Implementing the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Scientific Practice—A Case Study

Abstract

Widespread enthusiasm for establishing scientific codes of conduct notwithstanding, the utility of such codes in influencing scientific practice is not self-evident. It largely depends on the implementation phase following their establishment-a phase which often receives little attention. The aim of this paper is to provide recommendations for guiding effective implementation through an assessment of one particular code of conduct in one particular institute. Based on a series of interviews held with researchers at the Department of Biotechnology of Delft University of Technology, this paper evaluates how the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Scientific Practice is received by those it is supposed to govern. While respondents agreed that discussion of the guiding principles of scientific conduct is called for, they did not consider the code as such to be a useful instrument. As a tool for the individual scientific practitioner, the code leaves a number of important questions unanswered in relation to visibility, enforcement, integration with daily practice and the distribution of responsibility. Recommendations are provided on the basis of these questions. There is more at stake than merely holding scientific practitioners to a proper exercise of their duties; implementation of scientific society

What happens in the Lab: Applying Midstream Modulation to Enhance Critical Reflection in the Laboratory

“…Theoretically established claims that scientists and engineers should reflect on the normative dimensions of their work do not in themselves enforce or encourage such reflection. Indeed, policy calls for ethical reflection may have at best a tangential effect on research practices because researchers generally perceive the broader socio-ethical context of research as peripheral to their work (Guston 2000; Rappert 2007; Schuurbiers et al 2009a). The question of implementation can thus stymie broad normative commitments to ethical reflection in research practice.…”

Do Codes of Ethics Reveal a University’s Commitment to Sustainable Development? Evidence from Italy

“…The universities' efforts taken to trigger SD are communicated to stakeholders through various institutional documents such as codes of ethics [16][17][18]. Fundamentally, they are a statement of an organisation's primary rules, values, and prescriptions of conduct that is permissible or not [19], describing desirable professional conduct and guiding individuals in resolving ethical issues [20], as well as informing employees of actions that will lead to sanctions [21].…”

“…Thus, codes of ethics and sustainability reports are complementary documents that universities oriented towards SD. In fact, codes of ethics orient university strategies and express the fundamental values of the university community, ensure the protection of fundamental rights, and establish rules of conduct for the members of that community, including provisions on discrimination, abuse, conflicts of interest and intellectual property [16][17][18], while sustainability reports are final documents [10,15] that enable the investigation of whether, and which, actions related to SD have been implemented by the university.…”

Entering the Social Experiment: A Case for the Informed Consent of Graduate Engineering Students

“…Rather than basing an education for responsible social experimentation on general ethical principles-which can be often fail to apply to specific contexts (Schuurbiers, Osseweijer, and Kinderlerer 2009), or attempting to create engineers who can simultaneously function as risk assessment experts, risk managers, or public risk communicators-which can be unrealistic, we suggest that graduate engineering education should cultivate a necessary condition for any specific ethical response under conditions of uncertainty: the reflexive awareness of the engineering student concerning the broader social systems in which her laboratory project, institution, and sector is already embedded. Basing an education on socio-technical change on the de facto social contexts of the laboratory within which engineering graduate students already work could afford numerous opportunities for learning about the immediate and mediated social dimensions of engineering.…”