A Framework for Systematic Analysis of Ethical Issues in S&T Policy

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor at National Research Institute for Science Policy, Tehran Iran

2 Assistant Professor at National Research Institute for Science Policy, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The ethics of public policy is a branch of applied ethics. Having a look at policy process, it tries to provide analyses on different types of ethical challenges involved in that process and the ways that could resolve those challenges. Issues and problems discussed in the literature of the ethics of public policy are diverse and wide-ranging and a framework has not been proposed yet to systematically regulate that diversity. After providing a review on those diverse issues and themes, this paper proposes a systemic model of public policy and applies the model to regulating ethical themes and issues related to policy process. The framework developed in the paper classifies ethical problems relevant to policy into five main categories: ethical issues arising before decision-making, ethical issues arising after decision-making, ethical issues related to economic-social-institutional structures that affect policy-making, ethical problems arising from the activities of stakeholder groups, and finally, ethical issues related to ideas and normative frameworks in the minds of policy-makers.
 

Keywords

References

[1] Cooper, T. L. (Ed.) (2000). Handbook of Administrative Ethics (2nd ed.). New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
[2] Cooper, T. L. (2012). The Responsible Administrator: An Approach to Ethics for the Administrative Role. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[3] Koops, B.-J. (2015). The Concept, Approaches and Applications responsible innovation. In: Responsible Innovation 2. Edited by Koops, B.-J., Oosterlaken, I., Romijn, H., Swierstra, T., and Van Den Hoven, J. Springer. pp. 1-15.
[4] Jos, P. H. (1990). Administrative Responsibility Revisited: Moral Consensus and Moral Autonomy. Administration and Society, 22(2), 228-248.
[5] Dobel, J. P. (1990). Integrity in the Public Service. Public Administration Review, 50, 354-360.
[6] Cooper, T. L., & Wright, N. D. (Eds.) (1992). Exemplary Public Administrators: Character and Leadership in Government. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[7] Fisher, E. C., Jones, J. S., & von Schomberg, R. (Eds.). (2006). Implementing the precautionary principle: perspectives and prospects. Edward Elgar Publishing.
[8] Bell, R. (1985). Professional Values and Organizational Decision Making. Administration and Society, 17(1), 21-60.
[9] Fiore, W. I., Brunk, J. J., & Meyer, C. K. (1992). Norms of Professional Behavior in Highly Specialized Organizations: the Case of American Zoos and Aquariums. Administration and Society, 24, 81-99.
[10] Fischer, F. (1988). Ethical Discourse in Public Administration. Administration and Society, 15(1), 5-42.
[11] Stewart, D. W. (1991). Theoretical Foundations of Ethics in Public Administration: Approaches to Understanding Moral Action. Administration and Society, 23(3), 357-373.
[12] Nourizadeh, M., Kalantari, E., & Habiba, S. (2018). Modeling of Tehran Residents Attitude to GMFs Using Strutural Equations. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 9(4), 77-99. {In Persian}.
[13] Colby, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1987a). The Measurement of Moral Judgment.Vol. 1: Standard issue scoring manual. Cambridge University Press, New York.
[14] Colby, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1987b). Theoretical Foundations and Research Validation. Vol. 2: Standard issue scoring manual. Cambridge University Press, New York.
[15] Stewart, D. W., Sprinthall, N. A., & Shafer, D. M. (1994). Moral development in public administration. Handbook of administrative ethics, 325-48.
[16] John, P. (1998). Analysing Public Policy. London, Pinter. pp. 1-21.
[17] Sabatier, P. (1991). Political Science and Public Policy. Political Science and Politics, 24(2), 144-147.
[18] Moe, T. (1990). The politics of Structural Choice: Toward a Theory of Public Bureaucracy. In: Organization Theory: From Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond, edited by Williamson, O. New York: Oxford University Press.
[19] Schlager, E., & Blomquist, W. (1996). A Comparison of Three Emerging Theories of the Policy Process. Political Research Quarterly, 49(3), 651-672.
[20] Majone, G. (2006). Agenda Setting. In: Goodin, R. E., Moran, M., & Rein, M. (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[21] Hurlimann, T., Peña-Rosas, J. P., Saxena, A., Zamora, G., & Godard, B. (2017). Ethical issues in the development and implementation of nutrition-related public health policies and interventions: A scoping review. PloS one, 12(10), e0186897. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186897.
[22] Bovens, M., Hart, P., & Kuipers, S. (2006). The Politics of Policy Evaluation. In: Goodin, R. E., Moran, M., & Rein, M. The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[23] Immergut, E. M. (2006). Institutional Constraints on Policy. In: Goodin, R. E., Moran, M., & Rein, M. (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[24] Campbell, J. L. (2002). Ideas, politics, and public policy. Annual review of sociology, 28(1), 21-38.
[25] Ghanei Rad, M. A., Mohmoodi, M., & Ebrahim Abadi, H. (2017). Compilation of Multidimentional Model for evolution of Humanities and social science, Development. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 9(1), 85-103. {In Persian}.
Journal of Science and Technology Policy
Volume 12, Issue 2
June 2019
Pages 29-41

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics