This paper shows that ecological and legal culture is an integral part of the generic scientific category ‘ecological culture’, which reveals only partly the relationship between society and nature that falls under the rules of international and national law. Another, no less important, distinguishing feature of the sub-category ‘ecological and legal culture’ is that it assumes the presence not only of knowledge about the state of nature or its internal interrelationships, but also of skills through legal means to protect nature from negative anthropogenic influence. In the context of the emergence of new environmental threats of the 21st century (e.g. climate change, ozone holes, and the impact on nature of bioand nanotechnologies), it is necessary to form a new public system of values, knowledge and practical skills for legal (including judicial) environmental protection by the citizens of Russia, which will require the alteration of education, training programs and upbringing.
{"title":"New purposes and goals of ecological and legal culture development in Russia","authors":"A. Anisimov","doi":"10.3354/esep00188","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00188","url":null,"abstract":"This paper shows that ecological and legal culture is an integral part of the generic scientific category ‘ecological culture’, which reveals only partly the relationship between society and nature that falls under the rules of international and national law. Another, no less important, distinguishing feature of the sub-category ‘ecological and legal culture’ is that it assumes the presence not only of knowledge about the state of nature or its internal interrelationships, but also of skills through legal means to protect nature from negative anthropogenic influence. In the context of the emergence of new environmental threats of the 21st century (e.g. climate change, ozone holes, and the impact on nature of bioand nanotechnologies), it is necessary to form a new public system of values, knowledge and practical skills for legal (including judicial) environmental protection by the citizens of Russia, which will require the alteration of education, training programs and upbringing.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"19 1","pages":"13-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48295155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite significant research in environmental sociology, environmental sustainability, and cultural geography, the following questions remain ambiguous for many Indigenous communities: What constitutes land-based research and what is its purpose? How are researcher and participants situated in land-based research? Who has the power to select the research topic, research objectives, and research site? Who has the power to determine research protocols, data analysis and dissemination procedures? What can be learned from land-based research? Focusing on a relational participatory action research (PAR) project with the Laitu Khyeng Indigenous community in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), Bangladesh, this paper addresses the above questions as a means of advocating for land-based research. My learning journey in land-based research is a relational ceremony that not only reinforces my desire to create a bridge between researcher and participant needs but also serves as inspiration in rethinking the meaning of research from the participants’ perspectives.
{"title":"Clarifying the process of land-based research, and the role of researcher(s) and participants","authors":"Ranjan Datta","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00187","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00187","url":null,"abstract":"Despite significant research in environmental sociology, environmental sustainability, and cultural geography, the following questions remain ambiguous for many Indigenous communities: What constitutes land-based research and what is its purpose? How are researcher and participants situated in land-based research? Who has the power to select the research topic, research objectives, and research site? Who has the power to determine research protocols, data analysis and dissemination procedures? What can be learned from land-based research? Focusing on a relational participatory action research (PAR) project with the Laitu Khyeng Indigenous community in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), Bangladesh, this paper addresses the above questions as a means of advocating for land-based research. My learning journey in land-based research is a relational ceremony that not only reinforces my desire to create a bridge between researcher and participant needs but also serves as inspiration in rethinking the meaning of research from the participants’ perspectives.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48742445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The concept of morality underpins the moral responsibility that not only depends on the outward practices (or ‘output’, in the case of humanoid robots) of the agents but on the internal attitudes (‘input’) that rational and responsible intentioned beings generate. The primary question that has initiated extensive debate, i.e. ‘Can humanoid robots be moral?’, stems from the normative outlook where morality includes human conscience and socio-linguistic background. This paper advances the thesis that the conceptions of morality and creativity interplay with linguistic human beings instead of non-linguistic humanoid robots, as humanoid robots are indeed docile automata that cannot be responsible for their actions. To eradicate human ethics in order to make way for humanoid robot ethics highlights the moral actions and adequacy that hinges the myth of creative agency and self-dependency, which a humanoid robot can scarcely express.
