David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6 (2):107-126 (1993)
The behavior of individuals currently living will generally have long-term consequences that affect the well-being of those who will come to live in the future. Intergenerational interdependencies of this nature raise difficult moral issues because only the current generation is in a position to decide on actions that will determine the nature of the world in which future generations will live. Although most are willing to attach some weight to the interests of future generations, many would argue that it is not necessary to treat these interests as equivalent to those of the current generation. A common approach in this context is to use a system of discounting to evaluate future benefits and harms. This paper assesses the logic of discounting drawing on the writings of economists and philosophers. Much of the economic literature concerns the choice of an appropriate social discount rate. The social discount rate can be taken to reflect beliefs about the rights of future generations, a subject that has been extensively debated in the phioosophic literature. The writings of both economists and philosophers concerned with the weight to attach to the interests of future generations are reviewed and evaluated in this paper and the implications for environmental policy are discussed.
|Keywords||social discount rate time preference rights future generations environmental policy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Robert E. Goodin (1988). What is so Special About Our Fellow Countrymen? Ethics 98 (4):663-686.
Knud Haakonssen (1981). The Science of a Legislator: The Natural Jurisprudence of David Hume and Adam Smith. Cambridge University Press.
Matthew Hanser (1990). Harming Future People. Philosophy and Public Affairs 19 (1):47-70.
Rosalind Hursthouse (1991). Virtue Theory and Abortion. Philosophy and Public Affairs 20 (3):223-246.
Gregory Kavka (1978). The Futurity Problem. In Richard I. Sikora & Brian M. Barry (eds.), Obligations to Future Generations. White Horse Press. 186--203.
Citations of this work BETA
Kathryn Paxton George (1992). Sustainability and the Moral Community. Agriculture and Human Values 9 (4):48-57.
Similar books and articles
Gillian Brock (1998). Future Generations, Natural Resources, and Property Rights. Ethics and the Environment 3 (2):119 - 130.
Geoffrey Brennan (2007). Discounting the Future, yet Again. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (3):259-284.
Jan Deckers (2011). Negative “GHIs,” the Right to Health Protection, and Future Generations. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (2):165-176.
William J. FitzPatrick (2007). Climate Change and the Rights of Future Generations. Environmental Ethics 29 (4):369-388.
Ronald Jeurissen & Gerard Keijzers (2004). Future Generations and Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (1):47-69.
Ori J. Herstein (2009). The Identity and (Legal) Rights of Future Generations. The George Washington Law Review 77:1173.
Steve Vanderheiden (2006). Conservation, Foresight, and the Future Generations Problem. Inquiry 49 (4):337 – 352.
Pierre Mallia & Henk ten Have (2003). From What Should We Protect Future Generations: Germ-Line Therapy or Genetic Screening? Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 6 (1):17-24.
Clark Wolf (1996). Markets, Justice, and the Interests of Future Generations. Ethics and the Environment 1 (2):153 - 175.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #59,278 of 1,102,882 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #62,002 of 1,102,882 )
How can I increase my downloads?