Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this article I examine how or if the capability approach can contribute to understanding the vulnerabilities, unfreedoms and disadvantages experienced by Indigenous Peoples in Canada. I offer a critical evaluation of the capability approach with a specific interest in Martha Nussbaum’s capability theory. Namely, I look at Nussbaum’s idea of “affiliation” (Nussbaum, M. C. 1999. Sex and Social Justice. Oxford University Press). Nussbaum’s idea of affiliation highlights the importance of “being able to live for and in relation to others” (Nussbaum, M. C. 1999. Sex and Social Justice. Oxford University Press, 41). I will discuss what this means and how it is important for reconciling Indigenous Peoples’ ways of thinking about justice with the capability framework. I will argue that Nussbaum’s idea of affiliation is too generic. It does not point out what is valuable for Indigenous Peoples in Canada to realise capabilities. Essentially, I am contending with whether a general capability framework can reflect Indigenous People’s capacities to realise capabilities in ways that matter to them.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Corey McKibbin (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: