Value Judgments, Ethics, and LCA of Nanomaterials Kevin C. Elliott Department of Philosophy University of South Carolina.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Masters in Education in eLearning The University of Hull.
Advertisements

Integrating the gender aspects in research and promoting the participation of women in Life Sciences, Genomics and Biotechnology for Health.
Curriculum Making The What, Who, and Why
Applications in Social Work Practice with Youth Ethical Decision Making.
Project Monitoring Evaluation and Assessment
School of Marketing Ehrenberg-Bass Institute for Marketing Science Sales management issues relating to cross-functional selling teams John Wilkinson.
How to Know If and When It’s Time to Commission a Life Cycle Assessment.
CADTH Therapeutic Reviews
Structural uncertainty from an economists’ perspective
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
An evaluation framework
Chapter 6 Consumer Attitudes Consumer Attitudes.
Opportunities for RAC Participation. Three Part discussion General presentation; Example of oil and gas decision making; and Panel Discussion of RAC involvement.
Ethical Decision Making
Validity Lecture Overview Overview of the concept Different types of validity Threats to validity and strategies for handling them Examples of validity.
FAO/WHO CODEX TRAINING PACKAGE
Tamar Chachibaia, PhD Candidate “Strategy and policy issues for implementation of nanotechnologies in medical education” Advanced Course ‘Research in Medical.
Writing level 3 essays An initial guide. Key principles The key principles of essay writing still apply: Understanding the topic Plan your response Structure.
Development of Interdisciplinary Program on Climate Change and Sustainability Policy- CLIMASP” CLARIFYING ETHICS AND VALUES CLIMASP Course Curriculum Development.
Life Cycle Assessment Overview of LCA and Methodology October 30, 2012.
Soo Young Rieh School of Information University of Michigan Information Ethics Roundtable Misinformation and Disinformation April 3-4, 2009 University.
CAMPUT 2015 Energy Regulation Course Donald Gordon Conference Centre Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario Role of Tribunal Staff, Interveners and Independent.
Strategic Human Resource Management
Life Cycle Overview & Resources. Life Cycle Management What is it? Integrated concept for managing goods and services towards more sustainable production.
Assessment Center Essentials Kevin R. Murphy Department of Psychology Pennsylvania State University, USA.
What is an Inventory Program for? Dr. Emilio Moceo Ph.D Director of Studies Meet international obligations and expectations Inform international, national,
Connections paper Route J – Religious Ethics with New Testament 2792 About the paper & exam questions.
Chapter 1 Understanding Ethics
“A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world.”
Lesson Overview Lesson Overview Science in Context Lesson Overview 1.2 Science in Context.
How to Write a Critical Review of Research Articles
The contrasting environments that early career academics experience in their departmental teaching and on programmes of initial professional development.
Lesson Overview Lesson Overview Science in Context Lesson Overview 1.2 Science in Context.
What is Necessary to Ensure Natural Justice in EIA Decision-making? Angus Morrison-Saunders Senior Lecturer in Environmental Assessment School of Environmental.
Rob Goble George Perkins Marsh Institute Clark University, Worcester, MA NCSU Workshop on Communicating Health and Safety Risks on Emerging Technologies.
Environmental Science
PART: An Innovative Way to Integrate Performance Information with the Budget by Jonathan D. Breul, Executive Director IBM Center for the Business of Government.
Lesson Overview 1.2 Science in Context.
APACA Northern California Section March 23, 2013.
Copyright © 2014 by The University of Kansas Developing and Using Criteria and Processes to Set Priorities.
Chapter 1 Introduction to Clinical Sport Psychology By San-Fu Kao.
Intergenerational Equity & Social Justice Concepts RD September 2001.
Employee Survey 2005 Results from employee survey run during Feb/March 2005.
Ethical Decision Making , Ethical Theories
PULSE Resources. HOME PAGE:contains the PULSE Vision, Mission, and Aim. It also highlights “New and Note-worthy” items and the right hand side contains.
Anne Matthews, Health & Society, School of Nursing and Human Sciences, DCU The paradox of ‘low quality evidence; strong recommendation’: An analysis of.
1 1 EPA Nanotechnology Research Program – LCA Considerations Jeff Morris National Program Director for Nanotechnology 5 November 2009.
Describe the Role of Situational and Dispositional Factors in Explaining Behaviour By Mr Daniel Hansson.
ZeroWIN 3 rd general meeting Southampton, 5-8 July 2010.
Formulating a research problem R esearch areas and topics.
Copyright © May 2014, Montessori Centre International.
Cochrane Agenda and Priority Setting Methods Group (CAPSMG)
Lesson Overview Lesson Overview Science in Context Lesson Overview 1.2 Science in Context Scientific methodology is the heart of science. But that vital.
European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education Project updates Marcella Turner-Cmuchal.
Preparing for your research report
Department of Water and Environmental Regulation
Environmental Health Management (EN481)
Internal Assessment 2016 IB Chemistry Year 2 HL.
The NICE Citizens Council and the role of social value judgements
Outline What is Literature Review? Purpose of Literature Review
Ethical Decision Making
What is Necessary to Ensure Natural Justice in EIA Decision-making?
IAASB-IESBA Coordination
Ethics Theory and Business Practice
Proposed ISQC 1 (Revised)
Proposal for MSFD risk-based approach project in OSPAR region
Moral Decision-Making
Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment
What do I do? How do I choose?
PUBLIC POLICY, POWER AND DECISION
Presentation transcript:

