Ubuntu and Capabilities Approach: Basic Doctrines for Calibrating Humanitarian Action

Open access

Abstract

This article explores prospects of using Ubuntu and Capabilities Approach to expand the scope of humanitarian action, to design one which serves humanity better even in the absence of disaster to essentially fulfil human development needs. It is considerate of the fact that humanitarian works contributes immensely in determining the extent to which humanity thrives. The traditional view on humanitarianism presupposes action-driven initiatives geared towards devising interventions to restore or reinforce human social order, improve livelihoods and quality of life. In sociological terms, human development is dependent on realizing and safeguarding, amongst others, human well-being, civil liberties and social security. The article utilizes core values enshrined in Ubuntu, Africa’s historic philosophy of life, and Amartya Sen’s Capabilities Approach as tools of analysis, with the view to expressing how to operationalize what should be considered stable humanitarian conditions and human well-being. Owing to persistent socio-economic challenges, especially the poverty problem, it is asserted that humanitarian action ought to depart from being a post-disaster intervention strategy, to being a pro-active and preventative pre-disaster orientated action, intended to nurture well-being and resultantly enable human development.

Buchanan-Smith, M. & Cosgrave, J. (2013). Evaluation of Humanitarian Action: Pilot Guide. The Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP), London: Overseas Development Institute.

Burges, J.P. (2002). Ethics of Humanitarian Intervention: The Circle Closes. Security Dialogue, 33(3), 261-264.

Clark, D.A. (2005). Sen’s capability approach and the many spaces of human well-being. The Journal of Development Studies, 41(8), 1339-1368.

Darcy, J. (2004). Human Rights and Humanitarian Action: A review of the issues. Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) Background Paper. London: Overseas Development Group.

Eliastam, J.L.B. (2015). Exploring Ubuntu discourse in South Africa: Loss, liminality and hope. Verbum et Ecclesia, 36(2), 1-8.

Fox, F. (2001). New Humanitarianism: Does It Provide a Moral Banner for the 21st Century? Disasters, 25(4), 275-289.

Frangonikolopoulos, C.A. (2005). Non-governmental Organisations and Humanitarian Action: The Need for a Viable Change of Praxis and Ethos. Global Society, 19(1), 49-72.

Hilhorst, D. &Schmiemann, N. (2002). Humanitarian principles and organisational culture: Everyday practice in Meedecins Sans Frontie res-Holland. Development in Practice, 12(3-4), 490-500.

Hilhorst, D. & Jansen, B. (2012). Constructing Rights and Wrongs in Humanitarian Action: Contributions from a Sociology of Praxis. Sociology, 46(5), 891-905.

Kamwangamalu, N.M. (1999). Ubuntu in South Africa: a Sociolinguistic Perspective to a Pan-African Concept. Critical Arts: South-North Cultural and Media Studies, 13(2), 24-41.

Letseka, M. (2012). In Defence of Ubuntu. Studies in Philosophy Education, 31, 47-60.

Lucchi, E. (2012). Moving from the ‘why’ to the ‘how’: reflections on humanitarian response in urban settings. Disasters, 36(1), 87-104.

MacFarlene, S.N. & Weiss, T. (2000). Political Interest and Humanitarian Action. Security Studies, 10(1), 112-142.

Macrae, J. (1998). The Death of Humanitarianism: An Anatomy of the Attack. Disasters,22(4), 309-317.

Mkhize, N. (2008). Ubuntu and harmony: An African approach to morality and ethics. In Nicholson, R. (ed.) Persons in community: African ethics in a global culture, pp.35-44. Scottsville: UKZN Press.

Mokgoro, Y. (1998). Ubuntu and the Law in South Africa. Potchefstroom Electronic Journal,1(1), 15-26.

Morris, N. (2008). The Evolution of Humanitarian Action. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 27(1), 24-29.

Murithi, T. (2007). A local response to the global human rights standards: the Ubuntu perspective on human dignity. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 5(3), 277-286.

Nussbaum, B. (2003). Ubuntu: Reflections of a South African on Common Humanity. Reflections, 4(4), 21-26.

Pease, K.K. & Forsythe, D.P. (1993). Human Rights, Humanitarian Intervention, and World Politics. Human Rights Quarterly, 15(2), 290-314.

Rapatsa, M. (2015). Human Dignity as a Foundational Norm in the Understanding of Human Rights. Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology, 12(2), 41-53.

Sachs, A. (2012). Liberty, Equality, Fraternity: Bringing Human Solidarity Back Into the Rights Education. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 4(3), 365-383.

Sen, A.K. (1985). Well-being, Agency and Freedom: The Dewey Lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169-221.

Sen, A.K. (1992). Inequality Re-examined. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Sen, A.K. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Sen, A.K. (2005). Human Rights and Capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6(2), 151-166.

Slim, H. (2005). Idealism and Realism in Humanitarian Action. Two Talks Given at the ACFID Humanitarian Forum, Canberra, 5 October 2005. Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue.

Stoddard, A. (2009). Humanitarian NGOs: challenges and trends. In Joanna, M. & Adele, H., Humanitarian Action and the ‘Global War on Terror’: A Review of Trends and Issues, (eds.). pp.25-36, HPG Report, HPG: London.

Tong, J. (2003). Questionable Accountability: MSF and Sphere in 2003. Disasters, 28(2), 176-189.

Tshoose, C.I. (2009). The Emerging Role of the Constitutional Value of Ubuntu for Informal Social Security in South Africa. African Journal of Legal Studies, 3(1), 12-19.

Wright, H.R. (2012). Child care, children and capability. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42(3), 409-424.

Zetter, R. & Deikun, G. (2010). Meeting humanitarian challenges in urban areas. Forced Migrant Review, 34(5), 5-7.

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 85 85 23
PDF Downloads 27 27 10