Programme for Applied Ethics Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies NTNU Dragvoll Låven, 7491 Trondheim, Norway

Grand challenges and our obligations to future generations

FINAL CONFERENCE OF THE ISP-FIDE PROJECT

Applied Ethics Technology and Governance

of Health and Natural Resources Project Code: 217426

Funded by The Research Council of Norway

ISP-FIDE Programme

21-22 May 2015, Scandic Nidelven Hotel Trondheim, Norway

Contents Plenary lectures……………...….2

Day 1………………………….2 Day 2………………………….3

Parallel presentations………..…5 Sessions A…………………….5 Sessions B…………………….6 Sessions C…………………….7 Sessions D…………………….8 Sessions E…………………….9 Sessions F…………………..10

Abstracts (alpabethical)……..11 PhD Forum abstracts………….43 PhD Forum programme………47 Schedule of presenters……….48 Programme overview…………50

2

Plenary lectures Day 1. Thursday, 21 May 2015

1. Ruth Macklin (Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York) - Ethical Challenges in Confronting Disasters: Some Lessons Learned 09:30 – 10:15 (Chair: May Thorseth) Plenary Room

Ethical challenges in confronting disasters occur before, during, and after catastrophic events. One challenge is whether and how research can be carried out without delaying or interfering with humanitarian responses. Yet research can provide critical information about preparation for and response to future disasters. Lessons learned from hurricanes, earthquakes, and tsunamis in recent years can provide some guidance.

2. Ole Frithjof Norheim (University of Bergen) - Fair priority setting in

healthcare: from political theory to practice 13:00 – 13:45 (Chair: Berge Solberg) Plenary Room

Norway has a long tradition of systematic priority setting. In November 2014, the third Official Committee on Priority Setting in the Health Sector presented a new, comprehensive framework for setting priorities. This happens at a time when all countries experience increasing demands on their health resources and numerous countries face shrinking budgets. This talk will discuss normative foundations for fair and legitimate priority setting in health

3. Ove Jakobsen (University of Nordland) – Ecological economics – Ideology

or Utopia? 17:30 – 18:15 (Chair: Siri Carson) Plenary Room To illustrate the difference between change within the existing system and more fundamental change I present the concepts ideology and utopia based on the contributions from Karl Mannheim and Paul Ricoeur. Both argue that societal development depends on the existence of utopia. Utopia is the driving force in the change processes in human societies. The first step is recognizing that; “the differential feature of ideology and utopia is that utopia is situationally transcendent while ideology is not” (Ricoeur 1986), and the second step is accepting that; “utopia is fundamentally realizable” (Ricoeur 1986). In a historical perspective utopian descriptions characterize the main problems in the society and function as a beacon light for the change processes. Based on these perspectives I will clarify the differences between green economy and ecological economics.

3

Day 2. Friday, 22 May 2015

4. Kerri Woods (University of Leeds) - Environmental Human Rights and Future Generations 09:00 – 9:45 (Chair: May Thorseth) Plenary Room

Human rights, we are told, are rights that humans have simply in virtue of their humanity. If that is true, then the theories of human rights that we endorse disclose something about what we understand a minimally human life to be, and who we consider to belong within a community of rights-bearers. In this paper I reflect on the implications of these two points for future human beings and environmental human rights. I address the question, when and why do future persons have standing as rights-bearing members of a shared moral community? This question has bearing on, but is not reducible to, Parfit’s much-discussed non-identity problem. The view I defend is that one cannot demonstrate within a formalistic account of rights the moral standing of future persons. Rather, the moral status of future persons depends upon a sense of community, the success or failure of which depends in substantial part upon a political project. The second strand of argument in the paper relates to the question of the character of the environmental rights that we have qua humans which emerges from this political project. The most often endorsed view of environmental human rights defends not a new, distinctive environmental right, but rather, a ‘greening’ of already accepted human rights, whereby environmental degradation is recognised as one of the ‘standard threats’ that may violate human rights to life, health, well-being and so on. Here I argue that in this approach human life is only contingently recognised as being ecologically embedded. Given that human rights express both a sense of a minimally decent life, and thus, implicitly, a vision of what it is to be a human, I argue that human rights theorists miss an important element of the human qua human if they take ecological embeddedness to be contingently rather than necessarily relevant to human rights.

5. Peter-Paul Verbeek (University of Twente) – Google Glass to Sex Selection Chips: Moral Mediation and the Ethics of Technology 12:30 – 13:15 (Chair: Rune Nydal) Plenary Room The ‘mediation approach’ in philosophy of technology has revealed an intrinsic normative dimension of technology. Technologies mediate human interpretations and practices, including moral decisions and actions. Antenatal diagnostic technologies, for instance, help to shape ethical decisions about abortion, just like smart energy meters affect people’s everyday environmental ethics. In this paper, I will investigate how this ‘mediation

4

approach’ can be expanded to play a role in the ethical evaluation of new technologies. In order to do that, I will investigate how technologies do not only have an impact on moral actions and decisions, but also on the normative frameworks we use to assess these very technologies. The frameworks for assessment take shape in interaction with the technologies they are supposed to assess. There is no ‘outside’ of technology from which we can ethically reflect on technology; ethics can only take place ‘from within’ our technologically mediated situation. To investigate this, the paper will explore the moral dimensions of two emerging technologies: Google Glass (which was recently put on hold by Google, but which is likely to be reactivated in the near future), and a lab-on-a-chip technology for sex selection, that is currently being developed at the University of Twente. Both technologies will play significant mediating roles in our normative frameworks, as they are likely to have an impact on our responsibilities and values regarding our offspring, and our ways of engaging in the public sphere. How can the complex interplay between the technological disclosure of reality, the technological mediation of practices, and human moral actions and decisions be understood? And what does this imply for the ethical assessment of technologies, and for the ethics of technology design?

5

Parallel presentations

Parallel sessions A Thursday, 21 May 2015 10:30 – 12:00 A1 (Plenary Room) Chair: May Thorseth

10:30 – 11:00 - Adrian-Paul Iliescu (University of Bucharest) - The Principle of Just Savings and Its Discontents

11:00 – 11:30 - Hilde Bjørkhaug and Heidi Vinge (Centre for Rural Research) - Cultural and economic valuation in the Norwegian debate on agricultural land protection

11:30 – 12:00 - Hin Hoarau Heemstra (University of Nordland) - Innovation for value facilitation in experience tourism: insights from service-dominant logic

A2 (Meeting Room 1) Chair: Rune Nydal

10:30 – 11:00 - Peter Danielson (University of British Columbia) - Adding a Temporal Dimension to Technology Assessment (A2-4)

11:00 – 11:30 - Kjetil Rommetveit (University of Bergen) - Adressing grand challenges through technoscience? (A2-5)

11:30 – 12:00 - Andreas Christiansen (University of Copenhagen) – The moral significance of synthetic biology (A2-6)

A3 (Meeting Room 2) Chair: Siri Carson

10:30 – 11:00 - Magnus Frostenson (Örebro University School of Business) - When the Internet becomes corporate social responsibility: On how the state invents a new CSR issue (A3-7)

11:00 – 11:30 - Haley Knudson and John Eilif Hermansen (NTNU) - Framework and methodology for evaluation and nomination of goods to the WTO Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA): Special focus on environmental goods for developing countries (A3-8)

11:30 – 12:00 - Jacob Dahl Rendtorff (Roskilde University) - Basic Ethical Principles of Corporate Environmental Responsibility - The need for a theoretical re-examination of sustainability in economics and business (A3-9)

6

Parallel sessions B Thursday, 21 May 2015 14:00 – 15:30 B1 (Plenary Room) Chair: Siri Carson

14:00 – 14:30 - Gry Wester (University of Bergen) - The moral significance of the social inequalities in health: Some policy implications (B1-10)

14:30 – 15:00 - Jasper Littmann (University of Kiel) - Antimicrobial resistance and distributive justice (B1-11)

15:00 – 15:30 - John Barugahare (University of Bergen) - Moral Guilt for “Natural Resource Curse” in Low Income Countries: An inquiry into Moral Duties of Victims’ Governments for Intergenerational Equity (B1-12)

B2 (Meeting Room 1) Chair: Rune Nydal

14:00 – 14:30 - Giovanni De Grandis (NTNU) - Grand Challenges as Collective Practical Reason: The Wisdom of Realism (B2-13)

14:30 – 15:00 - Sophia Efstathiou and Bjørn Myskja (NTNU) – Under-standing ecologies of value: the case of seaweed (B2-14)

15:00 – 15:30 - John-Arne Skolbekken (NTNU) – Meaningless numbers? Some reflections on the notion of individual risk (B2-15)

B3 (Meeting Room 2) PhD Forum Session 2 Chair: Allen & Per-Erling

14:00 – 14:30 - Sem de Maagt (Utrecht University) - Reflective Equilibrium and Moral Objectivity

14:30 – 14:45 - Discussion 14:45 – 15:15 - Sveinung Sivertsen (University of Bergen) - Ethical

impartiality, scientific objectivity 14:30 – 14:45 - Discussion

7

Parallel sessions C Thursday, 21 May 2015 15:45 – 17:15 C1 (Plenary Room) Chair: May Thorseth

15:45 – 16:15 - Frida Ngalesoni, George, Amani Mori, Bjarne Robberstad, Ole Frithjof Norheim - Incorporating distributional concerns in recommendations for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Tanzania (C1-16)

16:15 – 16:45 - Lilybeth Centeno-Lumagbas (Free University of Amsterdam) - Rethinking risk factors of non-communicable diseases in some slum communities: through the lens of Globalization (C1-17)

16:45 – 17:15 - Juan Miguel Rey (University of Granada) - Advocacy & Lobbying around tobacco products commercialization: In search of transparency through EU public health policies decisions (C1-18)

C2 (Meeting Room 1) RESET SESSION Chair: Run Nydal

15:45 – 17:15 Presentations on “Emprical Ethics” by members of the Research Group on the Ethos of Technology (RESET)

B3 (Meeting Room 2) PhD Forum Session 3 Chair: Allen & Per-Erling

15:45 – 16:15 - Krister Bykvist (Stockholm University) - ‘They smiled at the good and frowned at the bad’. The fitting attitude analysis of value reconsidered

16:15 – 16:30 - Discussion 16:30 – 17:00 - Ivar Labukt (University of Bergen & University of Tromsø) -

Evolutionary debunking arguments: a threat to egoism or impartialism?

