RESEARCH STARTER
Intergenerational justice
Intergenerational justice refers to the ethical obligation that one generation has toward both preceding and succeeding generations, particularly concerning the environment and societal welfare. This concept raises significant questions about the fairness of current generations exploiting natural resources, polluting the environment, and the moral implications of these actions on future inhabitants of the planet. Debates around intergenerational justice often highlight the tension between the need for immediate technological and economic progress and the responsibility to ensure a sustainable future.
Critics of intergenerational justice argue that past generations have acted without regard for future consequences, suggesting that current generations should feel free to do the same. However, this viewpoint is countered by the ethical stance that each generation bears a moral duty to leave the world in a better state for those who follow. This perspective is increasingly supported by legal actions aimed at holding governments and corporations accountable for their environmental impact.
Overall, intergenerational justice is a complex issue that intertwines ethics, environmental policy, and social justice, inviting diverse opinions on how best to navigate the responsibilities owed to future generations.
Authored By: Männikkö, Nancy Farm, PhD 1 of 4
Published In: 2023 2 of 4
- Related Topics:
3 of 4
- Related Articles:A Theoretical Framework for Transformative Corporate Intergenerational Equity.;Birthright Entitlements and Obligations in an Intergenerational Political Society.;Cultivating multigenerational moral expansion: Interventions cultivate moral concern for future generations in boundless and zero‐sum contexts.;Impartial Intergenerational Beneficence: The Psychology of Feeling (Equal) Intergenerational Concern for All Future Generations.;Reimagining the future of education: Inclusive pedagogies, critical intergenerational justice, and technological disruption.
4 of 4
Full Article
DEFINITION: The sense of obligation or fair play that one generation of humanity holds toward the generations that follow and precede it
The laws and policies that are created in relation to environmental issues are, in part, influenced by legislators’ and policymakers’ views about the necessity of pursuing intergenerational justice.
In addition to societal issues such as how the young should treat older adults or whether one generation should pay for the education of the next, the concept of intergenerational justice encompasses numerous questions regarding the environment. Is it fair or just for the current generation to exploit natural resources to the point where those resources may become exhausted? Is it fair or just for today’s society to fill landfills with garbage or the atmosphere with pollutants that tomorrow’s citizens will have to clean up? Although the answers to such questions regarding an implicit social contract reaching across generations may seem self-evident, not everyone agrees that the members of each generation have a moral obligation to leave the world a better place than they found it.
Some economists and policy analysts have argued in favor of what might appear to be shortsighted selfishness on the part of the current generation of humanity. They point to past ecologically unsound practices, such as overreliance on fossil fuels, and assert that the technological progress that humans have made can be attributed to their need to respond to problems created by the selfish behavior of past generations. Using this line of reasoning, they claim that it is unnecessary for current generations to preserve natural resources, curb population growth, or reduce industrial pollution. Frequently coupled with this argument is the statement that past generations showed no restraint or consideration for intergenerational justice, and current generations should be equally free to engage in selfish behavior. This latter argument is sometimes referred to as “mutual unconcern” between generations.
The flaw in pursuing a policy of mutual unconcern is that it is based on an assumption of continual technological and scientific progress. While it may be historically true that technological advances allowed past generations to substitute new resources for depleted ones, such as the substitution of coal for fuel when deforestation rendered charcoal scarce in Great Britain during the Industrial Revolution, humans cannot presume that science will always provide technical solutions to environmental problems. The historical record is rife with examples of technical solutions that, in the long run, generated more problems than they solved.
Further, engaging in unsound or damaging practices while arguing that the next generation will find a way to clean up the resulting mess fails on moral grounds. People should recognize that current actions do have significant impacts on the future. The fact that current generations may not live to see the consequences of their actions should not release them from the moral obligations implicit in the social contract. The idea of distributive justice within a generation suggests, for example, that it is immoral for the wealthy to exploit the poor; that same concept of distributive justice suggests that, rather than pursuing a policy of mutual unconcern, intergenerational justice mandates mutual concern, particularly regarding the environment.
In the twenty-first century and across the globe, an increasing number of courts are stepping in to pressure public and private entities to ensure a more sustainable future. This trend in the narrative concerning intergenerational justice and environmental issues attaches legal repercussions to those who fail to recognize their accountability for reducing climate change's effects.
Bibliography
Gosseries, Axel, and Lukas H. Meyer, editors. Intergenerational Justice. Oxford UP, 2009.
Hiskes, Richard P. The Human Right to a Green Future: Environmental Rights and Intergenerational Justice. Cambridge UP, 2009.
Meyer, Kristin. "Courts Step Up On Intergenerational Climate Justice." International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 4 Aug. 2021, www.iucn.org/news/environmental-law/202108/courts-step-intergenerational-climate-justice. Accessed 15 Sept. 2025.
Strazzante, Erika. "Intergenerational Justice, or How to Be a Good Ancestor." Generation Climate Europe, 29 July 2022, gceurope.org/intergenerational-justice-or-how-to-be-a-good-ancestor/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2025.
Wang, Jodi-Ann, and Tiffanie Chan. “What Is Meant by Intergenerational Climate Justice?” London School of Economics and Political Science, 7 Dec. 2023, www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-meant-by-intergenerational-climate-justice/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2025.
