Thanks for the post!
When I first started studying intergenerational justice, I was kind of surprised that political philosophers in the area pay little attention to the debate on discount rates (not even to argue about how to decide it democratically), and put a lot of pressure on discussios on representation and on the so-called “boundary problem”.
(which is sort of curious: most of the scholars I’ve talked to buy the consequences of the nonidentity problem, and so conclude that future people don’t really have rights… and yet, they think it’s ok to discuss how they should be represented, etc.)
I became a bit disillusioned.
On the other hand, I became more hopeful with some initiatives that are likely too recent to have figured on your reviews, and I was wondering if you have any opinion on them:
a) the Vanuatu initiative: a UN resolution asking ICJ for a opinion on legal responsibilities regarding climate change—explicitly mentioning future generations;
b) the GCR management act in US.
Thanks for the post! When I first started studying intergenerational justice, I was kind of surprised that political philosophers in the area pay little attention to the debate on discount rates (not even to argue about how to decide it democratically), and put a lot of pressure on discussios on representation and on the so-called “boundary problem”. (which is sort of curious: most of the scholars I’ve talked to buy the consequences of the nonidentity problem, and so conclude that future people don’t really have rights… and yet, they think it’s ok to discuss how they should be represented, etc.) I became a bit disillusioned. On the other hand, I became more hopeful with some initiatives that are likely too recent to have figured on your reviews, and I was wondering if you have any opinion on them: a) the Vanuatu initiative: a UN resolution asking ICJ for a opinion on legal responsibilities regarding climate change—explicitly mentioning future generations; b) the GCR management act in US.