Supporting Intergenerational Climate Resilience

The ethics of climate change require that short-term impacts and long-term impacts on future generations should be considered. Climate justice is based on the ethical duty of intergenerational responsibility, which implies that the present generation should act in a manner that does not affect future generations. The concept of intergenerational climate resilience has a simple needs-based approach, which can be used to evaluate climate policy equity and sustainability. The threat of making sure that the future generations have an opportunity to afford their basic needs without necessarily being forced to face the unchangeable outcomes of climate change, makes the present generation act in haste. In order to understand resilience in terms of intergenerational justice, policy frameworks should be in place to balance the short-term reduction strategies and long-term adaptation to meet basic needs across generations.

Intergenerational climate justice is founded on intergenerational altruism. Altruism, or being concerned with the well-being of other individuals, is also implemented into the future generations that are endangered by climate change. The intergenerational altruism factor in the impetus of the masses in support of climate policies is vital since individuals who fear future generations will feel more inclined to support costly mitigation strategies (Agneman et al., 2024, p. 2). In one of the studies, participants who were involved in an intergenerational dilemma exercise had more positive attitudes toward policies to reduce carbon emissions since they were induced to consider how the actions of their descendants would be (Agneman et al., 2024, p. 7). These exercises introduce the focus on the interdependency of the moral issues, blame on the future, and the existing policy preferences today. Agneman et al (2024) believe that the environmental health-oriented policies that are long-term have a higher probability of gaining popularity when they attract the ethical interest of the members of future generations (p. 6). This framework not only demonstrates the moral duty that we as human beings owe to the younger generations but also demonstrates how morality can be used to persuade people to support specific policies.

The use of resilience to climate change does not solely concern the recovery after a disaster, but also the future generation being able to afford basic needs, which is paramount to their health. Petz (2023) provides a needs-based definition of resilience, which is sufficientarian and explains that policy must be guided by the interventions that can protect the basic needs of the current and future generation. This implies that there should be widespread access to clean water, food, health, and movement during climate change situations. According to Petz (2023), the focus on the immediate adjustment may result in leaving the future generation powerless in the face of the consequences of the things that we are not mitigating today, like the rising sea levels or the increased temperatures (p. 302). Using the pillars of justice as the basic needs, Petz is concerned with the present and the future generation having the capability to enjoy the benefits of having sufficient resources to live good lives. Intergenerational resilience should be discussed in terms of the measures to be taken to avoid the risk of denying the basic needs of future generations to create a resilient society capable of reacting to the risk of climatic impacts without threatening the health of future generations.

Intergenerational resilience can be achieved through policies that incorporate mitigation and adaptation strategies, leading to long-term sustainability. Bessant et al. (2025) propose the policies that would not only offer short-term climate sustainability, but also long-term adaptation to the changing climate, such that the resources would be allocated to the present generation, but to future generations as well. These suggestions are multigenerational climate assemblies and carbon budgeting because they offer a more formalized method of engaging individuals across all age groups in policymaking on climate to make sure that the policies advantage the current generation and the future generations (Bessant et al., 2025, p. 7). These are some of the defences that may lead to the occurrence of the events that climate resiliency is not a disaster-only response, but the creation of systems that can absorb the shock of future events, protect logistical systems, and finally allow the living to be improved in future generations. The society can take a step in the right direction by investing in such measures, thereby adopting a fairer climate policy that can balance intergenerational justice with the interests of the current generation against those of the future generation.

In conclusion, there is a great need to act on climate change, not only to mitigate the short-term effects but also to leave a world where future generations will be free to secure their most essential needs: food, shelter, and comfort. An intergenerational resilience based on aggregate needs and needs-based interests of justice provides an escape in policy decision-making, in search of a compromise between long-term and short-term accommodation. Together with the issue of intergenerational altruism, society will be capable of coming up with climate policies that would allow the support of other people, which will not only be beneficial to the current generation but also the following one. Thus, the primary focus on intergenerational resiliency and the key functions of climate policy will not only enable the emergency issue of climate change to be tackled, but also the at-risk future state of the coming generation will be more adequate and sustainable to provide the entire population with a more balanced and equitable future.