Vol. XXXVIII / 1 - Studia Moralia

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A TASK OF THE STATE. ETHICAL ASPECTS 225
is principally acceptable to future generations. 13 The discursive
ethical element recognisable in this line of thought is meant to
be advocatory. Future generations rank as the weakest, most
vulnerable part conceivable in this scenario. They have no
chance to stand up for their own interests in the present,
although their opportunities for development may be drastically
and irreversibly compromised.
A just approach would be to allow each generation the same
rate of increase in environmental impact or deterioration in
environmental conditions as the current generation. 14 It is
commonly acknowledged that even fairly small increases in the
rates of deterioration in the most problematic areas of ecology
are, within the span of only a few decades, likely to lead to a
situation in which we ourselves would not care to live. Principles
of justice dictate that we do not leave nature in a poorer and/or
more precarious state than that which we inherited. The thought
that the earth and its fruits are the common property of all
mankind, that is to say, of all generations, is familiar to
theological social ethics (and is also apparent in some secular
contexts) – it is a form of “capital”, the “interest” on which
allows us to live our lives. In less picturesque terms one could
say that our natural, ecological “capital” should not lose any of
its value. This type of thinking is also the substrate of the
“management rules” which have evolved from interpretation of
the model of sustainable development. These rules demand that
the sum of “natural” nature and artificial, technology-based
equivalents allows comparable opportunities of life to future
generations. In this requirement for justice lies the pivotal
aspect of obligation – along with the theologically founded
13
Cf. Höffe, O., Moral als Preis der Moderne, p. 173.
14
The question of exactly how many generations are to be included in
this comparison is not primary; O. Höffe argues for 100 generations; cf.
Moral als Preis der Moderne, p. 184f. At present there is little doubt that the
problem of resources alone (not to mention climate and ozone layer
problems) forces us to think in substantially more narrow time frames; for
an overview, cf. Lochbühler, W., Christliche Umweltethik. Schöpfungstheologische
Grundlagen, Philosophisch-ethische Ansätze, Ökologische
Marktwirtschaft (Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang, 1996) pp. 24-43.