Abstract
The capability approach is gaining momentum as a theory of corporate responsibility and business ethics at a time when the UN Guiding Principles have become a most important framework. A novel approach is now emerging that seeks to understand and specify human rights obligations of businesses within the framework provided by the capability approach. This article partially examines the triad corporate responsibility–human rights–capability approach by exploring the relationship between human rights and capabilities. Thus, it offers conceptual and practical implications for a human rights perspective on corporate responsibility. The bulk of our thesis focuses on studying Nussbaum’s and Sen’s claim that human rights are entitlements to capabilities by means of a discussion of the notion of human dignity. In particular, we show the capability approach’s ability to dissipate theoretical and practical challenges posed by the notion of dignity. This article does not offer a detailed explanation of the implications of our investigation for human rights responsibilities of business. However, an outline of its potential contribution toward unfolding those obligations, conceptually and practically, is provided.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The link between dignity and capabilities has received little attention. Some scholars have engaged in a theoretical conversation with the CA (Formosa and Mackenzie 2014; Bendik-Keymer 2014; Claassen 2014; Pirson 2017), whilst others have applied it to different topics. Westermann-Behaylo et al. (2016) have explored it in the context of stakeholder theory. Markova (2014) criticizes Nussbaum’s notion of dignity for lack of strong theoretical justification and find it necessary to turn to Marcel’s Christian humanism for guidance. Bertland (2009) considers that the CA can support virtue business ethics by suggesting human dignity as a proxy basis for the controversial notion of teleology.
However, Nussbaum’s (2011b) emphasis on ‘active striving’ would seem to weaken the attribution of dignity to fetuses or people in permanent vegetative state, which has drawn criticism on Nussbaum. For instance, Kittay (2005) suggests to change the source of dignity from minimal agency to the capacity to care and be cared for, which clearly provides broader coverage to the most vulnerable.
References
Alkire, S. (2010). Human development: Definitions, critiques, and related concepts. Human development research papers (2009 to present), HDRP-2010-01, (pp. 1–96).
Bendik-Keymer, J. (2014). From human to all of life: Nussbaum’s transformation of dignity. In F. Comim & M. C. Nussbaum (Eds.), Capabilities, gender, equality: Towards fundamental entitlements (pp. 175–214). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bertland, A. (2009). Virtue ethics in business and the capabilities approach. Journal of Business Ethics,84, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9686-3.
Bolton, S. C. (2005). Emotion management in the workplace. Gordonsville, VA: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bolton, S. C. (2007). Dignity in and at work: Why it matters. Dimensions of dignity at work (pp. 3–16). London: Routledge.
Bonvin, J.-M., & Moachon, E. (2012). Assessing employee voice in restructuring processes against the capability approach. A case study in the swiss metal sector. Management Revue,23(2), 158–172.
Buchanan, R. (2001). Human dignity and human rights: Thoughts on the principles of human-centered design. Design Issues,17(3), 35–39.
Burchardt, T., & Vizard, P. (2011). ‘Operationalizing’ the capability approach as a basis for equality and human rights monitoring in twenty-first-century Britain. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,12(1), 91–119.
Carozza, P. G. (2003). Subsidiarity as a structural principle of international human rights law. American Journal of International Law,97, 38–79.
Carozza, P. G. (2008). Human dignity and judicial interpretation of human rights: A reply. European Journal of International Law,19(5), 931–944.
Carozza, P. G. (2011). Human dignity in constitutional adjudication. In T. Ginsburg & R. Dixon (Eds.), Research handbook in comparative constitutional law (pp. 459–472). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Cecchini, S., & Notti, F. (2011). Millennium development goals and human rights: Faraway, so close? Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,12(1), 121–133.
Claassen, R. (2014). Human dignity in the capability approach. In M. Düwell, J. Braarvig, R. Brownsword, & D. Mieth (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of human dignity. Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 240–249). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comim, F. (2001). Operationalizing Sen’s capability approach. Paper presented at the justice and poverty: Examining Sen’s capability approach, Cambridge, 5–7 June
Cornelius, N. (2002). Building workplace equality: Ethics, diversity and inclusion. London: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Cornelius, N., & Gagnon, S. (2004). Still bearing the mark of cain? Ethics, diversity and inequality measurement. Business Ethics: A European Review,13(1), 27–40.
