Justice: Means versus Freedoms
By Amartya Sen. 1990
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- I. Robeyns
- Pratik Gajane
- Yingqin Zheng
- Bernd Carsten Stahl
- M. Grasso
- R. Pierik
- S. Pressman
- G. Summerfield
Citations in the corpus
- On formalizing fairness in prediction with machine learning (2017, background): “Sen (41; 42) argue that variations related to the protected attributes like age, sex, gender, race, caste give individuals unequal powers to achieve goals even when they have the same opportunities.”
- Resources versus Capabilities: Social Endowments in Egalitarian Theory (2007, background): “Thus, the core of Sen’s objection to equality of resources is that it focuses exclusively on means instead of ends (Sen, 1990).”
- Technology, capabilities and critical perspectives: what can critical theory contribute to Sen’s capability approach? (2011, background): “While it is recognised that individual agency is embedded in specific socio-cultural environment (Sen 1990a, 2006), and that there is still space for the agency to be evaluated and appraised (Sen 1985b), Sen is reluctant to theorise how individual agency is restricted and what this means for…”
- A normative ethical framework in climate change (2007, background): “In other words, the difference between the SCA and the RTJF – which at first glance seem similar, especially in their focus on the least well-off – lies in the different informational base on which they rely (the ‘focal personal features,’ Sen 1990, p. 112).”
- The Economic Contributions of Amartya Sen (2000, background): “Customs, traditions, laws, and welfare transfers, all augment or reduce entitle- ments (Sen, 1990c) .”
- Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined (2017, background): “…since newborn girls have been killed or fatally neglected, or female foetuses have been aborted, because they were females in a society in which daughters are more likely to be seen as a burden, especially when compared to sons (Sen 1990b, 2003b, 1992b; Klasen 1994; Klasen and Wink 2003).”