RESUMEN
Value sensitive design (VSD) aims at creating better technology based on social and ethical values. However, VSD has not been applied to long-term and uncertain future developments, such as societal planning for climate change. This paper describes a new method that combines elements from VSD with scenario planning. The method was developed for and applied to a case study of adaptation to sea level rise (SLR) in southern Sweden in a series of workshops. The participants of the workshops found that the method provided a framework for discussing long-term planning, enabled identification of essential values, challenged established planning practices, helped find creative solutions, and served as a reminder that we do not know what will happen in the future. Finally, we reflect on the limitations of the method and suggest further research on how it can be improved for value sensitive design of adaptation measures to manage uncertain future sea level rise.
Asunto(s)
Cambio Climático , Elevación del Nivel del Mar , Predicción , Humanos , Suecia , IncertidumbreRESUMEN
Standard tools used in societal risk management such as probabilistic risk analysis or cost-benefit analysis typically define risks in terms of only probabilities and consequences and assume a utilitarian approach to ethics that aims to maximize expected utility. The philosopher Carl F. Cranor has argued against this view by devising a list of plausible aspects of the acceptability of risks that points towards a non-consequentialist ethical theory of societal risk management. This paper revisits Cranor's list to argue that the alternative ethical theory responsibility-catering prioritarianism can accommodate the aspects identified by Cranor and that the elements in the list can be used to inform the details of how to view risks within this theory. An approach towards operationalizing the theory is proposed based on a prioritarian social welfare function that operates on responsibility-adjusted utilities. A responsibility-catering prioritarian ethical approach towards managing risks is a promising alternative to standard tools such as cost-benefit analysis.
Asunto(s)
Análisis Ético , Teoría Ética , Gestión de Riesgos/ética , Riesgo , Eticistas , Humanos , Política Pública , Conducta Social , Responsabilidad SocialRESUMEN
Many institutions worldwide are considering how to include uncertainty about future changes in sea-levels and storm surges into their investment decisions regarding large capital infrastructures. Here we examine how to characterize deeply uncertain climate change projections to support such decisions using Robust Decision Making analysis. We address questions regarding how to confront the potential for future changes in low probability but large impact flooding events due to changes in sea-levels and storm surges. Such extreme events can affect investments in infrastructure but have proved difficult to consider in such decisions because of the deep uncertainty surrounding them. This study utilizes Robust Decision Making methods to address two questions applied to investment decisions at the Port of Los Angeles: (1) Under what future conditions would a Port of Los Angeles decision to harden its facilities against extreme flood scenarios at the next upgrade pass a cost-benefit test, and (2) Do sea-level rise projections and other information suggest such conditions are sufficiently likely to justify such an investment? We also compare and contrast the Robust Decision Making methods with a full probabilistic analysis. These two analysis frameworks result in similar investment recommendations for different idealized future sea-level projections, but provide different information to decision makers and envision different types of engagement with stakeholders. In particular, the full probabilistic analysis begins by aggregating the best scientific information into a single set of joint probability distributions, while the Robust Decision Making analysis identifies scenarios where a decision to invest in near-term response to extreme sea-level rise passes a cost-benefit test, and then assembles scientific information of differing levels of confidence to help decision makers judge whether or not these scenarios are sufficiently likely to justify making such investments. Results highlight the highly-localized and context dependent nature of applying Robust Decision Making methods to inform investment decisions.
Asunto(s)
Agua de Mar , Incertidumbre , Toma de Decisiones , HumanosRESUMEN
A "plausible worst-case scenario" of a gradually increasing level of multidrug-resistant bacteria (carbapenem-resistant E. coli) in the human population was developed and used to study how Swedish authorities would manage this situation and to identify preventive measures that could be taken. Key findings include: (1) a scenario in which 5% of the population in southern Sweden become carriers of carbapenem-resistant E. coli is possible or even likely in 10 to 15 years; (2) it is not clear when and how the increase of E. coli resistant to carbapenems as in the scenario would be detected in the general human population; (3) identified negative consequences of the scenario on society were primarily due to increased demands on the healthcare system and potential consequences for food-producing animals, food safety, and environmental health; and (4) a number of preventive and mitigation measures were suggested, including initiating long-term screening programs for public and animal health as well as for food and water production to monitor increasing levels of carbapenem resistance. Strategies and plans to prevent and handle future increasing prevalence of multidrug-resistant bacteria need to be developed.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Carbapenémicos/uso terapéutico , Farmacorresistencia Bacteriana Múltiple , Escherichia coli/efectos de los fármacos , Administración en Salud Pública , Salud Pública/métodos , Proteínas Bacterianas/metabolismo , Portador Sano/epidemiología , Congresos como Asunto , Escherichia coli/enzimología , Predicción , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Suecia/epidemiología , beta-Lactamasas/metabolismoRESUMEN
One of the central issues in radiation protection consists in determining what weight should be given to individual doses in relation to collective or aggregated doses. A mathematical framework is introduced in which such assessments can be made precisely in terms of comparisons between alternative distributions of individual doses. In addition to evaluation principles that are well known from radiation protection, a series of principles that are derived from parallel discussions in moral philosophy and welfare economics is investigated. A battery of formal properties is then used to investigate the evaluative principles. The results indicate that one of the new principles, bilinear prioritarianism, may be preferable to current practices, since it satisfies efficiency-related properties better without sacrificing other desirable properties.