From a variety of ethics to the integrity and congruence of research on biodiversity conservation

被引：0
作者：
Lajaunie C. [1 ,2 ]
机构：
[1] French National Institute of Health and Medical Research INSERM, Regional Office Provence Alpes Côte d’Azur et Corse, Marseille
[2] Strathclyde Centre for Environmental Law and Governance (SCELG), Law School, Strathclyde University, Glasgow
来源：
Asian Bioethics Review | 2018年 / 10卷 / 4期
关键词：
Biodiversity conservation; Ecological integrity; Ethical congruence; Research integrity; Values alignment;
D O I：
10.1007/s41649-018-0072-x
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
This article aims to find the elements that are required for a common ethical approach that is suitable for the different perspectives adopted in integrative biodiversity conservation research. A general reflection on the integrity of research is a priority worldwide, with a common aim to promote good research practice. Beyond the relationship between researcher and research subject, the integrity of research is considered in a broader perspective which entails scientific integrity towards society. In research involving a variety of disciplines and a diversity of legal and ethical frameworks, there is a need of harmony between different sets of values. The notion of congruence (or more pragmatically, alignment) reflects the consistency of ethics in research within the biodiversity conservation’s community of researchers. It also bears on the coherence of values shared between the scientific community and society. We examine the notion of research integrity in a broad sense. This examination is to be conducted in relation to the goal of protecting ecological integrity, which is at the core of biodiversity conservation. The notion of integrity constraints should be investigated further to develop a pragmatic response to the need for integrity and congruence in research for biodiversity conservation. © 2018, National University of Singapore and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码：313 / 332
页数：19
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]  
The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Strasbourg: ALLEA - All European Academies and ESF- European Science Foundation, (2011)
[2]  
The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, revised edition, (2017)
[3]  
Anderson M., Anderson S.L., Machine ethics, (2011)
[4]  
Balsamo A., Mitcham C., Interdisciplinarity in ethics and the ethics of interdisciplinarity, The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity, pp. 259-272, (2012)
[5]  
Bennett N.J., Teh L., Ota Y., Christie P., Ayers A., Day J.C., Franks P., Gill D., Gruby R.L., Kittinger J.N., Zachary Koehn J., Lewis N., Parks J., Vierros M., Whitty T.S., Wilhelm A., Wright K., Aburto J.A., Finkbeiner E.M., Gaymer C.F., Govan H., Gray N., Jarvis R.M., Kaplan-Hallam M., Satterfield T., An appeal for a code of conduct for marine conservation, Marine Policy, 81, pp. 411-418, (2017)
[6]  
Biasetti P., De Mori B., A framework of values: reasons for conserving biodiversity and natural environments, Ethics & Politics, 18, 3, pp. 527-545, (2016)
[7]  
Bossi E., Scientific integrity, misconduct in science, Swiss Medical Weekly, 140, 13-14, pp. 183-186, (2010)
[8]  
Bosworth A., Chaipraditkul N., Cheng M.M., Gupta A., Junmookda K., Kadam P., Macer D., Millet C., Sangaroonthong J., Waller A., Ethics and biodiversity, (2011)
[9]  
Brall C., Maeckelberghe E., Porz R., Makhoul J., Schroeder-Baeck P., Research Ethics 2.0: new perspectives on norms, values, and integrity in genomic research in times of even scarcer resources, Public Health Genomics, 20, 1, pp. 27-35, (2017)
[10]  
Carroll C., Hartl B., Goldman G.T., Rohlf D.J., Treves A., Kerr J.T., Ritchie E.G., Kingsford R.T., Gibbs K.E., Maron M., Watson J.E.M., Defending the scientific integrity of conservation-policy processes, Conservation Biology, 31, 5, pp. 967-975, (2017)
12345678