Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-rz4zl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-21T09:07:44.103Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - The Democratic Ideal and Its Normative Value for Future Generations

from Part I - Normative Framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2025

Peter Lawrence
Affiliation:
University of Tasmania
Michael Reder
Affiliation:
Hochschule fur Philosophie Munchen
Get access

Summary

In Chapter 3, firstly, we reconstruct central theoretical models of democracy and enquire how an expansion of representation mechanisms for future generations could be conceptualised within these justificatory narratives. Secondly, we analyse the values that underlie democratic practices which can be helpful for advancing proxy representation at the international level by providing ethical criteria for such reforms. This involves analysing the discourses of intergenerational justice, solidarity and vulnerability. The chapter then turns to examine how these discourses can be translated into political forms of proxy representation by drawing on the all affected principle which requires that those affected by a decision have a role in the making of that decision, which is argued to be an element of most, if not all theories of democracy. This in turn is hypothesised to provide a basis for extension of the demos to include future generations, which then justifies proxy forms of representation to enable their representation . Human rights are argued to constitute a practice of global values which provides a powerful normative orientation for climate law and policy-making.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Representing Future Generations
Climate Change and the Global Legal Order
, pp. 48 - 90
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abe, H., Wenning, M. & Fritsch, M. (2024). Intercultural Philosophy and Environmental Justice between Generations Indigenous, African, Asian, and Western Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, B. (1999). Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice. In Dobson, A., ed., Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 93117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayertz, K. (1999). Four Uses of Solidarity. In Bayertz, K., ed., Solidarity. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 328.10.1007/978-94-015-9245-1_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, D. (2011). Does Anthropogenic Climate Change Violate Human Rights? Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 14(2), 99124.10.1080/13698230.2011.529703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, S. (2004). The Rights of Others, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bernstorff, J. von. (2021). New Responses to the Legitimacy Crisis of International Institutions: The Role of ‘Civil Society’ and the Rise of the Principle of Participation of ‘The Most Affected’ in International Institutional Law. European Journal of International Law, 32(1), 125–57.Google Scholar
Birnbacher, D. (1988). Verantwortung für zukünftige Generationen, Ditzingen: Reclam.Google Scholar
Bohman, J. (1999). Democracy as Inquiry, Inquiry as Democratic: Pragmatism, Social Science and the Democratic Division of Labour. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 590607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, J. (2007). Democracy across Borders: From Dêmos to Dêmoi, Cambridge, MA: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.10.7551/mitpress/2327.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boston, J. (2016). Governing for the Future: Designing Democratic Institutions for a Better Tomorrow, Bingley: Emerald.10.1108/S2053-7697201725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown Weiss, E. (1989). In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law: Common Patrimony, and Intergenerational Equity, Tokyo: The United Nations University; Dobbs Ferry, NY: Transnational Publishers.Google Scholar
Butler, J. (2016). Rethinking Vulnerability and Resistance. In Butler, J., Gambetti, Z. & Sabsay, L., eds., Vulnerability in Resistance. Durham & London: Duke University Press, 1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, J. (2020). The Inorganic Body in the Early Marx: A Limit-Concept of Anthropocentrism. Radical Philosophy, 206, 317.Google Scholar
Butler, J. (2004). Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence, London: Verso.Google Scholar
Butler, J. & Athanasiou, A. (2013). Dispossession: The Performative in the Political, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Caney, S. (2010a). Climate Change, Human Rights and Moral Thresholds. In Gardiner, S., Caney, S., Jamieson, D. & Shue, H., eds., Climate Ethics Essential Readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 163–77.Google Scholar
Caney, S. (2010b). Human Rights and Global Climate Change. In Pierik, R., & Werner, W., eds., Cosmopolitanism in Context: Perspectives from International Law and Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1944.Google Scholar
Charter of the United Nations, XV UNCIO 335, amendments in 557 UNTS 143, 638 UNTS 308 and 892 UNTS 119.Google Scholar
Christiano, T. (2011). Is Democratic Legitimacy Possible for International Institutions? In Archibugi, D., Koenig-Archibugi, M. & Marchetti, R., eds., Global Democracy: Normative and Empirical Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 6995.10.1017/CBO9780511977992.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CPDR) (2006) (adopted 12 December 2006 in UNGA resolution A/RES/61/106; entered into force 3 May 2008), 2515 UNTS 3.Google Scholar
