2023
Nickel, Philip; Loosman, Iris; Frank, Lily; Vinnikova, Anna
Justice and Empowerment Through Digital Health: Ethical Challenges and Opportunities Journal Article
In: Digital Society, vol. 2, 2023.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Access to care, Conceptual engineering, Digital health, Equity, Ethics of Technology, Health literacy, Health empowerment, Justice, Responsibilization
@article{Nickel2023b,
title = {Justice and Empowerment Through Digital Health: Ethical Challenges and Opportunities},
author = {Philip Nickel and Iris Loosman and Lily Frank and Anna Vinnikova },
url = {https://www.esdit.nl/s44206-023-00075-x/},
doi = {10.1007/s44206-023-00075-x },
year = {2023},
date = {2023-10-10},
urldate = {2023-10-10},
journal = {Digital Society},
volume = {2},
abstract = {The proposition that digital innovations can put people in charge of their health has been accompanied by prolific talk of empowerment. In this paper we consider ethical challenges and opportunities of trying to achieve justice and empowerment using digital health initiatives. The language of empowerment can misleadingly suggest that by using technology, people can control their health and take responsibility for health outcomes to a greater degree than is realistic or fair. Also, digital health empowerment often primarily reaches people who already have high technological and health literacy, leaving others behind. We critically investigate whether the concept of health empowerment could be re-engineered to mean something different, namely the process of improving the health literacy and access of those who least possess it, in line with recent proposals for conceptual engineering in the service of justice. We settle on the weaker conclusion that underlying ethical values including justice should be used to interpret the existing concept of empowerment. To conclude, we take a high-level view of various strategies for achieving the ethical value associated with digital health empowerment.},
keywords = {Access to care, Conceptual engineering, Digital health, Equity, Ethics of Technology, Health literacy, Health empowerment, Justice, Responsibilization},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The proposition that digital innovations can put people in charge of their health has been accompanied by prolific talk of empowerment. In this paper we consider ethical challenges and opportunities of trying to achieve justice and empowerment using digital health initiatives. The language of empowerment can misleadingly suggest that by using technology, people can control their health and take responsibility for health outcomes to a greater degree than is realistic or fair. Also, digital health empowerment often primarily reaches people who already have high technological and health literacy, leaving others behind. We critically investigate whether the concept of health empowerment could be re-engineered to mean something different, namely the process of improving the health literacy and access of those who least possess it, in line with recent proposals for conceptual engineering in the service of justice. We settle on the weaker conclusion that underlying ethical values including justice should be used to interpret the existing concept of empowerment. To conclude, we take a high-level view of various strategies for achieving the ethical value associated with digital health empowerment.
Remmers, Gaston; Hermann, Julia; Siebrand, Egbert; van Leersum, Catharina M.
Mind the Relationship: A Multi-Layered Ethical Framework for Citizen Science in Health Journal Article
In: Etica & Politica/Ethics & Politics , vol. XXV, iss. 2, pp. 171-196, 2023.
Abstract | BibTeX | Tags: Capabilities approach, care ethics, citizen science, health, Justice, participation
@article{nokey,
title = {Mind the Relationship: A Multi-Layered Ethical Framework for Citizen Science in Health},
author = {Gaston Remmers and Julia Hermann and Egbert Siebrand and Catharina M. van Leersum},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-01-31},
urldate = {2023-01-31},
journal = {Etica & Politica/Ethics & Politics },
volume = {XXV},
issue = {2},
pages = {171-196},
abstract = {There is a heated debate about what citizen science is and is not. We argue that instead of aiming
at a definition of citizen science, we should reflect upon its ethical starting points. Based on our
practical experiences with citizen science initiatives, we come up with an ethical framework that
consists of two core values (respect and justice), five ethical desiderata (relationship between
equals; recognition of each other's capacities, knowledge, and agency; reciprocity; openness for
different goals; and openness for different research methods and paradigms) and two
fundamental qualities (symmetry and transparency). The desiderata reflect ethically problematic
practices, such as the use of citizens by academic scientists as mere sensors, and biases in the
existing literature, such as labelling the projects that are initiated and led by citizens as “extreme”.
