View - ResearchGate
View - ResearchGate View - ResearchGate
Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a Multidimensional Framework for Human Development education (the goal of universal primary education). 1 These are the three disciplines where the MDG’s targeted human capabilities development, and therefore it can be called its list of ‘universally applicable capabilities”. It could be seen that participation and security are the most conspicuous omissions from this list. Participation typifies the incorporation of recipient’s choices, priorities and concerns and it addresses the long term dimensions of human development by taking care of the issues of ownership and functional sustainability. Without it any agenda remains both transient and alien. Security’s importance has swelled in a polarized world where the ease to interact has also incremented the convenience to sabotage. It signifies the capability to protect oneself against threat-immediate or foreseen, present or future. A diminutive security seriously compromises even the utility of high capabilities in other areas. Therefore, adding participation and security to the spectrum of human development already delineated by the MDG’s, the list of universally applicable capabilities is defined to include food, health, education, participation and security. Far from an exclusive list covering all blends of human development, this list provides an indication about the ambit of universally applicable capabilities for human development. In fact its ultimate shape could be quite distinct, when all the diverse needs of people at different locations and under different circumstances are accommodated within it. The lists of basic capabilities drawn up by Martha Nussbaum (Crocker & Robeyns 2010) and Sabina Alkire (2002) could provide some very useful insights in this regards. A little clarification is, however, warranted for the apparently glaring omission of not including income in this list. Income, it should be understood, is endemic to all the universally applicable capabilities, like the gender equality. It is a crucial determinant within the space of conversion factor but is often mistakenly considered a single capability deprivation. But income also has this queer characteristic by which the same amount of income produces quite variable entitlements 1 As explained above, the goal of gender parity and woman empowerment does not constitute any one capability deprivation but is endemic to all. Therefore it is left out of this classification. 162
Nasir Khan, University of Auckland, New Zealand in different people under different circumstances 1 . Such an erratic variability is contradictory to both the form and composition of universally applicable capabilities. Income as determinant of human capabilities, therefore, could only be utilized productively if it is used as a conversion factor to instil the enabling capacities in people, once the course of personal circumstances and resources has been ascertained. Herein lay an explanation of why the progress made by the MDG’s in reducing income poverty has not filtered out into other goals to make commensurate improvement there. From this list of universally applicable capabilities, we now turn to the crucial step of devising a strategy to give it context specificity. For this we make use of approximation instead of aggregation to avoid the kind of generalization encountered by the MDG’s. While the MDG’s used aggregation as an instrument for horizontal levelling off of the divergent landscape of human development, we believe that approximation avoids such a generalization by focusing on a context-specific vertical extension of outreach. In our approximation framework, thresholds are indentified on each of the universally applicable capabilities which serve as the ‘standards’ of human development. To these standards, the levels of human development are ‘approximated’ everywhere, by taking action wherever warranted within the three spaces of capabilities development. In this scheme, a development project first identifies the prevailing levels of the human development in any particular situation. The scope, magnitude and dimensions of the development project are then set in accordance with the distance between the prevailing and standard conditions of human development. This provides an alternative to the holistic and situationalinsensitive mathematical contrivances of rates, ratios, proportions and percentages. But the real difference lay not in the mere substitution of aggregation by approximation, but the manner in which this approximation is used to captures a true measure of people’s circumstances and draft the course of a development project accordingly. In this proposed framework, approximation is carried out within a 1 For further elaboration on these aspects of income such as relative deprivations, please see Sen 1976 and Sen 2000. 163
- Page 17 and 18: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 19 and 20: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 21 and 22: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 23 and 24: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 25 and 26: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 27 and 28: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 29 and 30: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 31 and 32: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 33 and 34: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 35 and 36: Effect of Gasohol Production on the
- Page 37 and 38: Journal of Asia Pacific Studies ( 2
- Page 39 and 40: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 41 and 42: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 43 and 44: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 45 and 46: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 47 and 48: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 49 and 50: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 51 and 52: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 53: A Historical Approach to Myanmar’
- Page 56 and 57: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 58 and 59: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 60 and 61: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 62 and 63: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 64 and 65: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 66 and 67: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 70 and 71: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 72 and 73: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 74 and 75: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 76 and 77: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 78 and 79: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 80 and 81: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 82 and 83: Revisiting the MDG’s: Exploring a
- Page 84 and 85: The Eco-friendly Tharu Tribe: A Stu
- Page 86 and 87: The Eco-friendly Tharu Tribe: A Stu
- Page 88 and 89: The Eco-friendly Tharu Tribe: A Stu
- Page 90 and 91: The Eco-friendly Tharu Tribe: A Stu
- Page 92 and 93: The Eco-friendly Tharu Tribe: A Stu
- Page 94 and 95: Journal of Asia Pacific Studies ( 2
- Page 96 and 97: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 98 and 99: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 100 and 101: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 102 and 103: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 104 and 105: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 106 and 107: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 108 and 109: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 110 and 111: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 112 and 113: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 114 and 115: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
- Page 116 and 117: The Paradox Struggle Between Islami
Nasir Khan, University of Auckland, New Zealand<br />
in different people under different circumstances 1 . Such an<br />
erratic variability is contradictory to both the form and<br />
composition of universally applicable capabilities. Income as<br />
determinant of human capabilities, therefore, could only be<br />
utilized productively if it is used as a conversion factor to<br />
instil the enabling capacities in people, once the course of<br />
personal circumstances and resources has been ascertained.<br />
Herein lay an explanation of why the progress made by the<br />
MDG’s in reducing income poverty has not filtered out into<br />
other goals to make commensurate improvement there.<br />
From this list of universally applicable capabilities, we now<br />
turn to the crucial step of devising a strategy to give it<br />
context specificity. For this we make use of approximation<br />
instead of aggregation to avoid the kind of generalization<br />
encountered by the MDG’s. While the MDG’s used<br />
aggregation as an instrument for horizontal levelling off of<br />
the divergent landscape of human development, we believe<br />
that approximation avoids such a generalization by focusing<br />
on a context-specific vertical extension of outreach.<br />
In our approximation framework, thresholds are indentified<br />
on each of the universally applicable capabilities which serve<br />
as the ‘standards’ of human development. To these<br />
standards, the levels of human development are<br />
‘approximated’ everywhere, by taking action wherever<br />
warranted within the three spaces of capabilities<br />
development. In this scheme, a development project first<br />
identifies the prevailing levels of the human development in<br />
any particular situation. The scope, magnitude and<br />
dimensions of the development project are then set in<br />
accordance with the distance between the prevailing and<br />
standard conditions of human development.<br />
This provides an alternative to the holistic and situationalinsensitive<br />
mathematical contrivances of rates, ratios,<br />
proportions and percentages. But the real difference lay not<br />
in the mere substitution of aggregation by approximation,<br />
but the manner in which this approximation is used to<br />
captures a true measure of people’s circumstances and draft<br />
the course of a development project accordingly. In this<br />
proposed framework, approximation is carried out within a<br />
1 For further elaboration on these aspects of income such as relative<br />
deprivations, please see Sen 1976 and Sen 2000.<br />
163
Change language