SÉVERINE DENEULIN, MATHIAS NEBEL AND NICHOLAS SAGOVSKY TRANSFORMING UNJUST STRUCTURES The Capability Approach THE CAPABILITY APPROACH Structural injustice has traditionally been the concern of two major academic disciplines: economics and philosophy. The dominant model of economics has long been that of neo-classical economics. For neo-classical economists, human we- being is to be assessed by the availability of disposable income or according to goods consumed; it is measured by the levels of utility achieved in the consumption of commodities. Social order is fashioned by the ways consumers maximise their 1 well-being and enterprises maximise their profits. A core assumption is that all 2 commodities are commensurable: they can all be measured according to a single 3 numerical covering value, which is their price. Within this neo-classical paradigm, justice is achieved when the utility level of someone cannot be increased without 4 another person seeing his or her utility level decrease. The dominant paradigm of neo-classical economics was strongly challenged when development and welfare economist Amartya Sen received the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1998. His work offered an alternative to the neo-classical evaluation of human well-being in the utility/commodity space. The underlining philosophical intuition behind Sen’s work is that the standard of living lies in the living and not in the consumption of commodities. In searching for an alternative measure of human well-being, Sen devised his capability approach.

This book examines how justice and reconciliation in world politics should be conceived in response to the injustice and alienation of modern colonialism?

"Belonging has been a formative struggle for me. Like most people with marginalized identities, my experience has taught me that it's hard to be yourself and feel like you belong in a culture that is hostile to your existence. That's why my body of work as a scientist, author, professor, speaker, and advocate for body liberation always comes back to the impact of belonging or not belonging. Radical Belonging is my manifesto, helping us heal from the individual and collective trauma of injustice and support our transition from a culture of othering to one of belonging." —Lindo Bacon Too many of us feel alienated from our bodies. This isn't your personal failing; it means that our culture is failing you. We are in the midst of a cultural moment. #MeToo. #BlackLivesMatter. #TransIsBeautiful. #AbleismExists. #EffYourBeautyStandards. Those of us who don't fit into the "mythical norm" (white, male, cisgender, able-bodied, slender, Christian, etc.)—which is to say, most of us—are demanding our basic right: To know that who we are matters. To belong. Being "othered" and the body shame it spurs is not "just" a feeling. Being erased and devalued impacts our ability to regulate our emotions, our relationships with others, our health and longevity, our finances, our ability to realize dreams, and whether we will be accepted, loved, or even safe. Radical Belonging is not a simple self-love treatise. Focusing only on self-love ignores the important fact that we have negative experiences because our culture has targeted certain bodies and people for abuse or alienation. For marginalized people, a focus on self-love can be a spoonful of sugar that makes the oppression go down. This groundbreaking book goes further, helping us to manage the challenges that stem from oppression and moving beyond self-love and into belonging. With Lindo Bacon's signature blend of science and storytelling, Radical Belonging addresses the political, sociological, psychological and biological underpinnings of your experiences, helping you understand that the alienation and pain you are experiencing is not personal, but human. The problem is in injustice, not you as an individual. So many of us feel wounded by a culture that has alienated us from our bodies and divided us from each other. Radical Belonging provides strategies to reckon with the trauma of injustice; reclaim yourself, body and soul; and rewire your nervous system to better cope within an unjust world. It also provides strategies to help us all provide refuge for one another and create a culture of equity and empathy, one that respects, includes, and benefits from all its diverse peoples. Whether you are transgender, queer, Black, Indigenous or a Person of Color, disabled, old, or fat—or your more closely resemble the "mythical norm"—Radical Belonging is your guidebook for creating a world where all bodies are valued and all of us belong—and for coping with this one, until we make that new world a reality.

