This paper presents a comparative analysis of the Capability Approach Theory (CA) and the Inspiration Economy Theory (IE), two influential yet distinct frameworks for socioeconomic development. While the Capability Approach, pioneered by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum, emphasises expanding individual freedoms through institutional support and resource allocation, the Inspiration Economy Theory, developed by Mohamed Buheji, focuses on mindset transformation and community-driven problem-solving through experiential learning. 
The study identifies three key similarities between the two theories: (1) both recognise the untapped potential within people that requires activation for development, (2) each framework underscores the necessity of intervention whether through external capability-building or internal inspiration, and (3) both highlight structural barriers such as governance failures and resource inequality as major impediments to progress. 
However, critical differences emerge in their operational mechanisms. The Capability Approach relies on external actors (e.g., governments, NGOs) to provide resources and create enabling environments, making it most effective in stable institutional settings. In contrast, the Inspiration Economy Theory fosters self-driven change through resilience-building and local engagement, demonstrating adaptability in resource-scarce or unstable contexts. 
Using qualitative comparative analysis, this paper examines theoretical foundations, practical applications. Findings suggest that while CA excels in structured environments, IE offers a viable alternative for marginalised communities with limited institutional support. The study concludes by proposing a potential integration of both frameworks—leveraging IE’s grassroots empowerment to complement CA’s institutional focus—for more holistic and inclusive development strategies.