{"title":"工作质量(QoW):迈向能力理论","authors":"Thomas C. Stephens","doi":"10.1080/19452829.2023.2240738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper introduces a comprehensive conceptual framework for measuring the Quality of Work (QoW) using the Capability Approach (CA). Drawing from [Robeyns,, Ingrid. 2017. Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers.] modular framework for developing Capability Theories, it proposes we conceive of work as a body of resources existing in a “space” of work. Dimensions of QoW can be identified based on how work resources enhance, or impede, the achievement of important “beings and doings” (Functionings) both inside (intrinsic importance) or outside (instrumental) this space – such as intrinsic Functionings like meaningful work; or instrumental Functionings like family- and life-fulfilment. However, it further argues that many approaches to QoW are under-specified, since they neglect the crucial ways that peoples’ wider circumstances, outside this space of work, determine peoples’ overall work-related wellbeing. This calls for indices of multi-dimensional QoW to also measure (a) the range of wider Functionings people could achieve outside their current work activity (the Capability Set); and (b) personal, social, and environmental factors which affect how work resources are converted into Functionings (Conversion Factors). It is only by taking these circumstances into account that indices can capture the true impact of the worst forms of work, by understanding who is forced to engage in this work.","PeriodicalId":46538,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Development and Capabilities","volume":"24 1","pages":"309 - 335"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Quality of Work (QoW): Towards a Capability Theory\",\"authors\":\"Thomas C. Stephens\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19452829.2023.2240738\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This paper introduces a comprehensive conceptual framework for measuring the Quality of Work (QoW) using the Capability Approach (CA). Drawing from [Robeyns,, Ingrid. 2017. Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers.] modular framework for developing Capability Theories, it proposes we conceive of work as a body of resources existing in a “space” of work. Dimensions of QoW can be identified based on how work resources enhance, or impede, the achievement of important “beings and doings” (Functionings) both inside (intrinsic importance) or outside (instrumental) this space – such as intrinsic Functionings like meaningful work; or instrumental Functionings like family- and life-fulfilment. However, it further argues that many approaches to QoW are under-specified, since they neglect the crucial ways that peoples’ wider circumstances, outside this space of work, determine peoples’ overall work-related wellbeing. This calls for indices of multi-dimensional QoW to also measure (a) the range of wider Functionings people could achieve outside their current work activity (the Capability Set); and (b) personal, social, and environmental factors which affect how work resources are converted into Functionings (Conversion Factors). It is only by taking these circumstances into account that indices can capture the true impact of the worst forms of work, by understanding who is forced to engage in this work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46538,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Development and Capabilities\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"309 - 335\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Development and Capabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2023.2240738\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Development and Capabilities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2023.2240738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文介绍了一个使用能力方法(CA)测量工作质量(QoW)的综合概念框架。引自[Robeyns, Ingrid. 2017]。幸福、自由和社会正义:能力方法的再审视。剑桥,英国:Open Book Publishers。模块化框架来发展能力理论,它建议我们将工作设想为存在于工作“空间”中的资源体。QoW的维度可以根据工作资源如何增强或阻碍重要的“存在和行为”(功能)在这个空间内部(内在重要性)或外部(工具性)的实现来确定,例如有意义的工作等内在功能;或工具性功能,如家庭和生活的实现。然而,该研究进一步指出,许多衡量QoW的方法都没有明确规定,因为它们忽视了人们在工作空间之外的更广泛环境决定人们整体工作幸福感的关键方式。这需要多维QoW的指数来衡量(a)人们在当前工作活动之外可以实现的更广泛的功能范围(能力集);(b)影响工作资源如何转化为功能的个人、社会和环境因素(转化因素)。只有将这些情况考虑在内,通过了解哪些人被迫从事这种工作,指数才能捕捉到最恶劣工作形式的真正影响。
The Quality of Work (QoW): Towards a Capability Theory
ABSTRACT This paper introduces a comprehensive conceptual framework for measuring the Quality of Work (QoW) using the Capability Approach (CA). Drawing from [Robeyns,, Ingrid. 2017. Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers.] modular framework for developing Capability Theories, it proposes we conceive of work as a body of resources existing in a “space” of work. Dimensions of QoW can be identified based on how work resources enhance, or impede, the achievement of important “beings and doings” (Functionings) both inside (intrinsic importance) or outside (instrumental) this space – such as intrinsic Functionings like meaningful work; or instrumental Functionings like family- and life-fulfilment. However, it further argues that many approaches to QoW are under-specified, since they neglect the crucial ways that peoples’ wider circumstances, outside this space of work, determine peoples’ overall work-related wellbeing. This calls for indices of multi-dimensional QoW to also measure (a) the range of wider Functionings people could achieve outside their current work activity (the Capability Set); and (b) personal, social, and environmental factors which affect how work resources are converted into Functionings (Conversion Factors). It is only by taking these circumstances into account that indices can capture the true impact of the worst forms of work, by understanding who is forced to engage in this work.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Human Development and Capabilities: A Multi-Disciplinary Journal for People-Centered Development is the peer-reviewed journal of the Human Development and Capabilities Association. It was launched in January 2000 to promote new perspectives on challenges of human development, capability expansion, poverty eradication, social justice and human rights. The Journal aims to stimulate innovative development thinking that is based on the premise that development is fundamentally about improving the well-being and agency of people, by expanding the choices and opportunities they have. Accordingly, the Journal recognizes that development is about more than just economic growth and development policy is more than just economic policy: it cuts across economic, social, political and environmental issues. The Journal publishes original work in philosophy, economics, and other social sciences that expand concepts, measurement tools and policy alternatives for human development. It provides a forum for an open exchange of ideas among a broad spectrum of academics, policy makers and development practitioners who are interested in confronting the challenges of human development at global, national and local levels.