Ilse Oosterlaken

Design for Development: A Capability Approach

In this article I suggest a ‘capability approach’ towards designing for society, and particularly, the world’s poor. I will explain that this approach assigns a central place to human capabilities in our discussions of justice and development and criticizes a focus on utility or preference satisfaction. In the literature on the capability approach technical artifacts have hardly been acknowledged as an input for human capabilities, although Sen and some other authors sometimes refer to the example of a bicycle that expand one’s capabilities to move about. Using Bijker’s analysis of the history of the development of the bicycle, I argue that the details of design are very important for an artifact’s impact on human capabilities. In current design practice the focus is, however, too much on things like usability and user satisfaction. Where Buchanan has argued that design should rather find its ultimate ground in human rights and human dignity, I propose human capabilities as an alternative. Due to the functionalistic orientation of the capability approach, this alternative may be more fruitful and appealing to for designers. Analogue to ‘value sensitive design’ – an emerging approach in the ethics of technology - we should thus look into the possibility of ‘capability sensitive design’. What this entails exactly should be investigated, but it is likely that it will turn out to have commonalities with existing design movements like participatory design and universal design. The article will end with some suggestions for further research on a capability approach of design.

Inserting Technology in the Relational Ontology of Sen's Capability Approach

In the July 2009 issue of this journal, Smith and Seward presented a critical realist ontology of human capabilities. Using insights from philosophy of technology/science and technology studies, it is argued that their ontology can and should be extended; not only individuals and social structures, but also technological artifacts should be recognized as important constituents of human capabilities.

Editorial: ICT and the capability approach

founded by econ-omist Amartya Sen and philosopher Martha Nussbaumattaches central importance to individual human capabili-ties. These are the effective freedoms or real opportunitiesof people to achieve valuable ‘beings and doings’ (alsocalled ‘functionings’ by capability theorists). Resources—including technical artifacts—may contribute to theexpansion of one’s capabilities, but there may also be allsorts of ‘conversion factors’ in place that prevent this. Theapproach highlights the ‘multidimensionality’ of well-being and sees people as active agents shaping their ownlives. In 1998 Sen won the Nobel Prize in economics forhis work, which has deeply influenced the United NationsDevelopment Program (UNDP). In the field of develop-ment studies the CA has indeed gained popularity, but thisis not the only area of application.One of the first articles to apply the CA to ICT was—asfar as we know—that of Garnham (1997). ‘‘Thinking ofentitlements in terms of functionings and capabilities’’, hearguedconvincingly,‘‘allows ustogetbehindthe superficialindices of access and usage that we so often use’’ for ICTpolicy purposes. In the last couple of years an increasingnumber of scholars seem to discover the potential of the CAfor deliberations about ICT. For example, Van den HovenandRooksby(2008)acknowledgetheprofoundnessofSen’scritique on the Rawlsian concept of primary goods in theirargument concerning information and distributive justice.And Sen himself has recently (2010) also taken up the topicof ICT, discussing the positive contribution of the mobilephone to the worldwide expansion of human capabilities.Ethics and Information Technology had so far published twoarticles as part of this growing body of literature: a broad,agenda-setting article (Johnstone 2007) and an applicationto the digital divide, more in particular websites ‘missing’ inthe South (Wresch 2009).This special issue now brings together seven new arti-cles on the topic. It contains a mix of theoretical reflectionsand some applications, and the articles are broadly orderedfrom the more abstract to the more concrete. The threearticles that present the most concrete, detailed cases andthat are thus introduced towards the end of this editorial,happen to all focus on ‘ICT for Development’ (ICT4D).Although of great ethical significance, the topics of povertyand development have so far not been covered in muchdetail in this journal, and articles on ICT4D tend to bepublished in specialized journals.

Marrying the Capability Approach, Appropriate Technology and STS: The Case of Podcasting Devices in Zimbabwe

How can our knowledge of technology, including its design, be used to enhance the capabilities of all people? What is an appropriate technology? Can the choices people make about technology be embedded into the design process? Can the capability approach contribute to sustainable, appropriate technological solutions for development challenges? These are just some of the key questions posed in this chapter. First we position ICT development interventions as a useful vehicle for exploring the added value of the capability approach. Second we introduce the case of podcasting in Zimbabwe to provide a practical example. We explain what a capability approach of such a case would entail. This is then rooted in the appropriate technology movement, to which the capability approach may contribute its theoretical framework. Next, it is discussed how insights and theories from science and technology studies may be helpful in better understanding the complex dynamics between technology and human capabilities. These discussions then lead to a section about technology choice, for which well-being and agency are important considerations. It is argued that deliberate technology choice is the key to answering the questions posed earlier.

Applying Value Sensitive Design (VSD) to Wind Turbines and Wind Parks: An Exploration

Community acceptance still remains a challenge for wind energy projects. The most popular explanation for local opposition, the Not in My Backyard effect, has received fierce criticism in the past decade. Critics argue that opposition is not merely a matter of selfishness or ignorance, but that moral, ecological and aesthetic values play an important role. In order to better take such values into account, a more bottom-up, participatory decision process is usually proposed. Research on this topic focusses on either stakeholder motivations/attitudes, or their behavior during project implementation. This paper proposes a third research focus, namely the ‘objects’ which elicit certain behavioral responses and attitudes—the wind turbine and parks. More concretely, this paper explores Value Sensitive Design (VSD) as way to arrive at wind turbines and parks that better embed or reflect key values. After a critical discussion of the notion of acceptance versus acceptability and support, the paper discusses existing literature on ecology and aesthetics in relation to wind turbine/park design, which could serve as ‘building blocks’ of a more integral VSD approach of the topic. It also discusses the challenge of demarcating wind park projects as VSD projects. A further challenge is that VSD has been applied mainly at the level of technical artifacts, whereas wind parks can best be conceptualized as socio-technical system. This new application would therefore expand the current practice of VSD, and may as a consequence also lead to interesting new insights for the VSD community. The paper concludes that such an outcome-oriented approach of wind turbines and park is worth exploring further, as a supplement to rather than a replacement of the process-oriented approach that is promoted by the current literature on community acceptance of wind parks.

