Operationalising the Capability Approach

Generally, the CA is a framework used to explore well-being. However, the study somewhat reverses the CA by putting primary emphasis on sexuality-based deprivations to accentuate that there is a connection between poverty and sexuality vis-à-vis sexuality and development. Moreover, the study moves beyond the conventional use of the CA as a “distant assessment of human capabilities” relying on an objectivist methodological approach which focuses primarily on the use of secondary data to generate indicators or indices to explore the capabilities or functionings of particular individuals or groups (Ibrahim, 2014:10–12). The reason being that the study considers the conventional application of the CA insufficient in capturing the opportunities, choices and freedom intrinsically important to people.

Whilst the CA’s intentional width presents its greatest advantage, it simultaneously presents its greatest disadvantage. Correspondingly, one of the main criticisms of the CA concerns the difficulty of its operationalisation (Laderchi, 2003:255). Although, the study acknowledges that it is not straightforward to operationalise the CA, the study still argues careful methodological choices such as: “(a) secondary or primary data; (b) macro- or micro-level analysis; (c) grassroots or country-level exploration; (d) subjective or objective indicators; (e) qualitative or quantitative methods; and, lastly, (f) individual or collective levels of application” (ibid.:10) does allow for operationalisation of the CA. Pointing back to the study’s methodological chapter, it ought to be clear that the study depends on primary data obtained with qualitative methods in order to conduct a micro- level analysis of LGBT individuals lived experiences of sexuality-based deprivations in Kampala, Uganda.

As previously explained, the distinction between functionings (achieved ability to be and do) and capabilities (ability to choose between valuable beings and doings) is central in the CA’s conceptualisation of freedom vis-à-vis development. Irrespective of the aforementioned methodological reflections, the CA’s multidimensionality with its emphasis on intercultural and interpersonal variations still makes the question of how to select relevant capabilities and/or functionings persistently central to any operationalisation attempt (ibid.:17). Robeyns (2003 cited in Ibrahim, 2014:17–18) proposes to operationalise the CA by first, explicitly formulating the chosen capabilities; second, methodologically justifying the selection of capabilities; third, considering the

32

empirical application of the research; and fourth, ensuring that all salient capabilities are included. Although, this suggestion transcends many of the scholarly discussions stranded on whether to put emphasis on functionings or capabilities in the operationalisation of the CA, it nevertheless contrasts with the study’s critical hermeneutic approach to knowledge production given its rather deductive reasoning.

Hence, the four procedural steps were more or less reversed in the study’s operationalisation of the CA. That is to say, although the CA was established as a theoretical framework prior to the fieldwork, a pre-determined list of capabilities and deprivations on which to focus during the interviews was considered counterintuitive to the CA’s normative framework (Alkire, 2005:121–123). Moreover, a pre-determined understanding of the sexuality-based deprivations experienced by LGBT individuals in Kampala would have contrasted with the study’s claimed alignment with the post- colonial critique of development’s engagement with sexuality. As such, the study first, indirectly ensured the inclusion of all deprivations salient to LGBT individuals in Kampala through data saturation, and then established and formulated the deprivations on which to focus during the cycles of coding by focusing on the informants’ realized (functionings) and realizable (capabilities) beings and doings.

The most salient codes were divided into the twelve dimensions of poverty in the web of connections between poverty and sexuality to determine the most important dimensions. These include insecurities, ascribed and legal inferiority, social relations, institutions and access, and lack of political clout. Insecurities refer to vulnerability to violations in a broad sense such as physical assaults and unsubstantiated evictions; social relations and institutions and access are strongly intertwined as they include the opportunities people have to engage in private and public social areas of life. Ascribed inferiority refers to the deprivation of a person’s intrinsic value. Based upon divergences and convergences between the deprivations in each dimension, the dimension of social relations and institutions and access were merged into social and institutional ostracism. The rationale behind this final step in the operationalisation of the CA is that, if capabilities are constitutive of freedom, deprivations must be constitutive of unfreedom. As such, the division of deprivations into dimensions of poverty, assisted in the broadening of the concept of poverty and in the understanding of the framing of non- conforming sexuality in Uganda.

33

In the methodology chapter the analysis strategy to reduce, reorganise and represent the data material was outlined. Combining the analysis strategy with the established theoretical and conceptual framework, the table below provides an excerpt of the process of operationalising the CA for the poverty dimension of insecurities.

Table 1: Excerpt of Operationalisation Process

Dimension of Poverty: Insecurities

Codes

Fear of Violations “a victim of rape”

“Being beaten and assaulted, being evicted” “beat me so badly”

“stone you to death” “they are hunting us”

“We fear violence and rejection” “I was fearing mob justice” Being in the Public Sphere “we are not free in this life”

“we cannot move freely, the way we were, that is the fear I got

“a very closeted life”

“places where the rest of the public engage in” “act straight”

“you are not yourself, when you are in such places”

“It is easy for people to ruin you, if they know that you are gay”

Job Insecurity “I cannot get a job” “change my look”

Deprived Functionings

Bodily integrity

Sense of safety and security Self-integrity

Mobility

Access to material resources Deprived Capability Sexual Agency

34

The first part of the table shows some of the most salient in-vivo codes (quotation marks) and the descriptive codes (underlined) that emerged from the coding process. The second part then uses the codes to establish the beings and doings (functionings) that LGBT individuals are deprived of in Kampala on the basis of their sexuality. For example, the descriptive code ‘Fear of Violations’ shows that LGBT individuals are deprived of the functioning to feel safe and secure in the public sphere due to direct or indirect experiences of violations. The last part of the table ultimately looks at the functionings that LGBT individuals are deprived of, and then establishes the overarching capability inadequacy that characterises the given poverty dimension in the case of LGBT individuals in Kampala.

While Corrêa and Jolly (2008) primarily use the web of connections to underline their argument that sexuality is socially constructed without any further the discussion of it, the study uses it to cement the multidimensionality of poverty and its connection to sexuality. Furthermore, the illustration not only assists the study in systematically organising and cross-checking the sexuality-based deprivations that emerged from the data with well-established dimensions of poverty. It also accentuates that situated empirical studies are needed to understand the contextual connections between poverty and sexuality to, in turn, alleviate the poverty. The next chapter correspondingly outlines the context that informs the dimensions of poverty and sexuality-based deprivations that LGBT individuals experience in Kampala.

35