Compare two futures
Who governs, who benefits, and which terms remain open?
Compare any two entries. Their differences are editorial descriptions, not distances on a common scale.
Life and institutions
Decisions about production and land use must account for living systems that do not vote or own property. Some projects attractive to present humans are limited on that basis.
Material provision need not depend on owning scarce productive assets. Political disputes shift toward allocation, participation and how different ways of life share common resources.
Practical authority
A revisable human mandate with institutions representing nonhuman interests.
The source premise does not settle the final governing institution.
Benefits and costs
Nonhuman life can constrain development rather than relying on voluntary restraint. Reduced human consumption or development and disputes over representation.
A material floor independent of private productive wealth. Collective allocation can constrain private projects; disagreements over contribution persist.
Practical human governing authorityDifferent or incomplete terms
Humans retain practical final authority
Additional project hypothetical. The authored compact explicitly operates under a human mandate.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether humans retain practical final governing authority.
Revisable governing mandatesDifferent or incomplete terms
People can effectively revise governing mandates
Additional project hypothetical. The authored human mandate is explicitly revisable.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people can effectively replace governing mandates.
A practical right to leave
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people have a usable right to leave.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether people have a usable right to leave.
Several self-governing communities
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether several communities govern themselves.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether several communities govern themselves.
A guaranteed material floorDifferent or incomplete terms
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Provision can vary with the settlement; a universal material floor is not guaranteed.
Material provision is guaranteed broadly
Linked source premise. The linked Egalitarian Utopia premise expressly includes guaranteed income.
Private ownership of productive resourcesDifferent or incomplete terms
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The economic settlement may use private or common productive ownership.
Production is organized without private ownership
Linked source premise. The linked premise abolishes property; productive ownership is included in that abolition.
Continuing biological humanity
Biological humanity continues
Additional project hypothetical. Biological humanity continues alongside represented nonhuman life.
Biological humanity continues
Linked source premise. The linked premise includes biological humans in the continuing society.
Others’ choice to transform themselves
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether feasible substantial transformation is legally permitted.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether feasible substantial transformation is legally permitted.
Standing for artificial persons
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether artificial persons have institutional standing.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether artificial persons have institutional standing.
Enforced limits on selected capabilitiesDifferent or incomplete terms
Selected capabilities face enforced limits
Project editorial inference. The project treats enforceable ecological constraints on selected technological projects as capability limits. The ecological reason for those limits is not itself elicited by the questionnaire.
The scenario leaves this condition unspecified
Unresolved. The scenario does not say whether institutions enforce a ceiling on selected capabilities.
Visible exercise of governing powerDifferent or incomplete terms
People know who exercises governing power
Additional project hypothetical. The authored ecological mandate is public.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. The project leaves the governing arrangement, including the visibility of its power, open.
Practical independence from a technical provider
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Infrastructure may offer practical alternatives or create an indispensable provider; the settlement does not fix this.
Depends on the variant; no single answer
Unresolved. Common provisioning does not determine whether infrastructure has practical alternatives.
Open questions
Who speaks for ecosystems and resolves conflicts among present and future interests.
Practical human control, exit and rights for artificial persons.
These are authored descriptors. An unresolved feature is not evidence of a guarantee, a conflict or equivalence. Consult Planetary Restoration Compact sources or Egalitarian Utopia sources.