You are the new environmental inspector in a small town. The only major employer — 800 jobs, three generations of families — has been quietly contaminating the river for years. The health damage will not be measurable for 15 more years, but the projections are unambiguous. You have the legal authority to shut them down today or grant a 2-year remediation window.

Why this dilemma matters

These choices are rarely between good and bad — they are between different distributions of harm. Choosing “Shut them down now. The contamination is real and delay only compounds the damage” prioritises rules that hold everyone the same; choosing “Grant the 2-year window. 800 families cannot wait — give them a real chance to fix it” gives more weight to choices that account for difference.

Worth asking yourself

• Are we solving the problem or moving it?
• What does this say about what we collectively value?