Abstract
A wide range of theoretical and philosophical arguments have been made about what constitutes intergenerational justice and how it should be achieved. Theories of intergenerational justice can help stimulate the imagination about possible futures and ways of being, and they can also (depending on which approach or approaches one finds influential) serve as a locus for shaping political demands or forms of advocacy/activism. This chapter considers two key contributions to the field of intergenerational justice – the work of John Rawls and Amartya Sen – and their implications for present and future generations. Rawls’ particular ideas about equality of liberty and opportunity are singularly influential in modern political thought and debates about social justice. Sen’s work on human freedom, functionings and capabilities has been more prominent in recent years among policy makers and economists. His ideas have had a significant impact on how development is understood and measured around the world, most notably through the United Nations Human Development Index. The high profile of both theories subjects them to considerable critique and interpretation, not least in relation to the prominence of contemporary social policy challenges such as globalisation, sustainable development and debates about fairness between generations. It is this idea of intergenerational justice that is our chief interest. To grapple with this concept, however, it is first important to understand what a theory of justice is and what it means for people alive today. In this chapter we outline the basic components of a theory of justice and consider both Rawls’ and Sen’s ideas about justice among contemporaries. The chapter also looks at the challenges posed by thinking intergenerationally, and how Rawls, Sen and others have applied their theories to make a case for principles of intergenerational justice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Anderson, E. (1999). What is the point of equality? Ethics, 109(2), 287–337.
Barry, B. (1977). Rawls on average and total utility: A comment. Philosophical Studies, 31(5), 317–325.
Barry, B. (1999). Sustainability and intergenerational justice. In A. Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and futurity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brighouse, H., & Robeyns, I. (Eds.). (2010). Measuring justice: Primary goods and capabilities. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, C. (2010). On Amartya Sen and “the idea of justice”. Ethics and International Affairs, 24(3).
Burchardt, T. (2008). Monitoring inequality: Putting the capability approach to work. In G. Craig, T. Burchardt, & D. Gordon (Eds.), Social justice and public policy: Seeking fairness in diverse societies. Bristol: Policy Press.
Cohen, G.A. (1989). On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice. Ethics, 99(4), 906–944.
Daniels, N. (1975). Reading rawls: Critical studies on Rawls’ a theory of justice. New York: Basic Books.
Dobson, A. (1998). Environmental politics and distributive justice. In A. Dobson (Ed.), Justice and the environment: Conceptions of environmental sustainability and theories of distributive justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations. (2011). Climate legacy initiative publishes policy paper. http://www.intergenerationaljustice.org/index.php?Itemid=238&id=173&option=com_content&task=view
Fulop, S. (2016). 15 the institutional representation of future generations. In G. Bos & M. Düwel (Eds.), Human rights and sustainability: Moral responsibilities for the future (pp. 195–211). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Gaspart, F., & Gosseries, A. (2007). Are generational savings unjust? Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 6(2), 193–217.
Gauthier, P. (1986). Morals by agreement. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Gosseries, A. (2008). Theories of intergenerational justice: A synopsis, S.A.P.I.EN.S [Online], 1.1, 23 Dec 2008. http://sapiens.revues.org/165
Gosseries, A., & Meyer, L. H. (Eds.). (2009). Intergenerational justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gutwald, R., et al. (2014). A capability approach to intergenerational justice? Examining the potential of Amartya Sen's ethics with regard to intergenerational issues. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 15(4), 355–368.
Heath, J. (1997). Intergenerational cooperation and distributive justice. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 27(3), 361–376.
Kuper, A. (2000). Rawlsian global justice: Beyond the law of peoples to a cosmopolitan law of persons. Political Theory, 28(5), 640–674.
Langhelle, O. (2000). Sustainable development and social justice: Expanding the Rawlsian framework of global justice. Environmental Values, 9(3), 295–323.
Leach, M., Scoones, I., & Sterling, A. (2010). Dynamic sustainabilities: Technology, environment, social justice. London: Earthscan.
Lessmann, O., & Rauschmayer, F. (2013). Re-conceptualizing sustainable development on the basis of the capability approach: A model and its difficulties. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(1), 95–114.
McKinnon, C. (2012). Climate change and future justice: Precaution, compensation and triage. London: Routledge.
