Guardians For The Future

Seen at Dot Earth:

Given the human tendency to favor current needs over future risks, some environmental and legal scholars are proposing that governments at various levels appoint a “legal guardian of future generations” to consider the impact of policy choices on citizens yet unborn.[...]

I was casting about for an illustration of how this could play out and realized one decent example is the situation of polar bears in a human-warmed world. Their populations have risen in recent decades because of hunting controls. So, for the moment, all is well. But the long-term picture is bleak, according to the latest analysis by government bear biologists. How quickly do we act to change energy choices now to limit chances that Arctic sea ice will disappear entirely in summers later in the century (something most biologists agree would greatly diminish bear numbers)? Is it good enough (from the standpoint of future human generations) to preserve the bears mainly in zoos (as in this Wildlife Conservation Society video clip)?[...]

The climate issue embodies this challenge of balancing present and future costs more than just about any other, many experts say. Long-lived carbon dioxide emissions accumulate, making the challenge of averting a dangerous buildup ever harder with every year of delay in shifting to less polluting (if costlier) energy options.

But the swifter the shift, the higher the costs. It’s something of an intergenerational tug of war, but no one is born yet to pull on the far end of the rope. That’s why [one activist] feels that someone in this generation needs to take on that duty.

It’s an intriguing idea—appointing someone to act as an advocate for the future. However, aren’t political leaders supposed to be forward-thinking? It’s sad to think that politicians have become so entrenched in the “do what it takes to get reelected” mentality that the option of creating a whole new bureaucracy to look out for the future’s interests could be seen as necessary…or at least semi-appealing…by some.

This also smells sorta-kinda like a mega expansion of the EPA and the seemingly ubiquitous requirement that environmental impact assessments be made before approving many such projects. While such reviews are worthwhile, they have a tendency to slow down the process, and open the process up to additional litigation.

And, while I’m a fan for keeping government bureaucrats disempowered from making mischief…I don’t know that expanding the bureaucracy and increasing the potential for litigation is the wisest course of action.