Sustainability, Uncertainty, and Intergenerational Fairness

Author(s):  
Richard B. Howarth
2012 ◽  
pp. 35-63
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Clerico

Public projects (to be understood as the set of public choices that affect human behavior and the dynamics of the economic system) can result in an immediate and a future stream of benefits or an immediate flow of benefits with costs occurring in the future. The public choice, therefore, raises both the problem of intergenerational relations and the criterion of fairness (distributive justice) that governs them. The problem arises because, given the non-simultaneity of the costs and benefits of a project, discrepancies may arise in treatment between the generations. The time raises a twofold objective: the pursuit of distributive justice in intergenerational and the need to respect the criterion of intergenerational efficiency level. Closely connected to this dual aim is the problem of the discount rate. As a euro today has a value other than a euro available within a few years the monetary values that accrue in different times must be discounted. The opportunity to use the discount rate raises issues of both fairness and efficiency at both intra-and intergenerational level. Different levels of discount rate implies different burden for different generations. A level is appropriate to distinguish between the problems of fairness from the problems of efficiency. The opportunity of using the discount rate is based on two essential elements: the opportunity cost of capital, and the time preference of the subjects which in turn depends on factors such as impatience and uncertainty. The current evaluation of a public project depends on individual willingness to pay for that project. It follows that the discount of this assessment is similar to the discount of monetary values that ripen at different times. The cost-benefit assessment needs using the discount rate, but the use raises, in particular, the problem of intergenerational fairness.


2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 437-453
Author(s):  
Kristina Woock ◽  
Susanne Busch

Im Rahmen der COVID-19-Pandemie wird die Frage nach einer gerechten Gesundheitsversorgung anhand verschiedener Interventionsebenen diskutiert. Menschen mit niedrigem sozioökonomischem Status weisen aufgrund ihrer höheren Exposition zum Virus ein höheres Infektionsrisiko auf. Intergenerationale Gerechtigkeit, beispielsweise im Kontext der Impfpriorisierung, ist ebenfalls in der Diskussion. Menschen, die nicht an COVID-19 erkrankt sind, nehmen Gesundheitsleistungen seltener in Anspruch. Um eine gerechtere Gesundheitsversorgung zu gewährleisten wird vorgeschlagen, dass eine sozial gerechte Grundstruktur nicht die gleichmäßige Verteilung von Ressourcen bedeutet, sondern dass eine gleiche Ausgangslage für alle den Ausschlag für mehr Gerechtigkeit in der Krise gibt. Abstract: Is the Virus a Respecter of Persons? Fair Provision of Health-Services in the Current Crisis. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic the issue of a fair provision of health-services is being raised on different layers of intervention. People with a low socio-economic status face a higher risk of infection because of increased exposure to the virus. Intergenerational fairness is under discussion, for instance in the context of the prioritization of inoculation. People that suffer from other diseases than COVID-19 take less advantage of the health-care system. For ensuring a more suitable distribution of resources it is being suggested that not equality in the distribution of resources but equity in initial positions will ensure more justness in a crisis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Josephine M. Wildman ◽  
Anna Goulding ◽  
Suzanne Moffatt ◽  
Thomas Scharf ◽  
Alison Stenning

Abstract The concept of intergenerational fairness has taken hold across Europe since the 2008 financial crisis. In the United Kingdom (UK), focus on intergenerational conflict has been further sharpened by the 2016 ‘Brexit’ vote to take the UK out of the European Union. However, current debates around intergenerational fairness are taking place among policy makers, the media and in think-tanks. In this way, they are conversations about, but not with, people. This article draws on qualitative interviews with 40 people aged 19–85 years and living in North-East England and Edinburgh, Scotland's capital city, to explore whether macro-level intergenerational equity discourses resonate in people's everyday lives. We find widespread pessimism around young people's prospects and evidence of a fracturing social contract, with little faith in the principles of intergenerational equity, equality and reciprocity upon which welfare states depend. Although often strong, the kin contract was not fully ameliorating resentment and frustration among participants observing societal-level intergenerational unfairness mirrored within families. However, blame for intergenerational inequity was placed on a remote state rather than on older generations. Despite the precariousness of the welfare state, participants of all ages strongly supported the principle of state support, rejecting a system based on family wealth and inherited privilege. Rather than increased individualism, participants desired strengthened communities that encouraged greater intergenerational mixing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document