Intergenerational equity
The leaders of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy considered the precept of seven generation sustainability when making present decisions that could have significant impact on their potential future descendants.
Pope Francis, in his 2015 encyclical letter Laudato si', commented thatWe can no longer speak of sustainable development apart from intergenerational solidarity.
[26] For example, to the extent that borrowed funds are invested today to improve the long-term productivity of the economy and its workers, such as via useful infrastructure projects, future generations may benefit.
[29] Stanley Druckenmiller and Geoffrey Canada call the large increase in government debt being left by the Baby Boomers to their children "Generational Theft".
This concept was originally set out in 1974 by economist James Tobin, who wrote that "The trustees of endowed institutions are the guardians of the future against the claims of the present.
[34][35] Moreover, on average, voters over 65 played "a leading role in driving up GHG emissions in the past decade and are on the way to becoming the largest contributor" due to factors such as demographic transition, less concern about climate change, and higher use of carbon-intensive products like energy for heating and private transport.
[36][37] In 2015, a group of youth environmental activists filed a lawsuit against the U.S. federal government for insufficiently protecting against climate change in Juliana v. United States.
They also have an interest in ensuring that the climate system remains stable enough to secure their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property, rights that depend on a livable Future.”[40] In November 2016, the case was allowed to go to trial after US District Court Judge Ann Aiken denied the federal government’s motion to dismiss the case.
"[41] Australian politician Christine Milne made statements in the lead-up to the 2014 Carbon Price Repeal Bill, naming the Liberal National Party (elected to parliament in 2013) and inherently its ministers, as intergenerational thieves; her statement was based on the party's attempts to roll back progressive carbon tax policy and the impact this would have on the intergenerational equity of future generations.
[42] A "weak sustainability" perspective argues that intergenerational equity would be achieved if losses to the environment that future generations face were offset by greater gains in economic progress (as measured by contemporary mechanisms/metrics).
[44][45][46] From the "strong sustainability" perspective, no amount of economic progress[verification needed] (or as measured by contemporary metrics) can justify leaving future generations with a degraded environment.
Sharon Beder cautions that the "weak" perspective lacks a knowledge of the future and which intrinsically valuable resources will not be able to be replaced by technology.
For intergenerational equity, the relevant issue becomes the degree to which people of different generations enjoy equal living standards over their lifetimes.
[51] Professor Steven Wisensale describes the burden on current working age adults in developed economies, who must care for more elderly parents and relatives for a longer period of time.
This problem is exacerbated by the increasing involvement of women in the workforce, and by the dropping fertility rate, leaving the burden for caring for parents, as well as aunts, uncles, and grandparents, on fewer children.