Value Judgments, Ethics, and LCA of Nanomaterials Kevin C. Elliott Department of Philosophy University of South Carolina

Overview Value Judgments and LCA Considering Burdens of Proof Contributing to Broader Deliberations

Value Judgments I am using the term ‘value judgments’ fairly broadly, to refer to decisions that involve weighing the importance of multiple considerations in the absence of decisive rules or algorithms –Science is full of such decisions: choosing research projects and methodologies, characterizing and evaluating the quality of data, interpreting results, weighing multiple bodies of evidence The considerations, or “values,” that influence these judgments don’t always have to be ethical or social, but I will be focusing on judgments that do have ethical or social ramifications

Value Judgments Some of the value judgments associated with LCA are relatively obvious: –Deciding to pursue a consequential or an attributional assessment –Choosing the functional unit and the system boundaries –Determining categories of environmental impacts to assess –Deciding, if making a recommendation, how to weigh the importance of different environmental impacts

Value Judgments I want to highlight some more subtle value judgments that arise especially when making recommendations for future research that can inform LCA of nanomaterials: –How should we prioritize materials (or manufacturing processes, etc.) to study? Should we focus on those that are likely to be used most widely? Or should we focus on those that seem likely to have the greatest environmental impact? Or should we emphasize those that are easiest to study (and perhaps to yield generalizable data)?

Value Judgments Some other decisions: –Do we call for studies of highly purified, homogeneous materials, or rather mixtures of materials that might be more relevant to predicting effects from waste streams? –What principles should guide the choice of biological models? Should we aim especially for ecological relevance? Or should we place more emphasis on simpler and better understood model organisms? –What sorts of human and environmental effects should we prioritize? For example, how high a priority are developmental and reproductive effects, versus information about acute toxicity?

Images from:

Burdens of Proof In situations of particularly serious uncertainty, deciding where to place the burden of proof (and what level of evidence is needed to overcome that burden) becomes especially significant –Should decision makers start with the presumption that particular classes of nanomaterials are more, less, or equally environmentally friendly in comparison with current products? –Are there “streamlined” approaches to LCA that could provide adequate information in the near future? These decisions are laden with ethical and social judgments (e.g., about how much we would like to discontinue current practices or how much we value the services that new nanoproducts could offer)

Broader Deliberations Many contributors to the social and ethical literature on nanotechnology regard this as a unique opportunity to introduce new technologies in a more transparent, socially responsive manner The recent National Citizens’ Technology Forum (NCTF) provides a good example of these efforts

Broader Deliberations An overview of the NCTF: –Consisted of 6 groups located around the country, including a total of 74 individuals –Each group met face-to-face for two days at the beginning and at the end of the process –They received background reading materials –All 74 individuals interacted online 10 times over the course of a month and had the opportunity to develop questions for experts, who joined some of the discussions –Each group developed a final report with recommendations

Broader Deliberations Many commentators have argued that these deliberative exercises should address more specific issues that are relevant at present I think that it is worth considering whether there are social issues associated with LCA that merit inclusion in such venues –For example, considering what to think about nanotechnologies that could replace valuable materials from developing countries –Or, perhaps, considering how to weigh the importance of various categories of environmental impacts –Or considering how to frame the burden of proof for shifting to new nanoproducts

Conclusion I encourage reflection on three issues: –Attention to value judgments, especially those that arise when we call for particular sorts of future research –Burdens of proof and standards of evidence when responding to uncertainty –Subjects that merit broader deliberation, such as social consequences of adopting particular nanomaterials