Processes and consequences in business ethical dilemmas: The oil industry and climate changes

This paper proposes a framework to examine business ethical dilemmas and business attitudes towards such dilemmas. Business ethical dilemmas can be understood as reflecting a contradiction between a socially detrimental process and a self-interested profitable consequence. This representation allows us to distinguish two forms of behavior differing by whether priority is put on consequences or on processes. We argue that these forms imply very different business attitudes towards society: controversial or competitive for the former and aligned or cooperative for the latter. These attitudes are then analyzed at the discursive level in order to address the question of good faith in business argumentation, i.e. to which extent are these attitudes consistent with actual business behaviors. We argue that consequential attitudes mostly involve communication and lobbying actions aiming at eluding the dilemma. Therefore, the question of good faith for consequential attitudes lies in the consistency between beliefs and discourse. On the other hand, procedural attitudes acknowledge the dilemma and claim a change of the process of behavior. They thus raise the question of the consistency between discourses and actual behavior. We apply this processes/consequences framework to the case of the oil industry’s climate change ethical dilemma which comes forth as a dilemma between ‘emitting greenhouse gases’ and ‘making more profits’. And we examine the different attitudes of two oil corporations-BP Amoco and ExxonMobil-towards the dilemma.Business ethical dilemma, procedural rationality, consequential rationality, oil industry, climate change, Kyoto protocol

Managing science-policy interfaces for impact : Interactions within the environmental governance meshwork

Science-policy interface organizations and initiatives (SPIORG) are a key component of environmental governance designed to make links between science and society. However, the science­policy interface literature lacks a structured approach to explaining the impacts of context on and by these initiatives. To better understand these impacts on and interactions with governance, this paper uses the concept of the governance ‘meshwork’ to explore how dynamic processes – encompassing prior, current and anticipated interactions – co­produce knowledge and impact via processes, negotiation and networking activities at multiple governance levels. To illustrate the interactions between SPIORGs and governance meshwork we use five cases representing archetypal SPIORGs. These cases demonstrate how all initiatives and organizations link to their contexts in complex and unique ways, yet also identifies ten important aspects that connect the governance meshwork to SPIORGs. These aspects of the meshwork, together with the typology of organizations, provide a comprehensive framework that can help make sense how the SPIORGs are embedded in the surrounding governance contexts. We highlight that SPIORGs must purposively consider and engage with their contexts to increase their potential impact on knowledge co-­production and policy making.Peer reviewe

Improving the science-policy dialogue to meet the challenges of biodiversity conservation: having conversations rather than talking at one-another

A better, more effective dialogue is needed between biodiversity science and policy to underpin the sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity. Many initiatives exist to improve communication, but these largely conform to a ‘linear’ or technocratic model of communication in which scientific “facts” are transmitted directly to policy advisers to “solve problems”. While this model can help start a dialogue, it is, on its own, insufficient, as decision taking is complex, iterative and often selective in the information used. Here, we draw on the literature, interviews and a workshop with individuals working at the interface between biodiversity science and government policy development to present practical recommendations aimed at individuals, teams, organisations and funders. Building on these recommendations, we stress the need to: (a) frame research and policy jointly; (b) promote inter- and trans-disciplinary research and “multi-domain” working groups that include both scientists and policy makers from various fields and sectors; (c) put in place structures and incentive schemes that support interactive dialogue in the long-term. These are changes that are needed in light of continuing loss of biodiversity and its consequences for societal dependence on and benefits from nature

Opening up the participation laboratory: the co-creation of publics and futures in upstream participation.

How to embed reflexivity in public participation in techno-science and to open it up to the agency of publics are key concerns in current debates. There is a risk that engagements become limited to “laboratory experiments,” highly controlled and foreclosed by participation experts, particularly in upstream techno-sciences. In this paper, we propose a way to open up the “participation laboratory” by engaging localized, self-assembling publics in ways that respect and mobilize their ecologies of participation. Our innovative reflexive methodology introduced participatory methods to public engagement with upstream techno-science, with the public contributing to both the content and format of the project. Reflecting on the project, we draw attention to the largely overlooked issue of temporalities of participation, and the co-production of futures and publics in participation methodologies. We argue that many public participation methodologies are underpinned by the open futures model, which imagines the future as a space of unrestrained creativity. We contrast that model with the lived futures model typical of localized publics, which respects latency of materials and processes but imposes limits on creativity. We argue that to continue being societally relevant and scientifically important, public participation methods should reconcile the open future of research with the lived futures of localized publics

The formation of policy for protection of cold-water coral off the coast of Norway

This paper presents the implementation of conservation measures, especially bottom trawl free areas, for the protection of cold-water coral off the Norwegian coast. The protection measures became effective less than 9 months after the managers were informed and the public became aware of damaged coral on nationwide television. Behind this quick reaction were a number of agents such as the oil industry, fishers, biologists, NGOs as well as policy-makers. The implementation of the protected areas was remarkably free of contention. This work attempts to outline the reasons for this, and determine whether there are lessons to be learned with regard to conservation measures elsewhere.Deep water coral Management Closed areas

Participation in EU biodiversity governance: how far beyond rhetoric?

We explore the theory and practice of participation in EU biodiversity governance, focusing on the implementation of the Birds and Habitat directives and Natura 2000 at the EU and member-state levels in the cases of France and Germany. We identify three shifts in EU biodiversity governance which potentially lead to intensifying participatory processes, but which may also be induced by more participation: (i) a shift from a top-down state-centred administrative understanding of policy making towards more flexible and bottom-up approaches; (ii) a shift towards more democratic, ‘postnormal’, types of science; and (iii) a shift from a conservation focus towards a more anthropocentric ecosystems goods-and-services approach framed in a normative context of sustainability. We look at whether these shifts happen in practice and also look at the link with participation. At all political levels a big gap remains between the rhetoric on participation and the real-life implementation of participatory processes.