Resources versus Capabilities
Social Endowments in Egalitarian Theory
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6345161 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Roland Pierik (0000-0002-6777-011X, Radboud University Nijmegen, corresponding author), I Robeyns (0000-0002-2893-1814, Radboud University Nijmegen, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2007 |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 133-152 |
| Publication date | 2007-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0032-3217 • E-ISSN: 1467-9248 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00646.x |
| OpenAlex | W2170918625 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 18 |
| References cited | 28 |
Two of the most important theories in contemporary liberal egalitarianism are Ronald Dworkin's equality of resources and Amartya Sen's capability approach. Recently Dworkin has claimed that Sen's capability approach does not provide a genuine alternative to equality of resources. In this article, we provide both an internal and an external critique of Dworkin's claim. In the first part of the article we develop an internal critique by providing a detailed analysis of Dworkin's claim. Andrew Williams has contested Dworkin's claim, but he has failed to convince Dworkin of his objections. We analyze this debate, and offer an argument that, we hope, settles this dispute. In the second part of the article we argue that an analysis beyond the current parameters of the liberal-egalitarian debate points to three significant differences between Dworkin's and Sen's egalitarian theories: the degree to which they rely on an ideal-theoretical approach; their ability to judge social structures that are intertwined with people's social endowments; and their endorsement of a well-defined criterion to demarcate morally relevant from morally irrelevant inequalities. This broader analysis not only reinforces our conclusion that Dworkin's equality of resources and Sen's capability approach are genuinely distinct, but it also suggests some more general insights that may be relevant for a better understanding of contemporary egalitarian thinking
Argument (complex analysis · Capability approach · Economics · Egalitarianism · Epistemology · Ideal (ethics · Law and economics · Liberalism · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Sociology · Free Will and Agency · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
Clarification
Which Future for the Capability Approach?
Critiques and Debates
Core Ideas and the Framework
Introduction
Inequality and the Labor Market – Theories, opinions, models, and practices of unequal distribution and how they can be justified
An Agency‐Based Capability Theory of Justice
Capabilities in a Just Society
Ideal Theory in Theory and Practice
A Philosophical Examination of Social Justice and Child Poverty
The Cambridge Handbook of the Capability Approach
Equality of opportunity and the precarization of labour markets
Equality of Resources and the Problem of Recognition
Multidimensional Approach to an Analysis of Individual Deprivation
North African Identity and Racial Discrimination in France
Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice
Fulfilling food practices
When Does Unequal become Unfair? Judging Claims of Environmental Injustice
Justice, gender, and the family
Capability and Well-Being
Taking Care of Men
The Political Philosophy of Needs
Gender Inequality and Theories of Justice
What Is the Point of Equality?
Capability and Well‐Being
Polity and Group Difference
Dworkin on Capability
A Theory of Justice
Sovereign Virtue
Sovereign Virtue Revisited
On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice
Can the Capability Approach Be Justified
Poor, Relatively Speaking
Inequality Reexamined
Equality of Whom? Social Groups and Judgments of Injustice
Defending Equality of Outcome
Inequality Re-examined
Mortality as an Indicator of Economic Success and Failure
Responsibility, Luck, and the ‘Equality of what?’ Debate
What is Egalitrianism
The Capability Approach
Equality for the Ambitious
On Politics, Constitutional Interpretation, and Abortion Rights Jurisprudence
| Unique citing works | 18 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2008 - 2021 (14) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 18 |