17:00 – 17:15 - Discussion

8

Parallel sessions D Friday, 22 May 2015 10:00 – 11:30 D1 (Plenary Room) Chair: May Thorseth

10:00 – 10:30 - Fei Teng (Utrecht University) - A Confucian version of moral duty to the green future (D1-22)

10:30 – 11:00 - Anastasia Tkalich - Public Reason in Multicultural Conflicts: Global Solution or Ethical Challenge? (D1-23)

11:00 – 11:30 - Lin Olderøien Elvegård (NTNU) – Does the context of professional sports suffer from moral blindness? - Moral, rationality and choosing means for maximizing gains (D1-24)

D2 (Meeting Room 1) Chair: Giovanni de Grandis

10:00 – 10:30 - Clemens Driessen (Wageningen University & Research Centre) - Small solutions for grand challenges: (techno-) ethics as artistic experiment with landscape and skill (D2-25)

10:30 – 11:00 - Kjartan Koch Mikalsen (University of Nordland) – Theses on Freedom, Coercion and Redistribution of Wealth (D2-26)

11:00 – 11:30 - Sofia Moratti (European University Institute, Florence) and Lars Ø. Ursin (NTNU) - Treatment and non-treatment decisions in neonatology: what can we learn from the Dutch experience? (D2-27)

D3 (Meeting Room 2) Chair: Siri Carson

10:00 – 10:30 - Rita D´Oliveira Bouman (NTNU) - Another other side to co-benefits: An ethical reflection on co-benefits in climate change mitigation context (D3-28)

10:30 – 11:00 - Siri Granum Carson (NTNU) – Land grabbing and the ethical investment strategy of the Government Pension Fund – Global (D3-29)

11:00 – 11:30 - Øivind Hagen (BI Norwegian Business School) - The shift from implicit CSR to explicit CSR in the Scandinavian setting - a turn from legislative to normative business regulation? (D3-30)

9

Parallel sessions E Friday, 22 May 2015 13:30 – 15:00 E1 (Plenary Room) Chair: May Thorseth

13:30 – 15:00 - Melina Duarte (University of Tromsø) - For a Global Management of Natural Resources (E1-31)

13:30 – 15:00 - Hermann Køhn Sæther (NTNU) - Is Green Growth an illusion? A quest for a sound solution to the climate crisis (E1-32)

13:30 – 15:00 - Johanna Romare (Linköping University) - What Would a Sustained, Inclusive, and Equitable Economic Growth Be Like? (E1-33)

E2 (Meeting Room 1) Chair: Bjørn Myskja

13:30 – 15:00 - Kristian Alm (BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo) – Advisors co-publishing with the PhD-student in the PhD: plagiarism as ethical challenge (E2-34)

13:30 – 15:00 - Rune Nydal (NTNU) and Berge Solberg (NTNU) - Less serious misconduct in research: a question of quality or ethics? (E2-35)

13:30 – 15:00 - Berge Solberg (NTNU) – Medical research ethics – saving the world or saving the interests of the participants? (E3-36)

E3 (Meeting Room 2) Chair: Siri Carson

13:30 – 15:00 - Harald Stelzer (University of Graz) - The Challenge of Climate Engineering – Saved by Technology? (E3-37)

13:30 – 15:00 - Bjørn Myskja, Siri Carson, and Lars Ursin (NTNU) - Think global, buy national: CSR in the Norwegian food value chain (E3-38)

13:30 – 15:00 - Karin Buhmann (Copenhagen Business School) – Encouraging Arctic Extractives TNCS to contribute towards public policy objectives on sustainable human and environmental development: towards a research agenda (E3 - 39)

10

Parallel sessions F Friday, 22 May 2015 15:15 – 16:45 F1 (Plenary Room) Chair: Rita Bouman

15:15 – 16:45 - Allen Alvarez & May Thorseth (NTNU) - Intergenerational justice and obligations towards future generations: Ethical land use policy (F1-40)

15:15 – 16:45 - Gerhard Bos (Utrecht University) - Is there a relevant gap between us and future people? a human rights approach to long-term responsibility (F1-41)

15:15 – 16:45 - Joachim H. Spangenberg (Sustainable Europe Institute Germany), Malgorzata Dereniowska (Aix-Marseille University), Finn Arler (Aalborg University), and Petter Næss (Norwegian University of Life Sciences) - No Rights for the Future, but Obligations of the Present? Responsibilities of the Present Generations Towards Future Generations (F1-42)

F2 (Meeting Room 1) Chair: Sophia Efstathiou

15:15 – 16:45 - Heidrun Åm (NTNU) - Conditions of Possibility for Translating Responsible Research and Innovation (F2-43)

15:15 – 16:45 - Annamaria Carusi (University of Sheffield) - Co-responsible science & humanities in medicine (F2-44)

15:15 – 16:45 - Matthias Kaiser (University of Bergen) - The ethics of aquaculture in a global food chain (F2-45)

F3 (Meeting Room 2) EBEN Scandinavia Meeting Chair: Siri Carson

15:15 – 16:45 – Meeting with members of EBEN Scandinavia

11

Abstracts (alphabetically arranged)

1. Allen Alvarez & May Thorseth (NTNU) - Intergenerational justice and

obligations towards future generations: Ethical land use policy (F1-40) We propose to review some key philosophical challenges to the intuition that members of the current generation have an obligation to make land use sustainable for the sake of future generations. Should we limit the present generations’ use of land that will reduce their opportunities to increase their welfare in order to benefit future generations who do not yet exist? Which ‘future generations’ do we need to take into account? We shall argue that there is a need to extend the scope beyond national societies, and also beyond human species, i.e. a view that is still anthropocentric but at the same time includes nature as such. Further, we shall argue that our current ethical commitments are internally connected to our obligations towards future generations. We will explore several responses to motivational challenges that undermine any obligation to constrain consumption for the sake of future people (e.g. Parfit's non-identity problem). There is uncertainty as to whether depleting natural resources could really adversely affect future generations in a morally significant way compared to those that would exist if we conserve resources. While some environmentalists dismiss the problem, philosophers (e.g. Arrhenius) and economists (e.g. Howarth) try to solve it. We will address key aspects of both the scope of obligations problem and the motivation problem. Additionally, we will also show some practical implications by trying to answer why and to what extent we need to constrain land use. We propose to analyze the limits to increasing welfare that the present generation should observe in order to save enough for future generations (both their descendants and others).

2. Kristian Alm (BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo) – Advisors co-publishing with the PhD-student in the PhD: plagiarism as ethical challenge (E2-34) At the international scene, politicians confront the scientific world with increased expectations when it comes to the efficiency and documentation of scientific production. Scientists should publish more. This development seems to be closely linked to political discussions about science as a vehicle to solve urgent problems at the international scene (Bader 2014, Nisbet and Markowitz 2015) As a possible obedient answer from the society of researchers the amount of co-publishing is increasing in all academic disciplines the last couple of decades (Puuska et.al. 2014). At the national scene in Norway, we can see traces of this development, as in a mirror. Advisors co-publish with

12

their PhD-students in the PhD more than before in many academic disciplines. This is apparently because the cooperation produce many advantages. The advisor receives an increased salary, meets the demands of his institution, heightens his academic status and strengthens the possibilities for a better career and more substantial financial support to research projects (Schymura and Loeschel 2014). The students receive support in order to write scientifically, reduces the time of the PhD period and are better off to publish in peer-reviewed periodicals. Last, but not least, the PhD might be easier approved because the committee often knows the advisor (Kamler 2008). However, does the development also imply disadvantages? Based on studies on plagiarism (Osbourne and Holland 2009) I want to develop the working-hypothesis that under certain empirical circumstances there is a risk that the advisor receives an undeserved authorship and unfair credit for work he has not done when he co-publishes in the PhD. In order to shape an empirical basis for this hypothesis we have constructed a database that identifies to which degree the main and secondary advisor co-publish with their students in the PhD. The database consists of all the PhDs published between 2000-2014 at Norges Handelshøyskole in Bergen, Økonomisk Insitutt Universitet i Oslo, Handelshøyskolen BI and Psykologisk Insitutt Universitetet i Oslo, 520 in number. I will argue that the empirical findings in the database could support the hypothesis.

3. John Barugahare (University of Bergen) - Moral Guilt for “Natural

Resource Curse” in Low Income Countries: An inquiry into Moral Duties of Victims’ Governments for Intergenerational Equity (B1-12) The concept of «Natural Resource Curse» is neither unfamiliar nor uncommon in discussions regarding the sustainability of peace and development in Low Income Countries (LICs). The concept of intergenerational equity here implies that the existence and persistence of avoidable lack of efficiency and sustainability in natural resource use is a moral wrong of the contemporary generation in relation to future generations. This gives rise to moral obligations for intergenerational equity borne by the current generation. Whereas in the case of High Income Countries (HICs) the attribution of responsibilities and moral obligations is clearer and straight forward in their domestic contexts, in the case of LICs this is a complex calling for critical inquiry. More often than not the culpability of the “natural resource curse” within LICs is imputed to HIC governments and their multinational companies and cooperation. Whereas this attribution is not wrong and, therefore, a necessary factor in understanding the problem at hand, a critical study of this problem suggests that the role of the outsiders in-itself is a not sufficient factor in explaining and fixing the plight of future generations in LICs. The assertion defended in this paper is that an inquiry

13

into the victims’ governments’ moral responsibility and the resulting moral obligations for intergenerational equity in natural resource use will make a significant difference in the governance and use of natural resources in LICs.

4. Hilde Bjørkhaug and Heidi Vinge (Centre for Rural Research) - Cultural and economic valuation in the Norwegian debate on agricultural land protection (A2-2) Available land for grain-production in Norway is about 1% of the total land area and one third of the total productive agricultural land. On the one hand available grain area has become a determining measure in the Norwegian food security and food sovereignty discourse. It is seen as a major challenge to sustain or increase this area (and its productivity). On the other hand financial interests represented by actors such as private equity and hedge funds, property developers and industry are seeking easy and secure objects for investment and development. A decision to secure agricultural land is value based, both culturally and economically, and open for negotiations. In this paper recent development on the status of agricultural land in Norway, for food, finance –or both, is discussed in relation to cultural and economic valuation. Analysis leading up to the discussions is based on a broad range of empirical data such as interviews with stakeholders on agricultural land issues, media texts and public reports and policy documents. Findings suggest that while speculation in agricultural land for long has been protected in both legislation and in the public opinion, the current liberal government is seeking areas for deregulation. Agriculture and land use policies are among targeted areas for liberalisation and with this the position of food production in Norway is weakened.

5. Gerhard Bos (Utrecht University) - Is there a relevant gap between us and future people? a human rights approach to long-term responsibility (F1-41) In this paper it will be argued that, from the perspective of human rights, there can in practice be no relevant distinction between securing the rights of present and securing the rights that future people will have. This argument addresses the worry that the temporal distance between us and future people, implies unsurmountable theoretical, institutional, epistemic and motivational challenges. These challenges include the non-existence, non-identity, non-reciprocity, the pure intergenerational problem, the problem of representation etc. It will be argued that, seen from the perspective of human rights, any long-term responsibility there is would have to be framed as a state’s duty to secure the human rights of its citizens. Securing human rights for its citizens,

14

it would be problematic for a state to secure human rights of present while neglecting the future rights of its future citizens. For as state to secure human rights in real life conditions where individuals live together but are outlived by their successors, depends on securing human rights for its citizens both present and future. Currently living have a increasing motive to demand the state to do so, the more human rights of their future compatriots will be under pressure from future resource scarcity or pollution. However, in the context of human rights states are authorized and should be held responsible to secure human rights for present and future citizens, whether or not the current set of citizens acts of this motive. What it takes to secure human rights for future citizens is an important question that requires knowledge and a normative assessment of risks and unknowns, but one that should be asked only on the recognition of a long-term responsibility to secure human rights of future people.

6. Rita D´Oliveira Bouman (NTNU) - Another other side to co-benefits: An ethical reflection on co-benefits in climate change mitigation context (D3-28)

Climate change mitigation is often associated with technologies and policies aiming to diminish the human impacts which cause the disturbance in the normal pattern of global climate. The debate around this concept focuses usually on the modification of courses of action regarding the activities that most contribute to the phenomenon of climate change. Such analyses are directed both to human activities that are responsible for global warming effect and also to the ones which may prevent and/ or mitigate the changes in the global climate pattern. Nevertheless, in recent years, there has been a growing interest in understanding and quantifying the additional benefits that may arise when and if some mitigation policies are set in motion.

Many contexts (e.g. industrial parks, agricultural areas) have been stage for climate mitigation plans and actions but urban settings have been privileged scenarios for such policies and technologies. There are different reasons that make metropolis interesting examples in climate mitigation framework, and a particular sort of governance is one of those important aspects. A special combination of social-economic and political characteristics favours the implementation in cities, of the boldest strategies in mitigation strategy history.