Cojocaru, M. D. (2021). Passionate Animals: Emotions, Animal Ethics, and Moral Pragmatics, Lanham, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Cot, J. P. (2011). United Nations Charter. In Wolfrum, R., ed., Max Planck Encyclopaedia of International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. (1999). Can International Organisations be Democratic? A Sceptic’s View. In Shapiro, I. & Hacker-Cordon, C., eds., Democracy’s Edges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1936.10.1017/CBO9780511586361.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, R. (2024). Coming Soon A UN Envoy for Future Generations, United Nations University (October 9, 2024). Available at: https://unu.edu/cpr/blog-post/coming-soon-un-envoy-future-generations.Google Scholar
De-Shalit, A. (1995). Why Posterity Matters: Environmental Policies and Future Generation, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Derrida, J. (1992). In Drucilla, C., Rosenfield, M. & Carlson, D., eds., Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1937). Democracy and Educational Administration. School and Society, 45, 457.Google Scholar
Dijk, N. van (2021). The Capability Approach as a Road Map for Re-thinking Intergenerational Justice. In Linehan, J. & Lawrence, P., eds., Giving Future Generations a Voice: Normative Frameworks, Institutions and Practice. Cheltenham/Camberley: Edward Elgar, 4261.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K. (2007). The New Transnationalism: Transnational Governance and Its Democratic Legitimacy, London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobson, A. (1999). Fairness and Futurity. Essays on Environmental Sustainability, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donger, E. (2022). Children and Youth in Strategic Climate Litigation: Advancing Rights through Legal Argument and Legal Mobilisation. Transnational Environmental Law, 11(2), 263–89.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. & Niemeyer, S. (2012). Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. & Pickering, J. (2019). The Politics of the Anthropocene, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Edenhofer, O., Wallacher, J., Lotze-Campen, H., Reder, M., Knopf, B. & Müller, J. eds. (2012). Climate Change, Justice and Sustainability: Linking Climate and Development. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-4540-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekardt, F. (2015). Theorie der Nachhaltigkeit: Rechtliche, ethische und politische Zugänge – am Beispiel von Klimawandel, Ressourcenknappheit und Welthandel, 3rd ed., Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Fox, G. H., & Roth, B. R., eds. (2020). Democracy and International Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.4337/9781788114752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, T. (1992). The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance. American Journal of International Law, 86(1), 4691.Google Scholar
Fung, A. (2013). The Principle of Affected Interests: An Interpretation and Defense. In Smith, R. M. & Nagel, J. H., eds., Representation: Elections and Beyond, Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 236–68.Google Scholar
Gardiner, S., Caney, S., Jamieson, D. & Shue, H. (2009). Climate Ethics: Essential Readings, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, T. (2021). Democracies and International Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108914871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. E. (1986). Protecting the Vulnerable. A Reanalysis of Our Social Responsibilities, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goodin, R. E. (2007). Enfranchising All Affected Interests, and Its Alternatives. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 35(1), 4068.10.1111/j.1088-4963.2007.00098.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosseries, A. (2001). What Do We Owe the Next Generation(s). Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 35(1), 293354.Google Scholar
Gosseries, A. & Meyer, L. H. eds. (2009). Intergenerational Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199282951.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, C. C. (2007). Transnational Solidarities. Journal of Social Philosophy, 38(1), 148–64.Google Scholar
Gutwald, R. & Reder, M. (2023). How to Protect Children? A Pragmatic Approach: On State Intervention and Children’s Welfare. Journal of Ethics, 27(1), 7795.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1998). Die Postnationale Konstellation: Politische Essays, Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (2010). The Concept of Human Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human Rights. Metaphilosophy, 41(4), 464–80.10.1111/j.1467-9973.2010.01648.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Held, D. (1995). Democracy and the Global Order. From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Heyd, D. (2009). A Value or an Obligation? Rawls on Justice to Future Generations. In Gosseries, A. & Meyer, L. H., eds., Intergenerational Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 167–88.Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2023). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. A Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate, Geneva: IPCC.Google Scholar
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (adopted 16 December 1966; entered into force 23 March 1976), 999 UNTS 171.Google Scholar
International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (adopted 16 December 1966; entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3.Google Scholar
Jaeckel, A. et al. (2017). Conserving the Common Heritage of Humankind – Options for the Deep Seabed Mining Regime. Marine Policy, 78, 150–57.Google Scholar
Jonas, H. (1979). Das Prinzip Verantwortung: Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Klabbers, J. et al. (2021). International Law and Democracy Revisited. European Journal of International Law, 32(1), 915.Google Scholar
