scholarly journals Moral Cosmopolitans in Eight Countries Bestow Equitable Benefit and Security on Outsiders

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuechunzi Bai ◽  
Susan Fiske ◽  
Varun Gauri

Moral cosmopolitanism prioritizes global welfare over national interest. Cosmopolitans, in contrast to moral patriots, bestow equitable benefit and security across borders. Participants from four continents (N = 5,772) endorsed degrees of belief in equitable benefit and security, which respectively predicted (a) making monetary donations to global rather than national organizations and (b) protecting an immigrant rather than citizens. Correlated with their decision making, cosmopolitans’ accessible concepts included the relevant group, impartiality, and concrete need construal. Manipulating the accessibility of these cosmopolitan thoughts increased global donations by 12%. We situate theories of morality without borders in diverse, real-world contexts, and provide large-scale empirical evidence regarding cognitive conditions for cosmopolitan thinking. Increasing moral cosmopolitanism through reasoning could be valuable for global decision-making in domains such as climate change, migration, poverty, trade, and public health.

2021 ◽  
pp. medethics-2020-107134
Author(s):  
Thana Cristina de Campos-Rudinsky ◽  
Eduardo Undurraga

Although empirical evidence may provide a much desired sense of certainty amidst a pandemic characterised by uncertainty, the vast gamut of available COVID-19 data, including misinformation, has instead increased confusion and distrust in authorities’ decisions. One key lesson we have been gradually learning from the COVID-19 pandemic is that the availability of empirical data and scientific evidence alone do not automatically lead to good decisions. Good decision-making in public health policy, this paper argues, does depend on the availability of reliable data and rigorous analyses, but depends above all on sound ethical reasoning that ascribes value and normative judgement to empirical facts.


Author(s):  
Taha Yasseri ◽  
Jannie Reher

AbstractThrough a large-scale online field experiment, we provide new empirical evidence for the presence of the anchoring bias in people’s judgement due to irrational reliance on a piece of information that they are initially given. The comparison of the anchoring stimuli and respective responses across different tasks reveals a positive, yet complex relationship between the anchors and the bias in participants’ predictions of the outcomes of events in the future. Participants in the treatment group were equally susceptible to the anchors regardless of their level of engagement, previous performance, or gender. Given the strong and ubiquitous influence of anchors quantified here, we should take great care to closely monitor and regulate the distribution of information online to facilitate less biased decision making.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oscar Daniel Salomón ◽  
María Gabriela Quintana ◽  
Andrea Verónica Mastrángelo ◽  
María Soledad Fernández

Vector-borne diseases closely associated with the environment, such as leishmaniases, have been a usual argument about the deleterious impact of climate change on public health. From the biological point of view interaction of different variables has different and even conflicting effects on the survival of vectors and the probability transmission of pathogens. The results on ecoepidemiology of leishmaniasis in Argentina related to climate variables at different scales of space and time are presented. These studies showed that the changes in transmission due to change or increase in frequency and intensity of climatic instability were expressed through changes in the probability of vector-human reservoir effective contacts. These changes of contact in turn are modulated by both direct effects on the biology and ecology of the organisms involved, as by perceptions and changes in the behavior of the human communities at risk. Therefore, from the perspective of public health and state policy, and taking into account the current nonlinear increased velocity of climate change, we concluded that discussing the uncertainties of large-scale models will have lower impact than to develop-validate mitigation strategies to be operative at local level, and compatibles with sustainable development, conservation biodiversity, and respect for cultural diversity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Jan-Erik Lane

Climate and earth scientists now predicting abrupt climate change never ask the social sciences whether large scale policy-making and international coordination, like the COP21 project, is all feasible. The message from policy analysis is that rational decision-making is a myth, as there is bound to be mistakes, confusion and opportunism in policy implementation. Is it better for each state to develop its own climate policy – the resilience option? However, when looking at energy planning by core states, one finds little of decarbonisation. Only Uruguay has good preparation for global warming. Abrupt climate change threatens numerous tipping points towards Hawking irreversibility. But the social sciences are skeptical about large scale policy implementation based upon comprehensively rational decision-making.


Author(s):  
MATTHEW KOPEC ◽  
JUSTIN BRUNER

Abstract Discussions of the nonidentity problem presuppose a widely shared intuition that actions or policies that change who comes into existence do not, thereby, become morally unproblematic. We hypothesize that this intuition is not generally shared by the public, which could have widespread implications concerning how to generate support for large-scale, identity-affecting policies relating to matters like climate change. To test this, we ran a version of the well-known dictator game designed to mimic the public's behavior over identity-affecting choices. We found the public does seem to behave more selfishly when making identity-affecting choices, which should be concerning. We further hypothesized that one possible mechanism is the notion of harm the public uses in their decision making and find that substantial portions of the population seem to each employ distinct notions of harm in their normative thinking. These findings raise puzzling features about the public's normative thinking that call out for further empirical examination.


Author(s):  
Jan M. Stratil ◽  
Deepak Paudel ◽  
Karen E. Setty ◽  
Carlos E. Menezes de Rezende ◽  
Aline A. Monroe ◽  
...  

