Climate Change and the Need for Intergenerational Reparative Justice

Almassi, Ben

doi:10.1007/s10806-017-9661-z

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If narrow anthropocentrism is just one-now prevalent, but somewhat anomalous-way of conceptualizing value and human relations with the broader world, then engaged environmental justice theorizing and movement building may bring to the fore a wide range of traditions and perspectives historically marginalized or backgrounded in academic discourse. Within academia, growing literatures in Indigenous environmental justice (McGregor 2018; Estes 2019; Whyte 2020a), critical environmental justice (Pellow 2018), restorative and reparative environmental justice (Almassi 2020), and other areas continue to deepen the conversation and develop stronger links between theory and practice, within and outside the academy.…”

Section: Environmental Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another strand of relational ethics emerges out of feminist ethical theory, particularly feminist care ethics, which emphasizes caring relations as central and calls attention to context-sensitive, care-and relationship-oriented ethical reasoning (Gilligan 1982;Noddings 1984;Held 2006). In environmental philosophy, care ethical approaches have been developed by Cuomo (1998), Whyte and Cuomo (2017), Preston and Carr (2018), Almassi (2020), and others. Whyte and Cuomo (2017, 235) argue that care-oriented approaches "conceive of environmental harms and the exploitation of nonhuman animals as failures to extend caring to worthy others and see those failures in relation to similar failures to care for other people."…”

Section: Relational Approaches To Environmental Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, relational approaches to environmental ethics tend to view ethics not as a matter of applying the right algorithm but as ongoing practices of "staying with the trouble" (Haraway 2016), focusing on renewing relatives (Holtgren et al 2014), kincentric praxis (cf. Salmón 2000Haraway 2016; Kanngieser and Todd 2020), relational accountability (Reo 2019), and other approaches that seek to repair damaged relationships (Almassi 2020) and build and sustain relationships of respect and reciprocity (Kimmerer 2013).…”

Section: Relational Approaches To Environmental Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are some encouraging signs along these lines. Intergenerational ethics has broadened beyond knotty puzzles such as the nonidentity problem that preoccupied the field for so long (see, e.g., De‐Shalit 1995; Thompson 2009; Gardiner 2011; Habib 2013; Almassi 2017; Nolt 2017; Fritsch 2018; Droz 2019); environmental ethicists are finding ways to consider the value of the past without idealizing it (see, e.g., Holland 2011; Palmer 2011; Hourdequin and Havlick 2016; Drenthen 2018); and scholars are articulating possibilities for constructive engagement with animals, plants, and the broader world as well as conceptions of sustainability that aim to “maintain and sustain the fullness of health [needed] for us to thrive, and for everything else to thrive” (Armstrong 2007).…”

Section: Forwards Backwards or Something Else? Environmental Ethics In The “Anthropocene”mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Environmental Ethics: The State of the Question

Hourdequin¹

2021

The Southern J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental ethics, as an academic field, was born out of professional philosophers' frustrations with anthropocentrism. In particular, philosophers such as Richard Sylvan and Holmes Rolston III found that canonical Western philosophy overlooked important questions regarding human relations to nonhuman animals and the broader world. Because many other traditions attend more closely to these relations, it is helpful to contextualize the initial development of academic environmental ethics as a critical response to a particular kind of deficiency characteristic of the Western tradition. In recent decades, the field has grown and broadened, and a more pluralistic, interdisciplinary, intercultural, and intersectional environmental ethics is emerging. This article traces developments in the field of environmental ethics during the last fifty years, beginning with discussions of the value of nature, deep ecology, the land ethic, environmental virtue ethics, and environmental pragmatism. Next, I turn to approaches that integrate social and environmental concerns through lenses that consider power dynamics and challenge relations of domination and oppression, bringing into focus questions of environmental and ecological justice. The final section considers some of the distinctive challenges associated with what some have dubbed "the Anthropocene," noting that the nature and designation of this epoch remain contested.

show abstract

Section: Environmental Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Relational Approaches To Environmental Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Relational Approaches To Environmental Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Forwards Backwards or Something Else? Environmental Ethics In The “Anthropocene”mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Environmental Ethics: The State of the Question

Hourdequin¹

2021

The Southern J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Almassi (2017) however seems to adhere to what he claims to be a “relational” concept of interdependence regarding intergenerational justice: he considers the past, present, and future generations to be in continuity and therefore bound by a duty of reciprocity, from the obligation to protect new and future members of the community, as it was done by previous generations. It could be said, however, that this foundation principle of intergenerational justice is not far from that of equality, because if the obligations of previous generations are still valid for the present and for the future, it is because essentially these obligations are the same for individuals or collectives that have the same characteristics, that is, that can be considered as equals.…”

Section: Intergenerational Justice and Energy Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Delivering a timely and Just Energy Transition: Which policy research priorities?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the concept of "energy justice" has attracted much attention and research effort. Although all policy issues related to energy justice are worthy of further study, the time constraints posed by the looming threat of climate change suggests the need for coordinated policy research efforts. At the current stage of development of European societies, we consider that four policy research strands might be most important in the light of specific evolving trends of European energy systems. Therefore, we propose these priorities as a shared research agenda for academic and policy researchers. In this article, we develop and discuss the following four research priority strands: (a) intergenerational justice and energy justice, (b) justice and energy vulnerability, (c) transformation of the social imaginary and energy infrastructure, and (d) damage, compensation, and energy infrastructure. For each topic, we highlight their critical issues and research opportunities. We conclude that these priorities are necessary not only to accelerate the energy transition but also to avoid negative impacts that climate change and the transition phase could produce on already established patterns of inequality.

show abstract

Flexibility for intergenerational justice in climate resilience decision-making: an application on sea-level rise in the Netherlands

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To adapt to a changing climate, decision-makers design, evaluate, and implement measures that have an implication of justice on citizens in the present and well into the future. Decision-makers are often required to make decisions without certainty of the consequences and understanding their effects on intergenerational justice. Thus, managing the impacts of climate change requires novel decision-aiding approaches that consider climate impacts’ temporal and spatial heterogeneity and the uncertainty in climate predictions, preferences, and values. We reviewed the literature on the extent to which principles of intergenerational justice—conservation of options and resources for future generations—have been integrated to traditional approaches in climate resilience decision-making. We explore the extent to which flexibility, i.e., the conservation and expansion of options in subsequent decision periods, can contribute to upholding the principles of intergenerational justice under uncertainty. We illustrate the approach in the case of the Delta Programme in the Netherlands, a complex system designed to protect against sea-level rise (SLR). Designing adaptation strategies to SLR with flexibility as a core concept brings significant advantages in circumstances of uncertainty. The conservation of options in flexible pathways, in this case, contributes to the principles of intergenerational justice. Our civilization’s long-term sustainability and survival may depend on the extent to which individuals can see beyond their gains and toward the gains of the collective society at an intergenerational scale.

show abstract

Climate Change and the Need for Intergenerational Reparative Justice

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

Environmental Ethics: The State of the Question

Environmental Ethics: The State of the Question

Delivering a timely and Just Energy Transition: Which policy research priorities?

Flexibility for intergenerational justice in climate resilience decision-making: an application on sea-level rise in the Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About