scholarly journals Trust and Professionalism in Science: Medical Codes as a Model for Scientific Negligence?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Desmond ◽  
Kris Dierickx
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Textual Analysis ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Oecd Countries ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Professional Communities ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Background: Professional communities such as the medical community are acutely concerned with negligence: the category of misconduct where a professional does not live up to the standards expected of a professional of similar qualifications. Since science is currently strengthening its structures of self-regulation in parallel to the professions, this raises the question to what extent the scientific community is concerned with negligence, and if not, whether it should be. By means of comparative analysis of medical and scientific codes of conduct, we aim to highlight the role (or lack thereof) of negligence provisions in codes of conduct for scientists, and to discuss the normative consequences for future codes of conduct.Methods: We collected scientific and medical codes of conduct in a selection of OECD countries, and submitted each code of conduct to comparative textual analysis.Results: Negligence is invariably listed as an infraction of the norms of integrity in medical codes of conduct, but only rarely so in the scientific codes. When the latter list negligence, they typically do not provide any detail on the meaning of ‘negligence’.Discussion: Unlike codes of conduct for professionals, current codes of conduct for scientists are largely silent on the issue of negligence, or explicitly exclude negligence as a type of misconduct. In the few cases where negligence is stipulated to constitute misconduct, no responsibilities are identified that would help prevent negligence. While we caution against unreasonable negligence provisions as well as disproportional sanctioning systems, we do argue that negligence provisions are crucial for justified trust in the scientific community, and hence that there is a very strong rationale for including negligence provisions in codes of conduct.

scholarly journals Trust and professionalism in science: medical codes as a model for scientific negligence?

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Desmond ◽  
Kris Dierickx
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Textual Analysis ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Oecd Countries ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Professional Communities ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Background Professional communities such as the medical community are acutely concerned with negligence: the category of misconduct where a professional does not live up to the standards expected of a professional of similar qualifications. Since science is currently strengthening its structures of self-regulation in parallel to the professions, this raises the question to what extent the scientific community is concerned with negligence, and if not, whether it should be. By means of comparative analysis of medical and scientific codes of conduct, we aim to highlight the role (or lack thereof) of negligence provisions in codes of conduct for scientists, and to discuss the normative consequences for future codes of conduct. Methods We collected scientific and medical codes of conduct in a selection of OECD countries, and submitted each code of conduct to comparative textual analysis. Results Negligence is invariably listed as an infraction of the norms of integrity in medical codes of conduct, but only rarely so in the scientific codes. When the latter list negligence, they typically do not provide any detail on the meaning of ‘negligence’. Discussion Unlike codes of conduct for professionals, current codes of conduct for scientists are largely silent on the issue of negligence, or explicitly exclude negligence as a type of misconduct. In the few cases where negligence is stipulated to constitute misconduct, no responsibilities are identified that would help prevent negligence. While we caution against unreasonable negligence provisions as well as disproportionate sanctioning systems, we do argue that negligence provisions are crucial for justified trust in the scientific community, and hence that there is a very strong rationale for including negligence provisions in codes of conduct.

Professional Society Codes of Conduct: Their Use & Misuse – An Ethical Problem Upon Which the Integrity of Science Rests

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadredin Moosavi
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Ethical Problem ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Professional Society ◽  
Professional Societies

