Human impacts on large‐scale ecological interactions effectively confer fundamental advantages of wealth and power to some members of society and not to others. As illustrated here by reference to a 1993 cholera outbreak resulting from degradation of aquatic ecosystems, these impacts can pose barriers to the normal channels through which one might pursue individual advantage, thereby raising tensions for liberal theories of justice that are committed both to basic liberties and to distributive fairness. I first illustrate these tensions by reference to John Rawls's theory. I then argue that although Nussbaum's theory, which emerged in dialogue with Rawls's, improves upon it in this regard, it remains subject to the same basic tensions. Instituting ‘capability ceilings’ that impose a limit on the set of basic opportunities available to people would help resolve this tension. Thus, in addition to Nussbaum's proposal for establishing capability thresholds, I defend capability ceilings as a friendly amendment to her theory.

This paper analyzes the concept of identity developed by Amartya Sen in recent work, especially in the book Identity and Violence. It discusses the relationship between identity and solidarity, arguing that the former is necessary but by no means sufficient for the latter, so that, contra what Sen sometimes suggests, identities are not simply forms of solidarity. It then argues that Sen's account is both morally and methodologically individualist — which seems right — and that it is also correct in seeing identities as, in a certain sense, normative. But it then shows that his account is also rationalist, in treating identity as grounding reasons for thinking and acting, and that this leaves out the important role of non‐rational factors in the social and political mobilization of identity. This means that some of Sen's policy proposals, while helpful, will not deal with some serious cases where identity leads to political violence.

Should human beings who have been granted basic rights be allowed to bargain them away? In some countries, most prominently in China, special export zones exist where workers are required to give up several of their rights in order to be employed. Are there serious objections to such renouncements? The first part of this paper discusses some of the pros and cons. In the second part, the results of a questionnaire experiment are reported where the students were asked to evaluate a situation where the reinstatement of basic human rights had to be weighed against an aid programme of economic reconstruction leading to growth and greater efficiency. As far as German students are concerned, the issue of exercising basic rights has lost quite a bit of its original support over a period of roughly 15 years. Results from other European nations are also reported.

The present paper examines two currently popular approaches to ethical theory — namely, ‘Expressivism’ (also known as ‘emotivism’ and ‘non‐cognitivism’) and contemporary forms of ‘Kantianism’ — and argues that neither provides a suitable foundation for the capabilities approach. Two philosophers are discussed in some detail — Simon Blackburn, as a leading representative of Expressivism, and Thomas Scanlon, as a leading representative of ‘Kantianism’ — but the views of Habermas also come under some scrutiny. The paper ends by advocating a view close to that of John Dewey.

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. Text of the first Mahbub ul Haq Memorial Lecture of the Human Development and Capability Association, given at the New School in New York on 19 September 2007. 2. Underlying the approach is the major issue of what Hilary Putnam calls the denial of a "fact\value dichotomy." I shall not have the chance to address that methodological question here (although I do discuss it in the book; Sen, A. (forthcoming) The Idea of Justice, Penguin, London and Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.); but see Hilary Putnam's contribution to this issue. See also Putnam, H. (2002) The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.; and Vivian Walsh (2004) 'Sen after Putnam', Review of Political Economy, 16, pp. 315–394. 3. This relates to the central focus of the work of the Human Development and Capability Association. Indeed, I would imagine they are getting much attention in the wonderful conference of the Human Development and Capability Association, imaginatively arranged by Sakiko Fukuda Parr, working with Martha Nussbaum, President of the Human Development and Capability Association, and others (including the dynamic Sabina Alkire). 4. I have discussed this issue in my essay 'Elements of a theory of human rights', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 32 (2004), pp. 315–356. 5. I tried to go into these issues in my 1984 Dewey Lectures at the Columbia University, which were published in the form of three papers, under the general title of 'Well‐being, agency and freedom', Journal of Philosophy, 82 (1985), pp. 169–221. The connections are more fully explored in The Idea of Justice. 6. On this see my article 'What do we want from a theory of justice?', The Journal of Philosophy, 103 (2006), pp. 215–238. 7. On this see my essays 'Maximization and the act of choice', Econometrica, 65 (1997), pp. 745–779; and 'Consequential evaluation and practical reason', Journal of Philosophy, 97 (2000), pp. 477–502. 8. Nagel, T. (2005) 'The problem of global justice', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 33, p. 115.

The present paper contributes to operationalizing the Capability Approach by proposing a methodology for the design of sets of indicators for monitoring inequality among social groups based on census and household surveys. The result is a set of indicators and synthetic indices that can be disaggregated by social groups, in a way that allows the monitoring of inequalities in the overall achievement either of fundamental rights or of specific rights. The methodology combines the heuristic power of Principal Component Analysis in offering empirical evidence for the aggregation of indicators with the operational advantage of Fuzzy Set Theory for their final design and measurement. The paper emphasizes the complementarities of these statistical techniques. The methodology is illustrated by the design of a set of indicators for monitoring housing adequacy in the Venezuelan context.

The Gujarat pogrom of 2002 is evidence of a profound crisis in India's democracy. Samuel P. Huntington's influential thesis of the ‘clash of civilizations,’ according to which the world is torn between democratic western values and threatening Islamic values, gives no help in explaining the situation, since the threatening values of the Hindu Right derive largely from European origins and are being used to threaten innocent Muslim civilians. I argue that the real ‘clash of civilization’ is the clash within every modern society between those who are prepared to live with people who differ, on terms of equal respect, and those who seek the comfort of a single ‘pure’ ethno‐religious ideology. At a deeper level, the ‘clash’ is internal to each human being, as fear and aggression contend against compassion and respect. Policy‐makers eager to promote the victory of respect over violence can learn from the case of India, where a wise institutional structure and a genuinely free press are major assets in resisting the call to hate. On the other hand, India's current lack of emphasis on critical thinking in the schools, and its lack after Gandhi's death of a public culture of compassion to counter the Hindu Right's culture of humiliated, warlike masculinity, sound warning notes for the future.