澄清环境保护的伦理立场:电车问题的思想实验。

IF 7.6 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
BioScience Pub Date : 2025-06-17 eCollection Date: 2025-09-01 DOI:10.1093/biosci/biaf052
Guillaume Latombe, Ugo Arbieu, Sven Bacher, Stefano Canessa, Franck Courchamp, Stefan Dullinger, Franz Essl, Michael Glaser, Ivan Jarić, Bernd Lenzner, Anna Schertler, John R U Wilson
{"title":"澄清环境保护的伦理立场:电车问题的思想实验。","authors":"Guillaume Latombe, Ugo Arbieu, Sven Bacher, Stefano Canessa, Franck Courchamp, Stefan Dullinger, Franz Essl, Michael Glaser, Ivan Jarić, Bernd Lenzner, Anna Schertler, John R U Wilson","doi":"10.1093/biosci/biaf052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Conservation policies often need to integrate scientific predictions with ethical considerations. However, different normative ethical systems at the root of conservation approaches often support different decisions, and the moral stances of stakeholders are influenced by diverse societal values and perceptions. This creates the potential for dilemmas and conflicts. In the present article, we adapt the well-known trolley problem thought experiment to a conservation context. Exploring variations in how the problem is framed enables us to highlight key concepts that need to be considered in decision-making (uncertainty; asymmetry in numbers, victims, and impacts; temporal and spatial asymmetry; causal relationships and stakeholder involvement). We argue that the trolley problem offers a simplified but flexible framework to understand and predict the factors underlying differences in moral stances across diverse conservation issues, foster communication, and facilitate informed decision-making in conservation practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":9003,"journal":{"name":"BioScience","volume":"75 9","pages":"722-736"},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12412296/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clarifying ethical stances in conservation: a trolley problem thought experiment.\",\"authors\":\"Guillaume Latombe, Ugo Arbieu, Sven Bacher, Stefano Canessa, Franck Courchamp, Stefan Dullinger, Franz Essl, Michael Glaser, Ivan Jarić, Bernd Lenzner, Anna Schertler, John R U Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/biosci/biaf052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Conservation policies often need to integrate scientific predictions with ethical considerations. However, different normative ethical systems at the root of conservation approaches often support different decisions, and the moral stances of stakeholders are influenced by diverse societal values and perceptions. This creates the potential for dilemmas and conflicts. In the present article, we adapt the well-known trolley problem thought experiment to a conservation context. Exploring variations in how the problem is framed enables us to highlight key concepts that need to be considered in decision-making (uncertainty; asymmetry in numbers, victims, and impacts; temporal and spatial asymmetry; causal relationships and stakeholder involvement). We argue that the trolley problem offers a simplified but flexible framework to understand and predict the factors underlying differences in moral stances across diverse conservation issues, foster communication, and facilitate informed decision-making in conservation practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BioScience\",\"volume\":\"75 9\",\"pages\":\"722-736\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12412296/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BioScience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaf052\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioScience","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaf052","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

保护政策通常需要将科学预测与伦理考虑结合起来。然而,不同的规范伦理体系往往支持不同的决定,利益相关者的道德立场受到不同的社会价值观和观念的影响。这就造成了潜在的困境和冲突。在本文中,我们将著名的电车问题思想实验应用到守恒的环境中。探索问题框架的变化使我们能够突出决策中需要考虑的关键概念(不确定性;数量、受害者和影响的不对称;时间和空间的不对称;因果关系和利益相关者的参与)。我们认为,电车问题提供了一个简化但灵活的框架,以理解和预测不同保护问题中道德立场差异的潜在因素,促进沟通,并促进保护实践中的明智决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Clarifying ethical stances in conservation: a trolley problem thought experiment.

Clarifying ethical stances in conservation: a trolley problem thought experiment.

Clarifying ethical stances in conservation: a trolley problem thought experiment.

Clarifying ethical stances in conservation: a trolley problem thought experiment.

Conservation policies often need to integrate scientific predictions with ethical considerations. However, different normative ethical systems at the root of conservation approaches often support different decisions, and the moral stances of stakeholders are influenced by diverse societal values and perceptions. This creates the potential for dilemmas and conflicts. In the present article, we adapt the well-known trolley problem thought experiment to a conservation context. Exploring variations in how the problem is framed enables us to highlight key concepts that need to be considered in decision-making (uncertainty; asymmetry in numbers, victims, and impacts; temporal and spatial asymmetry; causal relationships and stakeholder involvement). We argue that the trolley problem offers a simplified but flexible framework to understand and predict the factors underlying differences in moral stances across diverse conservation issues, foster communication, and facilitate informed decision-making in conservation practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BioScience
BioScience 生物-生物学
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
2.00%
发文量
109
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: BioScience is a monthly journal that has been in publication since 1964. It provides readers with authoritative and current overviews of biological research. The journal is peer-reviewed and heavily cited, making it a reliable source for researchers, educators, and students. In addition to research articles, BioScience also covers topics such as biology education, public policy, history, and the fundamental principles of the biological sciences. This makes the content accessible to a wide range of readers. The journal includes professionally written feature articles that explore the latest advancements in biology. It also features discussions on professional issues, book reviews, news about the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS), and columns on policy (Washington Watch) and education (Eye on Education).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信