Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach argues that well-being is determined by a person's ability to achieve their goals and live a life that they value.

Nussbaum identifies a number of key capabilities that are essential for human well-being, including life, health, education, and political participation.

Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach differs from traditional welfare economics in a number of ways, including its focus on individual well-being, its emphasis on non-material factors, and its consideration of the role of social and political institutions.

Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach has been criticized for being too vague and abstract, for being difficult to measure, and for ignoring the importance of economic growth.

Despite its criticisms, Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach remains influential because it provides a comprehensive framework for thinking about well-being, highlights the importance of non-material factors in well-being, and has been used to develop policies and programs that promote human well-being.

Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach is a more comprehensive and developed version of Sen's Capability Approach, as it includes a wider range of capabilities and a more explicit focus on social justice.

Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach has been used in practice to develop policies and programs that promote human well-being, to evaluate the effectiveness of development interventions, and to hold governments accountable for their human rights obligations.

There are a number of challenges to implementing Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach in practice, including the difficulty of measuring capabilities, the lack of political will to address the underlying causes of poverty and inequality, and the resistance of vested interests to change.

Despite the challenges to implementing it in practice, Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach remains a valuable tool for thinking about well-being and social justice because it provides a comprehensive framework for thinking about well-being, highlights the importance of non-material factors in well-being, and has the potential to promote human well-being and social justice.

There are a number of key debates surrounding Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach, including the debate over the relationship between capabilities and resources, the debate over the role of culture in shaping capabilities, and the debate over the measurement of capabilities.

Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach has been used to inform policy and practice in areas such as education, health, and gender equality by developing policies that aim to expand people's capabilities, evaluating the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving people's capabilities, and holding governments accountable for their obligations to respect, protect, and fulfill people's capabilities.

Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach has been criticized for being difficult to measure, for being too focused on individual well-being and neglecting the importance of social factors, and for being too vague and abstract to be useful for policymaking.

Despite its limitations, Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach remains a valuable tool for thinking about well-being and social justice because it provides a comprehensive framework for thinking about well-being, highlights the importance of non-material factors in well-being, and has the potential to promote human well-being and social justice.

There are a number of key challenges to implementing Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach in practice, including the difficulty of measuring capabilities, the lack of political will to address the underlying causes of poverty and inequality, and the resistance of vested interests to change.