<p>The scientific community has a long history of self-regulation, with accepted public standards regarding the ethical conduct of research, treatment of human subjects and plagiarism. Violations of these widely accepted standards have been investigated and enforced via universities, funding agencies and publishers using their employment, financial and copyright relationships with members of the scientific community. Some modicum of fairness protecting both sides of the relationship arises from an open process, the ability of either party to seek other partners for their work and public shaming of miscarriages of justice committed by either side. By focusing directly on scientific work and the evidence used to support it where scientific expertise is relevant; these standards have worked reasonably well in keeping science honest without silencing scholars whose work is not currently accepted by the mainstream. Such science is by definition self-correcting and warrants public faith in the integrity of its findings.</p><p>Recently, these standards have been expanded into broad Codes of Conduct including regulation of behavior normally reserved for national legal systems built on clearly defined constitutional due process rights, which professional societies lack the jurisdiction, expertise, resources and will to protect. While lacking legal authority, the shadow tribunals these codes create have significant ability to impact the careers of those accused of transgressing their dictates. Such extra-legal bodies, often staffed by non-scientists serving as investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury, undermine academic freedom and the expression of diverse ideas required for a healthy, inclusive scientific community. Instead of being judged on their research, scientists now risk being bullied out of the field on the basis of social considerations reflecting the opinion of unelected code compliance officers acting to fulfill the agenda of professional society leaders rather than those officials elected to enforce national laws. These behavioral tribunals are the anti-thesis of scientific practice and threaten to undermine public faith in the integrity of science.</p><p>This presentation examines several cases from the recent scientific literature. The merits of each case are evaluated using the professional society code of conduct applied to the scientists in question, with outcomes for the parties involved and wider implications of the case discussed. The results suggest that professional society codes of conduct remain capable of assessing the merits of scientific research though social pressure to favor particular demographic groups is undermining the process. The same analysis indicates that professional societies are not competent in assessing behavior via their codes of conduct due to fundamentally flawed investigatory mechanisms and lack of due process protections. Strong biases in society leadership allows misuse of codes of conduct to unlawfully impose a policy agenda on the community, despite evidence that such policy is at odds with, and harmful to, scientific practice. Public belief in the integrity of science will erode if the scientific community fails to disavow and halt the misuse of professional society codes of conduct to regulate behavior in a fashion that no national legal system would condone.</p>

scholarly journals Organizational Dynamics and Public Service Ethics in Nigeria

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 217
Author(s):  
Joseph Nkang Ogar ◽  
Nweake Christopher Ude
Keyword(s):  
Public Service ◽  
Ethical Behavior ◽  
Textual Analysis ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Dominant Role ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Organizational Dynamics ◽  
Conducive Environment ◽  
Selection Of

The selection of 'right man' for 'right job' and his/her orientation in administrative philosophy and social values need to be reinforced by effective systems for ethical administration as they create 'conducive' or 'non conducive' environment Numerous studies have indicated that organization climate and atmosphere will play a dominant role in influencing individuals with appropriate attitudes and skills. Keeping this in view, this work focuses on the important aspects of organization and their impact on ethical behavior of administrators. Some of the important issues raised are to what extent hierarchy influences ethical behavior. How rules and procedures influence administration. Whether ethics institutions and codes of conduct help achieve public service ethics? This method used in this research is context textual analysis.

scholarly journals Corporate codes of conduct: Are three generations sufficient to ensure the effective enforcement of labour rights?

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-118
Author(s):  
Aneta Tyc
Keyword(s):  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Multinational Enterprises ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Corporate Code ◽  
Three Generations ◽  
Labour Rights ◽  
Corporate Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Illegal Activities

In the 1970s, the number of reports concerning unethical or illegal activities of multinational corporations increased and led to discussions within international organisations. In 1976, the OECD was first to adopt its Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The ILO adopted its Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy in 1977, and UN issued the Global Compact in 2000. Subsequently, many codes of conduct have been established to provide a stable framework in which MNEs conduct their business. The purpose of this paper is to assess, through the prism of three generations of codes, if self-regulation is sufficient to ensure the effective enforcement of labour rights. I fill the gap in existing research by providing a comprehensive explanation for the shortcomings of this instrument. Research indicates that there is a lack of involvement of social partners in the decision-making process leading to the adoption of codes of conduct. Once adopted, they impose lower standards than the public regulatory frameworks. They are more selective in their choice of labour rights. There are also many difficulties in implementing, monitoring and enforcing a corporate code of conduct. These tools mainly address marketing aims and respond to the unfavourable publicity produced by the media about the inconsistency of certain corporate policies with international labour standards. I conclude by discussing how codes of conduct could be transformed to more eƒectively address workers’ rights.

