ABSTRACT
The core text of Max-Neef and his colleagues on the matter of need spans precisely 41 pages of well-spaced text, a minor fraction of that provided by Len Doyal and Ian Gough. MaxNeef defines 'fundamental needs' along two axes: existential and axiological. Max-Neef's approach, while less rigorous in theoretical terms, is more comprehensive than Doyal and Gough's framework in allowing for qualitative factors to be taken into account. It also offers the possibility of analysing not only 'positive' satisfiers, but also goods and activities that prevent the satisfaction of fundamental needs. Doyal and Gough broadly build on, and contribute a theoretical basis to, the growing body of work on alternative social and economic indicators. MaxNeef's approach is an equally powerful challenge to the core 'development paradigm' which continues to dominate the mainstream approaches to the formulation and implementation of social and economic change.