Full Article
DEFINITION: The sense of obligation or fair play that one generation of humanity holds toward the generations that follow and precede it
The laws and policies that are created in relation to environmental issues are, in part, influenced by legislators’ and policymakers’ views about the necessity of pursuing intergenerational justice.
In addition to societal issues such as how the young should treat older adults or whether one generation should pay for the education of the next, the concept of intergenerational justice encompasses numerous questions regarding the environment. Is it fair or just for the current generation to exploit natural resources to the point where those resources may become exhausted? Is it fair or just for today’s society to fill landfills with garbage or the atmosphere with pollutants that tomorrow’s citizens will have to clean up? Although the answers to such questions regarding an implicit social contract reaching across generations may seem self-evident, not everyone agrees that the members of each generation have a moral obligation to leave the world a better place than they found it.
Some economists and policy analysts have argued in favor of what might appear to be shortsighted selfishness on the part of the current generation of humanity. They point to past ecologically unsound practices, such as overreliance on fossil fuels, and assert that the technological progress that humans have made can be attributed to their need to respond to problems created by the selfish behavior of past generations. Using this line of reasoning, they claim that it is unnecessary for current generations to preserve natural resources, curb population growth, or reduce industrial pollution. Frequently coupled with this argument is the statement that past generations showed no restraint or consideration for intergenerational justice, and current generations should be equally free to engage in selfish behavior. This latter argument is sometimes referred to as “mutual unconcern” between generations.
The flaw in pursuing a policy of mutual unconcern is that it is based on an assumption of continual technological and scientific progress. While it may be historically true that technological advances allowed past generations to substitute new resources for depleted ones, such as the substitution of coal for fuel when deforestation rendered charcoal scarce in Great Britain during the Industrial Revolution, humans cannot presume that science will always provide technical solutions to environmental problems. The historical record is rife with examples of technical solutions that, in the long run, generated more problems than they solved.
Further, engaging in unsound or damaging practices while arguing that the next generation will find a way to clean up the resulting mess fails on moral grounds. People should recognize that current actions do have significant impacts on the future. The fact that current generations may not live to see the consequences of their actions should not release them from the moral obligations implicit in the social contract. The idea of distributive justice within a generation suggests, for example, that it is immoral for the wealthy to exploit the poor; that same concept of distributive justice suggests that, rather than pursuing a policy of mutual unconcern, intergenerational justice mandates mutual concern, particularly regarding the environment.
In the twenty-first century and across the globe, an increasing number of courts are stepping in to pressure public and private entities to ensure a more sustainable future. This trend in the narrative concerning intergenerational justice and environmental issues attaches legal repercussions to those who fail to recognize their accountability for reducing climate change's effects.
Bibliography
Gosseries, Axel, and Lukas H. Meyer, editors. Intergenerational Justice. Oxford UP, 2009.
Hiskes, Richard P. The Human Right to a Green Future: Environmental Rights and Intergenerational Justice. Cambridge UP, 2009.
Meyer, Kristin. "Courts Step Up On Intergenerational Climate Justice." International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 4 Aug. 2021, www.iucn.org/news/environmental-law/202108/courts-step-intergenerational-climate-justice. Accessed 15 Sept. 2025.
Strazzante, Erika. "Intergenerational Justice, or How to Be a Good Ancestor." Generation Climate Europe, 29 July 2022, gceurope.org/intergenerational-justice-or-how-to-be-a-good-ancestor/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2025.
Wang, Jodi-Ann, and Tiffanie Chan. “What Is Meant by Intergenerational Climate Justice?” London School of Economics and Political Science, 7 Dec. 2023, www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-meant-by-intergenerational-climate-justice/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2025.
More Like ThisRelated Articles
Related Articles (5)
Related Articles (5)
- A Theoretical Framework for Transformative Corporate Intergenerational Equity.Published In: Journal of Environmental Law, 2025, v. 37, n. 1. P. 45Authored By: Cheong, Ben ChesterPublication Type: Academic Journal
- Birthright Entitlements and Obligations in an Intergenerational Political Society.Published In: Monist, 2023, v. 106, n. 2. P. 132Authored By: Thompson, JannaPublication Type: Academic Journal
- Cultivating multigenerational moral expansion: Interventions cultivate moral concern for future generations in boundless and zero‐sum contexts.Published In: British Journal of Social Psychology, 2025, v. 64, n. 2. P. 1Authored By: Law, Kyle Fiore; Young, Liane; Syropoulos, StylianosPublication Type: Academic Journal
- Impartial Intergenerational Beneficence: The Psychology of Feeling (Equal) Intergenerational Concern for All Future Generations.Published In: Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 2026, v. 52, n. 5. P. 1279Authored By: Syropoulos, Stylianos; Law, Kyle Fiore; Kraft-Todd, Gordon; Young, LianePublication Type: Academic Journal
- Reimagining the future of education: Inclusive pedagogies, critical intergenerational justice, and technological disruption.Published In: Policy Futures in Education, 2026, v. 24, n. 3. P. 484Authored By: Murtiningsih, Siti; Sujito, AriePublication Type: Academic Journal