Etikk i praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 2020-05-22T11:42:55+00:00 The Editors Open Journal Systems <p>Etikk i praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics (EiP) is a scholarly journal of applied ethics and related political theory. EiP aims to create a broad-based and unique journal for Nordic research within ethics. The contributions may focus on ethical, political or social aspects of scientific and technological developments within different fields, research ethics, and normative power, democracy and culture analyses. The journal provides a meeting place for applied ethics, be it within biotechnology, research, primary and secondary education, childhood, the Internet, culture, nature, business life, sports, the media, medicine, politics or elsewhere.&nbsp;EiP is double-blind peer reviewed and is published open access two times per year in May and November. It is currently level 1 in the&nbsp;<a href=";bibsys=0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Norwegian scientific classification system</a>.</p> <p>Views expressed in the Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics are those of the authors and not necessarily those of its editors or publisher.</p> Emergency, Values and Evidence 2020-05-22T11:41:36+00:00 Allen Alvarez Espen Stabell May Thorseth <p style="text-indent: 14.2pt; margin: 6.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;"><span lang="EN-GB">This open issue of the Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics consists of four papers that discuss the topics covering vaccination, sustainability, development ethics research and family ethics. It also includes a book review.</span></p> 2020-05-18T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Allen Alvarez; Espen Stabell, May Thorseth Mandatory childhood vaccination: Should Norway follow? 2020-05-22T06:44:52+00:00 Espen Gamlund Karl Erik Müller Kathrine Knarvik Paquet Carl Tollef Solberg <p><em>Systematic public vaccination constitutes a tremendous health success, perhaps the greatest achievement of biomedicine so far. There is, however, room for improvement. Each year, 1.5 million deaths could be avoided with enhanced immunisation coverage. In recent years, many countries have introduced mandatory childhood vaccination programmes in an attempt to avoid deaths. In Norway, however, the vaccination programme has remained voluntary. Our childhood immunisation programme covers protection for twelve infectious diseases, and Norwegian children are systematically immunised from six weeks to sixteen years of age. In this article, we address the question of whether our country, Norway, should make the childhood vaccination programme mandatory. This question has received considerable public attention in the media, yet surprisingly little academic discussion has followed. The aim of the article is to systematically discuss whether it is morally justified to introduce a mandatory childhood vaccination programme in Norway. Our discussion proceeds as follows: We begin by presenting relevant background information on the history of vaccines and the current Norwegian childhood vaccination programme. Next, we discuss what we consider to be the most central arguments against mandatory childhood vaccination: the argument from the standpoints of parental rights, bodily integrity, naturalness, mistrust, and immunisation coverage. After that, we examine the central arguments in favour of mandatory childhood vaccination from the standpoints of harm, herd immunity, and as a precautionary strategy. We conclude that there are convincing moral arguments in favour of adopting a policy of mandatory childhood vaccination in Norway.</em></p> <p><strong>Keywords</strong>: autonomy, harm principle, herd immunity, parental rights, precautionary approach</p> 2020-02-22T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Espen Gamlund, Karl Erik Müller, Kathrine Knarvik Paquet, Carl Tollef Solberg Staying within planetary boundaries as a premise for sustainability: On the responsibility to address counteracting sustainable development goals 2020-05-22T11:42:55+00:00 Heidi Rapp Nilsen <p><em>Sustainable development, as explained through the three pillars of environment, society and economy, is a well-known concept and has been used extensively in recent decades. There is finally a growing acknowledgement that environmental sustainability is the prerequisite for achieving the other two pillars of societal and economic sustainability. Nevertheless, there is a tendency to not explicate the negative interactions between the pillars of sustainability, as in the interlinkages between the UN’s sustainable development goals. In this paper, we draw attention to a method for explicating both reinforcing and counteracting goals. This is a conceptual paper but with short, illustrative examples from different levels of the R&amp;D sphere on how this method can be used: one example is at the project level, two are from financiers of R&amp;D projects, and the other is at the UN level. Finally, a longer discussion on relevant ethical guidelines is presented. This paper addresses the responsibility to recognize when and how sustainability goals counteract each other through two key actions. The first action is to identify transgressions of global ecological system boundaries and the resulting serious consequences for trading on environmental sustainability. The second involves bringing to the fore relevant ethical guidelines from the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committee. An update of these guidelines is suggested to reflect recent research on the transgression of planetary boundaries and the consequences for a safe operating space for humans on Earth</em>.