Early Geoengineering Governance: The Oxford Principles

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Heyward ◽  
Steve Rayner ◽  
Julian Savulescu
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Engineering Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
The World ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Political Decision Making

Clare Heyward, and Steve Rayner, and Julian Savulescu examine the legitimacy and social control over the research, development and eventual deployment of geo-engineering to reduce human caused climate change. They believe that it is permissible in principle but all geo-engineering R&D should be subject to some sort of governance given its potential to affect everyone in the world. They defend the Oxford Principles of ethical-political decision-making principles. 1) Geo-engineering is in the public interest and should be regulated as a public good; 2) there should be public participation in geo-engineering decision-making; 3) geo-engineering research should be transparent and available to the public; 4) risk assessments should be conducted by independent bodies, and be directed toward both the environmental and socio-economic impacts of research and deployment; and 5) the legal, social, and ethical implications of geo-engineering should be addressed before a project is undertaken or technology deployed. The authors then compare the Oxford Principles favorably the three main alternative models that guide geoengineering development. They argue that it has a greater scope of application than the alternatives and better lend themselves to action-guiding recommendations and regulations, appropriate to different technologies -- while preserving longstanding environmental and political values.

Regulatory Rationales Beyond the Economic: In Search of the Public Interest

2010 ◽  
pp. 38-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Feintuck
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Political Values ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Media ◽  
Market Driven ◽  
Market Economics

This article contends that regulation in certain fields should incorporate and give emphasis to values beyond those of market economics. It is argued here that the frame of reference of the market is too narrow to encompass properly a range of social and political values which are established in liberal democracies and can be seen as constitutional in nature. Examples from fields such as environmental regulation and regulation of the media are used here to illustrate a range of non-economic values which have been, are, or should be reflected in regulatory theory and practice as a means of recognising and reflecting principles related to social justice. Such principles extend beyond, and may be antithetical to the practices, values, and outcomes of market-driven decision-making.

Normative Juridical Review Comparison of Land Acquisition Regulations for Railway Infrastructure between Indonesia and Malaysia

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhina Setyo Oktaria ◽  
Agustinus Prasetyo Edi Wibowo
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Influencing Factor ◽  
Land Acquisition ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
The Public ◽  
Indonesian Government ◽  
The People ◽  
Railway Infrastructure ◽  
The World ◽  
The Government

Land acquisition for public purposes, including for the construction of railroad infrastructure, is a matter that is proposed by all countries in the world. The Indonesian government or the Malaysian royal government needs land for railroad infrastructure development. To realize this, a regulation was made that became the legal umbrella for the government or royal government. The people must agree to regulations that require it. Land acquisition for public use in Malaysia can be completed quickly in Indonesia. The influencing factor is the different perceptions of the understanding of what are in the public interest, history and legal systems of the two countries as well as the people's reaction from the two countries

Deliberative Democracy and Public Dispute Resolution

2018 ◽  
pp. 709-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Susskind ◽  
Jessica Gordon ◽  
Yasmin Zaerpoor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Fact Finding

Deliberative democracy and public dispute resolution (PDR) have the same goal—to inform and determine the public interest—but they involve different skills and practices. This article considers the ways in which deliberative democratic approaches to policy-related decision-making can be supplemented with tools used in public dispute resolution—specifically, the use of an independent mediator, the well-developed technique of stakeholder assessment, and a new strategy called joint fact-finding, where stakeholders with different interests work together with outside experts to identify common assumptions, gather information together, and formulate and clarify opinions. All are designed to achieve fairer, wiser, more stable and more efficient outcomes.

scholarly journals Identifying the barriers to female leadership in Paramedicine

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paige Mason
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Academic Medicine ◽  
Equal Opportunity ◽  
Female Leadership ◽  
Private Sphere ◽  
The Public ◽  
Government Decision ◽  
The World ◽  
Main Message