Cornelius, N., & Skinner, D. (2005). An alternative view through the glass ceiling: Using capabilities theory to reflect the career journeys of senior women. Women in Management Review,20(8), 595–602.
Cornelius, N., & Skinner, D. (2008). The careers of senior men and women—A capabilities theory perspective. British Journal of Management,19(1), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00579.x.
Cornelius, N., Todres, M., Janjuha-Jivraj, S., Woods, A., & Wallace, J. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and the social enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics,81(2), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9500-7.
de Melo-Martín, I., & Salles, A. (2011). On disgust and human dignity. The Journal of Value Inquiry,45(2), 159–168.
Dierksmeier, C. (2016). Reframing economic ethics. Springer.
Drydyk, J. (2011). Responsible pluralism, capabilities, and human rights. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,12(1), 39–61.
ECtHR. (2007). Vereinigung Bildender Künstler v. Austria. In E. C. o. H. Rights (Ed.), (Vol. App. No. 68354/01).
Enderle, G. (1996). Towards business ethics as an academic discipline. Business Ethics Quarterly,6(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/3857240.
Enderle, G. (2004). Global competition and corporate responsibilities of small and medium-sized enterprises. Business Ethics: A European Review,13(1), 51–63.
Formosa, P., & Mackenzie, C. (2014). Nussbaum, Kant, and the capabilities approach to dignity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice,17(5), 875–892.
Gagnon, S., & Cornelius, N. (1999). From ethics ‘by proxy’ to ethics in action: New approaches to understanding HRM and ethics. Business Ethics: A European Review,8(4), 225–235.
Giovanola, B. (2009). Re-thinking the anthropological and ethical foundation of economics and business: Human richness and capabilities enhancement. Journal of Business Ethics,88(3), 431–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0126-9.
Glendon, M. A. (1998). Knowing the universal declaration of human rights. Notre Dame Law Review,73, 1153.
González-Cantón, C. (2012). Empowering people in the business frontline. The Ruggie’s framework and the capability approach. Management Revue. The International Review of Management Studies,23(2), 191–216.
Hahn, F. (1982). On some difficulties of the utilitarianism economist. In A. Sen & B. Williams (Eds.), Utilitarianism and beyond (pp. 187–198). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press & Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
Hick, R., & Burckhardt, T. (2016). Capability deprivation. In D. Brady & L. M. Burton (Eds.), The oxford handbook of the social science of poverty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hicks, D. (2011). Dignity—Its essential role in resolving conflict. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hodson, R. (2001). Dignity at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kateb, G. (2011). Human dignity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kittay, E. (2005). Equality, dignity and disability. In M. A. Waldron & F. Lyons (Eds.), Perspectives on equality: The second Seamus Heaney lectures (pp. 95–122). Dublin: Liffey.
Leßmann, O. (2012). Applying the capability approach empirically: An overview with special attention to labor. Management Revue,23(2), 98–118.
Leßmann, O., & Bonvin, J.-M. (2011). Job-satisfaction in the broader framework of the capability approach. Management Revue,22(1), 84–99.
Lodigiani, R. (2010). Recalibrating lifelong learning and active citizenship: implications drawn from the capability approach. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education,3, 59–78.
Macklin, R. (2003). Dignity is a useless concept: It means no more than respect for persons or their autonomy. BMJ: British Medical Journal,327(7429), 1419.
Markova, A. (2014). The concept of dignity in the capability approach: A personalistic perspective. In M. Pop (Ed.), Values of the human person: Contemporary challenges (Vol. VIII, pp. 273–280, Vol. Romanian Philosophical Studies). Washington DC.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.
McCrudden, C. (2008). Human dignity and judicial interpretation of human rights. European Journal of International Law,19(4), 655–724.
McCrudden, C. (2013). In pursuit of human dignity: An introduction to current debates. Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series,309, 1–55.
