The Anthropocene's Unjust Heirs: Intergenerational Ethics in a Post-Natural World
Keywords:
Anthropocene, Intergenerational Ethics, Geoengineering, Technological Stewardship, Future GenerationsAbstract
The foundational premise of mainstream intergenerational ethics, as articulated by thinkers like Hans Jonas and John Rawls, is that future generations will inherit a "natural" world—a biogeophysically stable Earth system broadly analogous to the Holocene conditions that nurtured the development of human civilization. The proposed epoch of the Anthropocene fundamentally shatters this premise. This paper argues that future generations will not inherit a pristine or self-regulating nature, but a planet pervasively and perpetually shaped by direct human technological management, from climate geoengineering and genetic rescue of species to large-scale pollution remediation and automated conservation systems. This seismic shift renders traditional models of intergenerational ethics, centered on conservation, non-maleficence, and resource distribution, critically inadequate. Our primary duty to the future is no longer merely one of preserving a natural legacy but has transformed into a daunting responsibility of stewardship over complex, irreversible socio-ecological-technological systems. This paper investigates the profound ethical implications of this new responsibility, which we term the "Anthropocene Inheritance." It entails novel and poorly understood obligations, including the duty to transmit the capacity and knowledge to manage these technological systems, the justice implications of imposing "obligatory technological dependencies," and the rights of future people to consent to or refuse their inherited technological condition. Through an analysis of emerging technologies like Solar Radiation Management and CRISPR-driven genetic conservation, this paper develops a new ethical framework: "Techno-Stewardship Justice." This framework obligates present generations to ensure that the actively managed planet we bequeath is not only habitable but also just, navigable, and does not foreclose the ability of future generations to define their own relationship with the world, thereby preserving their autonomy in a post-natural age.
Downloads
References
Beck, U. (2015). Emancipatory catastrophism: What does it mean to climate change and risk society?. Current Sociology, 63(1), 75-88.
Biermann, F., & Kim, R. E. (2020). The boundaries of the planetary boundary framework: A critical appraisal of approaches to define a “safe operating space” for humanity. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 45, 497-521.
Ellis, E. C. (2018). Anthropocene: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Gardiner, S. M. (2011). A perfect moral storm: The ethical tragedy of climate change. Oxford University Press.
Hamilton, C. (2013). Earthmasters: The dawn of the age of climate engineering. Yale University Press.
Jamieson, D. (2014). Reason in a dark time: Why the struggle against climate change failed—and what it means for our future. Oxford University Press.
Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility: In search of an ethics for the technological age. University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (2017). Facing Gaia: Eight lectures on the climatic regime. Polity Press.
Liao, S. M., Sandberg, A., & Roache, R. (2012). Human engineering and climate change. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 15(2), 206-221.
McKinnon, C. (2012). Climate change and future justice: Precaution, compensation, and triage. Routledge.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., ... & Sörlin, S. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223).
Szerszynski, B. (2020). The Anthropocene and the geographies of responsibility. The Geographical Journal, 186(1), 12-23.
Trisos, C. H., Auerbach, J., & Katti, M. (2021). Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 5(9), 1205-1212.
Vaughan, N. E., & Lenton, T. M. (2011). A review of climate geoengineering proposals. Climatic Change, 109(3-4), 745-790.
Whyte, K. P. (2018). Indigenous science (fiction) for the Anthropocene: Ancestral dystopias and fantasies of climate change crises. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 1(1-2), 224-242.
Zylinska, J. (2018). The end of man: A feminist counterapocalypse. University of Minnesota Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Advances in Law, Pedagogy, and Multidisciplinary Humanities

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.