South Africa's Constitution contains some of the most ambitious socioeconomic rights provisions in the world (health, education, shelter, food, social security). More than thirty years of jurisprudence has developed a sophisticated framework for their interpretation. But the central question that jurisprudence has not yet fully addressed is this: do these rights, as currently interpreted, create the conditions for flourishing, or merely for survival? This research strand develops what I call a jurisprudence of becoming. It is an approach to constitutional interpretation that asks not only "has the right been violated?" but "does the rights framework, as it stands, create the conditions under which people can become what they are capable of becoming?" The cost of getting this wrong has a name. Irene Grootboom won, in 2000, the judgment that founded our socioeconomic-rights jurisprudence, and died eight years later without a home. The right declared in her name was never made real in her own life. A jurisprudence of becoming carries the transformative-constitutional project past the moment of vindication to ask about the life the judgment was meant to make possible. The question is also one of distribution, and so of economics: what an economy is organised to produce, and for whom, sets the outer limit of what any judgment can secure.