The Capability Approach and Cape York: Noel Pearson's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Capability Approach and Cape York: Noel Pearson’s Reconceptualisation and Alteration of Amartya Sen’s Development Framework Nicola Reeves M.A. (Hons.) A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2015 School of Political Science and International Studies Abstract Amartya Sen’s capability approach has been gaining influence as both an evaluative and a prescriptive framework for improving human well-being. Most recently, a ‘deeper’ articulation of the capability approach has been presented by Sen in terms of Development as Freedom. He presents this as a more comprehensive approach to development, with the intention of it being universally applicable. Therefore, Sen’s approach has also been promoted as a framework for understanding, evaluating and achieving development in cross-cultural contexts. An important instance of its implementation is by Noel Pearson in an Australian Indigenous context. Pearson frames his approach to Indigenous development in terms of the capability approach. His project – the Cape York welfare reform trials – has been implemented through the Cape York Institute for Policy and Leadership and Cape York Partnerships in the Cape York Peninsula. Pearson and these organisations have the aim of creating further opportunities to extend policy trials to other Indigenous contexts in Australia. In this thesis, I compare and contrast Pearson’s use of the capability approach based framework with my interpretation of an ideal-typical version of Sen’s capability approach and Development as Freedom. This ‘ideal-type’ is reconstructed from Sen’s theoretical work and wider debates about it and allows me to demonstrate that Pearson reconceptualises and alters Sen’s framework, changing the conditions within which capability is to be realised with important social and political consequences. In particular, this thesis shows how Sen’s central development goals, which are oriented towards enhancing individual capabilities and expanding freedoms, are reframed and realigned by Pearson. His adaptations have the effect of inadvertently shoring up the premises of neoliberal political economic ideals at the expense of Indigenous cultural values and practices, a result of the central importance Pearson assigns to problems he associates with ‘passive welfare’ and welfare dependency. A critical engagement with the problems entailed in Pearson’s reframing of the CA also magnifies what critics have argued to be the unfreedoms and contradictions associated with liberalism in Sen’s work too (although in Sen’s work this is corrected through the provision of social safety-nets). In light of these findings, I argue that Pearson’s use of the language of the capability approach is rhetorical rather than substantive. It serves the purpose of justifying the development project of the Cape York Institute and Cape York Partnerships, and is typical in embodying problematic assumptions of mainstream, global Indigenous development paradigms. 1 Declaration by Author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my research higher degree candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis. 2 Publications During Candidature No publications included. Publications Included in this Thesis No publications included. 3 Contributions by Others to the Thesis No contributions by others. Statement of Parts of the Thesis Submitted to Qualify for the Award of another Degree None. 4 Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the dedicated supervision of Professor Katharine Gelber and Dr. Heloise Weber. I am so very grateful for your enduring help and guidance on this project, thank you. I am also grateful for the unfaltering support of friends and family. Thank you Mum and Dad for always supporting me through my education. In April 2012 in the face of unimaginable hardship, Ross Viner and Scott Pedersen, you protected me and pushed me to continue. Rhiannon Neilson, Ashely Matthew, Morgan Rodgers-Gibson, thank you for never letting me down. Gaylene Smith and Rita Mesch, thank you for your strength and encouragement. I continue to learn from you both, every day. And to Matt Smith who has helped me in strength and spirit, without even knowing. 5 Keywords The capability approach, development as freedom, Amartya Sen, economic and social development, Noel Pearson, Indigenous Australia, Indigenous development, Cape York, passive welfare, liberal political economy, neoliberalism Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC) ANZSRC code: 140202, Economic Development & Growth, 30% ANZSRC code: 160505, Economic Development Policy, 40% ANZSRC code: 160501, Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Policy, 30% Fields of Research (FoR) Classification FoR code: 1606, Political Science, 35% FoR code: 1401 Economic Theory, 35% FoR code: 1605, Policy & Administration, 30% 6 Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Declaration by Author .................................................................................................................. 2 Publications During Candidature ................................................................................................ 3 Publications Included in this Thesis ........................................................................................... 3 Contributions by Others to the Thesis ........................................................................................ 4 Statement of Parts of the Thesis Submitted to Qualify for the Award of Another Degree ............................................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ 5 Keywords ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Australian & New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC) ........................... 6 Fields of Research (FoR) Classification ...................................................................................... 6 List of Figures & Tables ............................................................................................................. 10 List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. 11 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 13 Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 18 Methodological Considerations ......................................................................................... 18 Ethical Considerations ....................................................................................................... 19 Context of The Thesis. ....................................................................................................... 20 Contribution to Knowledge ................................................................................................ 24 Thesis Argument ................................................................................................................ 24 Chapter Outline .................................................................................................................. 26 Further Research ............................................................................................................... 31 Chapter One A Reconstruction of Sen’s Capability Approach & Development as Freedom Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 32 The CA as a Framework of Thought for the Evaluation of Well-Being ........................... 34 The CA as a Critique of Other Approaches to Welfare ...................................................