Taking this into consideration, the presentation’s goal is to reflect about moral consequences and dilemmas coming from specific urban climate mitigation actions that were clearly influenced by co-benefits rationale. The starting point of this analysis is the comparison between two iconic political initiatives undertaken in Europe, regarding urban transportation. Both of them have had the objective of diminishing greenhouse gases (GHG) emission,

15

comprising somehow similar co-benefits but with different approaches. Because co-benefits is still an evolving concept with particular meanings according to the referral context, some further examples are given, within climate change mitigation literature, to better clarify what is meant in the case of this paper. The following chapter deals more closely with the moral angle of co-benefits rationale that is subjacent to both aforementioned initiatives. The goal is to reveal hidden value choices and ethical implications. At the same time, strengths and limitations of such approach to climate change mitigation are demonstrated. Since the debate over the added value of some climate change mitigation strategies is so rich and to make the case more comprehensive, additional examples of co-benefits are cited to show that the same moral questions are present in other situations. Finally, we draw some conclusions with reference to value conflicts and fairness within co-benefits discourse.!

7. Karin Buhmann (Copenhagen Business School) – Encouraging Arctic Extractives TNCS to contribute towards public policy objectives on sustainable human and environmental development: towards a research agenda (E3 - 39) With the economic opportunities created by climate change, Arctic states encounter substantial environmental and social risks in relation to natural resource extraction. They also enjoy opportunities to benefit from lessons in the Global South as well as Global North to turn resources into a blessing rather than a curse. Natural resource exploitation in the Arctic does not generally encounter the problems associated with weak public governance that have marred several resource-rich countries elsewhere in the world and led to calls for CSR as private governance. Taking an approach to CSR as being economic organisations’ impact on society, this paper posits that in Arctic states CSR offers interesting potential for public regulators to steer private/public-private resource exploitation towards increased contributions to public sustainability and welfare state objectives. The significance of CSR policies and practices as private governance modalities towards risk management and as competition parameters combine with normative guidance based on CSR norms (e.g. the UN Global Compact, OECD’s Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the UN Guidelines on Business and Human Rights). Focusing on debates concerning resource extraction operations in Greenland and the pertinent policy framework, this paper discusses the potential which CSR may hold as a governance modality for public regulators to encourage contributions of the private sector, in particular extractives industry operators, towards sustainable Arctic development. The presentation outlines a potential research agenda to combine private and

16

public governance of natural resources for the purposes of sustainable development in the Arctic.

8. Siri Granum Carson (NTNU) – Land grabbing and the ethical investment strategy of the Government Pension Fund – Global (D3-29) The Norwegian Government Pension Fund – Global (GPFG) is the largest sovereign wealth fund (SWF) in the world. In this paper, the debate concerning GPFGs investments in companies accused of land grabbing will serve as a case in light of which I review the basic economic and ethical principles of the GPFG. The research question for this paper is: Can and should the ethical investment strategy of the GPFD specifically address the topic of land grabbing?

The ethical investment practices of the GPFG have for several reasons – not least due to the sheer size of the fund – attracted international attention. During the decade following the implementation of the ethical guidelines in 2004, the public debate has continued, both concerning their financial soundness, their moral justification, the extent of constraints, and the “ethical tools” put into use (e.g. exclusion vs. dialogue with companies). In this paper I focus on a small section of this debate, the part concerning investments in companies accused of land grabbing, in order to identify and discuss certain problematic aspects of the ethical investment strategy of the GPFG. Through investments in companies renting or buying agricultural land, often in vulnerable areas, GPFG is arguably profiting from so-called land grabbing. The question under exploration in this paper is whether it is feasible to include land grabbing as a criteria for exclusion from the portfolio of the GPFG, or other strategies of ethical investment strategies, specifically through active ownership. A division is drawn between “narrow” and “broad” investment ethics, i.e. between 1) following ethical guidelines and 2) taking on a social and/or environmental responsibility to contribute to sustainable development. On basis of the debate concerning land grabbing, the policies and advice of the GPFG and the Council of Ethics are evaluated according to this distinction.

9. Annamaria Carusi (University of Sheffield) - Co-responsible science &

humanities in medicine (F2-44)

Medical humanities is a growing field in many European and North American contexts, with several new centres and dedicated teaching programmes. Traditionally, medical humanities has concentrated on aspects of medicine such as medical ethics and patient experience. Currently medical humanities is expanding into new domains – such as medical science and new technologies – and developing new approaches, perspectives and theories,

17

such as critical medical humanities1. This is a development of medical humanities that is currently being formed, and this presentation forms part of a broader endeavour to shape the field. It focuses in particular on the confluence of two trends of medical humanities towards consideration of medical science and research as well as medical practice and experience, and the towards to a critical medical humanities. This confluence is itself due to a crossing over between medical scientific understandings of disease and treatment, and humanities and social science understandings of the person, societies and cultures. To take just two examples: genomics and neuroscience both have implications for human self-understandings, which call for engagement from social sciences and humanities not only in terms of dealing with the ‘impacts’ of science, but also in terms of engaging with the scientific processes and practices which give rise to such implications in the first place.

Three different ways of inter-relating medical sciences and humanities are discussed: • ‘critical’ in the sense of critical neuroscience: that is, a collaboration of

humanities and science, which is does not imply an external critical or uncritical stance of neuroscience on the part of the humanities, but instead aims at an engaged constructive critique working alongside neurosciences in order to achieve an account of human being that is not entirely scientistically driven, but which includes humanities perspectives within it;2

• ‘affirmative’ in the sense of Nikolas Rose, that is, forging a relationship between the social and human sciences, and the life sciences, that attempts to affirm the openings towards the social and human sciences that already exist in the life sciences, and the openings towards the life sciences that are already in the social and human sciences, as ‘sciences of the living’:3

• ‘co-responsible’, inspired and informed by the previous two, but which develops further the extent to which it is possible for different forms of humanities research and practice to be active in forging a domain in participation with medical sciences and practice.

1!See!for!example!Whitehead!and!Woods!(forthcoming)!Edinburgh*Companion*to*the*Critical*Medical*Humanities.!University!of!Edinburgh!Press.!!2!Choudhury!and!Slaby!(2012)Critical*Neuroscience:*A*Handbook*of*the*Social*and*Cultural*Contexts*of*Neuroscience,!Blackwell!Publishing.!3!Nikolas!Rose!(2012)!‘The!Human!Sciences!in!a!Biological!Age’,!*Institute*for*Culture*and*Society*Occasional*Paper*3.1!!

18

10. Lilybeth Centeno-Lumagbas (Free University of Amsterdam) - Rethinking risk factors of non-communicable diseases in some slum communities: through the lens of Globalization (C1-17)

Noncommunicable Diseases (NCDs) are set to overtake infectious diseases as the primary cause of mortality and morbidity across the globe. World Health Organization categorizes cardiovascular diseases, cancer, chronic respiratory diseases, and diabetes as falling under NCDs. NCDs are diseases of long duration and slow progression. People who suffer from NCDs are burdened with long periods of disability and continued dwindling quality of life prior to their demise. This situation is further aggravated by the fact that most low-middle income countries are inadequately ready to face the challenges brought by the epidemic of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). For a period, NCDs are considered as the disease of affluence. This condition has dire consequences. Since, the status of poor people who are suffering from NCDs and are living in poverty stricken slum communities have not been given significant consideration. In fact, there is still a pervasive belief that people in slum communities do not suffer from NCDs in the same severity as that of the middle and upper class. On the other hand, if they suffer, it is because they have embraced the western lifestyle.

Globalization plays a crucial role in both the epidemic of NCDs and accelerated slum development. It is argued that as the economic benefits of globalization continues, slum formation will remain unabated and while in slums, the ‘common way of life’ is the western lifestyle4. Therefore, it increases slum dwellers’ chances of acquiring NCDs. However, is this really the case? With this question, a study on the issue of risk factors of NCDs in some slum communities in Chennai was conducted. The study is significant, as it will assist in knowing the prevalence of NCDs in informal settlements. And at the same time, it will help in determining whether known NCD risk factors work to the same extent in slum communities as assumed. Conducting the study in some slum communities in India and using mixed methods in the data collection, it is observed that i. Western lifestyle is not pervasive in some slum communities. In fact,

there is a ‘faithful’ adherence to cultural practices and traditional behaviors in slums. It means that while slum communities do not downplay the influence of McDonalds and sedentary behavior attributed to the western lifestyle, culture and tradition are the more significant factors affecting their health behaviors.

ii. Globalization is not only considered as vector of western lifestyle, but it is also their mechanism with which to present their ‘own’ lifestyles. It

4!Western!lifestyle!is!characterized!by!(1)!western!diet,!which!is!meatQsweet!diet!(e.g.!fries,!burgers,!pizza,!dips,!and!fried!foods)!(2)!sedentary!behavior!and!(3)!lack!of!exercise.!!

19

implies that existing NCD risk factors in the slums can be better understood by looking at the links and connections made in the encounter with different cultures and traditions within the condition of contemporary globalization.

iii. Globalization and NCD risk factors in the context of slum communities challenge conventional approach and explanations to NCD risk factors.

11. Andreas Christiansen (University of Copenhagen) – The moral significance

of synthetic biology (A2-6) A recent paper by Douglas, Powell and Savulescu5 argues that the most common arguments against synthetic biology (SB) succeed in showing that SB is morally significant. Moral significance here requires that there are reasons not to engage in SB that do not also apply to earlier, related practices that we are not disposed to be sceptical of. I argue that this conception of moral significance is too narrow, since it relies on problematic assumptions about the functioning of reasons – in particular, on the assumption that if a feature F is true of a practice that we accept, then F cannot be a reason against SB. I show that this assumption is false under a number of circumstances. On the basis of this more nuanced conception of moral significance, I re-examine the common arguments against SB, especially those concerning risk/uncertainty, objectionable attitudes to nature and the value of life.

12. Peter Danielson (University of British Columbia) - Adding a Temporal Dimension to Technology Assessment (A2-4) In this paper, we present evidence for change in evaluations over a short period of time. For the past six years using our N-Reasons platform, we have challenged groups of participants to evaluate a range of robotic technologies. While our intention was to fill in the social dimension, as well as enrich our qualitative understanding of conflicting evaluations, our quantitative data allows us to study change in evaluations as well. We sketch our methods and then show that the trajectory of judgments over time is not simple – we don’t simply get used to technologies (and evaluate them more favorably over time) or tired or them. Instead, different technologies age differently.

5!Douglas,!Thomas;!Powell,!Russell!and!Savulescu,!Julian!(2013):!Is!the!creation!of!artificial!life!morally!significant?!Studies*in*the*History*and*Philosophy*of*Biological*and*Biomedical*Sciences*44!(pp.!688Q696)!

20

13. Giovanni De Grandis (NTNU) - Grand Challenges as Collective Practical Reason: The Wisdom of Realism (B2-13) Grand Challenges are an increasingly popular banner for promoting goal-driven research that addresses the pressing problems of our time from climate change to food security, from the containment of healthcare costs to tackling antibiotic resistance, from unregulated urbanisation to poverty. It is now largely agreed that in order to contribute to address urgent social problems research has to become transdisciplinary and integrate different types of knowledge. I argue that taking Grand Challenges seriously requires us to see them as a form of collective practical reason and thus to develop a view of integration that is not exclusively dominated by epistemological worries and that includes informal types of knowledge (e.g. local knowledge and practical knowledge), intellectual virtues like imagination and sound judgments, as well as practical skills like phronesis (wisdom) and metis (resourcefulness, opportunism). This is what I call practical integration: a regulative ideal that is not fully attainable. It is also a sobering and realist ideal because it helps us in seeing the delusive nature of the quest for scientific solutions and technological fixes. The very nature of some of the components of the integrative mix makes it unlikely that practical integration could be achieved through following formal methods or routinized procedures. I therefore recommend a framework based on the interrelations between Values, Institutions and Knowledge (the VIK framework). This framework has been inspired by the analysis of some ante litteram examples of Grand Challenges—Public Health in early Victorian Britain and Town Planning in post WWII Britain. The VIK framework can be used both as an analytical tool for understanding cases of successful or failed integration, and as a practical inspiration in organising and bringing together research and social action. The ideal of practical integration and the VIK framework have important implications for the role of ethics in Grand Challenges and transdisciplinary research. On the one hand seeing Grand Challenges as instances of collective practical reason stresses they are essentially political endeavours motivated by strong value assumptions and judgements. On the other hand, it advocates a realist, contextualised and pragmatic view of the role of ethics, whose task is configured as an analysis of values aiming at achieving the broadest dynamic equilibrium between a plurality of competing values. The pursuit of this bottom-up normative approach calls for a combination of descriptive and critical ethical analysis. The corollary of this approach is that the normative force of values and principles does not derive from abstract models but from featuring in feasible plans of actions and scenarios. The general lesson is that our capacity for rational collective action has multiple limits, but that nonetheless a commitment to modest realism offers the better chances for

21

removing the worse injustices and building up our capabilities for problem-coping.

