Journal international de bioethique et d'ethique des sciences最新文献

The shift from electronic identification to digital identity is indicative of a shift in the spirit of the European texts. Whereas the legislator had thought of a purely technical identification process in 2014, in 2021 it is focusing on the role of the individual. The individual must be at the heart of the decision-making process as soon as data relating to his or her identity are concerned. In this sense, identity must now be self-sovereign. To achieve this, blockchain appears to be a particularly suitable technology. For this reason, it is being pushed by the European institutions and is included in the regulations currently being discussed at EU level. However, the appropriateness of its adoption deserves to be questioned.

After being enthusiastic, insurers are now increasingly reluctant to exploit the blockchain. The innovative technology promising a better customer relationship and a reduction in fraud associated with automated contract management seems promising. That is the reason why it is interesting to confront blockchain technology with insurance requirements. Thus, the contribution, without wanting to be exhaustive of the various difficulties generated by the blockchain, proposes to highlight some of them by targeting in turn the insurance of property, liability or even of person. The problems, mainly of a technical nature, could justify a temporary withdrawal from the insurance market in view of the advantages presented by the use of these technologies.

Smart contracts, which are computer programmes that run automatically when pre-programmed conditions are met, will impact the contractual process, especially when their development focuses on the contract formation phase. The use of digital oracles, which transmit information from the real world to the digital world, to trigger the application of the smart contract may degrade the quality of consent, replacing it with mere assent.

The organization of work through the remote practice of professional activity maintains a strong link with the notion of workload, given the implications that can be generated in terms of duration, work intensification and therefore overload for the teleworker. The legal mobilization of this notion is developing with the very expansion of the practice of telecommuting. Under the banner of the employer’s general safety obligation, case law and legislation are likely to evolve (by reinforcing the obligation to control and monitor workloads), as is the case with the « forfait en jours » system, another flexible work organization method.

The idea of collaborative governance is gaining popularity. However, how can it be truly collaborative? Decision-making systems with diverse stakeholders must deal with different positions, roles, interests, missions, observations, and values. The co P·R·I·M·O·V (Position, Role, Interest, Mission, Observation, Values) bioethics tool aims to improve the practice of sustainable, collaborative, and democratic development of technosocial initiatives through its user-friendly format for professional ethicists. The tool follows the logic of Conflict of Interest (CoI) analysis used in organizational ethics frameworks. CoI, as an analytical unit in ethics, allows the anticipation and management of problems that may compromise the short- and long-term activities of a program and its governance. This tool was built on a case study for the implementation of monitoring of antibiotic use in animal health in Quebec, Canada. The use of this bioethics tool is strategic and can help negotiate positions and thus co-construct a common frame of reference between the stakeholders in view of a collaborative governance favoring cooperation.

The Supreme Court of Canada having declared unconstitutional the legislative provisions prohibiting assisted dying because they were too broad in scope, the law of March 17, 2021 broadened these conditions, however postponing the date of application to March 17,2023 for the mentally ill only. Faced with the difficulties raised to avoid a broad interpretation of the criteria, which could open the way to requests based on weariness in combating difficult socio-economic situations, the law of March 9, 2023 extended this deadline until March 17, 2024.

This article discusses the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment (hereinafter “right to a healthy environment”) within the framework of a “food systems approach” and from the perspective of the three main functions of law in the transition to sustainable and equitable food systems (hereinafter “SAD”). The article aims to demonstrate that the right to a healthy environment is an indispensable right for achieving the transition to SADs through the building blocks of food systems, namely food supply chains, food environments and consumer behavior. First of all, the article notes that the right to a healthy environment has been at the heart of SAD since it was recognized as a human right by Resolution 48/13 of the Human Rights Council and Resolution 76/300 of the United Nations General Assembly. As well as underpinning the sustainability and equity of food systems, the right to a healthy environment is inseparable from the realization of other human rights, most notably the right to adequate food, itself at the heart of food systems. Secondly, the article argues that the operationalization of the right to a healthy environment by States would benefit from a “food systems approach” to ensure the transition to SADs. In this perspective, the right to a healthy environment constitutes a genuine vector for the development and adoption of legal and policy measures that improve the sustainability and equity of food systems, and the implementation of the CFS Voluntary Guidelines on Food Systems and Nutrition adopted in 2021.

The development of Territorial Food Strategies, like the French “Projets Alimentaires Territoriaux”, implies proposing new tools to support local decision-making. The FRUGAL set of indicators has been specifically developed for this purpose: to provide an expertise capacity to local actors and a knowledge base to understand their local food system and to develop and revise their food strategy. In this paper, we present the theoretical elements that made it possible to design and structure this set of indicators; the method for developing these indicators; and how this tool can be used by urban participants wishing to use it for a local diagnosis.

In light of the increasing number and complexity of food products on offer to meet the challenges of the food transition, this article looks at the consequences for consumers’ freedom of choice. This freedom of choice cannot be based on total autonomy, which generally leads to a loss of dietary reference points and guilt, or on radical heteronomy dictated by science or hygienic-ecological rationalities, which create tensions and divisions in society. Rather, dietary freedom is an effort to free oneself from the burden of a criterion-based vision of food. It calls for the restoration of an ethic of eating together, based on values and rules capable of preserving common goods and the well-being and survival of our fellow human beings.