The main message is clear: women are not making it to the top in any profession, anywhere in the world, and the field of prehospital and academic medicine is not immune. Whether in the public or private sphere, from the highest levels of government decision-making to common households, women continue to be denied equal opportunity with men

scholarly journals The crisis of modernity as the crisis of the political: Towards a critique of the reason of the ethos

2003 ◽  
pp. 61-85
Author(s):  
Simo Elakovic
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Political Power ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
The World ◽  
Political Act ◽  
Crisis Of Modernity ◽  
Political Decision Making

The crisis of modernity as the crisis of the political is seen by the author primarily as a crisis of the "measure" of the criterion of political decision making and action. This crisis is understood in the first place as a crisis of self-awareness and practice of the ethos. Machiavelli was the first to attempt a solution to this problem by introducing the concept of virtus, which became the fundamental principle of modern political philosophy. However, many modern and contemporary interpreters of Machiavelli's thought often ignore the social and political context in which the political doctrine of the Florentine thinker arose. Namely, Machiavelli's effort to find an authentic form of the political act that would make possible a harmonization and stabilization of the dramatic political circumstances then prevailing in Italian cities required a reliable diagnosis and adequate means for a successful therapy of the sick organism of the community. The epochal novelty in Machiavelli's political theory was the shift from the ancient theorization of virtue to its modern operationalization. Nevertheless, this shift is often interpreted as a radical opposing of the Greek concept of arete to the Roman virtus, which is crudely and simplistically reduced to bravery and strength necessary for taking and keeping political power. Hegel in his political philosophy travels an important part of the road - unconsciously rather than consciously - along with Machiavelli and Shelling. This particularly holds for his understanding of the necessity of strength and bravery in the process of operationalizing the spirit of freedom in history through the mediation of "negation" as "the power of evil". The mediation of subjectivity and substantiality, according to Hegel, takes place in the state by the brutal bridling of the world spirit where not just individuals but whole peoples are sacrificed - toward freedom, i.e. its realization in the community of the ethos. The "trouble of the times" is a consequence of the separation between I and the world (Entzeiung) and stems from a reduced political reason which lacks the criterion of the ethical totality for political action and decision making. By the separation of the ethos this reason get routinized and political action is reduced to naked technique of winning and keeping political power. In the concluding segment of the paper the author points to some global consequences of the crisis of political decision making in the historical reality at the end of 20th century.

Prison Crowding and the Evolution of Public Policy

1985 ◽  
Vol 478 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOAN MULLEN
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Budget Constraints ◽  
The Public ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
Eighth Amendment ◽  
The Future ◽  
American Prison

While crowding has been a persistent feature of the American prison since its invention in the nineteenth century, the last decade of crisis has brought more outspoken media investigations of prison conditions, higher levels of political and managerial turmoil, and a judiciary increasingly willing to bring the conditions of confinement under the scope of Eighth Amendment review. With the added incentive of severe budget constraints, liberals and conservatives alike now question whether this is any way to do business. Although crowding cannot be defined by quantitative measures alone, many institutions have far exceeded their limits of density according to minimum standards promulgated by the corrections profession. Some fall far below any reasonable standard of human decency. The results are costly, dangerous, and offensive to the public interest. Breaking the cycle of recurrent crisis requires considered efforts to address the decentralized, discretionary nature of sentence decision making and to link sentencing policies to the resources available to the corrections function. The demand to match policy with resources is simply a call for more rational policymaking. To ask for less is to allow the future of corrections to resemble its troubled past.

Private Networks and the Public Interest

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon James Bytheway ◽  
Mark Metzler
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Central Bank ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Central Banks ◽  
Capital City ◽  
World City ◽  
Capitalist System ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World ◽  
Hierarchical Nature

This concluding chapter examines the hierarchical nature of the markets in capital, which constitute the peak markets of the world capitalist system. It also reconsiders the central-bank connections between Tokyo, London, and New York as vital inner links within a larger set of world-city geographies. In a century of violent changes, these “capital city” geographies have been remarkably persistent. The great Tokyo bubble of 1989–90 was the greatest yet of its kind, but it now seems relatively modest next to the New York and London bubbles of 2007–8. Each of these “capital city” bubbles showed a mix of classic and novel features. Each also revealed, again, the centrality of the central banks themselves.