The Capability Approach, Technology and Design: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead

This introduction to the book The Capability Approach, Technology and Design consists of five parts. After a very short general introduction, I will first briefly present the capability approach, including the main concepts and debates about it. Next, I will – in an extensive literature review – take stock of what has been published so far on the capability approach, technology and design – what are the most interesting themes, discussions and ways of applying the approach? This will be divided in two sections: one on technology in general and one, more specifically, on ICT. Then I will highlight some interesting points and recurring themes from the different chapters of this book. I will end with some final reflections on the future of this emerging research topic.

Inappropriate Artefact, Unjust Design? Human Diversity as a Key Concern in the Capability Approach and Inclusive Design

Human beings differ from one another in countless ways. Within political philosophy this fact has been emphasized by the capability approach. A recurring example is that a bicycle often does not expand what a disabled person can do or be. Within engineering human diversity has been addressed by social design movements like universal/inclusive design. These movements seek practical solutions for its challenges, by creating products that do expand the capabilities of formerly excluded user groups. An example is a manually operated tricycle for disabled people in developing countries, or buildings that are accessible for wheelchairs. Using insights from analytical philosophy of technology I will first argue that the commonalities between both perspectives run deeper than one might think; The concern for human capabilities is deeply engrained in the nature of technical artifacts and engineering design. Secondly, I will give a philosophical account of the meaning of and grounds for statement like ‘this bicycle is inappropriate for disabled users’. One might say that the capability approach and the inclusive design movement offer a forceful reminder to philosophy of technology of the importance of such statements in light of human diversity. However, to make a step from a judgment of inappropriateness to a judgment of injustice – as we do in the case of wheelchair-unfriendly buildings – requires further normative principles. The capability is able to contribute to this, considering its arguments for the normative value of some human capabilities.

Towards an Ethics of Technology and Human Development

One of the societal challenges that engineering in a global world faces is that of making technology work in the context of developing countries and poverty reduction, to make it truly contribute to human development. This makes the relatively young field of development ethics potentially highly relevant to engineering, but unfortunately it has so far hardly addressed technology. To make its application to technology more than superficial, it is important to thoroughly explore its connections to engineering ethics, to ethics of technology, and even philosophy of technology more broadly. This claim is illustrated with the so-called ‘capability approach’, which is nowadays very popular within development ethics and which attaches central moral importance to individual human capabilities. The chapter discusses how insights from philosophy and ethics of technology are useful, among others, to better conceptualize the relation between technical artifacts and valuable human capabilities. In this way the chapter makes a small theoretical contribution towards an endeavor to create an ethics of ‘technology and human development.’

Economic Complexity and Human Development: How Economic Diversification and Social Networks Affect Human Agency and Welfare

distinction for the success of Khader’s theory. These questions notwithstanding, this work makes an exhaustive analysis of a difficult and important problem, offering both practical and philosophical guidance for thinking about adaptive preferences. It is an important contribution to studies in which questions of multiculturalism and moral relativism complicate the search for answers. Khader’s book also contributes to this discussion by reclaiming the dignity, empowerment, and sense of self-worth of individual women who exhibit inappropriately adaptive preferences, an important move in a discourse that ultimately seeks improvement of the human condition.

Technologies of Choice? ICTs, Development and the Capabilities Approach

complexities and often misidentifies the causality linking specific reforms to results in what we might call the “evaluation gap” (p. 16). These problems may be overcome by eschewing normatively “thin” and instrumental approaches in favour of an alternative that is more “thick” and focused on justice and rights. Existing measures of evaluating reform and practice are often little more than inferential. This does not entail our abandoning such efforts, but rather retaking stock and adapting a different perspective. Part 3 offers three chapters providing an illuminating, rich tapestry of empirical evidence to support the central argument. Armytage considers the cases of the Asian Development Bank, the experience of Australia’s aid agency in Papua New Guinea and a selection of reform practitioners across the Asia Pacific region. Many themes emerge, but one that stood out for this reader is evidence that an instrumental approach to judicial reform may not secure justice especially when implemented top-down with a focus on outcomes rather than process. A more comprehensive approach based on capability may help overcome these known problems by offering a more integrated approach to law and political justice. Plus, a focus on capability can achieve development goals such as propoor empowerment often lacking in more traditional approaches to development. Furthermore, a capability approach model does not depend exclusively on the state for its realization. Thus, such a model may have greater reach and ability to become realized than existing models. This rights-based programme for development has many attractions. One concern is that it perhaps is more convincing regarding how others have gone wrong than regarding how it will prove right. The comprehensive critiques of the many failings of past and current judicial reforms are alone worth the modest price tag in a compelling commentary that exposes these flaws with extensive scholarship to support findings. Nonetheless, Armytage may be right that there remains deep disagreement over guiding principles, but we must know a bit more about how capability and a neo-Aristotelian understanding of justice might offer a more compelling alternative rather than yet another approach added to the mix. Nevertheless, Reforming Justice is a major contribution to how we might think about the institutionalization of the capability approach and the role that judicial reform can and should play in development.