Entitlement failure and deprivation: a critique of Sen's famine philosophy 1
批判了阿马蒂亚·森的权利方法，指出其概念基础存在四大缺陷：对粮食供给下降的批评不足、交换权利与资本主义原则矛盾、将食物视为权利商品会引发其他基本需求的权利诉求、以及隐含假设非共产主义国家的收入分配最优。
This paper insinuates the conceptual foundation of Sen's entitlement approach by pinpointing its major weaknesses. First, Sen's critique of FAD is inadequate because speculative, not actual, supply and demand forces determine short-run commodity prices. Second, Sen's idea of 'exchange entitlement' is inconsistent with the principles of capitalism, since this economic system operates on the conceptual and legal framework of voluntary exchange. Third, if food is considered as an entitled commodity, other basic necessities of life, such as healthcare, education etc. could claim the same status. Finally, the approach is founded on a hidden hypothesis that income distributions in non-communist states are economically and politically optimal.