Koroma, A. G. (2012). Solidarity: Evidence of an Emerging International Legal Principle. In Hestermeyer, H. P. et al., eds., Coexistence, Cooperation and Solidarity: Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum, Leiden: Brill, 103–29.Google Scholar
Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, London: Verso.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2014). Justice for Future Generations, Climate Change and International Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2020). Representation of Future Generations. In Kalfagianni, A., Fuchs, D. & Haydn, A., eds., Routledge Handbook of Global Sustainability Governance, London: Routledge, 8899.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2021a). International Institutions for Future Generations and Democratic Legitimacy. In Cordonier Segger, M. C., Szabó, M. & Harrington, A. R., eds., Intergenerational Justice in Sustainable Development Treaty Implementation: Advancing Future Generations Rights through National Institutions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 597614.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2021b). Justifying Institutions for Future Generations Based on the Mitigation of Bias and Intergenerational Justice. In Linehan, J. & Lawrence, P., eds., Giving Future Generations a Voice: Normative Frameworks, Institutions and Practice, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2241.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2021c). International Relations. In Rajamania, L. & Peel, J., eds., The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 153–68.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. (2022). Justifying Representation of Future Generations and Nature: Contradictory or Mutually Supporting Values? Transnational Environmental Law, 11(3), 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGregor, D. (2018). Indigenous Environmental Justice, Knowledge, and Law. Kalfou, 5(2), 279–96.10.15367/kf.v5i2.213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, L. H. (2003). Past and Future. The Case for a Threshold Conception of Harm. In Meyer, L. H., Paulson, S. L. & Pogge, T. W., eds., Rights, Culture and the Law: Themes from the Legal and Political Philosophy of Joseph Raz, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 143–59.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248254.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, L. H., Paulson, S. L. & Pogge, T. W. (2003). Rights, Culture and the Law: Themes from the Legal and Political Philosophy of Joseph Raz, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248254.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Näsström, S. (2011). The Challenge of the All-Affected Principle. Political Studies, 59(1), 116–34.10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00845.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyka, M. (2021). International Seabed Authority and Environmental Deep-Sea Stewardship – Principles Governing the Protection and Use of Seabed Resources. Maritime Law, XXIX, 919.Google Scholar
Ott, K. (2007). Ethical Orientation for Climate Change Policies. In Rodi, M., ed., Implementing the Kyoto Protocol. Chances and Challenges for Transition Countries, Berlin, Germany: Lexxion, 1320.Google Scholar
Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and Persons, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. (1995). Pragmatism. An Open Question, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rancière, J. (2010). Dissensus on Politics and Aesthetics, London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Rasulov, A. (2021). ‘From the Wells of Disappointment’: The Curious Case of the International Law of Democracy and the Politics of International Legal Scholarship. European Journal of International Law, 32(1), 1747.10.1093/ejil/chab026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice: Original Edition, Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674042605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reder, M. & Köhler, L. (2016). Human Rights and Climate Policy. In Bos, G. & Duwell, M., eds., Human Rights and Sustainability, Moral Responsibility to the Future, London/New York: Routledge, 123–36.Google Scholar
Reder, M. & Heindl, A. (2020). Politische Solidarität in transnationaler Perspektive. WSI-Mitteilungen, 73(5), 349–55. https://doi.org/10.5771/0342-300X-2020-5-349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reder, M. & Stüber, K. S. (2020). Solidarität in der Krise: Für ein Verständnis politischer Solidarität in Corona-Zeiten im Anschluss an H. Arendt. Zeitschrift für Praktische Philosophie, 7(2), 443–66. https://doi.org/10.22613/zfpp/7.2.18.Google Scholar
Reder, M. & Faets, F. (2024). Judith Butler and Future Generations: Transtemporal Relationality, Generational Trouble and Future-Oriented Ruthless Critique. Philosophy & Social Criticism (online first). https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537241232965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reder, M., Gösele, A., Köhler, L. & Wallacher, J. (2018). Umweltethik: Eine Einführung in globaler Perspektive, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
Roth, B. R. (2021). The Trajectory of the Democratic Entitlement Thesis in International Legal Scholarship: A Reply to Akbar Rasulov. European Journal of International Law, 32(1), 4955.10.1093/ejil/chab031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandel, M. (1998). Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511810152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, T. (2005). When Does Equality Matter? In Nida-Rümelin, J. & Thierse, W., eds., Political Equality: Politische Gleichheit, Essen: Klartext Verlagsgesellschaft, 109–25.Google Scholar
