Practical Principles, Moral Truth, and Ultimate Ends

Grisez, Germain; Boyle, Joseph; Finnis, John

doi:10.1093/ajj/32.1.99

Cited by 255 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The framework proposes AoP and employs the seven dimensions of human lives (life itself; knowledge and aesthetic experience; some degree of excellence in work and play; friendship; self-integration; self-expression; transcendence) as impact categories [48][49][50]. Except for the seven dimensions for individual aspects, an eighth impact category-"fairness" is also included [16,43].…”

Section: Notementioning

confidence: 99%

Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited

Dan²,

Chen

2014

Sustainability

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:To promote the development of Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA), we conducted a comprehensive review of recently developed frameworks, methods, and characterization models for impact assessment for future method developers and SLCA practitioners. Two previous reviews served as our foundations for this review. We updated the review by including a comprehensive list of recently-developed SLCA frameworks, methods and characterization models. While a brief discussion from goal, data, and indicator perspectives is provided in Sections 2 to 4 for different frameworks/methods, the focus of this review is Section 5 where discussion on characterization models for impact assessment of different methods is provided. The characterization models are categorized into two types following the UNEP/SETAC guidelines: type I models without impact pathways and type II models with impact pathways. Different from methods incorporating type I/II characterization models, another LCA modeling approach, Life Cycle Attribute Assessment (LCAA), is also discussed in this review. We concluded that methods incorporating either type I or type II models have limitations. For type I models, the challenge lies in the systematic identification of relevant stakeholders and materiality issues; while for type II models, identification of impact pathways that most closely and accurately represent the real-world causal relationships is the key. LCAA may avoid these problems, but the ultimate questions differ from those asked by the methods using type I and II models. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2014, 6 4201

show abstract

Section: Notementioning

confidence: 99%

Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited

Dan²,

Chen

2014

Sustainability

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It subsequently became more common, and perhaps appropriate, to consider well-being as a multidimensional concept (Bleys 2012). In that regard, following McGillivray (2007), we can identify the capabilities approach (Sen 1982(Sen , 1985(Sen , 1993, among many other publications), the basic human values approach (Grisez et al 1987), the intermediate needs approach Gough 1991, 1993), the universal psychological needs approach (Ramsay 1992), the axiological categories approach (Max-Neef 1993), the universal human values approach (Schwartz 1994), the domains of subjective well-being approach (Cummins 1996), the dimensions of wellbeing approach (Narayan et al 2000), and the central human capabilities approach (Nussbaum 2000). This multiplicity of conceptualizations is often accompanied by a range of different expressions to label quite similar situations.…”

Section: Well-being and Shortcomings Of Gdpmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Construction of a Synthetic Index Comparing Multidimensional Well-Being in the European Union

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For many years, the quantification and measurement of level of well-being in a society has become an object of study by researchers, economists, international organizations and institutions. The purpose of these researches and applications is mainly the collection of data as accurate and complete as possible, dictating the paths of economic and social development policies, in order to help the economic problem of allocating scarce resources within a community, where not all individual needs can be fully met. The present work is intended as a part of that field. It will undertake the construction of a composite index of multidimensional well-being, through an aggregation of data, able to balance the trade-off between immediacy and completeness of information and to trespass the limits that characterize the commonly used income related measures. The method of factor analysis, which aims at detecting a statistically sufficient number of variables, is used to represent most of the explained variance of the phenomenon. Results are tested with different aggregative processes. This analysis is applied to the reality of the European Union, characterized by deep transformation and cultural, economic and social inequalities

show abstract

“…In addition, this paper assumes ex-ante that principals and agents would want and sometimes need to follow the stakeholder approach, which includes following normative principles like that of the Golden Rule, which states that one should treat others as one expects to be treated by others (Grisez, Boyle, and Finnis 1987;Melé 2009a;Melé 2009b;Melé 2012) if one wants to be seen as morally responsible, socially appropriate, respectful to other persons, and hence most likely avoid litigation. However, the current paper does not assume that agents and principals may not carry out socially harmful activities.…”

Section: Nature Of Corporate Governance Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate governance systems as dynamic institutions: Towards a dynamic model of corporate governance systems

Emenalo

2014

AJOBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking note of the evidence in extant literature that corporate governance systems are designed to incentivise, monitor, and guide agents to achieve firm mission, this paper develops a dynamic model of corporate governance systems that views these systems as artificial realities (Simon 1996) in general, and institutions in particular. The paper suggests that viewing these systems as institutions has theoretical and practical implications for the study and design of these systems, and illuminates how the process of double hermeneutic may explain the link between corporate governance research and policy recommendations to date and the US sub-prime crisis of 2007 onwards.

show abstract

Practical Principles, Moral Truth, and Ultimate Ends

Cited by 255 publications

References 9 publications

Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited

Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited

The Construction of a Synthetic Index Comparing Multidimensional Well-Being in the European Union

Corporate governance systems as dynamic institutions: Towards a dynamic model of corporate governance systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About