Madison Powers and Ruth Faden here develop an innovative theory of structural injustice that links human rights norms and fairness norms. Norms of both kinds are grounded in an account of well-being. Their well-being account provides the foundation for human rights, explains the depth of unfairness of systematic patterns of disadvantage, and locates the unfairness of power relations in forms of control some groups have over the well-being of other groups. They explain how human rights violations and structurally unfair patterns of power and advantage are so often interconnected. Unlike theories of structural injustice tailored for largely benign social processes, Powers and Faden's theory addresses typical patterns of structural injustice-those in which the wrongful conduct of identifiable agents creates or sustains mutually reinforcing forms of injustice. These patterns exist both within nation-states and across national boundaries. However, this theory rejects the claim that for a structural theory to be broadly applicable both within and across national boundaries its central claims must be universally endorsable. Instead, Powers and Faden find support for their theory in examples of structural injustice around the world, and in the insights and perspectives of related social movements. Their theory also differs from approaches that make enhanced democratic decision-making or the global extension of republican institutions the centerpiece of proposed remedies. Instead, the theory focuses on justifiable forms of resistance in circumstances in which institutions are unwilling or unable to address pressing problems of injustice. The insights developed in Structural Injustice will interest not only scholars and students in a range of disciplines from political philosophy to feminist theory and environmental justice, but also activists and journalists engaged with issues of social justice.

Christians are increasingly interested in justice issues. Relief and development work are important, but beyond that is a need for advocacy. This book shows how transforming systems and structures results in lasting change, providing theological rationale and strategies of action for evangelicals passionate about justice. Each of the authors contributes both academic expertise and extensive practical experience to help readers debate, discuss, and discern more fully the call to evangelical advocacy. They also guide readers into prayerful, faithful, and wise processes of advocacy, especially in relation to addressing poverty.

In his encyclical Sollicitudo rei socialis ("On Social Concerns," 1984) Pope St. John Paul II wrote of "structures of sin" operating in the world and how Christian solidarity held the key to confronting and overcoming them. In Structures of Grace teacher and activist Kevin Ahern profiles successful Catholic organizations from around the globe--some well-known, some less so--that embody Christian solidarity by addressing the urgent human issues of our day: immigration and human rights; healthcare and housing; food, agriculture, and water; war, peace and reconciliation. In telling the stories of organizations such as Jesuit Refugee Service, the Young Christian Workers, Plowshares and Network, Dr. Ahern sheds light on the mission, theology, and outreach of hundreds of such organizations, offering church professionals, students, educators, and volunteers a "directory of grace" at work in the world today. (Publisher)

Rebecca Todd Peters argues for an ethic of solidarity as a new model for how people of faith in the first world can live with integrity in the midst of global injustice and shape a more just future. Solidarity Ethics seeks to address the economic and social structures of our globalized context. Peters argues for a concrete ethics rooted in the Christian tradition of justice and transformation deeply informed by solidarity and relationality. Utilizing these theologically rich resources, an ethics of relational reflection, action, and construction is provided as an avenue for building viable strategies for social transformation.

Since the 1930s, organizing movements for social justice in the U.S. have largely been built on secular assumptions. But what if Christians were to shape their organizing around the implications of the truth that God is real and Jesus is risen? Reverend Alexia Salvatierra and theologian Peter Heltzel propose a model of organizing that arises from their Christian convictions, with implications for all faiths.

Aimed at practitioners, church leaders, academics, and students of mission and world Christianity, Mission in the Twenty-First Century provides fresh insights on the theology and practice of mission in our age. It brings together scholarly reflection on practice, case studies and stories, and questions for discussion. Addressing the "five marks of mission ? evangelism and proclamation, discipleship, social service, social transformation, and ecological concern ? chapters examine these marks in the context of such important factors as globalization, migration, Islam, "old Christendom," and peace and reconciliation. In addition to the editors, the international group of contributors includes Desmond Tutu, Jehu Hanciles, Anne Marie Kool, David Zac Nirigiye, Tony Gittins, Lamin Sanneh, Ashish Crispal, Melba Maggay, Hami Tutu Chapman, Gerald Pilay, Kwame Bediako, and Moonjang Lee.

Through a nationwide survey, the authors of this study conclude that US Evangelicals may actually be preserving the racial chasm, not through active racism, but because their theology hinders their ability to recognise systematic injustice.