</p> <p><strong>Keywords:</strong> Environmental sustainability, ethical guidelines for research, UN sustainable development goals, counteracting goals</p> 2020-05-06T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Heidi Rapp Nilsen Using Insights in Sen’s Capability Approach to Overcome Empirical Development Ethics Research Designing and Execution Challenges 2020-05-22T06:44:52+00:00 Almas Mazigo Johan Hattingh <p><em>In this paper, we support the adoption of an empirical approach in development ethics research and show that the theoretical insights and methodological guidelines in Sen’s capability approach (CA) can offer helpful guidance to development ethicists on designing and execution of such research. To this end, we show how specific insights in the CA guide one to identify and engage with relevant stakeholders in extensive dialogues about the ethical issues underlying their development practices and in gathering empirical data for further ethical reflections. Drawing on an empirical development ethics research project we conducted in the fisheries sector of Ukerewe District in Tanzania, we illustrate how the CA supported us in identifying 310 representatives of various categories of small-scale fishers and stakeholders, and in designing and executing empirical development ethics research in the form of progressive stages of dialogues in stakeholder groups. The participants in these stakeholder groups reflected on and assessed their individual and collective values, capacities, roles and interests in the fisheries sector. In turn, we gathered empirical data on (i) the nature and causes of the poverty of small-scale fishers and ways to overcome it, (ii) the </em><em>moral roots of the prevalence of institutional and professional apathy, and (iii) stakeholders’ motivations and concrete actions to support the redressing of the challenges facing small-scale fishers. Later, we used these empirical data to theorise about moving small-scale fishers from poverty to prosperity, and about the development ethic best suited to guide future initiatives in combatting poverty and generating wealth through the fisheries sector in Ukerewe District.</em>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>Keywords: </strong>Empirical Ethics, Development Ethics, Capability Approach, Small-scale Fisheries, Poverty, Ukerewe District, Tanzania</p> 2020-02-23T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Almas Mazigo What Grounds Special Treatment Between Siblings? 2020-05-22T11:42:02+00:00 Marcus William Hunt <p><em>Siblings ought to treat one another specially – in other words, siblings qua siblings ought to treat one another in ways that they need not treat others. This paper offers a theory of why this is the case. The paper begins with some intuitive judgments about how siblings ought to treat one another and some other normative features of siblinghood. I then review three potential theories of why siblings ought to treat one another specially, adapted from the literature on filial piety: the gratitude theory, the friendship theory, and the special goods theory. In each case, these theories fail to explain some of the intuitive judgments about how siblings ought to treat one another. The paper then proposes a familial belonging theory. The institution of the family has certain goals, which impose normative demands on family members. I suggest that one such family goal is that every member feel familial belonging towards every other member, a goal which grounds the ways in which siblings ought to treat one another specially.</em></p> <p><strong>Keywords</strong>: family ethics, filial piety, friendship, gratitude, sibling<em><br></em></p> 2020-05-18T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Marcus William Hunt Land use quandaries 2020-05-22T11:42:29+00:00 Espen Dyrnes Stabell <p>Book review of <em>Finance or Food? The Role of Cultures, Values, and Ethics in Land Use Negotiations</em>, edited by Hilde Bjørkhaug, Philip McMichael and Bruce Muirhead, 3-18. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 517236-002</p> 2020-05-06T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Espen Dyrnes Stabell Bidragsyterne - Contributors 2020-05-22T11:16:51+00:00 2020-05-19T07:16:37+00:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Allen Alvarez