5 minute read
INTERGENERATIONAL SOLIDARITY AND LONG-TERM THINKING
Systems and mindsets we need to secure the life of future generations
by Luise Meerheim
The generations of tomorrow will inevitably face significant challenges: climate change, food scarcity, resource depletion, overpopulation, and social inequalities are just some of the issues that will shape the future. Without a doubt, it is the responsibility of present governments to not only focus on the shortterm benefits of their policies but also making long-term sustainable decisions that secure or at least do not restrict the quality of life for future generations. Currently, however, as philosopher and author Roman Krznaric describes, we are living in “an age of political short-termism.” This is most evident in the issue of the climate emergency: despite warnings about human-induced climate change since the mid-20th century and the irreversible consequences of global warming since 1971, the measures taken against it are insufficient. Despite decades of knowledge, our current way of life is driving us towards a 3-degree warming scenario, which would have catastrophic consequences and severely threaten the lives of future generations. “The problem of short-termism in democratic politics has become so acute that a growing chorus of voices has begun speaking in favour of ‘benign dictatorship’ or ‘enlightened despotism’ as the solution to our problems, especially to take the tough measures required to deal with the climate emergency.” (Roman Krznaric in “The Good Ancestor”).
The Intergenerational Solidarity Index (ISI)
But is it really true that only a non-democratic form of government can achieve sustainable policies and thus generational justice?
The model of the Intergenerational Solidarity Index can provide us with an answer to this question. It’s a measure that compares 122 nations in how they care and take action for the well-being of future generations. Developed by Jamie McQuilkin, it was first published in 2018 in the journal “Intergenerational Justice
Review”. The ISI combines indicators of economic, ecological, and social long-term policies of states and assigns them a value from 0 (poor intergenerational solidarity) to 100 (good intergenerational solidarity). The interesting result: “the highest-scoring nations, such as Iceland, Nepal, Costa Rica, and Uruguay come from a wide range of geographical regions and income levels” (Roman Krznaric in “The Good Ancestor”). Furthermore, the ISI also provides insights into whether and to what extent democracies and autocratic regimes differ in terms of intergenerational solidarity. The evaluation reveals that 21 of the top 25 scoring states are democracies. Of the 25 states with the lowest scores, on the other hand, 21 are autocratic regimes. When averaging, democracies have a score of 60, while autocracies have a score of 42. What can be drawn from these results? There is no scientific evidence that suggests we could pursue more sustainable policies with more authoritarian regimes. On the contrary: “You are much more likely to find high levels of intergenerational solidarity in a democracy than an authoritarian regime.” (Roman Krznaric in “The Good Ancestor”). Despite these findings, we should not forget that current democracies cannot rest on these results. Despite their better performance, our democracies should be restructured and improved in their essence to enable sustainable policies.
Ways of learning Long-Term-Thinking
An inspiration for making politics, as well as our own thinking, more sustainable in the long term, is provided by the concept of 7th Generation Thinking. Indigenous populations as the Haudenosaunee already implemented this model for a long time as a fundamental aspect of their way of life. It implies that all decisions made in the present should take into account the lives and quality of life of seven generations ahead of us. With every important decision, we must ask ourselves: Will this decision also serve the people in the 7th generation after us, or at least not harm them?
Another way to approach long-term thinking is an extension of the thought experiment created by philosopher John Rawls called “The Veil of Ignorance.” Imagine you are behind a veil of ignorance. You have no knowledge of your own gender, background, wealth, abilities, or preferences – basically you have no idea what defines your own identity. Now you are asked to make decisions for society as a whole. How would you distribute wealth and resources?
Now also imagine you do not know which generation you will be born into. How do your decisions change? Would you distribute resources differently? Rawls assumes that in the ignorance of our identity, we would make the most socially just decision for society as a whole because we cannot decide in our self-interest.
Putting Long-Term-Thinking into Practise
Although this kind of thinking may seem distant in our current society, there are already approaches to implementing this concept and understanding intergenerational solidarity and justice as part of daily politics. For example, in Finland there is a parliamentary “committee for the future” that evaluates draft laws based on their impact on future generations, and other countries are following suit with similar groups evaluating laws regarding their international justice. One example is the position of the Commissioner for Future Generations in Wales, currently held by Derek Walkes. He describes his task as follows: “Promote the sustainable development principle, in particular to act as a guardian of the ability of future generations to meet their needs and encourage public bodies to take greater account of the long-term impact of the things they do.” These examples provide hope and should encourage each of us to be part of a larger restructuring: moving away from short-term thinking and toward long-term thinking.
“There is no scientific evidence that suggests we could pursue more sustainable policies with more authoritarian regimes.”
“ The most important question we must ask ourselves is: Are we being good ancestors?” (John Salk)