14. Clemens Driessen (Wageningen University & Research Centre) - Small

solutions for grand challenges: (techno-) ethics as artistic experiment with landscape and skill (D2-25)

Climate change, dwindling natural resources, environmental degradation, global inequality; When we think of the role of ethics in relation to this type of pressing global concerns it is tempting to think big. Formulated as ‘grand challenges’ –which are grand due to their global scale but also for being highly challenging– these call on us to radically rethink existing practices of consumption, production, investment and innovation. However, in this presentation I will argue that there is a danger in conceiving these overwhelming challenges as requiring grand, overarching solutions. It seems likely that we need to rethink both the institutions that got us on a path to destroy the planet and exploit others, as well as to rethink our conception of ethics and how that informs and motivates moral subjects. But does this necessarily mean we should only ‘think big’, by developing generic ethical arguments that should guide a global transition towards a sustainable and socially just society? Implementing grand solutions and gearing ethics towards informing these may make us fall into the modernist trap that James Scott described as ‘seeing like a state’: (which I would translate as being) without an eye for social dynamics, historically grown relations, place based characteristics, or personal and communal experiences. This presentation explores an alternative mode of conceiving of ethics, by proposing a set of contemporary artistic practices as models of multifaceted technological, social and moral experimentation. Reviewing work by artists Henriette Waal (‘the outdoor brewery’) and Renzo Martens (his Congolese cocoa gentrification project), a model of ethics emerges that is a matter of reimagining social relations and material practices on the ground, in a hands on manner. Waal’s work proposes to ‘taste the landscape’ after re-appropriating traditional modes of water purification. Martens’ project aims to connect the production of meaning of the contemporary art world to issues of global justice, and thereby offers another way of combing the development and exchange of skills and a reworking of the meaning of a productive landscape These artistic experiments may offer a new take on technology and its normative dimensions, by looking at how things (such as technologies) are positioned in space (which is always physical and cultural) and how they feature in relation to us, how our bodies learn to appropriate them and craft them.

22

This view of the normative dimensions of socio-technical practices thus emphasize landscape and skill as an entry into re-conceiving of our relation to environmental concerns and global justice. Landscape and skill are both notions that combine materiality and subjectivity, embodiment and meaning. And they can be considered primary aspects of our cultural heritage – and as such the original way in which our obligations towards ‘future generations’ were conceived: as developing and handing over embodied modes of living in a place - a place that now has become a potential network of globally interconnected places. Gearing a philosophy of technology to skilful engagement with the world around us – and the myriad ways in which that can be connected to faraway places such as a Congolese cocoa plantation, may offer new modes of conceiving a tentative, experimental and exciting process of ethical learning.

15. Melina Duarte (University of Tromsø) - For a Global Management of Natural Resources (E1-31) Who should govern the use and control of natural resources today? The use and control of natural resources are still governed by the nation-states. In the past, the nation-states acquired this prerogative as a right when presenting themselves as sovereign entities. They then became carriers of territorial rights, meant to protect the sectional integrity of the sovereign nation-states. With time, at least, two elements of territorial rights seemed to merge and become inseparable: the right to jurisdiction and the right to use and control natural resources. However, these rights are different from each other since the former is a right exercised over persons, and the latter is a right exercised over things; they should be treated separately. This move allows me to discuss the governance of the natural resources without having to philosophically compromise the whole structure of the nation-states and question their value as such. Nation-states are presented as collectives formed by the people and their representatives. Representatives, however, are subjected to govern according to a specific agenda, motivated by a party or, sometimes, self-interests. In low-income or developing countries without much political transparency, representatives find an easy door to corruption and manage to treat natural resources as their private property, depriving the people they represent of their fair share. It is like being betrayed by your own lawyer: you delegate your power and end up with nothing. In order to avoid the unjust control of natural resources, I would like to discuss in this presentation the alternative global forms of resource management and ownership. I will argue that while nationals and residents should keep the collective ownership of natural resources within the states’ territories, these resources should be managed globally. Global management would not only be more just for nationals and residents, vulnerable when subjected to corrupt representatives,

23

but also more just to people in general, as to residents in areas accidentally deprived of resources.

16. Sophia Efstathiou and Bjørn Myskja (NTNU) – Understanding ecologies of

value: the case of seaweed (B2-14) This paper offers a history and ethnography of industrial seaweed harvesting undertaken along the coast of Norway since the early 20th century. Through this paper we argue that the process of adding commercial, economic value to seaweed as a source of alginates (with applications in food and drug industries) comes with a re-valuation of seaweed as something other than sea weeds: seaweed becomes rather appreciated anew as a fruit of the sea; as kelp forests offering natural habitats for fish and other sea life, already valued by the fishing industry in Norway; as a natural organism of value in itself; as of value for scientific research and innovation; and as a national resource.

We argue that besides the marine ecology of these plants industrial biotechnology impacts an ecology of values around seaweed. By the metaphor of “an ecology of values” we mean to explicitly open up our understanding of living spaces, or “oikoi” to consider the moral and societal environments that living things occupy. Questions about an ecology of value consider processes of value-creation and value-obstruction that come bound up with the possibility of socio-technical or natural transformation of the material parts of living ecosystems.

Our hypothesis is that the practices of commercial and research sea-weed harvesting by sea-bottom trawling made it possible to value seaweed, and value it multiply. They brought attention to the value of sea-weed as a material value of the sea. But, with increasing automation of harvesting methods, attention turned to an appreciation of the competing economic value of seaweed as a fish habitat, and to the non-economic value of seaweed both as source of human appreciation and as a value in itself. Research into the utilisation, cultivation and processing of alginate-based materials made it possible to further appreciate seaweed as of value for scientific research and understanding. Finally, with the transition of the industry from private, but Norwegian, to public, to in the early 2000s, private and American-owned, the economic and symbolic value of the sea-weed as a national resource sharpened into focus. We complement the historical analysis with an in situ study of seaweed harvesting and processing undertaken by FMC Food and Nutrition.

24

17. Lin Olderøien Elvegård (NTNU) – Does the context of professional sports suffer from moral blindness? - Moral, rationality and choosing means for maximizing gains (D1-24) It seems difficult to decide whether some of the means for maximizing gains in sports are morally acceptable or not. Where the limit should be set for when a mean should be illegal is not easy to give an immediate answer to. An example is training in artificial high hemisphere. On which grounds may this be claimed morally acceptable or not? As long as this is a legal way of maximizing the level of oxygen capacity, the moral debate most likely will be absent. Would someone take the chance of defining height houses as morally unacceptable? Who are willing to risk one’s own interest and chances of winning by crossing this fine moral line and putting at risk their own chances of winning? Another more serious example is the football championship in Quarter and the cynical exploitation of foreign workers. Compared to exploitation or corruption in sports height houses are not a very serious example, but are still a part of the same debate. Where the limits should be set for when means for winning are morally unacceptable take the form of a prisoner’s dilemma. What rationally and morally premises allows human rights violations, corruption, doping or means in the legal borderline to happen? Are the moral and legal borders of what the participants in the context of professional sports are willing to accept a product of constant development, and a continuous bargaining on strategy? Does this situation give the participants the opportunity to choose moral blindness? As a point of departure, I use Rawls theoretical experiment “the original position”. My aim is to discuss how the context of sports construct a morally neutral position, as a known “veil of ignorance” as a choice of moral blindness in bargaining on the use of means for winning. I argue that the participant in the context of professional sports take the position of moral blindness as a strategy for increasing the chances of winning.

18. Magnus Frostenson (Örebro University School of Business) - When the Internet becomes corporate social responsibility: On how the state invents a new CSR issue (A3-7) The purpose of the paper is to show how a technological means of communication, the Internet, is framed as a CSR issue by the state and related to the responsibilities of business. Informed by the literature on institutional work, the paper also develops a model of the creation of a phenomenon as a ‘new’ CSR issue. The paper focuses on the Swedish government’s initiative to clarify how human rights are applied and enacted with regard to the Internet. Human rights, the government argues, are highly relevant in the discussion about the

25

Internet, in particular freedom of speech and the right to privacy. The government has established that human rights should also be an Internet relevant aspect from a responsibility point of view. The ambition of the state, in this case, is to strengthen the international framework for human rights and the Internet, an ambition that has had both national and international consequences. Based on a Swedish initiative, freedom of the Internet is now included in the recently revised OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises. In addition, the Swedish government works together with relevant businesses and other organizations to establish voluntary codes of conduct for guidance. This is an example of how care for human rights is extended to a new phenomenon, a means of communication, where it raises questions of how to enforce and implement rights following complex technological development. Limitations, surveillance, filtration, and control, the government argues, may hamper human rights on the Internet. Clarifying how human rights should be applied and interpreted in an Internet context is essential, the government claims. In doing so, the government points to the responsibility of business. Companies are obliged to follow laws where they operate, but they are also responsible for not acting in a way that undermines or contradicts human rights. How companies can and should behave with regard to the issues and challenges that the Internet brings about becomes relevant from a responsibility and technological development perspective. In the paper, the construction of the Internet as a CSR issue is described. Through an analysis informed by institutional work theory, generalization is possible and a model is developed that exhibits the nature and characteristics of a rising CSR issue, which is also possible to use to understand how other issues are made CSR relevant in a political and business context.

19. Øivind Hagen (BI Norwegian Business School) - The shift from implicit

CSR to explicit CSR in the Scandinavian setting - a turn from legislative to normative business regulation? (D3-30) he deregulation trend in Western economies accelerating through the 1980s and 1990s (Hertz, 2001), and the growing organizational expressiveness starting to become visible in the late 1990s (Hagen, 2009), indicate an antagonistic altering of the premises for the firm-society relation. On the one hand, political liberalization, market orientation and self-regulation imply more latitude for private companies. The number of governmental institutions overseeing commercial actors have ben built down, and there is a shift from ‘hard’ to ‘soft’ governance (Vogel, 2005) . At the same time increasingly more of the tasks in society are left to private actors with the argument that the private sector is more efficient than the public one in exploiting scarce

26

resources. This deregulation trend implies a loosening of the firm-society relation (Carson & Hagen, 2014).

On the other hand, we see a more recent development in which companies use a growing amount of resources on trying to influence and manage how they are perceived. Increasingly more of companies’ assets are tied up in symbolic and intangible assets like reputation and brand. Companies therefor expose identity through image-building, storytelling, core values and corporate social responsibility. The exposure of values and identity create clear expectations of corporate conduct at a range of stakeholders. This growing organizational expressiveness implies a limitation of latitude and a tightening of the firm-society relation (Carson, Hagen & Sethi, 2013). The ambition of this paper is to analyze how these two antagonistic trends - deregulation and expressiveness – and the interplay between them, alter the premises for the firm-society relation. Are the firm-society bindings loosened or tightened following the deregulations and the increasing organizational expressiveness?

