Procreative Prerogatives and Climate Change

ABSTRACT One of the most provocative claims in current climate ethics is that we ought to have fewer children, because procreation brings new people into existence and thereby causes large amounts of additional greenhouse gas emissions. The public debate about procreation and climate change is frequently framed in terms of the question of whether people may still have any children at all. Yet in the academic debate it is a common position that, despite the large carbon impact of procreation, it is still permissible to have one or two children per couple, if having children is needed for the parents' lives to go well. In this article, we propose a defence and a principled formulation of this procreative prerogative: agents are permitted to procreate if the goods that procreation provides are essential to their lives going well and cannot be replaced by other goods, nor be realized by lower‐emissions alternatives. This principle implies that procreative decisions require case‐by‐case assessment in which agents' self‐reflection, individual circumstances, and social context play a significant role.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Philosophy
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12773
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Climate Change and Geoengineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.28

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Procreative Prerogatives and Climate Change

Felix Pinkert, Martin Sticker
1 citations
Journal of Applied Philosophy
Climate Change and Geoengineering
0.28
article

Procreative Prerogatives and Climate Change

Felix Pinkert, Martin Sticker
article en
1 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT One of the most provocative claims in current climate ethics is that we ought to have fewer children, because procreation brings new people into existence and thereby causes large amounts of additional greenhouse gas emissions. The public debate about procreation and climate change is frequently framed in terms of the question of whether people may still have any children at all. Yet in the academic debate it is a common position that, despite the large carbon impact of procreation, it is still permissible to have one or two children per couple, if having children is needed for the parents' lives to go well. In this article, we propose a defence and a principled formulation of this procreative prerogative: agents are permitted to procreate if the goods that procreation provides are essential to their lives going well and cannot be replaced by other goods, nor be realized by lower‐emissions alternatives. This principle implies that procreative decisions require case‐by‐case assessment in which agents' self‐reflection, individual circumstances, and social context play a significant role.

Journal of Applied PhilosophyVol. 42(1)
University of Vienna (AT), University of Bristol (GB)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Austrian Science Fund, Central European University, Arts and Humanities Research Council
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
Climate Change and Geoengineering
0.28
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.