Democratic Rationales for Pre-Strike Ballots

2020 ◽  
pp. 189-213
Author(s):  
Breen Creighton ◽  
Catrina Denvir ◽  
Richard Johnstone ◽  
Shae McCrystal ◽  
Alice Orchiston
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Central Issue ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
The Public ◽  
Industrial Action ◽  
Democratic Rights

Chapter 7 interrogates the central issue in the book—the extent to which pre-strike ballot requirements give effect to the democratic rights of individual workers and the public interest in ensuring that the exercise of strike action is based on democratic decision-making. It argues that pre-strike ballot requirements are imposed on trade unions in a very different context when compared with other forms of political or industrial contests. The chapter analyses unions’ democratic processes in three interrelated, but different, key decisions in the process to take strike action under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth): (i) the decision to apply for an order for a pre-strike ballot to be held; (ii) the decision to approve proposed industrial action in a pre-strike ballot; and (iii) the decision to take approved industrial action after such action has been approved in a pre-strike ballot. Each of these decisions occurs within the context of the legal and industrial relations framework, and the democratic processes involved are inevitably shaped by those frameworks. The evidence presented in this chapter suggests that the first and third decisions are generally conducted in a manner that allows for participatory democratic processes. However, when union members vote in a pre-strike ballot, there is little evidence of the kinds of practices that typically characterize a participatory democratic model. Instead, union engagement with members is focused on educating them about the legal requirements and the consequences of abstention or a no vote in associated bargaining, rather than on the arguments for and against the proposed industrial action.

Conclusion: SDO Decision-making and the Public Interest

2020 ◽  
pp. 210-237
Author(s):  
Alison Harcourt ◽  
George Christou ◽  
Seamus Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
International Level ◽  
Multiple Streams ◽  
Policy Entrepreneurship ◽  
Historical Representation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Decision Making Processes

The conclusion situates the book’s findings in academic debates on democracy and the Internet, global self-regulation, and civil society, and international decision-making processes in unstructured environments. It assesses whether current standards-developing organization (SDO) decision-making is able to bridge historical representation gaps and deficiencies. A nuanced pattern is emerging with increasing inclusion of a wider number of actors within SDO fora. The first part of the chapter returns to the Multiple Streams (MS) framework applied to the case studies on a comparative basis. It identifies key processes under which SDO rules of interaction are established at the international level and explains which interests have come to the fore within decision-making highlighting the occurrence of policy entrepreneurship, forum shopping, and coupling. The final part explores additional frameworks for SDO regulation where spaces for public interest consideration might occur in the future. These are opportunities for inserting public interest considerations into international and national Acts, certification programmes, and the move towards open source solutions for Internet management. The book concludes that, although the literature is expansive on the interaction of corporate sector actors within SDOs, the study of other actors, such as digital rights groups, civil society, academics, policy entrepreneurs and the technical community as a whole, has been underdressed in the literature on international self-regulatory fora to date. In this respect, the book raises important questions of representation of the public interest at the international level by having addressed the actions of actors within SDO fora who promote public interest goals.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
John Gastil ◽  
Katherine R. Knobloch
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Small Group ◽  
Reliable Information ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Ballot Measures ◽  
Ballot Measure ◽  
Political Decision Making

Citizens are often asked to make decisions about ballot measures, but they rarely have access to reliable information with which to make those decisions. This chapter tells the story of Seattle’s failed monorail project to explain the problems voters face when figuring out how to cast their vote. It introduces a new governing institution that could help solve that dilemma, the Citizens’ Initiative Review (CIR). The CIR gathers together a small group of citizens to deliberate about a ballot measure and then pass along their findings for voters to use when making their own decisions. The CIR continues the tradition of experimental democracy, which seeks to improve the ways that citizens govern themselves. The CIR, and deliberative institutions like it, attempt to empower the public by introducing reliable information into political decision making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document