184
H. Schlör et al.
In the following, we analyse the six major groups of functionings. In the case of the
welfare functionings, the single man has the highest index value (0.491), followed
by the single women (0.424) and couples (0.354). The single parents (0.210) and
couples with children (0.214) have the lowest index values. Given this data, we can
conclude that the welfare basis of families with children is lower than that of single
households and couples.
When look specifically at the decent life functioning, it shows that the social
group of single women has the highest value (0.551), followed by couples without
children (0.374) and single men (0.486). Families with children have significantly
lower index values. Households with children have difficulties in achieving the same
level of decent life as households without children. Their capabilities are limited by
their functionings. When looking at the health functioning, three major groups of
households are identified. The CGI of single households is more than twice that of
the households with children and of couples without children.
As discussed above, the FEW-nexus can be characterized by the energy, mobility
and nutrition functionings.
The analysis of the functioning nutrition reveals that couples without children
have the highest value (0.368) and the single woman households have the lowest
value (0.210), whereas the other household groups have more or less similar values.
The energy functionings for a decent life show a similar distribution as the decent
life results, but the values are on average a little lower. The spread between the
highest and the lowest value is smaller; i.e. the energy capability budget is more
evenly distributed.
Also for the mobility functioning, a very heterogeneous picture of German households is revealed. In the case of mobility, the single man households have the highest
GCI value (0.516) followed by single women and couples. The index is significantly
lower for families with children, implying that these families on average have less
mobility options than the other households.
This has further implications for the social participation options of the households. Single men, single women and couples have a significantly higher opportunity
to use their capabilities in the social participation process. Families, in contrast, have
limited social participation options as indicated by their low CGI. The data show that
families generally save their capabilities for the education functioning. Their values
are much higher than those of the single households. They focus their functionings to
provide their children better capabilities and a better life in the future. Accordingly,
in their capability budget the functioning education has a significantly higher value
than the other functionings. Our finding confirms the central assumption of Sen that
the capability approach includes explicit value judgements which differ from person
to person [14, 57] and can be revealed by the GCI.
The analysis of the indirect German capability index shows that the impact of
the single households on the local and global water resources is much lower than
of the other households, as reflected in the highest CGI for the water footprint by
single women (0.776) and single men (0.770). The single parents and the couples
have significantly lower GCIs, so that the water footprint GCI of the average German
household is 0.353. This average household value is lower than the CGI value for
H. Schlör et al.
In the following, we analyse the six major groups of functionings. In the case of the
welfare functionings, the single man has the highest index value (0.491), followed
by the single women (0.424) and couples (0.354). The single parents (0.210) and
couples with children (0.214) have the lowest index values. Given this data, we can
conclude that the welfare basis of families with children is lower than that of single
households and couples.
When look specifically at the decent life functioning, it shows that the social
group of single women has the highest value (0.551), followed by couples without
children (0.374) and single men (0.486). Families with children have significantly
lower index values. Households with children have difficulties in achieving the same
level of decent life as households without children. Their capabilities are limited by
their functionings. When looking at the health functioning, three major groups of
households are identified. The CGI of single households is more than twice that of
the households with children and of couples without children.
As discussed above, the FEW-nexus can be characterized by the energy, mobility
and nutrition functionings.
The analysis of the functioning nutrition reveals that couples without children
have the highest value (0.368) and the single woman households have the lowest
value (0.210), whereas the other household groups have more or less similar values.
The energy functionings for a decent life show a similar distribution as the decent
life results, but the values are on average a little lower. The spread between the
highest and the lowest value is smaller; i.e. the energy capability budget is more
evenly distributed.
Also for the mobility functioning, a very heterogeneous picture of German households is revealed. In the case of mobility, the single man households have the highest
GCI value (0.516) followed by single women and couples. The index is significantly
lower for families with children, implying that these families on average have less
mobility options than the other households.
This has further implications for the social participation options of the households. Single men, single women and couples have a significantly higher opportunity
to use their capabilities in the social participation process. Families, in contrast, have
limited social participation options as indicated by their low CGI. The data show that
families generally save their capabilities for the education functioning. Their values
are much higher than those of the single households. They focus their functionings to
provide their children better capabilities and a better life in the future. Accordingly,
in their capability budget the functioning education has a significantly higher value
than the other functionings. Our finding confirms the central assumption of Sen that
the capability approach includes explicit value judgements which differ from person
to person [14, 57] and can be revealed by the GCI.
The analysis of the indirect German capability index shows that the impact of
the single households on the local and global water resources is much lower than
of the other households, as reflected in the highest CGI for the water footprint by
single women (0.776) and single men (0.770). The single parents and the couples
have significantly lower GCIs, so that the water footprint GCI of the average German
household is 0.353. This average household value is lower than the CGI value for