Capability approaches locate injustice in limited capacities, not denied goods.

Evidence

Both Nussbaum and Sen base ethical significance in the unfolding and flourishing of basic capabilities, however they are defined, and find harm—injustice, in fact—in the limiting of them. In an important sense, Sen and Nussbaum expand the distributional realm as they focus not just on the distribution of goods we need to flourish, but the processes we depend on for that flourishing to occur. Injustice comes not with a particular good denied, but with the capability that is limited. — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 146

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Core definitional content: distinguishes capability-approach injustice (limited process of flourishing) from goods-based distributive injustice.
  • recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
  • XREF: connects to: Distributing a primary good does not restore a system’s capability to function — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 503; Justice comprises interlinked distribution, recognition, participation, and capability — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 53; Justice theory extends beyond distribution to recognition, capability, and participation — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 33 (+4 more)

Broader Connections