Gain conceptual tools to help tackle the questions around the responsibilities of present generations to their own generation, as well as to past and future generations. Consider our role in repairing injustices of the past and in shaping opportunities of the future.
We humans can be quite short-sighted in our behaviours and mindsets. While philanthropy stands out for its future focus through instruments like perpetual endowments & legacy gifts, there is often little conversation about what is right or just when it comes to the relationship between past, present, and future generations. Whether or not its made explicit, the concept of intergenerational justice is at the heart of many choices philanthropies make. Intergenerational justice grapples with core questions, like:
Do present generations have a duty to consider past and future people?
What kinds of responsibilities exist between present, past, and future people?
What is owed to repair past injustices?
Generations are connected by many things, including our dependence on a shared ecosystem.
We can distinguish between different kinds of responsibilities to past and future generations. Simon Caney in his article, Justice and Future Generations, outlines at least four types:
This is about the distribution of income and wealth, including debt.
This is about the use of natural resources and the cre-ation of environmental threats, like climate change, biodiversity loss, and overpopulation.
This is about the health and wellbeing of present and future generations; for example, the use of antibiotics in this generation might increase drug-resistant infections that hurt future generations.
This is about the design of political institutions and the responsibilities of current generations to correct for past injustices and protect democratic institutions to safe-guard human rights into the future.
One of the hard-to-wrap-your-head-around features of intergenerational justice is the absence of direct reciprocity between people across generations. We are not in direct relationship with deceased generations. And we will not be in direct relationship with future generations who are yet to be born, or who might not be born because of our actions today. That means there is a permanent asymmetry in power relations between living people, those who lived in the past, and those who will live in the future. Couple that with what we know about human psychology, that we find it harder to be motivated by far away concerns, and we can see why short-termism so often prevails.
The nature of intergenerational relations is that we don't have the conditions for equal power to shape our experience in the world.
Philanthropy is an institution predicated on a longer-term view. Indeed, a core value proposition to donors is legacy -- the idea of passing along something of value, of ensuring an indelible link between past and future. But, it’s not only benefits that can be passed along. It’s also the accrual of harm. Harm occur in the form of money acquired and amassed as a result of land theft, unsustainable resource extraction, human exploitation, and/or policies that disproportionately privilege a few. Harm might also come in the form of upholding an image of benevolence in the face of continued dominance and oppression.
Each generation passes along both value and harm to future generations
Indeed, questions of intergenerational justice focus not just on divvying up material resources, but also on distributing capabilities, happiness, honors & obligations, and harms.
Concerns the distribution of money, goods, services, property
Concerns the distribution of desired ends like happiness and wellbeing
Concerns the distribution of real freedoms: (the means) that people have to do or be what they wish (their desired ends)
Concerns the distribution of status, duty, responsibility
Concerns the distribution of losses, offenses, and retribution
While there aren’t obvious or wholly objective answers about how to achieve intergenerational justice, arguably philanthropy, with its inbuilt interest in a gifting relationship between generations, is well positioned to host a more fulsome conversation. Only by making assumptions transparent and wrestling with different distributive approaches might we more fairly calibrate benefits and harms over time.
There are some different principles and philosophies that might guide the just distribution of harms and value amongst generations. Here we offer a few and interpret some of their possible implicaitons for philanthropy.
Approach
What it says
Role & focus of Philanthropy
Sufficientarianism
We have a duty to foster the conditions for future generations to have a decent minimum standard of living. Inequality within and between generations is OK provided a floor is met.
The role of philanthropy might be to ensure present and future generations achieve a minimum standard. The focus is on redistributing resources to a minimum threshold.
Relational Egalitarianism
We have a duty to realize a society in which all are treated as equal and in which there is no domination, exploitation, or oppression. In this approach, we are OK with some people having more than others as long as that inequality does not result in stigma or oppression.
The role of philanthropy might be to advocate for the equal distribution of rights and freedoms, pursue justice, and future proof democratic institutions. The focus is on repairing past injustice, and securing rights and capabilities.
Luck Egalitarianism
It is unjust and unfair for some people to be worse off through no fault of their own. So it is our duty to pass on a world that is in no worse shape than it is now. Future generations’ standard of living must be at least equal to ours.
The role of philanthropy might be to conserve and protect resources, acting as a ‘custodian’ rather than an ‘owner’ of both natural & material wealth. The focus is on protecting ecology, and divesting from extractive economies.
Seventh Generation Principle *Based on Haudenosaunee principles
Communities transcend time so all decisions must take into account seven generations into the future, centering seven grandmother teachings of wisdom, humility, respect, truth, bravery, love, and honesty.
The role of philanthropy might be to conserve and protect resources and values, acting as a ‘custodian’ rather than an ‘owner’ of both natural, cultural, and material wealth. The focus is on protecting ecology, and divesting from extractive economies. The focus in on protecting cultural and ecological heritage, divesting from extractive economies.
Intergenerational Justice asks about what each generation owes past and future generations.
Categories of responsibilities
These responsibilities are economic, ecological, bioethical, and political in nature.
No direct reciprocity
One challenge of intergenerational justice is that we are not in direct relationship and we have unequal power over other generations at the point of decisions.
Let's talk about intergenerational justice
As an institution concerned with intergenerational gifts, philanthropy is uniquely positioned to host deeper conversations about what is just.
The good and the bad
We pass on both value and harms to future generations, including intangible resources, capabilities, happiness, honours & obligations, and harms like losses, offenses, and retribution.
Many ideas of justice
Some of the different beliefs about what we owe to other generations include sufficientarianism, relational egaliatrianism, luck egalitarianism, and the Seventh Generation principle.
How do you think about your personal responsibility to past, present, and future generations? When you give, what time horizon are you focused on, and why?
Reactions & Impressions
Which beliefs about intergenerational justice resonated most with you or provoked a reaction? Do you hold a belief that was not represented here?
Questions & Hunches to test
How might a foundation you are close to better understand the link between present-day social challenges and past decisions, policies, and sources of philanthropic wealth?
Bioethics is a field of inquiry centered around the uses and moral implications of medicine and the bio-sciences; for example around genetic testing, organ transplants, and environmental concerns. It is based on 4 principles: Beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice.