Etikk i praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics <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> NTNU Open Access Journals en-US Etikk i praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 1890-3991 <div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;">Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:</span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;">Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a <a href="" target="_blank">Creative Commons Attribution License</a> that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;">Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', serif;">Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See <a href="" target="_blank">The Effect of Open Access</a>).</span></div> Mandatory childhood vaccination: Should Norway follow? <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> Espen Gamlund Karl Erik Müller Kathrine Knarvik Paquet Carl Tollef Solberg ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2020-02-22 2020-02-22 1 21 10.5324/eip.v14i1.3316 Using Insights in Sen’ Capability Approach to Overcome Empirical Development Ethics Research Designing and Execution Challenges <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> Almas Mazigo Johan Hattingh ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2020-02-23 2020-02-23 1 21 10.5324/eip.v14i1.3311