Can Martha Nussbaum’s Capability Theory of Justice help solve the crisis of women’s homelessness in the UK?

Despite being one of the richest countries in the world, ‘nearly a quarter of a million households across England (242,000) are now experiencing the worst forms of homelessness’ (Fitzpatrick et al. cited by Crisis UK, 2023, p.14). This paper will begin with two claims. Firstly, that a home of one’s own is of intrinsic value to individual wellbeing, and secondly, that only a theory grounded in the concept of individual dignity, such as Martha Nussbaum’s Capability Theory of Justice, can deliver housing policy worthy of the most vulnerable in our society. Current UK housing policy only allocates housing at a household level (for the benefit of the family or household as a whole) rather than an individual level (for the benefit of each and every person within the family or household). This ongoing failure to address inequalities within the household is now one of the main drivers of homelessness amongst women and children. Having established that a home of one’s own is of intrinsic value to individual wellbeing, it will be the main task of this paper to argue that the capability of ‘home’ ought to be included on Nussbaum’s list of central capabilities. On Nussbaum’s view the central capabilities represent the fundamental entitlements necessary (at minimum threshold levels) for securing a life ‘worthy of the dignity of a human being’ (Nussbaum, 2000, p.72). Thus the capabilities approach, Nussbaum tells us, interprets the Kantian ‘principle of each person as end’ as the ‘principle of each person’s capability’ (Nussbaum, 2000, p.74). Capabilities are for the good of each and every person – given that each is a bearer of value – never for the good of collectives such as family, household or state. It is this focus on each and every person as end, rather than the good of the family or household, which I shall argue makes the capabilities approach uniquely placed to help end the crisis of women’s homelessness. Nussbaum’s current ten central capabilities are: Life, bodily health, bodily integrity, senses imagination and thought, emotions, practical reason, affiliation, other species, play and control over one’s environment (Nussbaum, 2011a, p.33-34). Yet her list only mentions housing by implication, firstly as ‘adequate shelter’ included under the second capability bodily health, and secondly as ‘property’ included under the tenth capability control over one’s environment. Nussbaum makes no mention of home at all. The definition of home I intend to defend in this paper is: Home: being able to live in privacy or with others (human and non-human) in a place that is; safe, long-term, affordable, and which positively influences one’s sense of self and belonging. The capability of home cannot be reduced to mere shelter or property as Nussbaum would seem to suggest. The defining feature of home, I shall argue, is dignified dwelling. And the delivery of safe, affordable, genuine homes can only be realised in the UK, as elsewhere, when housing policy is guided by a theory grounded in the concept of individual dignity – such as Nussbaum’s Capability Theory of Justice.

Name dc:type.qualificationname

ma

Level dc:type.qualificationlevel

masters

Grantor dc:publisher.institution

University of Wales Trinity Saint David

Year dc:date.issued

2025

Author dc:creator

• Wilson, Emma

• HV Patholeg gymdeithasol. Lles cymdeithasol a chyhoeddus

Dc Identifier Grantnumber

UWTSD

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:repository.uwtsd.ac.uk:3938