The issue is discussed in light of the development in Scandinavia, and particularly Norway, for the last decades. The region has a distinct political economy with unique characteristics described as “the Scandinavian model” (Midttun, 2013). There are several unique traits of this model: The Scandinavian countries are welfare states with a highly developed safety net for their citizens, free health care- and educational system, and an accordingly high level of taxation. Historically the three countries have been an exception of the dichotomy view on governance as either free market or planned economy, with their ability to combine free market principles with a planned economy. The countries have also had relatively low unemployment rate, particularly Norway, and the Scandinavian economies proved robust during the turmoil following the financial crises in 2008-2009 (Economist, 2013). The welfare model has, however, come under critique. With an aging population, a larger part of young people in the population and increased immigration, the welfare systems have proved expensive to maintain and in many ways inefficient. The Scandinavian countries have therefor been heavily influenced by the political liberalization wind sweeping across Western economies from the 1980s and onwards and the following deregulation processes. Politicians advocating this view have argued that particularly the Scandinavian countries with their high level of taxation and mature welfare systems were ready for efficiency improvements.

Following the wave of liberalizations and deregulations, we have also experienced a growing organizational expressiveness in the Scandinavian economies (Røvik, 2007; Hagen, 2009). Among other things, this growing expressiveness is visible in the shift from implicit CSR to explicit CSR (Carson, Hagen and Sethi, 2013; Matten and Moon, 2008). In line with Matten and Moon I argue that in thoroughly regulated economies like

27

Scandinavia historically has been, legitimacy follows from following the law, while inn the present deregulated and more expressive economy public acceptance and license to operate takes active reflection and exposure of what legitimacy means and demands. In this paper I aim to investigate whether this shift from implicit CSR to explicit CSR could be described as a shift from legal bindings to normative bindings, and to discuss implications of the transition from legal bindings to normative bindings. References Carson, S.G. & Ø. Hagen (2014): “Loosening or tightening the bindings? Renegotiating the social contract through deregulation and organizational expressiveness”. Focus Journal, 9 (2), pp.42-50 (ISSN: 0973 – 9165) Carson, S.G., Ø. Hagen & S.P. Sethi (2013): "From implicit to explicit CSR in a Scandinavian context: The cases of HÅG and Hydro”. Journal of Business Ethics (DOI10.1007/s10551-013-1791-2) Hagen, Ø. (2009): Do Socially Responsible Brands Lead to Socially Responsible Companies? Understanding Change in Expressive Organizations. Trondheim: NTNU (doctoral dissertation 2009:51). Hertz, N. 2001. The Silent Takeover. Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy. London: Heinemann. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). ‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424. Midttun, A. (Ed.). (2013). CSR and beyond. A Nordic perspective. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Røvik, K.A. (2007). Trender og translasjoner. Ideer som former det 21. århundrets organisasjon. [Trends and translations. Ideas that shape the 21st century’s organization.] Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. The Economist (2013). The Nordic countries: The next supermodel. Special report. The economist. 2 February Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: the potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.

20. Hin Hoarau Heemstra (University of Nordland) - Innovation for value

facilitation in experience tourism: insights from service-dominant logic (A1-3)

This paper discusses how tourism-experience businesses can innovate to improve the facilitation of value co-creation. It is argued that if the service-dominant worldview is adopted, innovativeness and creativity become prevalent in this sector. In recent years, service-dominant logic has gained increased attention in both marketing and management research due to its focus on co-creation. Based on the idea that characteristics of products and services influence the unevenness of co-creation processes across different tourism sectors, this paper explores the meaning of service-dominant logic for innovation in experience tourism. Drawing on existing research and the example of whale watching as a form of nature-based experience tourism, the article discusses the relevance and usefulness of applying service-dominant logic to experience tourism research and practice. Insights from service-dominant logic can have important implications for innovation in tourism because they can affect the strategies of tourism managers for increasing co-creation and tourist participation in their proposed activities. The paper proposes and discusses innovation principles and guidelines based on

28

service-dominant logic and, as such, can be useful for both researchers and practitioners. Key words: Service-dominant logic, co-creation, innovation experience-based tourism, nature-based tourism.

21. Adrian-Paul Iliescu (University of Bucharest) - The Principle of Just Savings and Its Discontents (A1-1)

The aim of this talk is to search for the hidden premises of Rawls’s view of a Just Savings-duty towards future generations and to criticize them. I start from the remark that the Principle of Just Savings appears as a somewhat ‘artificial’ addition to Rawls’s principles of justice (some of the shortcomings of its addition to the famous principles of social justice have not gone unnoticed). My first question is what are the reasons for taking into account future generations in a theory of social justice at all; analysis can show, I submit, that, per se, Rawls’s justification of its addition (facilitating the persistence of just institutions) does not hold water. I then test the working hypothesis that Rawls’s analogy between a just society and a family (The Theory of Justice, $17) might explain his inclination to add the principle of just savings to the other principles of justice. I argue that this analogy is not convincing enough. I also examine critically the Rawls’s ‘two stages’-approach to the application of the Just Savings principle, and argue that it is based on an oversimplified view of the difficulties encountered by societies engaged in the attempt to establish just institutions (especially the difficulty to satisfy basic needs of the present generation). I conclude that the principle of Just Savings is indeed an artificial addition to Rawls’s idea of social justice.

22. Matthias Kaiser (University of Bergen) - The ethics of aquaculture in a global food chain (F2-45)

23. Asle Kiran (NTNU) – RESET Session on Empirical Ethics (C2)

See RESET abstract

24. Haley Knudson and John Eilif Hermansen (NTNU) - Framework and methodology for evaluation and nomination of goods to the WTO Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA): Special focus on environmental goods for developing countries (A3-8)

The paper presents the design, analyses and results of a methodological assessment and nomination of goods for the ongoing WTO Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA) negotiations. The purpose of the EGA is to reduce tariffs on identified environmental goods and technologies in order to promote

29

international sustainable production, consumption and development. The methodology presented is based on multi criteria decision making (MCDM) tools and management. The Norwegian Government’s focus on supporting the developing world has guided their international policy over the past years. This study is therefore commissioned by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs to ensure that goods of particular relevance to developing countries will be discussed in the EGA. Environmental goods specifically relevant to developing countries fall mainly into the categories of sanitation, waste management, water supply and availability, and renewable energy access. Increased trade and implementation of such environmental goods and technologies is meant to strengthen public health and capabilities on the household and community levels, based on local and renewable energy sources – empowering development while reducing GHGs. The methodology combines two approaches in its assessment of EGs for nomination to the EGA. Goods must first be analyzed and assessed for their impact on the environment and climate change mitigation, and second, be designed for to meet basic needs in developing countries. Using a MCDM approach, criteria to evaluate EGs are identified based on the following objectives and relevant research: • Goods not already on the APEC list of EGs – because the EGA has

already selected them for their agreement, • Goods that contribute to the reduction of climate gases and/or the ten

EGA environmental product categories such as air pollution control, solid and hazardous waste management, and environmentally preferable products, and

• Goods that help to meet basic needs in developing countries – developing a needs-based approach based on access to food and water, waste management and sanitation, energy access and related health and safety issues.

When a good benefits the environment, either directly or comparatively, and can be applied to solve issues and meet needs in developing contexts, it fits the general criteria of the study. The report identifies development EGs that make up the core of the study. They are evaluated across the environmental and development criteria, for their positive and negative contributions to each, and described in the text and in a summarizing factsheet. The presentation of development goods includes the Harmonized System (HS) six-digit subheading code and description, a description of content and use, and relevant Norwegian producers, sellers and traders, if applicable. 15 development EGs are identified in the report:

30

• Goods for waste management and sanitation: composting toilets, vacuum toilets, landfill liners and covers, and containers for waste management and sanitation purposes,

• Goods for drinking water delivery and storage: hand pumps, RE powered pumps, drinking water taps and valves, and flexible storage tanks for drinking and potable water,

• Goods for cleaner and renewable energy: Fresnel reflectors for solar energy, biomass boilers, hydraulic turbines, and

• Environmentally preferable goods: solar stoves and cookers, solar and other RE powered lamps, and building and construction products of sustainable natural materials.

The selection and discussion of development EGs will aid the Norwegian Delegation in promoting EGs that help to meet human development needs in the EGA negotiations, and will continue Norway’s contribution to global sustainable development. The discussion will include aspects of the asymmetric positions between industrialized and developing countries, along with the implications in relation to the upcoming UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the climate agreement attached to UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

25. Jasper Littmann (University of Kiel) - Antimicrobial resistance and distributive justice (B1-11)

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) presents one of the major threats for public health in the 21st century, with a predicted death toll of 300 million by 2050.1 It is increasingly gaining public attention; most recently following the World Health Organization’s renewed warning and the publication of the US President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology’s ‘Report On Combating Antimicrobial Resistance’.2,3 In order to preserve the effectiveness of antibiotics, their use must be drastically reduced.4 Current strategies to combat AMR focus primarily on the development of new classes of antibiotics, however in this paper it will be argued that such an approach ultimately fails to acknowledge the nature of the problem of drug resistance. It will be argued that the use of antimicrobial agents presents a distributive dilemma because even careful use will lead to the emergence of resistance and ultimately the decline of antibiotic effectiveness. As a result, it will be argued that for policy purposes, the effectiveness of antibiotics should be understood as a non-renewable resource. The paper will outline will outline, why such a classification carries far-reaching implications for the way in which we ought to tackle AMR in the future. Moreover, it will be explored, whether or not the restriction of antibiotic use for the purpose of preserving their effectiveness can be ethically defensible. The paper will argue that in some circumstances, the restriction of

31

antibiotic use may be warranted, even if patients thereby forego a therapeutical benefit.

26. Kjartan Koch Mikalsen (University of Nordland) – Theses on Freedom,

Coercion and Redistribution of Wealth (D2-26) In this paper I present a freedom based approach to redistribution of wealth that also might have implications for our relations to future generations. Two basic ideas are central to the approach that I will defend. First, the demands of freedom, understood as independence from other peoples arbitrary choices, trumps all other concerns in the justification of coercion, and, second, freedom in this sense is sufficient for grounding a comprehensive system of economic redistribution. I am presenting work that is still in an early phase, and my focus will therefore be on the basic framework of this freedom based approach, although I will also indicate some of its practical implications. The presentation revolves around the following theses: (i) public welfare provisions are not charity, (ii) legitimate coercion protects the equal freedom of all, (iii) public authorities are obliged to support the poor, and (iv) redistributive taxation need not be limited to providing basic needs for the poor, but can legitimately aim at reduction of economic differences.

27. Sofia Moratti (European University Institute, Florence) and Lars Ø. Ursin (NTNU) - Treatment and non-treatment decisions in neonatology: what can we learn from the Dutch experience? (D2-27) Primum non nocere (above all, do not harm) and in dubio abstine (when in doubt, do not intervene) are time-honored ethical imperatives guiding the medical profession. Over the past decades, technical advances have taken place in medicine that have greatly increased the possibilities of life-prolonging intervention in neonatology. However, not everything that is technically possible is appropriate in a specific case: not everything that could be done should be done. A major grand challenge that we are facing, and will increasingly face with advances in science, medicine and medical engineering, concerns the use of highly invasive life-prolonging medical treatment and technology on severely defective newborns. It is critical not to intervene indiscriminately and to devise, as a society, criteria guiding treatment and non-treatment decisions. This is one of our essential obligations to future generations. It is an exceptionally complex, international and interdisciplinary endeavor.

The talk will focus on the Dutch experience, which was, in several respects, pioneering and unique, and compare it to views from an on-going study in Norway.