Background: Decision-making on matters of public health and health policy is a deeply value-laden process. The World Health Organization (WHO)-INTEGRATE framework was proposed as a new evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework to support guideline development from a complexity perspective, notably in relation to public health and health system interventions, and with a foundation in WHO norms and values. This study was conducted as part of the development of the framework to assess its comprehensiveness and usefulness for public health and health policy decision-making. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study comprising nine key informant interviews (KIIs) with experts involved in WHO guideline development and four focus group discussions (FGDs) with a total of forty health decision-makers from Brazil, Germany, Nepal and Uganda. Transcripts were analyzed using MAXQDA12 and qualitative content analysis. Results: Most key informants and participants in the FGDs appreciated the framework for its relevance to real-world decision-making on four widely differing health topics. They praised its broad perspective and comprehensiveness with respect to new or expanded criteria, notably regarding societal implications, equity considerations, and acceptability. Some guideline developers questioned the value of the framework beyond current practice and were concerned with the complexity of applying such a broad range of criteria in guideline development processes. Participants made concrete suggestions for improving the wording and definitions of criteria as well as their grouping, for covering missing aspects, and for addressing overlap between criteria. Conclusion: The framework was well-received by health decision-makers as well as the developers of WHO guidelines and appears to capture all relevant considerations discussed in four distinct real-world decision processes that took place on four different continents. Guidance is needed on how to apply the framework in guideline processes that are both transparent and participatory. A set of suggestions for improvement provides a valuable starting point for advancing the framework towards version 2.0.


2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Frieler ◽  
A. Levermann ◽  
J. Elliott ◽  
J. Heinke ◽  
A. Arneth ◽  
...  

Abstract. Climate change and its impacts already pose considerable challenges for societies that will further increase with global warming (IPCC, 2014a, b). Uncertainties of the climatic response to greenhouse gas emissions include the potential passing of large-scale tipping points (e.g. Lenton et al., 2008; Levermann et al., 2012; Schellnhuber, 2010) and changes in extreme meteorological events (Field et al., 2012) with complex impacts on societies (Hallegatte et al., 2013). Thus climate change mitigation is considered a necessary societal response for avoiding uncontrollable impacts (Conference of the Parties, 2010). On the other hand, large-scale climate change mitigation itself implies fundamental changes in, for example, the global energy system. The associated challenges come on top of others that derive from equally important ethical imperatives like the fulfilment of increasing food demand that may draw on the same resources. For example, ensuring food security for a growing population may require an expansion of cropland, thereby reducing natural carbon sinks or the area available for bio-energy production. So far, available studies addressing this problem have relied on individual impact models, ignoring uncertainty in crop model and biome model projections. Here, we propose a probabilistic decision framework that allows for an evaluation of agricultural management and mitigation options in a multi-impact-model setting. Based on simulations generated within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP), we outline how cross-sectorally consistent multi-model impact simulations could be used to generate the information required for robust decision making. Using an illustrative future land use pattern, we discuss the trade-off between potential gains in crop production and associated losses in natural carbon sinks in the new multiple crop- and biome-model setting. In addition, crop and water model simulations are combined to explore irrigation increases as one possible measure of agricultural intensification that could limit the expansion of cropland required in response to climate change and growing food demand. This example shows that current impact model uncertainties pose an important challenge to long-term mitigation planning and must not be ignored in long-term strategic decision making.


Author(s):  
Andrew Watterson ◽  
William Dinan

The science on the effects of global climate change and air pollution on morbidity and mortality is clear and debate now centres around the scale and precise contributions of particular pollutants. Sufficient data existed in recent decades to support the adoption of precautionary public health policies relating to fossil fuels including shale exploration. Yet air quality and related public health impacts linked to ethical and environmental justice elements are often marginalized or missing in planning and associated decision making. Industry and government policies and practices, laws and planning regulations lagged well behind the science in the United Kingdom. This paper explores the reasons for this and what shaped some of those policies. Why did shale gas policies in England fail to fully address public health priorities and neglect ethical and environmental justice concerns. To answer this question, an interdisciplinary analysis is needed informed by a theoretical framework of how air pollution and climate change are largely discounted in the complex realpolitik of policy and regulation for shale gas development in England. Sources, including official government, regulatory and planning documents, as well as industry and scientific publications are examined and benchmarked against the science and ethical and environmental justice criteria. Further, our typology illustrates how the process works drawing on an analysis of official policy documents and statements on planning and regulatory oversight of shale exploration in England, and material from industry and their consultants relating to proposed shale oil and gas development. Currently the oil, gas and chemical industries in England continue to dominate and influence energy and feedstock-related policy making to the detriment of ethical and environmental justice decision making with significant consequences for public health.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca F. Goldberg ◽  
Laura N. Vandenberg

Abstract Background Numerous groups, such as the tobacco industry, have deliberately altered and misrepresented knowable facts and empirical evidence to promote an agenda, often for monetary benefit, with consequences for environmental and public health. Previous research has explored cases individually, but none have conducted an in-depth comparison between cases. The purpose of this study was to compile a comprehensive list of tactics used by disparate groups and provide a framework for identifying further instances of manufactured doubt. Methods We examined scholarly books, peer-reviewed articles, well-researched journalism pieces, and legal evidence related to five disparate industries and organizations selected for their destructive impacts on environmental and public health (tobacco, coal, and sugar industries, manufacturers of the pesticide Atrazine, and the Marshall Institute, an institute focused on climate change research, and other scientists from the era that associated with those in the Institute). These documents provided evidence for a list of tactics used to generate pro-industry spin and manufacture doubt about conferred harm. We then identified trends among sets of strategies that could explain their differential use or efficacy. Results We recognized 28 unique tactics used to manufacture doubt. Five of these tactics were used by all five organizations, suggesting that they are key features of manufactured doubt. The intended audience influences the strategy used to misinform, and logical fallacies contribute to their efficacy. Conclusions This list of tactics can be used by others to build a case that an industry or group is deliberately manipulating information associated with their actions or products. Improved scientific and rhetorical literacy could be used to render them less effective, depending on the audience targeted, and ultimately allow for the protection of both environmental health and public health more generally.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document