JUSTICE BETWEEN GENERATIONS

1
JUSTICE BETWEEN GENERATIONS

• LIMITS OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE

2
THE INTERTEMPORAL JUSTICE PROBLEM

• LIBERAL THEORIES OF JUSTICE FACE DIFFICULTIES IN
  ACCOMMODATING NON OVERLAPPING GENERATIONS
• UTILITARIANS ASSUME THAT ALTRUISTIC REGARD FOR
  THE FUTURE ON THE PART OF SOME CITIZENS WILL
  PRODUCE SUFFICIENT NET SAVING
• BUT PURE TIME DISCOUNTING AND OPPORTUNITY COST
  PRESENT VALUE ESTIMATES REDUCE LONG TERM BENEFITS
  TO ZERO
• THE ISOLATION PARADOX (SEN) BLOCKS A PURE MARKET
  DRIVEN OPTIMUM EVEN GIVEN SUFFICIENT INDIVIDUAL
  ALTRUISM

3
THE INTERTEMPORAL PROBLEM

• RIGHTS BASED THEORIES (RAWLS) REST ON PROCEDURES
  OF ACCOMMODATION THAT LIMIT FUTURE ORIENTATION TO
  THE NEAR TERM
• RAWLS INTER-TEMPERAL DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE
  COMBINED WITH A ZERO PURE TIME DISCOUNT FAILS TO
  ADDRESS THE PROBLEM OF LONG TERM PRESENT TIME
  DISCOUNTING
• THE KANTIAN MAXIM IS INSUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC TO
  PROVIDE AN INTERTEMPERAL RIGHTS PRINCIPLE

4
THE MIH PRINCIPLE

• MY PROPOSAL MINIMUM IRREVERSIBLE HARM PRINCIPLE
• IRREVERSIBLE HARM TO BE MINIMIZED IN TIME AND
  SPACE
• MIH OPERATES AS RIGHT FOR PRESENT OVERLAPPING
  GENERATIONS THIS OVERCOMES ACCOMMODATION PROBLEM
  

5
MIH

• MIH PROTECTS NON-OVERLAPPING GENERATIONS BY A
  CHAIN CONNECTION INTO THE FUTURE THIS OVERCOMES
  TEMPORAL ISOLATION PARADOX
• MIH SERVES AS A CONSTRAINT ON OTHER COST BENEFIT
  CALCULATIONS THIS OVERCOMES INDETERMINACY OF
  IDEAL PURE TIME DISCOUNT

6
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITS MIH

• ASSUMES A FAIR SYSTEM OF SOCIAL COOPERATION AND
  CONDITIONS OF MODERATE SCARCITY OBTAIN
• NOT A SELF-STANDING PRINCIPLE
• MIH IS A CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE

7
PROBLEMS MIH

• OBJECTIONS BECKERMAN
• ONLY EXISTING PEOPLE CAN HAVE RIGHTS
• TEMPORAL IMPARTIALITY CONTRARY TO NATURAL
  SENTIMENT
• COMPENSATION FOR IRREVERSIBLE HARM BEST RESPONSE
• FUTURE WELFARE BEST SERVED BY PRESERVATION OR
  CREATION OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY

8
PROBLEMS MIH

• OBJECTIONS OTHER
• HARM TOO VAGUE A CONCEPT TO LIMIT PRESENT
  BENEFITS
• WHAT IS IRREVERSIBLE RELATIVE TO AVAILABLE
  TECHNOLOGY AND WILLINGNESS TO PAY
• URGENT DEMANDS FOR WELFARE SHOULD OVERRIDE
  IRREVERSIBLE HARM

9
FUTURE DIRECTIONS

• CAN WE ARRIVE AT A CONSENSUS ON CRITERIA FOR HARM
  TO NATURE?
• SPECIES DIVERSITY?
• COMPLEXITY?
• FRAGILITY/ROBUSTNESS?

10
FUTURE DIRECTIONS

• CAN WE IDENTIFY CONSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS TO
  IMPLIMENT MIH OR OTHER INTER-TEMPORAL JUSTICE
  PRINCIPLES?
• CAN WE EXTEND NATIONAL AND REGIONAL CONSENSUS ON
  CRITERIA FOR INTER-TEMPORAL JUSTICE?