The Strength of Ethical Matrixes as a Tool for Normative Analysis Related to Technological Choices: The Case of Geological Disposal for Radioactive Waste

Kermisch, Céline; Depaus, Christophe

doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9882-6

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8 - 10 Initial development of this exercise has been described elsewhere. 11 In contrast to other collective decision tools, such as ethical matrix analysis, 12 the CHAT tool allows trade-offs between different possible areas of healthcare – rather than the analysis of a single technology. It also integrates technical knowledge in the structure of the game while letting participants input their own values, thus enabling trade-offs between technically complex options to be made by members of the public.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage

Hurst

Schindler

Goold

et al. 2018

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: As universal health coverage becomes the norm in many countries, it is important to determine public priorities regarding benefits to include in health insurance coverage. We report results of participation in a decision exercise among residents of Switzerland, a high-income country with a long history of universal health insurance and deliberative democracy. Methods: We adapted the Choosing Healthplans All Together (CHAT) tool, an exercise developed to transform complex healthcare allocation decisions into easily understandable choices, for use in Switzerland. We conducted CHAT exercises in twelve Swiss cities with recruitment from a range of socio-economic backgrounds, taking into account differences in language and culture. Results: Compared to existing coverage, a majority of 175 participants accepted greater general practice gatekeeping (94%), exclusion of invasive life-sustaining measures in dying patients (80%), longer waiting times for non-urgent episodic care (78%), greater adherence to cost-effectiveness guidelines in chronic care (66%), and lower premium subsidies (51%). Most initially chose greater coverage for dental care (59%), quality of life (57%), and long-term care (90%). During group deliberations, participants increased coverage for out-of-pocket costs (58%) and mental health to current levels (41%) and beyond current levels for rehabilitation (50%), and decreased coverage for quality of life to current levels (74%). Following group deliberation, they tended to change their views back to below current coverage for help with out-of-pocket costs, and back to current levels for rehabilitation. Most participants accepted the plan as appropriate and fair. A significant number would have added nothing. Conclusion: Swiss participants who have engaged in a priority setting exercise accept complex resource allocation trade-offs in healthcare coverage. Moreover, in the context of a well-funded healthcare system with universal coverage centered on individual choice, at least some of our participants believed a fully sufficient threshold of health insurance coverage was achieved.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage

Hurst

Schindler

Goold

et al. 2018

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with many other approaches to assessing ethical issues in engineering (e.g. Hofmann et al 2017;Hofmann 2017;Alkhatib and Abdou 2017;Lokhorst 2018;Kermisch and Depaus 2018), the approach taken in AWOSE has several conceptual benefits. It is comparably "open" in the sense that, albeit referring to a set of high-level ethical dimensions in order to stimulate and structure the brainstorming process, it does not impose a specific pre-defined list of questions that may unduly bias and distort results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

AWOSE - A Process Model for Incorporating Ethical Analyses in Agile Systems Engineering

Strenge

Schack

2019

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethical, legal and social implications are widely regarded as important considerations with respect to technological developments. Agile Worth-Oriented Systems Engineering (AWOSE) is an innovative approach to incorporating ethically relevant criteria during agile development processes through a flexibly applicable methodology. First, a predefined model for the ethical evaluation of socio-technical systems is used to assess ethical issues according to different dimensions. The second part of AWOSE ensures that ethical issues are not only identified, but also systematically considered during the design of systems based on information and communication technology. For this purpose, the findings from the first step are integrated with approaches from worth-centered development into a process model that, unlike previous approaches to ethical system development, is thoroughly compatible with agile methodologies like Scrum or Extreme Programming. Artifacts of worth-centered development called Worth Maps have been improved to guide the prioritization of development tasks as well as choices among design alternatives with respect to ethical implications. Furthermore, the improved Worth Maps facilitate the identification of suitable criteria for system evaluations in association to ethical concerns and desired positive outcomes of system usage. The potential of the AWOSE methodology has been demonstrated in the context of a technical system (smart glasses for cognitive assistance) that supports elderly and people with particular handicaps.

show abstract

“…Another standard use of the EM is to reveal ethical conflicts and ethical issues not addressed in-depth (Kermisch and Depaus, 2018). More specifically, the filled EM can to be used to anticipate conflicts between stakeholders, as it makes clear which pairs or groups of value demands are difficult or simply impossible to be satisfied simultaneously.…”

Section: Conflict Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethical Matrix as a Tool for Decision-Making Process in Conservation

Biasetti

Mori

2021

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision making-process in conservation can be very complex, having to deal with various value dimensions and potential conflicts. In fact, conflicts and competing interests between stakeholders are among the most quoted reasons for failure of projects. Ethical analysis can be helpful in this regard. In this paper we present a revision of the Ethical Matrix specifically tailored to decision-making processes in conservation. The Ethical Matrix is a conceptual tool devised to help decision-makers by supplying them with a framework of the ethically relevant aspects involved in decision-making process. It was originally developed for the ethical assessment of agri-food biotechnologies and later has been applied to other fields. The revised version we propose here has been designed for the ethical analysis of conservation priority-setting and impact. As conservation can raise many ethical relevant controversies, conceptual tools like the one presented here can be of help for conservationists, providing a map of the value demands involved. This map can be used to question the reasonableness of the value judgments, estimate the impact of different courses of actions, anticipate conflicts, and rank their severeness.

show abstract

The Strength of Ethical Matrixes as a Tool for Normative Analysis Related to Technological Choices: The Case of Geological Disposal for Radioactive Waste

Cited by 14 publications

References 35 publications

Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage

Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage

AWOSE - A Process Model for Incorporating Ethical Analyses in Agile Systems Engineering

The Ethical Matrix as a Tool for Decision-Making Process in Conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About