Misunderstandings of Capability Approach: Towards Paradigm Pluralism

 Capability approach figures among the most prominent approaches of social science disciplines. One reason for this is that in a world plagued by daunting inequalities and repressions the term capability presents a whole host of potentials. Another reason is that the failures or shortcomings encountered in development studies the last several decades have created something of a vogue for capability approach both in academia and industry. In the meantime, however, capability approach represents one of the most misunderstood and misused approaches of modern day times. One most pervasive misunderstanding or misuse comes with the idea that capability approach is unable to provide a definite, exhaustive list of capabilities nor to achieve measurable units of development. This idea is further compounded by the fact that Sen (1999, 2009) himself the originator of capability approach has invariably dismissed the discussions concerned with list and measurability. The present paper aimed to highlight the core nature of capability approach, while dispelling the misunderstandings surrounding it. Content analysis was conducted to appraise how capability approach was presented. Sen works were thus perused in light of a wider social science literature, with a focus on methodology. This is mainly because development studies are an interdisciplinary field. In so doing the paper was able to reposition capability approach as an interpretive, qualitative approach. It was thus found that authors continue to misuse and view capability approach through the lens of quantitative research. It was also found that interpretivism is by no means defined or evaluated based on the ability to supply a list of specific items and the measurability thereof. The paper suggested some paths for future research.