Intergenerational Equity & Social Justice Concepts

1. Intergenerational Equity&Social Justice Concepts RD300 19 September 2001

2. Intergenerational Equity • Concept deals with the fairness of imposing risks and costs (e.g. reduced natural resources) on future generations. • Issues such as climate change and nuclear waste disposal.

3. Within the literature there is general agreement that present generations have obligations to future generations. • However, there is considerable debate about the basis or specifics of such obligations. • Should we be talking about intergenerational ‘rights’ rather than ‘obligations? • Do rights convey greater moral authority? Legal rights?

4. Do we have a duty of justice to future generations? • Barry’s (1978) equates justice with equal opportunity. He contends that the overall range of opportunities open to successor generations should not be narrowed. • Page (1983) argues that …if the present generation provides a resource base essentially the same as it inherited (e.g. same level of contamination), it has satisfied intergenerational justice.

5. Are people willing to accept additional costs/burdens for themselves instead of shifting them to future generations? • If people are not internally motivated to accept these costs, should coercive public policies be adopted? • Intergeneration equity is linked to the issue of uncertainty: • Can we predict the impact of our actions? • What will future generations value? • Do we impose our generation’s values on a future society by the choices we make?

6. Discounting • Discounting - technique used by economists to make trade-offs between the present and the future. • Comparisons across time are standardized by calculating the present value of future benefits. • Discounting can be problematic for intergenerational comparisons.

7. Discounting • Tend to significantly discount benefits to future generations. Results are typically biased in favor of the present generation. • Perhaps use a lower social discount rate? • Can we put dollar values on these benefits and costs? • Should we discount the future at all?

8. Suggested Intergenerational Equity Principles • Every generation is the trustee for generations that follow. • There is an obligation to protect future generations, provided the interests of the present generation and its immediate offspring are not unduly jeopardized. • Near-term concrete hazards have priority over long-term hypothetical hazards.

9. This preference for the present and the near future is reduced where questions of irreversible harm exist. • When an action poses a plausible threat of catastrophic effects, then that action should not be pursued, absent some significant countervailing need. (Precautionary Principle) • The reduction of resource stocks entails a duty to develop substitutes. (Compensation)

10. Concepts of Justice • Justice can be thought of in more than one way. • Distributive justice - focuses on the distribution of outcomes from a decision. Is the distribution fair or just? • Procedural justice - concerned with the fairness of the process used to arrive at a decision.

11. Distributive Justice • Equity - outcomes based on productivity. • Equality - all members receive the same outcomes. • Need - distribution of resources to ensure that all essential needs are met.

12. Procedural justice - concerned with the fairness of the process used to arrive at a decision.

13. Procedural Justice • Can: increase job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and regulatory compliance. • Procedural justice judgements lead to enhanced satisfaction with outcomes. Example: the outcome of an environmental conflict. • Procedures are viewed as fairer when they vest process control or voice in those affected. The opportunity to express one’s own point of view, in itself, enhances procedural justice judgements.

14. Procedural justice enhances the evaluation of authorities and institutions. • Procedural justice affects behavior (e.g. dispute behavior, decision compliance, task performance). • People can usually agree on the criteria to determine procedural fairness.

15. A person may shift back and forth, using first one and then another way of framing concerns about justice or fairness. • Each frame of reference or context evokes its own standards of fairness. Potential for conflicts over difference concepts of justice. • Justice is in the eye of the beholder.

16. Some characteristics of a process that is procedural just • Unbiased • Accurate • Consistent • Level playing field • Standing - representative • Concerned with well-being and needs • Trust building • Flexible • Ethical

17. Resolving environmental conflicts typically requires addressing both “distributive” and “procedural” justice issues.