SAMUEL J. BROADS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ACCOUNTING PROFESSION

1996 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary John Previts ◽  
Thomas R. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Self Regulation ◽  
Accounting Profession ◽  
General Acceptance ◽  
Accounting Principles ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Securities Laws ◽  
Analogous Reasoning ◽  
Independent Audit ◽  
Selection Of

In the decade following the passage of the Federal Securities Laws of 1933 and 1934, the reform of accounting and auditing practices directed authority for selection of accounting principles and auditing procedures away from the discretion of the individual accountant and auditor. Instead, a self-regulatory peer driven process to establish general acceptance for a more limited set of principles and procedures was being initiated. Two events which occurred in 1938 indelibly affected this process, the SEC's decision to issue Accounting Series Release No. 4, which empowered non-governmental entities as potential sources of authoritative support, and the McKesson & Robbins fraud which called into question the value of the independent audit and the role of external auditing at the very time a momentum had been established for self-regulation by the nascent and recently reunified accounting profession. The contributions of Samuel J. Broad in both the initiatives for self-regulation of accounting principles and of auditing procedures is examined in this paper. Further, several examples of Broad's rhetorical technique of employing analogous reasoning to facilitate dissemination of complex economic and accounting issues are examined.

Dynamics of export potential of sunflower oil in Ukraine

Helia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kateryna Vasylkovska ◽  
Olha Andriienko ◽  
Oleksii Vasylkovskyi ◽  
Andrii Andriienko ◽  
Popov Volodymyr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Sunflower Oil ◽  
Climate Changes ◽  
Qualitative Change ◽  
Sunflower Seeds ◽  
Cultivation Technology ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract The analysis of the production and yield of sunflower seeds in Ukraine for the period from 2000 to 2019 was conducted in the article. The comparative analysis of the gross harvest of sunflower seeds and the export of sunflower oil for the years under research was carried out. The dependence of exports on gross harvest was revealed and its share was calculated. It was determined that the export of sunflower oil has increased over the years under research, which indicates a significant Ukraine’s export potential. It was found that the increase in the share of exports by 15.9% was made possible by a qualitative change in yield, that was ensured by the changes in the cultivation technology and by the selection of sunflower hybrids that are better adapted to climate changes. The recommendations for further improvement of cultivation technology in connection with climate change in order to further increase yields and the export potential of Ukraine were given.

scholarly journals The Value of “Social” Reputation: The Protection of MNE Workers from the Consumer’s Perspective

Global Jurist ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Giaconi ◽  
Lorenzo Giasanti ◽  
Simone Varva
Keyword(s):  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Decent Work ◽  
Social Ranking ◽  
Government Organizations ◽  
Social Reputation ◽  
The Social ◽  
Labour Standards ◽  
Additional Support

Abstract The virtually immediate information propagation has reduced the gap of knowledge once existing between MNEs and customers (i.e. Rana Plaza collapse, 2013). Consumers begin playing an important role in supporting workers. Their growing social awareness has clear economic consequences. MNEs have tried to react to the loss of social reputation, mainly adopting (and imposing to their suppliers) codes of conduct and ethics providing a minimum standard for decent work standards. This article aims to analyze the social reputation and social sustainability that have recently attracted stakeholders’ interest, from different points of view (MNEs, consumers, government and non-government organizations, unions). Those “new” forms of social initiatives (code of conduct, social ranking, consumers campaign, boycotting) are informative and could help to spread ILO labour standards. Clearly, they can represent only an additional support for workers who are struggling in the typical conflict between Work and Capital. The tendency to use a single parameter for assessing the social sensitivity of the MNEs, valid both for the countries “in development” and for those “already developed” risks to lead to a “race to the bottom” trend.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document