McCrudden, C. (2015). Labour law as human rights law: A critique of the use of ‘dignity’ by Freedland and Kountouris. In A. Bogg, C. Costello, A. C. L. Davies, & J. Prassl (Eds.), The autonomy of labour law (p. 304). London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1988). Nature, function and capability: Aristotle on political distribution. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary Volume I, 145–184.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1992). Human functioning and social justice: In defense of aristotelian essentialism. Political Theory,20(2), 202–246.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1995a). Emotions and women’s capabilities. In M. C. Nussbaum & J. Glover (Eds.), Women, culture and development. A study of human capabilities (pp. 360–401). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1995b). Human capabilities, female human beings. In M. C. Nussbaum & J. Glover (Eds.), Women, culture and development. A study of human capabilities (pp. 61–116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1997). Capabilities and human rights. Fordham Law Review,66, 273.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1998). Political animals: Luck, love, and dignity (reply to Card, Richardson, and Moody-Adams). Metaphilosophy,29(4), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9973.00099.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2000a). Women’s capabilities and social justice. Journal of Human Development,1(2), 219–247.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2000b). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2003). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics,9(2–3), 33–59.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2007a). Constitutions and capabilities: Perception against lofty formalism. Harvard Law Review,121, 4.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2007b). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2011a). Capabilities, entitlements, rights: Supplementation and critique. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,12(1), 23–37.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2011b). Creating capabilities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2013). The cosmopolitan tradition. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C., & Dixon, R. (2012). Abortion, dignity, and a capabilities approach. In B. Baines, D. Barak-Erez, & T. Kahana (Eds.), Feminist constitutionalism: Global perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Olson, K. (2002). Recognizing gender, redistributing labor. Social Politics,9, 380–410.
Osmani, S. R. (2005). Poverty and human rights: Building on the capability approach. Journal of Human Development,6(2), 205–219.
Parra, C. M. (2008). Quality of life markets: Capabilities and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,9(2), 207–227.
Pirson, M. (2017). Humanistic management: Protecting dignity and promoting well-being. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Power, J. L., Brotheridge, C. M., Blenkinsopp, J., Bowes-Sperry, L., Bozionelos, N., Buzady, Z., et al. (2013). Acceptability of workplace bullying: A comparative study on six continents. Journal of Business Research,66(3), 374–380.
Renouard, C. (2011). Corporate social responsibility, utilitarianism, and the capabilities approach. Journal of Business Ethics,98(1), 85–97.
Robeyns, I. (2003). Sen’s capability approach and gender inequalities: Selecting relevant capabilities. Feminist Economics,9(2–3), 61–92.
Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development,6(93), 93–117.
Sen, A. K. (1980). Equality of what? In S. McMurrin (Ed.), Tanner lectures on human values (Vol. 1, pp. 196–220). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, University of Utah Press.
Sen, A. K. (1982a). Choice, welfare and measurement. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sen, A. K. (1982b). Rights and agency. Philosophy & Public Affairs,1(11), 3–39.
Sen, A. K. (1984a). Resources, Values and Development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sen, A. K. (1984b). Rights and capabilities. In A. K. Sen (Ed.), Resources, values and development. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sen, A. K. (1985a). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Pub. Co.
Sen, A. K. (1985b). Well-being, agency, and freedom. Journal of Philosophy,82(4), 169–221.
Sen, A. K. (1985c). Women, technology and sexual divisions. Trade and Development,6, 195–223.
Sen, A. K. (1987). On ethics and economics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Sen, A. K. (1997). Human rights and Asian values: What Lee Kuan Yew and Le Peng don’t understand about Asia. The New Republic,217(2–3), 33–40.
Sen, A. K. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc.
Sen, A. K. (2002). Rationality and freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sen, A. K. (2004). Elements of a theory of human rights. Philosophy & Public Affairs,32(4), 315–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2004.00017.x.
Sen, A. K. (2005a). Human rights and capabilities. Journal of Human Development,6(2), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880500120491.
Sen, A. K. (2005b). Human rights and the limits of law. Cardozo Law Review,27, 2913–2927.
Sen, A. K. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sen, A. K. (2012). The global reach of human rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy,29(2), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2012.00555.x.
Sharkey, A. (2014). Robots and human dignity: A consideration of the effects of robot care on the dignity of older people. Ethics and Information Technology,16(1), 63–75.
Shivarajan, S., & Srinivasan, A. (2013). The poor as suppliers of intellectual property: A social network approach to sustainable poverty alleviation. Business Ethics Quarterly,23(3), 381–406. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201323326.
Stark, C. A. (2009). Respecting human dignity: Contract versus capabilities. Metaphilosophy,40(3–4), 366–381.