{"title":"Can humanoid robots be moral?","authors":"S. Chakraborty","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00186","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00186","url":null,"abstract":"The concept of morality underpins the moral responsibility that not only depends on the outward practices (or ‘output’, in the case of humanoid robots) of the agents but on the internal attitudes (‘input’) that rational and responsible intentioned beings generate. The primary question that has initiated extensive debate, i.e. ‘Can humanoid robots be moral?’, stems from the normative outlook where morality includes human conscience and socio-linguistic background. This paper advances the thesis that the conceptions of morality and creativity interplay with linguistic human beings instead of non-linguistic humanoid robots, as humanoid robots are indeed docile automata that cannot be responsible for their actions. To eradicate human ethics in order to make way for humanoid robot ethics highlights the moral actions and adequacy that hinges the myth of creative agency and self-dependency, which a humanoid robot can scarcely express.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46700240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"OPINION PIECE Counterproductive consequences of ‘anti-GMO’ activism","authors":"G. Tagliabue","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00185","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42487062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marine data are held by hundreds of different institutions in Europe: hydrographic offices, geological surveys, local authorities, environmental agencies, research institutes and universities. The increasing prevalence of open data policies helps to make these data more accessible and usable. But, on its own, this is not enough. The European Union is therefore supporting a partnership of approximately 150 organisations who are rendering the data more interoperable and therefore more usable through common standards, nomenclature and baselines. The data are accompanied by confidence intervals. This change is already increasing productivity, stimulating innovation, and reducing uncertainty in the blue economy.
{"title":"European efforts to make marine data more accessible","authors":"I. Shepherd","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00181","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00181","url":null,"abstract":"Marine data are held by hundreds of different institutions in Europe: hydrographic offices, geological surveys, local authorities, environmental agencies, research institutes and universities. The increasing prevalence of open data policies helps to make these data more accessible and usable. But, on its own, this is not enough. The European Union is therefore supporting a partnership of approximately 150 organisations who are rendering the data more interoperable and therefore more usable through common standards, nomenclature and baselines. The data are accompanied by confidence intervals. This change is already increasing productivity, stimulating innovation, and reducing uncertainty in the blue economy.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43740363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
12 pages.-- Open Access under Creative Commons by Attribution Licence. Use, distribution and reproduction are unrestricted. Authors and original publication must be credited
{"title":"Open access publishing: a service or a detriment to science?","authors":"G. Pierce, I. Theodossiou","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00184","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00184","url":null,"abstract":"12 pages.-- Open Access under Creative Commons by \u0000Attribution Licence. Use, distribution and reproduction are unrestricted. Authors and original publication must be credited","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48337501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Damalas, G. Kalyvioti, E. Sabatella, K. Stergiou
Full and open access is promoted as the international norm for the exchange of scientific data by numerous scientific and political bodies. In the contemporary digital era, since scientists are both consumers and producers of data, they inevitably play a crucial role in defining the level of data accessibility. Yet, it is individual researchers usually who resist the release of their data. Through a global online questionnaire survey, the perception of 858 life scientists with respect to open data was investigated. Differences in scientists’ perceptions were tested per major country, rank position and academic performance in order to identify partial and global preferences. The ‘Selfish Scientist Paradox’ was identified: although the majority of respondents were in favour of open access to life sciences data, and most acknowledged that data gathered by others is vital to their work, the same group of people were quite reluctant to share their own data; only a third of them were willing to make their data available unconditionally. Scientists with >10 yr professional experience were twice as likely to oppose open access, while almost half of junior researchers would rather not share their data prior to publishing. Senior scientists argued that although project funding in general was a significant incentive towards making their data available, at the same time certain confidentiality agreements in some projects become a main barrier to data sharing. Country of professional location largely affected most responses, revealing that southern Europeans had a ‘conservative’ attitude towards open access, being more unwilling to share their data. Analyses based on academic performance (publications and citations) indicated that established individuals were more dependent on data collected by others and more opposed to open access.
