This is a particularly difficult is

This is a particularly difficult issue because, in contrast to other groups for which we may want to ensure fair treatment, future generations.
One starting point for intergenerational equity is provided by philosopher John Rawls in his monumental work, A Theory of Justice. Rawls suggests one way to derive general principles of justice is to place, hypothetically, all people into an original position behind a “veil of ignorance”. This veil of ignorance would prevent them from knowing their eventual position in society. Once behind this veil, people would decide on rules to govern the society that they would, after the decision, be forced to inhabit.
In our contest, this approach would suggest a hypothetical meeting of all members of present and future generations to decide on rules for allocating resources among generations. Because these members are prevented by the veil of ignorance from knowing the generation to which they will belong, they will not be excessively conservationist ( lest they turn out to be a member of an earlier generation) or excessively exploitative (lest they become a member of a tater generation).
What kind of rule would emerge from such a meeting? One possibility is the sustainability criterion. The sustainability criterion suggest that, at a minimum, future generation should be left no worse off than current generations. Allocations that impoverish future generations, in order to enrich current generations, are, according to this criterion, patently unfair.
In essence, the sustainability criterion suggest that earlier generations are at libeny to use resources that would thereby denied to future generations as long as the well-being of future generations remains just as high as that of all previous generations. On the other hand, diverting resources from future use would violate the sustainability criterion if it reduced the well-being of future generations below the level enjoyed by preceding generations.
One of the implications of this definition of sustainability is that it is possible for the current generation to use resources (even deplorable resources) as long as the interests of future generations could be protected. We begin with examining the conditions under which efficient allocations satisfy the sustainability criterion. Are all efficient allocations sustainable?

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

This is a particularly difficult issue because, in contrast to other groups for which we may want to ensure fair treatment, future generations.One starting point for intergenerational equity is provided by philosopher John Rawls in his monumental work, A Theory of Justice. Rawls suggests one way to derive general principles of justice is to place, hypothetically, all people into an original position behind a “veil of ignorance”. This veil of ignorance would prevent them from knowing their eventual position in society. Once behind this veil, people would decide on rules to govern the society that they would, after the decision, be forced to inhabit.In our contest, this approach would suggest a hypothetical meeting of all members of present and future generations to decide on rules for allocating resources among generations. Because these members are prevented by the veil of ignorance from knowing the generation to which they will belong, they will not be excessively conservationist ( lest they turn out to be a member of an earlier generation) or excessively exploitative (lest they become a member of a tater generation).What kind of rule would emerge from such a meeting? One possibility is the sustainability criterion. The sustainability criterion suggest that, at a minimum, future generation should be left no worse off than current generations. Allocations that impoverish future generations, in order to enrich current generations, are, according to this criterion, patently unfair.Về bản chất, các tiêu chí phát triển bền vững cho thấy rằng thế hệ trước đó được tại libeny để sử dụng tài nguyên sẽ do đó từ chối cho thế hệ tương lai lâu như các phúc lợi của các thế hệ tương lai vẫn còn cao như của tất cả các thế hệ trước đó. Mặt khác, chuyển tài nguyên từ sử dụng trong tương lai sẽ vi phạm các tiêu chí phát triển bền vững nếu nó giảm phúc lợi của các thế hệ tương lai dưới mức hưởng của các thế hệ trước.Một trong những ý nghĩa của định nghĩa này phát triển bền vững là nó có thể cho thế hệ hiện tại để sử dụng tài nguyên (thậm chí thương tâm resources) miễn là lợi ích của các thế hệ tương lai có thể được bảo vệ. Chúng tôi bắt đầu bằng cách kiểm tra các điều kiện theo đó phân bổ hiệu quả đáp ứng tiêu chí phát triển bền vững. Tất cả hiệu quả phân bổ được bền vững?