The author makes the case that wealth inequality ramifies in the communicative practices of policymaking in ways which produce specific forms of epistemic injustice. Relative epistemic authority between richer and poorer knowers is established by limiting some speakers to being sources of information, and elevating others to the epistemically more sophisticated role of inquirer. In its systemic form, this differentiation has the effect of re-producing and maintaining ‘tracker prejudices’ (Fricker, 2007) and ‘tracker privileges’ (Medina, 2011) which then ramify in relational and distributive inequality (Fricker, 2016). The article suggests that in a context in which the inclusion of ‘lived experience’ has come to be seen as an intrinsic good in policy discourse (Smith-Merry, 2020), the lived experience we need to amplify isn’t that of the poor, it is that of the rich. Only in centring rich voices in social policymaking can we reveal and challenge the operation of wealth privilege and advance reparatory forms of epistemic practice.1

中文翻译：

---

通过对认知实践和代理的分析，认识和解决政策制定中的财富特权问题

作者认为，财富不平等在政策制定的交流实践中产生了影响，从而产生了特定形式的认知不公正。较富有和较贫穷知识者之间的相对认知权威是通过限制某些发言者作为信息来源，并将其他发言者提升为认知上更复杂的询问者角色而建立的。在其系统形式中，这种分化具有复制和维持“跟踪者偏见”（Fricker，2007）和“跟踪者特权”（Medina，2011）的效果，然后影响关系和分配不平等（Fricker，2016）。该文章表明，在“生活经验”已被视为政策话语中的内在好处的背景下（Smith-Merry，2020），我们需要放大的生活经验不是穷人的生活经验, 这是富人的。只有将富人的声音集中在社会政策制定中，我们才能揭示和挑战财富特权的运作，并推进认知实践的修复形式。1