{"title":"Open data in the life sciences: the ‘Selfish Scientist Paradox’","authors":"D. Damalas, G. Kalyvioti, E. Sabatella, K. Stergiou","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00182","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00182","url":null,"abstract":"Full and open access is promoted as the international norm for the exchange of scientific data by numerous scientific and political bodies. In the contemporary digital era, since scientists are both consumers and producers of data, they inevitably play a crucial role in defining the level of data accessibility. Yet, it is individual researchers usually who resist the release of their data. Through a global online questionnaire survey, the perception of 858 life scientists with respect to open data was investigated. Differences in scientists’ perceptions were tested per major country, rank position and academic performance in order to identify partial and global preferences. The ‘Selfish Scientist Paradox’ was identified: although the majority of respondents were in favour of open access to life sciences data, and most acknowledged that data gathered by others is vital to their work, the same group of people were quite reluctant to share their own data; only a third of them were willing to make their data available unconditionally. Scientists with >10 yr professional experience were twice as likely to oppose open access, while almost half of junior researchers would rather not share their data prior to publishing. Senior scientists argued that although project funding in general was a significant incentive towards making their data available, at the same time certain confidentiality agreements in some projects become a main barrier to data sharing. Country of professional location largely affected most responses, revealing that southern Europeans had a ‘conservative’ attitude towards open access, being more unwilling to share their data. Analyses based on academic performance (publications and citations) indicated that established individuals were more dependent on data collected by others and more opposed to open access.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43237041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
H. Dörner, J. Casey, N. Carvalho, D. Damalas, N. Graham, J. Guillen, S. Holmes, F. Natale, G. Osio, H. Rätz, Cristina Ribeiro, P. Vasilakopoulos
A systematic European Union (EU)-wide data framework for the collection of fisheries data in support of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was first implemented in 2002. Since that time, EU data collection regulation has undergone 2 revisions in response to evolving policy needs. The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) is responsible for conducting research and providing advice on fisheries management under the CFP, and since 2005 has worked closely with the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). JRC and STECF have an open data policy, and aggregated data submitted by EU member states in response to data calls issued under the provisions of the data collection regulation are published via the website of the STECF. This paper provides an overview of the fisheries data activities carried out by the JRC in support of and in collaboration with the STECF and discusses some of the benefits and drawbacks of such activities.
{"title":"Collection and dissemination of fisheries data in support of the EU Common Fisheries Policy","authors":"H. Dörner, J. Casey, N. Carvalho, D. Damalas, N. Graham, J. Guillen, S. Holmes, F. Natale, G. Osio, H. Rätz, Cristina Ribeiro, P. Vasilakopoulos","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00183","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00183","url":null,"abstract":"A systematic European Union (EU)-wide data framework for the collection of fisheries data in support of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was first implemented in 2002. Since that time, EU data collection regulation has undergone 2 revisions in response to evolving policy needs. The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) is responsible for conducting research and providing advice on fisheries management under the CFP, and since 2005 has worked closely with the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). JRC and STECF have an open data policy, and aggregated data submitted by EU member states in response to data calls issued under the provisions of the data collection regulation are published via the website of the STECF. This paper provides an overview of the fisheries data activities carried out by the JRC in support of and in collaboration with the STECF and discusses some of the benefits and drawbacks of such activities.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46839874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Water, a finite natural resource, is vital for the generation, sustenance and flourishing of all life forms. Rampant use and misuse of water make it a depleting natural resource. Consequently, conflicts and stresses have emerged involving the availability, accessibility, and quality of water. The shortage of water has also contributed to the spread of waterborne diseases. The crisis of availability and ac cessibility of quality water and the emergence and prevalence of these waterborne diseases have pushed some groups and individuals to suffer more than others. This disparate impact has contributed to inequities — especially health inequities — by failing to prevent the avoidable impacts of water shortage and waterborne disease on the health of individuals and groups. Considering this fact, the central argument of this paper is that water-related inequities are actually inequities caused at the level of health capabilities of groups and individuals. To address such inequities, this paper suggests that there is a need for a new foundation of water ethics because the existing frameworks fail to capture and address water-related inequities that are caused at the level of health capabilities. With a focus on India, this paper then argues that the new water ethics can be founded on Jennifer Prah Ruger’s social justice theory of the ‘Health Capability Paradigm (HCP)’. This paper then identifies and recommends some desirable changes to be made in the implementation of Indian water policy.
