If my booking a flight does not make a difference to the plane taking off and to climate change, what reason is there for me not to fly? If my small donation does not make a difference to what Doctors Without Borders can achieve, why should I donate? If my purchase of a factory-farmed chicken does not make a difference to how many chickens suffer and die, why not just buy it? These questions reflect a broader issue: the inefficacy problem, where individual actions seem insignificant in the face of collective harms.
This is the first edited volume dedicated exclusively to the inefficacy problem. It examines existing solutions, explores new ones, and sets the stage for future developments in the debate. Featuring contributions from Julia Nefsky, Chrisoula Andreou, Carolina Sartorio, Mark Budolfson, and others, it offers a comprehensive look at this pressing issue. The volume addresses central questions in the debate. Some chapters define the problem, while others explore instrumental solutions, arguing that even if we cannot make a difference, we can still influence outcomes in meaningful ways. Additional chapters discuss non-instrumental solutions, maintaining that even when we are instrumentally insignificant, we can still be significant in some non-instrumental way (e.g., act from fairness or integrity). Finally, some chapters adopt a broader perspective on the debate, moving beyond the distinction between instrumental and non-instrumental reasons – for instance by drawing parallels between interpersonal and intrapersonal dilemmas.
The Ethics of Inefficacy is an essential resource for researchers and graduate students in normative ethics, applied ethics, philosophy of responsibility, metaethics, metaphysics, epistemology, action theory, political philosophy, and philosophy of law.