32

28. Bjørn Myskja, Siri Carson, and Lars Ursin (NTNU) - Think global, buy national: CSR in the Norwegian food value chain (E3-38) In a world where issues of food safety and food security are increasingly important, the social responsibility of central actors in the food chain – producers and the main grocery chains – becomes more pressing. As a response, these actors move from implicitly assuming social responsibilities implied in laws, regulations and ethic al customs, towards explicitly expressing social responsibilities as a matter of company-specific values. Norwegian farming is among the most subsidized and protected areas of food production in the world. In this paper, we discuss the ethical values in play and expressed in the Norwegian food discourse, and the social responsibility of central food producers and retailers. How do they perceive and express their social responsibility, and – given their position in the local, national and global market – how should they handle these responsibilities? We analyse Tine and Nortura, two producers owned by farmer cooperatives with market regulator function, as well as Coop – a dominant grocery chain in Norway, with basis in the same public ownership model as the farmer-owned cooperative producers.

29. Frida Ngalesoni1, 4*, George Ruhago2, 4, Amani Mori2, 3, Bjarne Robberstad3, Ole Frithjof Norheim4 - Incorporating distributional concerns in recommendations for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Tanzania (C1-16) 1Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania 2 Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania 3 Centre for International Health, University of Bergen, Norway 4 Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Norway

Today’s priority setting is still guided mainly by the concern for maximizing population health with health equity considerations rarely being quantified. We aim to answer the question “to what extent is inequity in health reduced by implementing the most cost-effective intervention according to age-differentiated CVD risks thresholds for prevention?” We used TreeAge Pro 2014 to construct CVD models for two risk levels, high risk and moderate risk for a population cohort from 40 years and sub models representing priority to the young, priority to the old and differentiated risk profiles (lower CVD risk thresholds to the young and higher thresholds to the old). We then used Ginih impact (measure of inequality) and Achievement Index (inequality adjusted life expectancy) methodology!to capture concerns about equity and fairness in the distribution of age at death before and after a specific intervention.!

33

Our result suggests that there are no distributional conflicts - less inequality and more average health - in giving priority to the young versus the old and in providing medical primary prevention with age-differentiated compared to undifferentiated risk thresholds. For decisions on prioritizing the young than the older age group, there is less inequality measured as Ginih (0.235 vs 0.257), more life years gained (27.7 vs 26.9), higher achievement index (21.2 vs 20.0) and less cost per inequality adjusted life expectancy (US$ 2,165 vs US$ 2,421 per patient). When age-differentiated risk approach is applied; less inequality was achieved (Ginih: 0.214 vs 0.230), more life years gained (29.0 vs 28.4), higher achievement index attained (22.8 vs 21.9) at a lower cost per inequality adjusted life expectancy (US$ 1,065 vs US$ 1,240 per patient). In a country like Tanzania where inequalities in health are significant and where resources are limited, preventive cardiology using age-differentiated CVD risk thresholds is the most equitable and less costly approach. Budget impact analysis should be further considered to inform policy recommendations before implementation.

30. Rune Nydal (NTNU) and Berge Solberg (NTNU) - Less serious misconduct

in research: a question of quality or ethics? (E2 – 35) Norway is one of the few countries that have adopted legislation in order to ensure that research is conducted in accordance with recognised standards. The Norwegian act on ethics and integrity in research (2006) defines scientific misconduct as “falsification, fabrication, plagiarism and other serious breaches of good scientific practice that have been committed willfully or through gross negligence when planning, carrying out or reporting on research.” The definition clarified the mandate of the national commission for the investigation of scientific misconduct. One could report such cases to the commission. Some institutional guidelines where thus given for how serious cases should be handled, and consequently also what the commission should focus on. No guidelines were given for less serious cases. Currently, the legislation is reviewed by the Norwegian government considering, among other things, how less serious issues should be handled. This paper discusses two directions such considerations could take. Should less serious misconduct be treated as a question of quality or a question of ethics?

31. Jacob Dahl Rendtorff (Roskilde University) - Basic Ethical Principles of Corporate Environmental Responsibility - The need for a theoretical re-examination of sustainability in economics and business (A3-9) The problem of sustainability in economics and business can be framed around understanding what obligations business may have to respect

34

environmental ethics and what kind of philosophical theory should justify protection of the environment. The necessity to deal with this problem emerges out of the present challenges to the future of humanity on the planet. We are no longer passive participants in natural history, but our age, the Age of the Anthropocene, the human species has itself become a geological force that influences and changes its own natural history in interaction with other natural forces. Given this tremendous responsibility and power of humanity over its own position on earth, the argument of this paper moves on to clarify how environmental ethics for organizations cannot be understood uniquely at the basis of utility and enlightened self-interest, but must be considered as a challenge to anthropocentric ethics. The connection between sustainability and ethical principles is promoted as the essence of the ethics of organizational behavior in the environment. Moreover, this leads to the difficult problem of going from ethics to law and how to deal with environmental crime of large organizations and institutions. Finally, we can propose the concept of the balanced company as a possible solution to the problems of how to promote international action with regard to the problem of sustainability. It is important to integrate these kinds of basic ethical principles in corporate social responsibility and corporate responsibility.

32. RESET (Research group on the Ethos of Technology), NTNU – Empirical

ethics (A1) Empirical ethics is often said to be a “context-sensitive” approach that can be done in several ways at different stages of technology developments. Empirical ethics engage different well established methods like interviews, focus group studies, ethnographic observations, discussions, combined with studies of relevant scientific literature, philosophy and ethics literature, as well as public debate. It is however not straight-forward what role these empirical studies have in “empirical ethics”. How should the word "empirical" in "empirical ethics" be understood? The notion of "context-sensitivity" call attention to something in the world that needs to be taken into account in normative analysis, a something that is not easily accessible and picked up as a given. One key issue in empirical ethics is not to investigate what is, or what should be, involving difficult inferences from what "is" to what "ought to be" - but what is normative at stake. In order to do so, one need to get involved in some work we often refer to as "empirical", in lack of a better word. The notion of empirical ethics nevertheless draw attention to the methodological question of how to position oneself correctly in the world, it is not only important to "be there", but to position oneself adequately, in order to clarify normative issues of actions taken place in the world.

Empirical ethics is conceptually challenging as it challenge the fact-value distinction. This session explores different philosophical resources to think of

35

the relation between fact and values, and how this translates into reasons and methods for "being there", including understandings of the limitations and possibilities of engaging standard empirical work in moral reasoning.

33. Juan Miguel Rey (University of Granada) - Advocacy & Lobbying around

tobacco products commercialization: In search of transparency through EU public health policies decisions (C1-18)

Decisions made by policy makers through allowing the commercialisation of innovative products & new technologies have a big impact on the population’s behaviour, thus public health. This is the case of tobacco products and innovations within the sector. Referred to the e-cigs technologies, there has been a big debate among European public health policy makers, charities, other social agents and the tobacco industry and their lobbies. While transparency for positioning a product is needed –in the case of the e-cig it is a question of whether it is useful to help quitting smoking ori t is a new way to introduce people to nicotine intake-, we find out that lobbies use social media advocacy for telling their “truth”. This is the case of ICOWHO hashtag, a world conference that took place summer 2014, organised by the Instituto Catalán de Oncología and the World Health Organisation. A hashtag was created to discuss in twitter about findings and doubts about e-cigs effects on the population, but the hashtag was son invaded by pro-tobacco messages, invalidating every single reason given by the conference presenters as well as by people participation through the hashtag. Keywords: Social media advocacy, lobbies, new technologies, on-line behaviour

34. Johanna Romare (Linköping University) - What Would a Sustained,

Inclusive, and Equitable Economic Growth Be Like? (E1-33) In 2012, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development appointed poverty eradication to be one of the greatest global challenges the world is facing, and stated that to free the world from poverty and hunger is a matter of urgency. To create greater opportunities for all, to reduce inequalities, to raise the basic standards of living for the poor, etc., the world needs, according to the UN conference report, to “promot[e] a sustained, inclusive, and equitable economic growth” (United Nations, 2012).

Economic growth has brought wealth to the developed countries, and there is among many a belief that it could do the same for the developing countries as well: By expanding their economy they will potentially eradicate inequality and poverty. However, the view that (unlimited) exponential physical growth is possible has been questioned. Due to biophysical

36

limitations we cannot continue to grow our economy indefinitely. The view that unlimited exponential economic growth is possible is simply incorrect. Environmental economists such as Kenneth E. Boulding and Herman E. Daly, as well as philosophers such as Joseph R. Desjardins have been making this point for decades, arguing that an exponential economic growth obstructs sustainable living. In recent years, even modern mainstream economists such as Joseph Stiglitz have begun to question the economic rationality and the possibility for a continued economic growth. Stiglitz has argued that not only is the materialism and the rapid growth that market economy strives for environmentally unsustainable, it is also socially unsustainable due to it having led to extensive exploitation of unprotected individuals (Stiglitz, 2010b).

The report on United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development maintains that to promote a sustained, inclusive, and equitable economic growth we need to adhere to a sustainable management of natural resources and ecosystems that supports development “while facilitating ecosystem conservation, regeneration and restoration” (United Nations, 2012). In this paper I will in the light of the criticism of exponential economic growth, mentioned in the previous section, discuss the potential of promoting a sustained, inclusive, and equitable economic growth: What would a sustained, inclusive, and equitable economic growth be like? Is it possible to attain? What would be the proper institutional framework to enable it and to protect it? This paper has two aims: (i) to analyze the concept of a sustained, inclusive, and equitable economic growth, and (ii) to scrutinize the possibility of a Rawlsian institutional framework to enable and to protect a sustained, inclusive, and equitable economic growth. Beddoe, R. et. al. (2009). “Overcoming Systemic Roadblocks to Sustainability: The

Evolutionary Redesign of Worldviews, Institutions, and Technologies”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 106 (8): 2483–2489.

Daly, H. E. (1993). “Sustainable Growth. An Impossibility Theorem”. In H. E. Daly & K. Townsend. (eds.). Valuing the Earth. Boston: MIT Press. 267-273.

Daly, H. E. & Cobb, J. B. Jr. (1994). For the Common Good. 2nd ed. Boston: Beacon Press.

Desjardins, J. R. (2006). Business, Ethics, and the Environment. Imagining a Sustainable Future. Upper Saddle River, N. J: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Rawls, J. (1999a). A Theory of Justice. rev. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (1971). Rawls, J. (1999b). Law of Peoples. With "The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”.

Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press. Stiglitz. J. E. (2010a). Freefall. America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World

Economy. New York/London: W. W. Norton & Company. Stiglitz. J. E. (2010b). ”Moral Bankruptcy. Why Are We Letting Wall Street Off So Easy?”

Mother Jones. Issue. Jan/Feb. 2010. United Nations. (2012). Report of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable

Development. Sales No. A/CONF.216/16. New York: United Nations.

37

35. Kjetil Rommetveit (University of Bergen) - Adressing grand challenges

through technoscience? (A2-5)

It is increasingly demanded of research and innovation that they address societal needs and challenges, in areas ranging from health care and life style, to job creation, public security and sustainability. Changes in these important domains are therefore imagined as increasingly driven by technoscience, especially ICTs, but also bio-, nanotech, renewables and others. New inter- and multidisciplinary networks are shaping far beyond the networks of scientists and engineers, to also include risk managers, lawyers, ethicists, social scientists, users and publics. One implication is that also societal, ethical and legal issues increasingly become matters of engineering and risk management. Examples include the hardcoding of data protection and privacy into information infrastructures, increased use of risk and impact assessments, and the prospects for coding morals into social robots. What happens to law, and what happens to ethics or to social scientific analysis, as they enter into these new constellations of actors and networks? Will they lose their integrity in the process, or might they organise on new levels, as for instance attempted in recent efforts towards Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)?