{"title":"Issues of water in India and the Health Capability Paradigm","authors":"Rhyddhi Chakraborty","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00176","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00176","url":null,"abstract":"Water, a finite natural resource, is vital for the generation, sustenance and flourishing of all life forms. Rampant use and misuse of water make it a depleting natural resource. Consequently, conflicts and stresses have emerged involving the availability, accessibility, and quality of water. The shortage of water has also contributed to the spread of waterborne diseases. The crisis of availability and ac cessibility of quality water and the emergence and prevalence of these waterborne diseases have pushed some groups and individuals to suffer more than others. This disparate impact has contributed to inequities — especially health inequities — by failing to prevent the avoidable impacts of water shortage and waterborne disease on the health of individuals and groups. Considering this fact, the central argument of this paper is that water-related inequities are actually inequities caused at the level of health capabilities of groups and individuals. To address such inequities, this paper suggests that there is a need for a new foundation of water ethics because the existing frameworks fail to capture and address water-related inequities that are caused at the level of health capabilities. With a focus on India, this paper then argues that the new water ethics can be founded on Jennifer Prah Ruger’s social justice theory of the ‘Health Capability Paradigm (HCP)’. This paper then identifies and recommends some desirable changes to be made in the implementation of Indian water policy.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"17 1","pages":"41-50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45249201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Some of the amalgam of activities which comprise traditional science (‘real’ science) has fragmented into new modes under pressure from internal and external factors. The adoption of the internet and the World Wide Web (which have created cyberscience and are internal factors) can be equated with the introduction of the microscope and other instruments and procedures, though they have revolutionized the whole of science rather than some of its branches. External factors discussed here include post-modernism, neoliberalism, and McDonaldization. In post-modern science, the traditional model has become burdened by social and political interests, and concerns for practical problems in which scientific expertise can assist decision making; however scientific knowledge in itself is not a priority. Neoliberal guile has parasitized science as it has so much else in search of profit, and has seriously damaged its host. There are also degraded or pathological activities, ‘McScience’, in which the pursuit of knowledge has been corrupted by an excess of bureaucratic control and over-emphasis on personal rankings. The ethos which guides traditional science has been warped by these various outside interests, secrecy is rewarded, and practices once considered dishonest are prospering.
{"title":"The maladies of enlightenment science","authors":"Tim Wyatt","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00177","url":null,"abstract":"Some of the amalgam of activities which comprise traditional science (‘real’ science) has fragmented into new modes under pressure from internal and external factors. The adoption of the internet and the World Wide Web (which have created cyberscience and are internal factors) can be equated with the introduction of the microscope and other instruments and procedures, though they have revolutionized the whole of science rather than some of its branches. External factors discussed here include post-modernism, neoliberalism, and McDonaldization. In post-modern science, the traditional model has become burdened by social and political interests, and concerns for practical problems in which scientific expertise can assist decision making; however scientific knowledge in itself is not a priority. Neoliberal guile has parasitized science as it has so much else in search of profit, and has seriously damaged its host. There are also degraded or pathological activities, ‘McScience’, in which the pursuit of knowledge has been corrupted by an excess of bureaucratic control and over-emphasis on personal rankings. The ethos which guides traditional science has been warped by these various outside interests, secrecy is rewarded, and practices once considered dishonest are prospering.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"17 1","pages":"51-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43948015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：