sufficientarianism

Sufficientarianism is a theory of distributive justice that holds a distribution is morally acceptable to the extent that everyone has at least a sufficient level of a given good, such as income, wealth, or welfare. The central idea is that moral concern is concentrated on ensuring no one falls below a specified threshold; beyond meeting that threshold, additional advantages may be morally less relevant.

There are variants within sufficientarianism. Weak sufficientarianism maintains that justice requires the threshold to be met for all, but allows or tolerates inequality among those who are above the threshold. Strong sufficientarianism argues that the primary aim is to ensure everyone reaches the threshold, and resources otherwise used to raise some above it should be justified by how they affect those below.

Relation to other theories: Unlike strict egalitarianism, which demands equality of shares, or utilitarianism, which seeks to maximize total welfare, sufficientarianism treats excess as morally irrelevant unless it helps bring others up to the threshold. It is related to, but distinct from, prioritarianism and other threshold-based approaches that emphasize helping the worst off.

Criticisms: Critics argue that a fixed threshold can be arbitrary and may not capture varying needs or contexts. It can also overlook concerns about relative disadvantage, the value of more than mere sufficiency, or how to adapt thresholds over time. Debates also focus on how to set the threshold and what counts as sufficient.

Policy implications: If endorsed, sufficientarianism may support policies that guarantee a minimum standard of living, such as basic income or essential services, aimed at raising everyone to a defined floor while leaving further distributions to be determined by other considerations.