@article{273b6c40e7af4e1cb9fb9db95925cddf,
title = "Intrinsic Ethics Regarding Integrated Assessment Models for Climate Management",
abstract = "In this essay we develop and argue for the adoption of a more comprehensive model of research ethics than is included within current conceptions of responsible conduct of research (RCR). We argue that our model, which we label the ethical dimensions of scientific research (EDSR), is a more comprehensive approach to encouraging ethically responsible scientific research compared to the currently typically adopted approach in RCR training. This essay focuses on developing a pedagogical approach that enables scientists to better understand and appreciate one important component of this model, what we call intrinsic ethics. Intrinsic ethical issues arise when values and ethical assumptions are embedded within scientific findings and analytical methods. Through a close examination of a case study and its application in teaching, namely, evaluation of climate change integrated assessment models, this paper develops a method and case for including intrinsic ethics within research ethics training to provide scientists with a comprehensive understanding and appreciation of the critical role of values and ethical choices in the production of research outcomes.",
author = "Schienke, {Erich W.} and Baum, {Seth D.} and Nancy Tuana and Davis, {Kenneth J.} and Klaus Keller",
note = "Funding Information: As is argued previously in Schienke et al. (2009), RCR education that focuses solely or primarily on the first dimension by only teaching proper research behavior and procedure is not sufficiently comprehensive for those sciences that employ the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) merit criteria for proposal reviews, in particular, the broader impacts criterion. The NSF requires researchers to identify not only scientific and intellectual merit (first criterion) of a given research proposal, but also to address considerations of broader impacts (second criterion) of research on the infrastructure of science and on society. As such, we argued that typical RCR training, what we refer to as procedural ethics, does not provide the training needed to respond to the requirements of the NSF second criterion, the broader impacts criterion. Although projects funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) do not explicitly require consideration of broader impacts, we argued that the broader Funding Information: Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the National Science Foundation{\textquoteright}s Ethics in Engineering and Science Education grant (0529766) for its generous support. Any opinion and potential errors are, of course, attributed to the authors and not to the funding agency. The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful comments.",
year = "2011",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1007/s11948-010-9209-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "503--523",
journal = "Science and Engineering Ethics",
issn = "1353-3452",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "3",
}