Scholz, S. (2008). Political Solidarity, Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. A. (1950). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Schweiger, G. (2022). #Kinderarmut: Ein philosophischer Essay, Marburg: Büchner Verlag.Google Scholar
Sen, A. (2009). The Idea of Justice, London, UK: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Shelton, D. (2010). Intergenerational Equity. In Wolfrum, R. & Kojima, C., eds., Solidarity: A Structural Principle of International Law, Heidelberg: Springer, 123–61.Google Scholar
Tahmoudi, N., Faets, S. & Reder, M. (2020). Politik der Zukunft: Zukünftige Generationen als Leerstelle der Demokratie, Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.10.14361/9783839449875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tesón, F. R. (1992). The Kantian Theory of International Law. Columbia Law Review, 92, 53102.10.2307/1123025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. (2017). The Ethics of Intergenerational Relationships. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 47, 313–26.10.1080/00455091.2017.1280382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremmel, J. C. (2009). A Theory of Intergenerational Justice, Oxford: Earthscan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations. (2023a). United Nations System Common Principles on Future Generations, Report of the Chief Executives Board for Coordination (UN Doc. CEB/2023/1/Add.1) (4 May 2023).Google Scholar
United Nations. (2023b). United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Available at: www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/.Google Scholar
United Nations. (2023c). Global Issues: Democracy. Available at: www.un.org/en/global-issues/democracy.Google Scholar
United Nations. (2024). Summit of the Future, Our Common Agenda. Available at: www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future/pact-for-the-future.Google Scholar
UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). (1990). General Comment No. 3: The Nature of States Parties’ Obligations (Art. 2, Para. 1 of the Covenant) adopted at the fifth session of the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights on 14 December 1990, UN Doc. E/1991/23.Google Scholar
UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). (2018). Climate Change and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights. Statement of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (8 October 2018).Google Scholar
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (adopted 10 December 1982; entered into force 16 November 1994), 1833 UNTS 397.Google Scholar
UN Developmental Programme (UNDP). (2020). The Next Frontier: Human Development and the Anthropocene. Available at: https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2020.Google Scholar
UN Developmental Programme (UNDP). (2022). 2022 Special Report, New Threats to Human Security in the Anthropocene: Demanding Greater Solidarity. Available at: www.hdr.undp.org/en/2022-human-security-report.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UN General Assembly (UNGA). (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Resolution 217A (III). UN Doc. A/810 at 71. Available at: www.ohchr.org/en/resources/educators/human-rights-education-training/universal-declaration-human-rights-1948.Google Scholar
UN General Assembly (UNGA). (2000). 55/2. United Nations Millennium Declaration. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. UN Doc. A/RES/55/2.Google Scholar
UN Human Rights Council (HRC). (2015). Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law: Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council. UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/28/14, Geneva. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/795311.Google Scholar
UN Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR). (2023a). About Democracy and Human Rights: OHCHR and Democracy. Available at: www.ohchr.org/en/democracy.Google Scholar
UN Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR). (2023b). OHCHR and Climate Change. Available at: www.ohchr.org/en/climate-change.Google Scholar
United Nations Secretary-General (UNSG). (2013). Intergenerational Solidarity and the Needs of Future Generations: Report of the Secretary-General. UN Doc. A/68/322, New York. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/756820.Google Scholar
United Nations Secretary-General (UNSG). (2021). Secretary-General’s Report, Our Common Agenda.Google Scholar
Valentini, L. (2014). No Global Demos, No Global Democracy? A Systemization and Critique. Perspectives on Politics, 12(4), 789807.10.1017/S1537592714002138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderheiden, S. (2008). Atmospheric Justice: A Political Theory of Climate Change, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallacher, J., Michael, R. & Martin, K. (2009). Klimawandel, weltweite Armut und Gerechtigkeit. Begründung und Gestaltung einer integrierten Klima- und Entwicklungspolitik. Zeitschrift für Umweltpsychologie, 13/1, 5267.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of Justice, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. (1994). Thick and Thin, Notre-Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.10.2307/j.ctvpj75nhCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walzer, M. (2005). Politics and Passion: Towards a More Egalitarian Liberalism, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Wike, R. et al. (2024). Representative Democracy Remains a Popular Ideal, But People around the World are Critical of How It’s Working, Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Available at: www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/02/28/representative-democracy-remains-a-popular-ideal-but-people-around-the-world-are-critical-of-how-its-working/.Google Scholar
Winter, C. (2021). Subjects of Intergenerational Justice, London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×