Amartya Sen’s capability approach prioritizes poverty alleviation—particularly the deprivation of basic freedoms and opportunities—over economic inequality as a standalone concern. Yet by shifting the metric of inequality from income or resources to what individuals are actually able to do and be, his framework fundamentally redefines how disparities are assessed. Sen’s emphasis on capabilities highlights how identical income distributions can mask deep injustices, such as unequal access to healthcare, underscoring that material equality alone does not guarantee justice. However, the theoretical flexibility and richness of the capability approach pose practical challenges. Without a fixed list of core capabilities or standardized measurement tools, it remains difficult for policymakers to implement effectively. For instance, how should healthcare access be weighed against education when resources are limited? Overall, while Sen’s framework significantly deepens our understanding of inequality, it offers limited practical guidance on redistribution and leaves open the question of what constitutes morally tolerable inequality.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Tolerable Inequality According to Amartya Sen

  • Maurizio Bovi

摘要

Amartya Sen’s capability approach prioritizes poverty alleviation—particularly the deprivation of basic freedoms and opportunities—over economic inequality as a standalone concern. Yet by shifting the metric of inequality from income or resources to what individuals are actually able to do and be, his framework fundamentally redefines how disparities are assessed. Sen’s emphasis on capabilities highlights how identical income distributions can mask deep injustices, such as unequal access to healthcare, underscoring that material equality alone does not guarantee justice. However, the theoretical flexibility and richness of the capability approach pose practical challenges. Without a fixed list of core capabilities or standardized measurement tools, it remains difficult for policymakers to implement effectively. For instance, how should healthcare access be weighed against education when resources are limited? Overall, while Sen’s framework significantly deepens our understanding of inequality, it offers limited practical guidance on redistribution and leaves open the question of what constitutes morally tolerable inequality.