Tasioulas, J. (2013). Human dignity as a foundation for human rights. In C. McCrudden (Ed.), Understanding human dignity. Oxford: British Academy, Oxford University Press.
UN. (2011). Guiding principles on business and human rights: Implementing the United Nations “protect, respect and remedy” framework (J. G. Ruggie, Trans.). (pp. 1–42). New York, NY: United Nations Human Rights Council.
UN General Assembly. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, 217 A (III).
UN General Assembly. (1996a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, 999, 171.
UN General Assembly. (1996b). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, 993, 3.
UNDP. (2000). Human rights and human development. Human development report 2000. (pp. 290). New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme.
Unni, J. (2009). Gender differentials in education: Exploring the capabilities approach. Economic and Political Weekly,44(9), 111–117.
Vizard, P. (2006). Poverty and human rights. Sen’s ‘capability perspective’ explored. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vizard, P., Fukuda-Parr, S., & Elson, D. (2011). Introduction: The capability approach and human rights. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,12(1), 1–22.
Vogt, C. P. (2005). Maximizing human potential: Capabilities theory and the professional work environment. Journal of Business Ethics,58, 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-005-1423-6.
Waldron, J. (2010). Torture, terror, and trade-offs: Philosophy for the White House. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walsh, J. P., Weber, K., & Margolis, J. D. (2003). Social issues and management: Our lost cause found. Journal of Management,29(6), 859–881.
Wanderley, L. O. (2001). Sen’s capabilities approach: A meaningful framework for corporate social responsibility? Paper presented at the justice and poverty: Examining Sen’s capability approach, Cambridge, June
Westermann-Behaylo, M. K., Van Buren, H. J., & Berman, S. L. (2016). Stakeholder capability enhancement as a path to promote human dignity and cooperative advantage. Business Ethics Quarterly,26(4), 529–555. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2016.46.
Acknowledgments
This paper was (partly) financed by the Spanish Ministry of Economy (DGICYT) and FEDER Fund, through the research Project BENEB2 (FFI20014-56391-P).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Annex 1
Annex 1
Life: Being able to live a human life of normal length; not dying prematurely, or to live a life that is not reduced to the point of being not worth living.
Bodily health: Being able to enjoy a good health; to be adequately nourished; to have adequate shelter.
Bodily integrity: Being able to move freely; freedom from violence, including sexual assault and domestic violence; having opportunities for sexual satisfaction and freedom in matters of reproduction.
Senses, imagination, and thought: Being able to use the senses, to imagine, think, and reason—and most importantly to do so in a “truly human” way, a way which that is cultivated by proper education. Being able to use imagination and thought in order to experience and produce works and events of one’s own choice, whether religious, literary, musical, and so forth. Being able to use one’s mind in ways protected by freedom of expression. Being able to have pleasurable experiences and being able to avoid non-beneficial pain.
Emotions: Being able to have attachments to things and people outside ourselves; to love, to grieve, to experience longing, gratitude, and anger. Not having one’s emotional development suppressed by fear and anxiety.
Practical reason: Being able to form a conception of the good life and to engage in critical evaluation of our plans of life. This entails protection of freedom of thought and religious liberties.
Affiliation: A. Being able to live and socialize with others, to show concern for other human beings; to be able to identify with the situation of another. Protecting this specific capability requires the protection of institutions and freedoms that constitute and nourish such forms of affiliation. B. Having the social bases of self-respect and non-humiliation; being treated in a dignified way; the recognition of our equal worth as human beings. This entails provisions of non-discrimination on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, caste, religion, national origin.
Other species: Being able to live with concern for and in relation to animals, plants, and the world of nature.
Play: Being able to laugh, to play, to enjoy recreational activities.
Control over one’s environment: A. Political control: being able to participate effectively in political choices that govern one’s life; having the right of political participation, protections of free speech and association. B. Material control: being able to hold property and having property rights on an equal basis with others; having the right to seek employment on an equal basis with others; having the freedom from unwarranted search and seizure. In work, being able to work as a human being, exercising practical reason, and entering into meaningful relationships with other workers.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
González-Cantón, C., Boulos, S. & Sánchez-Garrido, P. Exploring the Link Between Human Rights, the Capability Approach and Corporate Responsibility. J Bus Ethics 160, 865–879 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3801-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3801-x