Top­ic: How can eco­log­i­cal inter­gen­er­a­tional jus­tice be ground­ed more firm­ly in the constitution?

The basis of this ques­tion was the unsolved prob­lem of rep­re­sent­ing future gen­er­a­tions in Ger­man democ­ra­cy. The con­sti­tu­tion only defines the rights of those already born, which basi­cal­ly means the gen­er­a­tions alive today. The pro­tec­tion of the con­sti­tu­tion has no effect on the future. The FRFG does not find it eth­i­cal­ly accept­able that gen­er­a­tions alive today use up the eco­nom­ic and eco­log­i­cal resources of the coun­try, espe­cial­ly where this means there is noth­ing left for future gen­er­a­tions. This is why it is nec­es­sary to safe­guard the rights of forth­com­ing gen­er­a­tions by embed­ding these rights in the constitution.


Should eco­log­i­cal inter­gen­er­a­tional jus­tice be ground­ed more firm­ly in the constitution?

If it should, how can this be achieved? (E.g. tar­gets set by the state, insti­tutes, author­i­ties). How should the direc­tives in the con­sti­tu­tion be improved or changed? Please give a sci­en­tif­ic and a gen­er­al­ly under­stand­able rea­son for your answer.

Con­grat­u­la­tions to the fol­low­ing prize-winners:

1st Place:
Doris Arm­bruster, Anemon Bölling, Dr. Johannes Rux


Symposium 2002

Sym­po­sium 2002: 5–7 July, Tutz­ing Castle

What is Gen­er­a­tional Justice?
In assos­ci­a­tion with

Evan­gel­i­cal Acad­e­my, Tutzing
YOIS Germany

Finan­cial support

Haniel Stiftung
Stiftung Mitarbeit

The Idea

Vic­tor Hugo once said “There is noth­ing more pow­er­ful than an idea whose time has come.” Today, this applies to the con­cept of inter­gen­er­a­tional justice.

sym_2002_1As a key phrase „Inter­gen­er­a­tional Jus­tice“ found its way into polit­i­cal and  social dis­course a long time ago. The phrase is used in UN-Dec­la­ra­tions and on talk shows in con­junc­tion with the green­house effect, holes in the ozone lay­er, atom­ic waste and also unem­ploy­ment. How­ev­er, a clear def­i­n­i­tion and a seri­ous dis­cus­sion regard­ing “Inter­gen­er­a­tional Jus­tice” is still lacking.

This is why FRFG organ­ised a sym­po­sium around the theme in July 2002. The aim was to fur­ther the polit­i­cal and aca­d­e­m­ic inter­est, and to incen­tivise ordi­nary cit­i­zens, espe­cial­ly young adults, to engage with the com­plex theme of Inter­gen­er­a­tional Justice.

Tutz­ing Cas­tle was the ide­al set­ting to house the conference.


About 80 atten­dees (60 par­tic­i­pants, plus speak­ers and jour­nal­ists) took up the invi­ta­tion to par­tic­i­pate in a pro­gramme that promised to be excit­ing: Podi­um dis­cus­sions about the anchor­ing of inter­gen­er­a­tional jus­tice in the con­sti­tu­tion as well as about the gen­er­al def­i­n­i­tion of the term, a broad range of work­shops and the pre­sen­ta­tion of the first inter­gen­er­a­tional jus­tice prize.

sym_2002_2The set­ting, a cas­tle sit­u­at­ed direct­ly by the Stam­berg­er Lake, and the won­der­ful weath­er, were pleas­ant sur­pris­es for all par­tic­i­pants and speak­ers, who made use of the refresh­ment pro­vid­ed by a dip in the Lake over the next few days. In the evening most par­tic­i­pants met in the bar for a beer or a coke, and dis­cussed the issues that had been pre­sent­ed in the day until late in the night.

The Sym­po­sium was there­fore not only a suc­cess in view of its con­tents, but also because it gave peo­ple the chance to meet oth­ers with sim­i­lar inter­ests. Free time was skil­ful­ly inter­spersed with meet­ings, mak­ing the sym­po­sium worth­while in more than one aspect.sym_2002_3

This Sym­po­sium also pro­vid­ed a suit­ably fes­tive back­drop for the awards cer­e­mo­ny of the Inter­gen­er­a­tional Jus­tice Prize 2001/2002 .

The dis­cus­sion from the Sym­po­sium are doc­u­ment­ed in the Book “Hand­buch Gen­er­a­tio­nen­gerechtigkeit”. It cov­ers the same themes, and var­i­ous speak­ers at the con­fer­ence con­tributed essays for it.