36. John-Arne Skolbekken (NTNU) – Meaningless numbers? Some reflections on the notion of individual risk (B2-15) The notion of individual risk may at first glance look like a conceptual misfit. In medicine risks are calculated based on knowledge about groups of people, not individuals. Still, individual risk has a prominent place in preventive medicine, and in everyday medical practice group estimates are translated into individual risk. The aim of this paper is to reflect on whether this can be seen as a meaningful practice or not. Among the issues addressed are relations between the group and the individual, and the communication of individual risk in various medical practices.

37. Berge Solberg (NTNU) – Medical research ethics – saving the world or saving the interests of the participants? (E3-36) The aim of the Norwegian act on medical research is to promote good research. “Good” should obviously be understood in broader terms than just methodologically good. The ethical perspective is at the centre of this law. However, how broad our understanding of “good” should be, is a matter of dispute. Traditionally, much of the work of research ethics committees (RECs) in medicine have been based on a narrow understanding of research ethics. Good research has been interpreted as research that has a favourable

38

risk-benefit ratio and are based on an informed (or a presumed) consent. Recently, different voices have criticised the narrow approach in research ethics, and argued for a broader ethics that take into consideration the greater good of society. In this paper I will investigate the opportunity set for broad ethics within the research ethical committee system. Would it be good if the RECs asked what research is really good for us?

38. Joachim H. Spangenberg (Sustainable Europe Institute Germany),

Malgorzata Dereniowska (Aix-Marseille University), Finn Arler (Aalborg University), and Petter Næss (Norwegian University of Life Sciences) - No Rights for the Future, but Obligations of the Present? Responsibilities of the Present Generations Towards Future Generations (F1-42) While philosophical foundations for the rights of future generations are still disputed, public opinion is in strong support to future-proofing the institutions of European societies. Less than right of non-existent agents, duties of current decision makers are demanded, making sure their decisions are taken in a future-conscious mind-set, and evaluated from a longer term perspective. Thus, we are faced with a two-fold problem: (1) how to translate moral rights of future generations into legally binding obligations in democratic settings on the one hand, and (2) which approach to decision making can best provide for taking account of future rights in the present time. Answering these questions requires, in the first step, a nuanced ethical analysis that gives foundations for a procedural approach to moral decision making under uncertainty. Current economic valuation, often predominant in evaluating decisions, is insufficient for that purpose. Although improvements are possible and necessary, assessments of future impacts and values should not be left to administrative bodies, but should be open to broader participation and should become part of the standard decision making process in democratic countries. Empirically, ombudspersons have been one to most effective means to this end so far, but besides their strengths they have serious shortcomings and vulnerabilities, as their fate in different countries testifies. Therefore an alternative solution is suggested, drawing lessons from past experience. It consists of a “Veto-Council” of societal, independent experts which has the right to interrupt parliamentary decision mechanisms and requiring a broader set of arguments to be taken into account before a final decision is taken. This way the autonomy of the parliament is respected, but current representatives of long term interests get the chance to make their concerns heard in the decision making process. Key words: Future rights, present duties, social ethics, economics, institutions

39

39. Harald Stelzer (University of Graz) - The Challenge of Climate Engineering – Saved by Technology? (E3-37)

Intentional interventions into the climate system receive increasing attention in climate science and policy. As put forward in a previous article the evaluation of climate engineering is often based on normative assumptions and ideological background conditions. Some climate engineering techniques have been described as fast and cheap technological fixes to the problem of climate change. Different arguments can be distinguished in this critique like the unwillingness to tackle the underlying problem of overconsumption of natural resources (including CO2 sinks), the tendency to solve behavioural problems by technical solutions, or a hubristic attitude underlying plans to intentional interfere into the climate systems. However, these arguments have not stayed unchallenged. Based on these counterarguments in favour for our potential engagement with climate engineering, the more general question arises: Can we be saved (only) by new technologies form the unintended consequences of our unsustainable use of older technologies, and if so, what role can be attributed to normative arguments in regard to technological fixes? The paper will put forward some tentative answers to this highly important question in the Anthropocene.

40. Hermann Køhn Sæther (NTNU) - Is Green Growth an illusion? A quest for a sound solution to the climate crisis (E1-32) The climate scientists consider global warming as a grave threat to the world that is already present. Despite this fact it seems like the society is unable to cope with the problem in an effective way. The outcome of the actions that are launched have barely affected the aggregated CO2 emissions. Green Economy is the conventional proposal for how we can solve the climate crisis. The main assumption is that the markets have to transform from 'brown' to 'green' economic growth. The suggested solution relies on actions as carbon capture, technological development and a growth which is detached from physical stocks. However, this proposal is not accepted by everyone. Firstly, different voices claim that the suggested actions within the concept of Green Economy are highly speculative. Furthermore the opponents doubt that a green growth can mitigate the CO2 emissions to the extent that is required. With these allegations in mind it is therefore disturbing to observe the present public debate about the topic. It seems like no one dares, or is able to ask critical questions concerning green growth. For instance, in Norway all of the political parties, except the Green Party, advocate that the problem should be solved within growth economy. Attempts to put the concerns about growth on the agenda are usually dismissed by the established parties and the

40

media. My assertion is that our society may have been captivated by the logic of growth economy, which prevents us from assessing the situation critically. Thus we may overlook crucial aspects. Due to my concern I will use John S. Dryzek´s discourse theory and similar theories to show how foundational values and world views determine which elements we incorporate in our discussions and which we exclude. The final question will be if we are stuck in a dogmatic logic that hinders us from asking necessary questions that can solve the climate crisis. I will also discuss the alternatives to growth and what kind of actions these concepts require.

41. Fei Teng (Utrecht University) - A Confucian version of moral duty to the green future (D1-22) In this paper we will examine the Contemporary Confucian account of humanity for framing the moral duty to the green future. The main question I intend to answer is this: If and for what reason that individual’s moral duty conceived a green future? If we take the concept of Confucian moral duty as a response to the integrated feeling between self and others, then why should this concept open to anything beyond current life world? Moreover, whether Confucianism could provide a feasible way to conduct a duty as such in the modern world, morally and politically? I will carry out the study of these questions in the case of climate change. This paper consists of following three parts: First, base on the studies of contemporary Confucian philosophers Tang Junyi (1909–1978) and Mou Zongsan (1909–1995), the realization of Confucian humanity entails a process of moral cultivation, in which self constantly “open oneself to and be affected by the spiritual, human, and natural beings in the surrounding world”. Moral duty in this context, is the natural and sincere response to the integration with others. Second, I argue moral duty in this sense has important ecological meanings in terms of the green future. Two issues will be presented: (1) there are universal implementations of Confucian moral duty in principle and in practice (2) Confucian humanity can be extended beyond human beings and regardless of the existence of object base one Confucian view of nature. Finally, the last part of the paper attempts to apply this concept in responding to the issue of moral duty to future generations in the context of climate change as example. It will especially pay attention on content of ecological duty and how to carry it out.

42. Anastasia Tkalich - Public Reason in Multicultural Conflicts: Global Solution or Ethical Challenge? (D1-23) To future generations we hand over a multicultural world rich in unsolved conflicts. The main field and probably cause of multicultural conflicts is

41

ethics. What should guide public debates when an ethical issue's discussion crosses the borders of states and cultures? And what, in this regard, makes the ethical discourse so special? Ethical discourse is substantially different from the classical international justice or economy discourses. This means that regulations concerning ethics and the public debates around them should be adapted to different cultural standards. Despite the special nature of ethical discourse, the order of public debate on ethical matters today is governed by the same deliberative democratic theory as all the other discourses. Example is the idea of public reason suggested in Political Liberalism by John Rawls in 1993 and elaborated later on by a number of political philosophers. This idea refers to a universal mode of reasoning, which should be applied to public debates for justifying particular positions of the partisans. The reference point of this idea is the so-called “good of the public”, which itself contains an ethical category as “good”. The presentation is going to discuss whether an idea with such a core can be successfully applied to multicultural/international conflicts?

43. Gry Wester (University of Bergen) - The moral significance of the social inequalities in health: Some policy implications (B1-10) Inequalities in health between different socio-economic groups are well-documented and well-known. These health inequalities are increasingly featuring on the public policy agenda. This growing interest seems at least partly fuelled by a sentiment, shared by many, that inequalities in health represent a greater injustice than inequalities in other important goods, and therefore that we have a further imperative to try to reduce them. I argue that social inequalities in health are of concern not because they are morally worse than other inequalities, but rather because they represent systematic disadvantage across several dimensions of well-being. Furthermore, while reducing health inequalities is a goal that has gained political traction, it has proven difficult to find effective remedies to the problem. We may do better in rectifying injustice if we invest our efforts in reducing inequalities in such goods and opportunities that are more directly under the influence of social intervention.

44. Heidrun Åm (NTNU) - Conditions of Possibility for Translating

Responsible Research and Innovation (F2-43) In recent years, the policy idea of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has come to characterize science and technology governance in the European Union. RRI represents normative ideals of steering science towards `the good' and of integrating science and the public. At the same time, university structures have profoundly changed in the last decades and universities are

42

increasingly characterized by public-private partnerships, international competition and projectification. How do demands for excellence and demands for responsibility correlate? What are the conditions of possibility to translate the policy ideas of RRI into research practice? For example, a part of the RRI policy idea is that researchers and research organizations shall be held accountable for the impacts of their research. But which space for actions do individual researchers actually have? And how do demands for the democratization of science, that are inherent in RRI, correspond with the increasing lack of influence on the governance of universities by university employees themselves?

The presentation will discuss and problematize such issues by drawing on the concept of translation as developed in STS (i.e. Callon 1986). Translation points to that ideas not only are transferred but change and are assembled anew in translation processes. This presentation draws on interviews with scientists (within nano- and biotechnology) and science policy-makers, as well as on participatory observations in RRI workshops. The case is Norway which is well suited for this study because the Research Council of Norway was a pioneer in demanding the integration of RRI in each single bio- and nanotechnology research proposal.

43

PhD Forum in Practical Philosophy Satellite Workshop to the ISP-FIDE Final Conference

20 -21 May 2015, Scandic Nidelven Hotel, Trondheim, Norway Wednesday, 20 May 2015 14:00 – 16:45 (Meeting Room 2) Gunnar Björnsson (Umeå University) - Manipulators, parasites and generalization arguments 14:00 – 14:45

Discusses the famous class of manipulation arguments for incompatiblism about determinism and responsibility, most recently defended at length by Derk Pereboom in hos book Fee Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life. According to such arguments, there is no relevant difference between cases where an agent's actions are manipulated by some other agent and cases where the agent's actions are causally determined by events over which the agent had no control, such as events preceding the agent's birth. Since manipulation undermines responsibility, so does determinism: the undermining generalizes. However, recent empirical studies suggest that people intuitively take manipulation to undermine responsibility because of the agency involved rather than because of the determinism. In this paper I present new evidence suggesting that while this might be right, it is possible to construct a generalization argument that starts from a case that does not involve any other agent. Compatibilists need a different kind of reply to generalization arguments. Henrik Andersson (Lund University) and Morten Dahlback (NTNU) - A Puzzle Regarding Value Comparisons 15:00 – 15:30

Here is an interesting puzzle: Suppose that you are to compare two drinks, A and B, in terms of how tasty you find them to be. The two drinks are qualitatively different, but the difference is so small so that it is indistinguishable for you. Since they taste just the same for you it is reasonable to assume that they are equally as good in terms of tastiness for you. Now compare B to C in terms of how tasty you find them to be. B and C also have a qualitative difference, but the difference is so small that it is not notable for you. Furthermore, the qualitative difference is of another kind then that of the difference between A and B, nevertheless it seems reasonable to say that B and C tastes equally as good to you. If this procedure is repeated enough times it is reasonable to assume that we will reach an item Z that is not equally as good as A, since the difference between A and Z is notable and they are not equally as good. Y is, however, equally as good as Z in taste according to you. Given that equally as good is a transitive relation this can, however, not be the case. But exactly what has gone wrong? In order to avoid this inconsistent result, at least one assumption of the argument must be rejected. In this paper the assumptions that underlie this argument are made explicit and carefully scrutinised. Some of

