Furthering Ethical Requirements for Applied Earth Science

Böhle, Martin; Ellis, Erle C.

doi:10.4401/ag-7401

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beyond its scope within geosciences, the term geoethics also associates easily with ethical (professional) practices in other disciplines. Examples are earth sciences [116], engineering disciplines [117], or people-disciplines [118]. These disciplines share a concern about the interaction of the social, cultural, and political compartments of the Earth system(s) with the abiotic and biotic compartments of the Earth system(s).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geoethics, a Branding for Sustainable Practices

Böhle

Marone

2021

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In struggles for cultural leadership, advocating a paradigm helps to disseminate, for example, a style of life, thinking, or common practices. Promoting a practice, that is, branding it, includes the use of a simple name or symbol (semiotic sign). Within geosciences, the label “geoethics” refers to a school of thought that uses established philosophical concepts to promote responsible professional practices. The outcomes that are available aggregate to a more general paradigm that calls for geocentric human practices. The label geoethics also sounds like a brand for those practices. As analysis shows, the notion of geoethics is not univocal. At first sight, that feature hinders using it as a brand for geocentric practices. However, the successful branding of the concept of sustainability, as a scientific and public paradigm, indicates the opposite. Although the notion of sustainability aggregates various concepts and is not univocal, it illustrates what cultural leadership can be achieved when a concept, paradigm, and brand use the same semiotic sign (name). Therefore, it is suggested that the school of thought, Geoethics, with its dedicated reference to the specific societal use of geosciences, should also be used as a brand: geoethics, the general application of geoethical thinking to promote geocentric human practices.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geoethics, a Branding for Sustainable Practices

Böhle

Marone

2021

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These statements call for an ethical professional practice that recognises the need for high intra-professional standards as well as the obligations of geoscientists towards society and the Earth. Hence, the 'geoethical promise' offers geologists, and others [111], a framework to analyse implications of choices to be made in professional contexts. Other frameworks are available [112][113][114][115], but none is comparable to the 'geoethical promise' in its operational form.…”

Section: Ethical Contexts Of the Geosciences And The 'Gts Amendment'mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ‘Anthropocene Proposal’: A Possible Quandary and A Work-Around

Böhle

Bilham

2019

Quaternary

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debates about naming the unfolding times of anthropogenic global change the ‘Anthropocene’ are ultimately debates about the ‘human condition’. The proposal to amend the geological time scale by adding an ‘Anthropocene’ epoch (that is, the ‘Anthropocene proposal’ in its strict sense) is both an intra-geoscience debate about scientific sense-making and a debate about the societal context of the geosciences. This essay juxtaposes these debates, starting from three postulates: first, that the scientific methods of geological chronostratigraphy are applied rigorously; second, that anthropogenic global change is happening; and third, that the ‘Anthropocene proposal’ may be rejected if it does not meet the conditions required for its approval based on the rigorous application of the scientific methods of geological chronostratigraphy. These postulates are analysed through the lenses of the Cape Town Statement on Geoethics and the normative statements of the ‘geoethical promise’. It is found that an ethical quandary would arise if the ‘Anthropocene proposal’ were to be rejected. Consequently, and given the societal contexts of the geosciences, it is explored whether distinguishing between the geological past (as demarcated according to current chronostratigraphic methodology) and contemporary geological–historical times (characterised somewhat differently) could offer a work-around to tackle the quandary.

show abstract

“…Information consists of data organized in a given structure and which, placed in a context, are endowed with meaning. Knowledge goes further: it makes predictions to establish causal links or make decisions (Bohn, 1994). Earth stewardship requires that scientists engage not only in the production of this knowledge, but also in meeting societal requirements for education and governance (Rozzi et al, 2015).…”

Section: Transfer Of Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Anthropocene governance, decisions are based on scientific evidence (Nakicenovic et al, 2016). Humanity must be the steward of the planet's natural resources and scientists must participate not only in the production of knowledge, but also in public discourse, decision-making, education and governance to reduce anthropogenic damage to the environment (Rozzi et al, 2015;Bohle and Erle, 2017;Peppoloni andDi Capua, 2015, 2016;. Scientists must be concerned with societies and environments and be aware of their role in the Earth system as well as their relationships with colleagues Bohle and Erle, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical recommendations for ocean observation

Barbier¹,

Reitz²,

Pabortsava³

et al. 2018

Adv. Geosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The United Nations proclaimed a decade of marine science for sustainable development (2021–2030) to develop a common framework that will ensure that ocean science can fully support countries in achieving the goal of sustainable development. Marine scientific understanding is fundamental to managing human activities that affect this environment, and ocean observations have a particularly important role in enhancing the knowledge base of our oceans. With this important task, scientists have the responsibility to act in an ethical way and apply all the fundamental principles described in the Cape Town statement: (a) ethical values, (b) social values and (c) cultural values (Peppoloni and Di Capua, 2017).This article is a fist attempt to highlight the core values applicable to ocean observation, which can then be improved and adopted as part of geoethics and the stewardship of the Earth system. It opens up avenues for reflection on geoethical implications in the field of ocean observation and suggests nine key principles that marine scientists could follow in their innovative research regarding open access to data, effectiveness, compliance with laws, environmental respect and nature conservation, reciprocal relation and cultural respect, equity and fairness, knowledge transfer, governance adapted to socio-ecological systems, and the use of animals in research.

show abstract

Furthering Ethical Requirements for Applied Earth Science

Cited by 13 publications

References 19 publications

Geoethics, a Branding for Sustainable Practices

Geoethics, a Branding for Sustainable Practices

The ‘Anthropocene Proposal’: A Possible Quandary and A Work-Around

Ethical recommendations for ocean observation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About