Bioethics and Responsible Leadership Dr. Florencia Luna FLACSO-CONICET Globethicsnet 2015

Responsible Leadership (RL) Broad concept of leadership: «each group of human beings has a leader or leaders». Leaders have power and they may be responsible. There might be tension between both possibilities… A responsible leader should be responsive to the needs, concerns and interests of the group.

RL and business Responsible leadership is about making business decisions that, next to the interests of the shareholders, also takes into account all the other stakeholders, such as workers, clients, suppliers, the environment, the community and future generations.

Bioethics and RL Bioethics studies human behavior and ethical problems in the fields of biological sciences, medicine and its new developments and technologies. A main worry in bioethics is the adequate protection of people, specially those with vulnerabilities. In which areas of bioethics is there is a need of RL? Let´s consider research ethics case (ethical problems regarding research in new drugs or treatments)

Some questions Are there different «kinds» or «types» of leaders? How should we work with them? How can we assess responsibility in a pluralistic society with a secular perspective (a community of moral strangers)?

Research ethics example If we follow the broad definition of leader, there might be different «types» of leadership: - individual researcher, - research ethics committee, - regulatory agencies/ policy makers at national levels, - global harmonization at international level - pharmaceutical companies: Big absent !!!

Research ethics example: Ideal leaders Research ethics committees: - Their mandate is the protection of research subjects, - Their members should be educated in ethics, - There is no conflict of interest (in theory). However they may fail (insufficient education of its members, lousy evaluation, etc…)

Other possible leaders Individual researcher: - advancement on the scientific arena, - care and protection of research subjects? Regulatory agencies: - responsibility towards the broad community (approval of safe drugs),

Research ethics example: pharmaceutical companies No conflict of interest: maximization of profit (alteration of the whole patent system)… Should they be responsible? Absolutely! (not only towards research subjects but also towards global health development). How to promote this in a selfish society where success is equivalent to finantial gain?

Hence… We have very different kind of leaders. Not only regarding their scope and power but also their interests and motivations… It seems we should have different tools and arguments adequate for each kind of leader…not a single and simple answer. How can we achieve RL in the case of pharmaceutical corporations?

Possible arguments Internal arguments (within their value system. Assumption self-interest): Not convenient to be seen as greedy companies ( Pharma against South Africa lawsuits on HIV-AIDS drugs) Importance to be seen as responsible (for reputation, etc…)

Possible arguments External arguments: - Special responsibility: companies do business with the health and welfare of people; they frequently use these populations as their research subjects, so they have moral obligations towards them. - They can be considered secondary agents of justice (i.e on human rights perspective).

What we need? => Education, education and education… - to create sympathy and a sensitive perception of reality, - to foster a interconnected vision of the world (contagious diseases travel fast!). => Rigorous laws at a national level but also harmonization at an international one («self-regulation is a delussion» J.Sachs). => And other proposals more creative….?