Why should we stop contributing to collective harms if this is a waste of effort? For example, why change our lifestyles to combat climate change?

My claims:

Ø Instrumental analyses are insufficient. Either they don’t provide reasons to act, or they don’t explain why we should waste our efforts.

Ø Instead, we need two universalization steps to solve the problem (not usually distinguished).

Ø I relate my account to kindred ideas in Kant, Parfit, Rawls, and some others.

Ø Finally, Nefsky’s challenges (superfluity, disconnect) can be addressed.

Keywords: collective action, instrumental, non-instrumental, wasted effort, universalization

For The Ethics of Inefficacy (Routledge, 2026)

Hopefully you can make it for this important discussion.