44

these assumptions will be more tempting to reject than others, but if we reject these then some significant standpoints within value theory will lose their appeal. Andreas Christiansen (University of Copenhagen) - Reasons holism and case based ethical reasoning 16:00 – 16:30

One of the most discussed recent theories in ethics is the moral particularism of (especially) Jonathan Dancy. Dancy’s position consists (very roughly) of two parts. (1) Holism about practical reasons: The valence and strength of a reason may vary from case to case (i.e. “a feature that is a reason in one case may be no reason at all, or an opposite reason, in another.”6) (2) Moral particularism: There are no ethical principles, or (in a weaker version) principles are not necessary for ethical reasoning. According to Dancy, there is a set of examples of reasons changing valence or strength from across cases that should lead us to accept holism, and that accepting holism should lead us to accept particularism. Dancy’s position has generated a lot of debate. Generally, the importance of the examples that motivate holism is accepted. The move of critics have been to block the further movement towards particularism, in one of two ways: (1) By arguing that reasons should be understood differently, in a way that allows the examples but doesn’t entail holism; e.g. by ‘expanding’ reasons to include the features that (supposedly) alter their valence or strength7, or by viewing reasons as defaults.8 (2) By accepting holism but denying that it leads to particularism.9 The paper explores the success of these attempts with respect to applied ethics, especially what I call ‘case based reasoning’. This refers to the practice of deriving conclusions about one case from intuitions about another case, or deriving conclusions that apply to all cases from such intuitions. I argue that acceptance of Dancy’s examples is sufficient to challenge this practice, regardless of whether holism and/or particularism can be resisted in one of the ways suggested in the literature. In particular, none of the anti-particularist views can show that the crucial inference – that (roughly) if F is a right-making feature (or reason) in one case, then it must be such feature (or reason) in other cases – is a binding principle of practical rationality. However, the various views that have been developed in response to Dancy may have be able to teach us something about what rationality does require in these cases – that is, precisely

6!Dancy,!Ethics*without*Principles*(Oxford:!Clarendon,!2004),*p.!7!7!E.g.!Brown,!”!The!Composition!of!Reasons”,!Synthese*191!(2014)!8!E.g.!Horty,!Reasons*as*Defaults!(Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press,!2012)!9!E.g.Väyrynen,!”Moral!Generalism:!Enjoy!in!Moderation”,!Ethics*116*(2006);!McKeever!&!Ridge,!Principled*Ethics:*Generalism*as*a*Regulative*Ideal*(Oxford:!Clarendon,!2006)*

45

what kinds of differences in judgment between similar cases are acceptable, and what kinds aren’t. Thursday, 21 May 2015 14:00 – 17:15 (Meeting Room 2) Sem de Maagt (Utrecht University) - Reflective Equilibrium and Moral Objectivity 14:00 – 14:30

The method of reflective equilibrium is the most dominant method of moral justification in ethics. The main appeal of reflective equilibrium lies in its normative ambition to provide an account of moral objectivity, without having to bear the controversial epistemological and metaphysical burdens of alternative, foundationalist approaches to moral justification, such as rational intuitionism. In this paper, I argue that proponents of reflective equilibrium cannot have it both ways. Either one accepts reflective equilibrium as a distinctive non-foundationalist method of moral justification, but in that case I argue that one ultimately has to give up on the objectivist aspirations of ethics. Alternatively, one may choose to preserve moral objectivity, but this, I argue, can only be done by embracing foundationalism of one kind or another. In other words, reflective equilibrium is either committed to moral relativism, or it has to reintroduce intuitionism through the backdoor. In the final section of the paper, I will suggest a way out of this dilemma by considering an often-overlooked alternative of ‘foundationalist coherentism’ in the guise of a transcendental argument. Keywords: reflective equilibrium, moral objectivity, coherentism, foundationalism, considered judgements, transcendental arguments Sveinung Sivertsen (University of Bergen) - Ethical impartiality, scientific objectivity 14:45 – 15:15

Ethics has long been compared to science, and is usually taken to come up short, methodologically speaking. One of the consequences of this is the belief that there will always be moral disputes that cannot be resolved rationally, or even that most our moral disputes – if they are not merely empirical misunderstandings – cannot be thus resolved. Work by Lorraine Daston (1992) and others on the history of 'objectivity' has shown how the dominant ideal of objectivity in modern natural science – aperspectival objectivity – has its roots in the notion of impartiality first developed in the ethics and aesthetics of the eighteenth-century Scottish Enlightenment. What is now the creed of the scientist striving to exclude from her research and her reports any distorting influence of who she, as an individual, happens to be was already then developed by Adam Smith into a full-fledged moral theory centred on the image of the "impartial spectator" (1759/1790, 2002). This realisation should weaken (still further) the intuitive sting of W. V. O. Quine's regret of the "methodological infirmity of ethics as compared to

46

science." (1979, 477) If we are to believe Michele M. Moody-Adams (1997), it’s necessary. While Quine's grounding of his regret in the "irreparable lack of empirical checkpoints that are the solace of the scientist" (1979, 480) has long sat uneasily in a philosophical landscape post Thomas Kuhn (or Donna Haraway), the core suspicion – that there is little hope of resolving moral disputes rationally – remains widely influential. On this background, I will show how the methodological affinity between Smith and modern science casts new light on the potential for his method of moral judgement to resolve moral disputes and drive genuine moral progress. Krister Bykvist (Stockholm University) - ‘They smiled at the good and frowned at the bad’. The fitting attitude analysis of value reconsidered 15:45 – 16:15

It seems fitting to favour the good and disfavour the bad. It has become increasingly popular to try to turn this intuition into an explicit definition of value in terms of fitting attitudes, where fittingness is understood as a deontic notion. The resulting account, the fitting attitude analysis of value (the FA-analysis, for short), thus promises a reduction of the evaluative to the deontic. I shall argue that the most important considerations that led people to adopt the FA-analysis can in fact be taken into account by a value primitivist who thinks goodness is not analyzable in terms of the deontic. Furthermore, value primitivism will avoid the many problems that afflict the FA-analysis. Why bother with patching up the FA-analysis, if value primitivism captures the most important intuitions that motivated the FA-analysis in the first place and, in addition, avoids its problems? Ivar Labukt (University of Bergen & University of Tromsø) - Evolutionary debunking arguments: a threat to egoism or impartialism? 16:30 – 17:00

What do you have most reason to do when your interests conflict with those of others? Should you be give absolute priority to yourself? Should you only give some priority to yourself? Or should you be completely impartial, allowing yourself to count for one and no more than one? These are obviously fundamental normative questions. They are also very difficult to answer. Henry Sidgwick found them so intractable that he gave up his quest for a single fundamental theory in ethics. He apparently concluded that egoism and impartialism both constitute rational perspectives on action, and that there is no telling what you should do when they conflict. In their recent book The Point of View of the Universe – Sidgwick and Contemporary Ethics, Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek and Peter Singer attempt to do what Sidgwick thought impossible. By examining the psychological and evolutionary causal history of the relevant ethical intuitions, they aim to resolve the dualism of practical reason in favour of impartialism. I will argue that they do not succeed. In fact, considerations of the kind they offer only serve to strengthen the case for egoism.

47

PhD Forum Programme

May 20, Wednesday 12:30 – 13:30 14:00 – 14:45 14:45 – 15:00 15:00 – 15:30 15:30 – 15:45 15:45 – 16:00 16:00 – 16:30 16:30 – 16:45

19:00

PhD Forum Session 1 LUNCH

Gunnar Björnsson (Umea) Discussion Henrik Andersson (Lund) Discussion Break Andreas Christiansen (KU) Discussion Dinner (Credo Bistro)

May 21, Thursday (ISP-FIDE Final Conference) 09:15 – 09:30 Opening 09:30 – 10:15 Keynote Lecture 1: Ruth Macklin 10:15 – 10:30 Break 10:30 – 12:00 Parallel sessions A

A1 A2 A3 12:00 – 13:00 LUNCH 13:00 – 13:45 Keynote Lecture 2: Ole Frithjoft Norheim 13:45 – 14:00 Break

14:00 – 15:30 Parallel sessions B PhD Forum Session 2 B1 B2 B3 Sem de Maagt (Utrecht)

Sveinung Sivertsen (Bergen) 15:30 – 15:45 Break 15:45 – 17:15 Parallel sessions C PhD Forum Session 3

C1 C2 C3 Krister Bykvist (SU) Ivar Labukt (Bergen / Tromsø

17:15 – 17:30 Break 17:30 – 18:15 Keynote Lecture 3: Ove Jakobsen 18:15 – 19:00 Break

19:00 Conference Dinner May 22, Friday

09:00 – 09:45 Keynote Lecture 4: Keri Woods 09:45 – 10:00 Break 10:00 – 11:30 Parallel sessions D

D1 D2 D3 11:30 – 12:30 LUNCH 12:30 – 13:15 Keynote Lecture 5: Peter-Paul Verbeek 13:15 – 13:30 Break 13:30 – 15:00 Parallel sessions

E1 E2 E3 15:00 – 15:15 Break 15:15 – 16:45 Parallel sessions

F1 F2 F3 16:45 End of conference

!!! ! 48

!!!

!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!49

!

Grand challenges and our obligations to future generations

ISP-FIDE PROJECT FINAL CONFERENCE

21-22 May 2015, Scandic Nidelven Hotel, Trondheim, Norway

Programme overview

May 20, Wednesday – Sattelite PhD Forum in Practical Philosophy 12:30 – 16:45 – PhD Forum Session 1 (Chairs: Allen & Per-Erling)

May 21, Thursday - ISP-FIDE Final Conference - Day 1

09:15 – 09:30 Opening 09:30 – 10:15 Plenary Lecture 1: Ruth Macklin (Chair: May) 10:15 – 10:30 Break 10:30 – 12:00 Parallel A1 (Chair:May), A2 (Chair:Rune) & A3 (Chair:Siri) 12:00 – 13:00 LUNCH 13:00 – 13:45 Plenary Lecture 2: Ole Frithjoft Norheim (Chair: Berge) 13:45 – 14:00 Break

14:00 – 15:30 Parallel sessions B1 (Chair:Siri), B2 (Chair:Rune), & B3: PhD Forum Session 2 (Chairs:Allen & Per-Erling)

15:30 – 15:45 Break 15:45 – 17:15 Parallel sessions C1 (Chair:May), C2 (Chair:Rune), &

C3: PhD Forum Session 3 (Chairs:Allen & Per-Erling) 17:15 – 17:30 Break 17:30 – 18:15 Keynote 3: Ove Jakobsen (Chair: Siri) 18:15 – 19:00 Break 19:00 Conference Dinner

May 22, Friday - ISP-FIDE Final Conference - Day 2 09:00 – 09:45 Plenary Lecture 4: Keri Woods (Chair: May) 09:45 – 10:00 Break 10:00 – 11:30 Parallel D1 (Chair:May), D2 (Chair:Giovanni), D3 (Chair:Siri) 11:30 – 12:30 LUNCH 12:30 – 13:15 Plenary Lecture 5: Peter-Paul Verbeek (Chair: Rune) 13:15 – 13:30 Break 13:30 – 15:00 Parallel sessions E1 (Chair:May), E2 (Chair:Bjørn), E3 (Chair:Siri) 15:00 – 15:15 Break 15:15 – 16:45 Parallel sessions F1 (Chair:Rita), F2 (Chair:Sophia, F3 (Chair:Siri)