The desiderata are supported by two ethical theories: care ethics and the capabilities approach.
The aim of our ethical framework is to stimulate and facilitate reflection upon what needs to be
considered when co-creating or assessing a citizen science initiative. Fundamentally, citizen
science ought to be a humanizing endeavour unlocking the investigative capacities of humans.
The ethical framework is meant to help reflect on this endeavour.
},
keywords = {Capabilities approach, care ethics, citizen science, health, Justice, participation},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
There is a heated debate about what citizen science is and is not. We argue that instead of aiming
at a definition of citizen science, we should reflect upon its ethical starting points. Based on our
practical experiences with citizen science initiatives, we come up with an ethical framework that
consists of two core values (respect and justice), five ethical desiderata (relationship between
equals; recognition of each other's capacities, knowledge, and agency; reciprocity; openness for
different goals; and openness for different research methods and paradigms) and two
fundamental qualities (symmetry and transparency). The desiderata reflect ethically problematic
practices, such as the use of citizens by academic scientists as mere sensors, and biases in the
existing literature, such as labelling the projects that are initiated and led by citizens as “extreme”.
The desiderata are supported by two ethical theories: care ethics and the capabilities approach.
The aim of our ethical framework is to stimulate and facilitate reflection upon what needs to be
considered when co-creating or assessing a citizen science initiative. Fundamentally, citizen
science ought to be a humanizing endeavour unlocking the investigative capacities of humans.
The ethical framework is meant to help reflect on this endeavour.
at a definition of citizen science, we should reflect upon its ethical starting points. Based on our
practical experiences with citizen science initiatives, we come up with an ethical framework that
consists of two core values (respect and justice), five ethical desiderata (relationship between
equals; recognition of each other's capacities, knowledge, and agency; reciprocity; openness for
different goals; and openness for different research methods and paradigms) and two
fundamental qualities (symmetry and transparency). The desiderata reflect ethically problematic
practices, such as the use of citizens by academic scientists as mere sensors, and biases in the
existing literature, such as labelling the projects that are initiated and led by citizens as “extreme”.
The desiderata are supported by two ethical theories: care ethics and the capabilities approach.
The aim of our ethical framework is to stimulate and facilitate reflection upon what needs to be
considered when co-creating or assessing a citizen science initiative. Fundamentally, citizen
science ought to be a humanizing endeavour unlocking the investigative capacities of humans.
The ethical framework is meant to help reflect on this endeavour.
2022
Huijts, Nicole M. A.; Contzen, Nadja; Roeser, Sabine
In: Energy Policy, vol. 165, no. 112963, 2022.
Links | BibTeX | Tags: Distribution, Emotions, Fairness, Geothermal energy, Justice, Risks
@article{nokey,
title = {Unequal means more unfair means more negative emotions? Ethical concerns and emotions about an unequal distribution of negative outcomes of a local energy project},
author = {Nicole M.A. Huijts and Nadja Contzen and Sabine Roeser},
doi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112963},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-06-16},
urldate = {2022-06-16},
journal = {Energy Policy},
volume = {165},
number = {112963},
keywords = {Distribution, Emotions, Fairness, Geothermal energy, Justice, Risks},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
2021
Pesch, Udo
Institutions of justice and intuitions of fairness: contesting goods, rules and inequalities Journal Article
In: Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2021.
Links | BibTeX | Tags: Equality, Fairness, Institutions, Justice, Public/private distinction
@article{Pesch2021b,
title = {Institutions of justice and intuitions of fairness: contesting goods, rules and inequalities},
author = {Udo Pesch},
doi = {10.1080/13698230.2021.1913887},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-04-09},
journal = {Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy},
keywords = {Equality, Fairness, Institutions, Justice, Public/private distinction},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}