom of choice into the conceptualization and assessment of well-being. This allows investigating the potential causes of needs deprivation by using the different parameters that condition the acquisition of capabilities

Combining the capability approach and Max-Neef’s needs approach for a better assessment of multidimensional well-being and inequalities: a case study perspective with vulnerable teenagers of the region of Paris (France)

Few works have tried to articulate the Capability Approach originally developed by Amartya Sen and the Fundamental Human Needs approach developed by Manfred Max-Neef. The goal of this paper is precisely to combine those two approaches in order (i) to build a truly multidimensional framework for assessing well-being and inequalities and (ii) to capture the complexity of human well-being from freedom of choice to needs satisfaction. To test this new framework we have conducted an empirical experimentation with vulnerable teenagers (15-17 years old) living in the suburbs of Paris (Dammarie-les-Lys, France) who suffer strong social exclusion and education difficulties. We have organized participatory workshops and then a questionnaire survey with the vulnerable groups and with a control group in order to assess subjective well-being inequalities. The results clearly demonstrate that the group of vulnerable teenagers suffers inequalities in all dimensions of well-being that we tested. These dimensions correspond to the nine axiological needs (Subsistence, Protection, Affection, Understanding, Participation, Leisure, Creation, Identity, Freedom) and the four existential needs (Being, Having, Doing, Interacting) that Max-Neef identifies in his matrix. Addressing inequalities in all of these dimensions clearly help to operationalize multidimensional well-being assessment. Regarding the theoretical side, on the one hand, our tentative for articulating the two approaches allows us to introduce the two categories of axiological and existential capabilities, to better link the concepts of capabilities, functionings, satisfiers and needs and finally to debate further the idea of a list of well-being dimensions by offering a matrix of ten capabilities. Moreover, the fundamental human approach is complemented by integrating freedom of choice into the conceptualization and assessment of well-being. This allows investigating the potential causes of needs deprivation by using the different parameters that condition the acquisition of capabilities

Combining the capability approach and Max-Neef’s needs approach for a better assessment of multidimensional well-being and inequalities: a case study perspective with vulnerable teenagers of the region of Paris (France)

Few works have tried to articulate the Capability Approach originally developed by Amartya Sen and the Fundamental Human Needs approach developed by Manfred Max-Neef. The goal of this paper is precisely to combine those two approaches in order (i) to build a truly multidimensional framework for assessing well-being and inequalities and (ii) to capture the complexity of human well-being from freedom of choice to needs satisfaction. To test this new framework we have conducted an empirical experimentation with vulnerable teenagers (15-17 years old) living in the suburbs of Paris (Dammarie-les-Lys, France) who suffer strong social exclusion and education difficulties. We have organized participatory workshops and then a questionnaire survey with the vulnerable groups and with a control group in order to assess subjective well-being inequalities. The results clearly demonstrate that the group of vulnerable teenagers suffers inequalities in all dimensions of well-being that we tested. These dimensions correspond to the nine axiological needs (Subsistence, Protection, Affection, Understanding, Participation, Leisure, Creation, Identity, Freedom) and the four existential needs (Being, Having, Doing, Interacting) that Max-Neef identifies in his matrix. Addressing inequalities in all of these dimensions clearly help to operationalize multidimensional well-being assessment. Regarding the theoretical side, on the one hand, our tentative for articulating the two approaches allows us to introduce the two categories of axiological and existential capabilities, to better link the concepts of capabilities, functionings, satisfiers and needs and finally to debate further the idea of a list of well-being dimensions by offering a matrix of ten capabilities. Moreover, the fundamental human approach is complemented by integrating freedom of choice into the conceptualization and assessment of well-being. This allows investigating the potential causes of needs deprivation by using the different parameters that condition the acquisition of capabilities

Discursive synergies for a 'Great Transformation' towards sustainability : pragmatic contributions to a necessary dialogue between human development, degrowth, and buen vivir

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu MdM-2015-0552There is a growing awareness that a whole-societal " Great Transformation " of Polanyian scale is needed to bring global developmental trajectories in line with ecological imperatives. The mainstream Sustainable Development discourse, however, insists in upholding the myth of compatibility of current growth-based trajectories with biophysical planetary boundaries. This article explores potentially fertile complementarities among trendy discourses challenging conventional notions of (un)sustainable development - Human Development, Degrowth, and Buen Vivir - and outlines pathways for their realization. Human Development presents relative transfor-mative strengths in political terms, while Degrowth holds keys to unlocking unsustainable material-structural entrenchments of contemporary socioeconomic arrangements, and Buen Vivir offers a space of cultural alterity and critique of the Euro-Atlantic cultural constellation. The weaknesses or blind spots ('Achilles heels') of each discourse can be compensated through the strengths of the other ones, creating a dialogical virtuous circle that would open pathways towards a global new " Great Transformation ". As one of the main existing platforms for pluralist and strong-sustainability discussions, Ecological Economics is in a privileged position to deliberately foster such strategic discursive dialogue. A pathway towards such dialogue is illuminated through a model identifying and articulating key discursive docking points