ABSTRACT
A flurry of publications on empowerment by institutions such as the World Bank that emerged
from about 2000-2005 was followed by initial critical analysis and then a lull in the use of
empowerment as a conceptual and analytic tool for addressing poverty and inequalities more
generally. However, the concept seems to have acquired new life in significant work that is
now being done by various international bodies and research programs, many of which refer
to or have been influenced by the work of Amartya Sen and the capabilities approach more gen-
erally. The capabilities approach focuses on what people are able to be and to do and not merely
on indicators such as levels of income or wealth. On Sen’s account, for example, poverty is best
understood as a deprivation of capabilities. As is well-known, Sen pays particular attention to
deprivations suffered by women and makes the strong claim that
For Sen, addressing gender inequalities is important not only because it limits what women can
be and do but also because attending to deprivations in women’s health, education, work oppor-
tunities, and political participation is integrally connected to removing inequalities of various
sorts for women, their children, and families. Crucial for Sen, however, is his rejection of the
idea that it is merely a matter of providing resources to women. This is treating them like
‘passive recipients of cunning development programs’ (11) or of ‘governmental handouts’
(178). Instead the focus needs to be on opening opportunities that allow women to ‘effectively
Christine . oggel
shape their own destiny and help each other’ (11). This is the thrust, importance, and purpose of
agency for Sen and for capability theorists more generally. Yet how agency is conceptualized
needs to be unpacked. This is precisely what recent theorists attempt to do in delineating
kinds of freedom and differentiating agency from empowerment in ways that are relevant to
addressing gender inequalities.
