Home  About us  Contact
 

Ethical Framework (ethical + framework)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Humanities and Social Sciences40%
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting40%

Selected Abstracts

TRUST AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN A LIBERAL MARKET

ECONOMIC AFFAIRS, Issue 2 2004
Chris Daykin
Although apparently anti-competitive, the organised professions are deemed to be in the public interest because they ensure a supply of expertise within an ethical framework. Since they rely on the concept of a fiduciary relationship between the professional and the client, any failure of trust can undermine the structure. The paper explores the basis for trust, why trust may have failed, and how it might be restored. [source]

ICCROM's Contribution to the Ethics of Heritage

MUSEUM INTERNATIONAL, Issue 3 2009
Isabelle Vinson
As UNESCO commemorates the founding of ICCROM, this article looks at the effects of conservation practices on building an international ethical framework for protecting the cultural heritage. Starting from the conditions in which ICCROM was created, it reviews the role of non-European countries in particular in creating the international programme for the conservation of heritage. It also emphasizes the importance for the future of an analysis that considers both normative and deontological instruments and practical ways of protecting heritage. [source]

Dependence and autonomy in old age: an ethical framework for long-term care

AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL ON AGEING, Issue 3 2004
Catherine Turton
[source]

RESEARCH ON PRISONERS , A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE IOM COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS (2006) AND EUROPEAN REGULATIONS

BIOETHICS, Issue 1 2010
BERNICE S. ELGER
ABSTRACT The Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on Ethical Considerations for Revisions to DHHS Regulations for Protection of Prisoners Involved in Research published its report in 2006. It was charged with developing an ethical framework for the conduct of research with prisoners and identifying the safeguards and conditions necessary to ensure that research with prisoners is conducted ethically. The recommendations contained in the IOM report differ from current European regulations in several ways, some being more restrictive and some less so. For example, the IOM report suggests limiting the percentage of prisoners that should be involved in a biomedical study to 50%, a limit that does not exist in Europe. However, the report does not specifically advise against research without a direct benefit to an individual prisoner: the European regulations are more restrictive than the IOM committee recommendations in this respect. The definition of minimal risk varies, as well as the proposed role of the minimal risk requirement and of the principle of subsidiarity (research that can only be done effectively in prisons). The IOM report proposes a number of thoughtful suggestions, which it would be beneficial to implement everywhere, such as registers of research on prisoners. The European regulations offer pragmatic solutions to several thorny issues. In summary, the IOM committee report represents an admirable effort to tackle the present inconsistencies and deficiencies of federal regulations in the US on research on prisoners (45 CFR 46 Subpart C). Nonetheless, before acting on the recommendations, US regulators might consider revisiting international guidelines such as those published by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Science (CIOMS) and the Declaration of Helsinki. [source]

Partial Utilitarianism as a suggested ethical framework for evaluating corporate mergers and acquisitions

BUSINESS ETHICS: A EUROPEAN REVIEW, Issue 4 2010
Nick Collett
Prior literature on ethical concerns in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) has often concluded that many stakeholders, such as workers and communities, have unjustly suffered as a result of takeovers and associated defences and that their rights as stakeholders have been violated. However, very few papers provide any guidance on how to evaluate a merger or acquisition from an ethical standpoint. This study looks at how ethical frameworks could be used to assess the ethical impact of a merger or acquisition and gives practical guidance. It is proposed that decision makers should consider the impact on four stakeholder groups: shareholders, employees, customers and directors. We call the proposed method for doing this Partial Utilitarian analysis. We suggest two possible ways of applying the Partial Utilitarian analysis. One approach could rely on the evidence from a sample of recent deals. For this, empirical analysis is conducted on a sample of large M&As in the United Kingdom in the period 1993,2003. Alternatively, a better approach, requiring considerable management time, requires forecasting of the economic impact on the four groups of stakeholders. The paper shows how to do this. [source]