Neuberger, H. & Fraser, N. (1993). Economic Policy: A Rights-Based Approach. Aldershot: Avebury.
Norton, B. (1999). Ecology and opportunity: Intergenerational equity and sustainable options. In A. Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and futurity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M. (2003). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics, 9(2–3), 33–59.
Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Okin, S. (1989). Justice, gender and the family. New York: Basic Books.
Page, E. (2007). Intergenerational justice of what: Welfare, resources or capabilities? Environmental Politics, 16(3), 453–469.
Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Paterson, M. (2001). Principles of Justice in the Context of Global Climate Change. In U. Luterbacher and D.F. Sprinz (eds.) International Relations and Global Climate Change. London: The MIT Press
Piachaud, D. (2008). Social justice and public policy: A social policy perspective. In G. Craig, T. Burchardt, & D. Gordon (Eds.), Social justice and public policy: Seeking fairness in diverse societies. Bristol: Policy Press.
Piachaud, D., Macnicol, J. & Lewis. J. (2009). A think piece on intergenerational equity. London: Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Rauschmayer, F., Bauler, T., & Schäpke, N. (2015). Towards a thick understanding of sustainability transitions – Linking transition management, capabilities and social practices. Ecological Economics, 109, 211–221.
Rauschmayer, F., Omann, I. & Frühmann, J. (2011) Needs, Capabilities and Quality of Life: Refocusing Sustainable Development. In Rauschmayer, F.,Omann, I. & Frühmann, J. (Eds.) Sustainable Development: Capabilities, Needs and Wellbeing. London: Routledge.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. London: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. (1993a). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rawls, J. (1993b). The law of peoples. In S. Shute & S. Hurley (Eds.), On human rights. New York: Basic Books/Harper Collins.
Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93–114.
Robeyns, I., & Brighouse, H. (2010). Introduction: Social primary goods and capabilities as metrics of justice. In H. Brighouse & I. Robeyns (Eds.), Measuring justice: Primary goods and capabilities (pp. 1–14). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Scholtes, F. (2010). Whose sustainability? Environmental domination and Sen’s capability approach. Oxford Development Studies, 38(3), 289–307.
Sen, A. (1980). Equality of what? In A. Sen (Ed.), Choice, welfare and measurement. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sen, A. (1993) Capability and Well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.). The Quality of Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. New York: Penguin.
Sen, A. (2013). The ends and means of sustainability. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(1), 6–20.
Sen, A. (2014). Global warming is just one of many environmental threats that demand our attention. The new republic. 22 Aug 2014. Available online: https://newrepublic.com/article/118969/environmentalists-obsess-about-global-warming-ignore-poor-countries
Singer, B. (1988). An extension of Rawls’ theory of justice to environmental ethics. Environmental Ethics, 10(3), 217–231.
Smith, A. (2009 [1759]). The theory of moral sentiments. London: Penguin Books.
Thompson, J. (2009). Intergenerational justice: Rights and responsibilities in an intergenerational polity. London: Routledge.
UNDP. (2017). About human development: Intellectual and historical underpinnings. United Nations Development Programme Human Development Reports. Available online at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev
Vanderbeck, R. M., & Worth, N. (Eds.). (2015). Intergenerational space. London: Routledge.
Vanderheiden, S. (2008). Climate Change and Intergenerational Justice. In S. Vanderheiden, Atmospheric Justice: A Political Theory of Climate Change, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 111–142.
Watene, K. (2013). Nussbaum’s capability approach and future generations. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14(1), 21–39.
Wissenburg, M. (1999). An extension of the Rawlsian savings principle to liberal theories of justice in general. In A. Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and futurity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolff, J. (2008). Social justice and public policy: A view from political philosophy. In G. Craig, T. Burchardt, & D. Gordon (Eds.), Social justice and public policy: Seeking fairness in diverse societies. Bristol: Policy Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Diprose, K. et al. (2018). Contrasting Theories of Intergenerational Justice: Just Savings or Capabilities. In: Punch, S., Vanderbeck, R. (eds) Families, Intergenerationality, and Peer Group Relations. Geographies of Children and Young People, vol 5. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-026-1_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-026-1_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-025-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-026-1
eBook Packages: Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences