A practical framework for ethics assessment in wildlife management decision-making |
| |
| Authors: | Christian A. Smith James A. Tantillo Benjamin Hale Daniel J. Decker Ann B. Forstchen Emily F. Pomeranz T. Bruce Lauber Michael V. Schiavone Kipp Frohlich Patrick E. Lederle R. Joseph Benedict Jeremy Hurst Richard King William F. Siemer Meghan S. Baumer |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Wildlife Management Institute, 2559 Primrose Lane, Helena, MT, 59601 USA;2. Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853 USA;3. Department of Environmental Studies and Department of Philosophy, University of Colorado, Boulder, 4001 Discovery Drive, Boulder, CO, 80303 USA;4. Center for Conservation Social Science, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853 USA;5. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 100 8th Avenue SE, St. Petersburg, FL, 33701 USA;6. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 4166 Legacy Parkway, Lansing, MI, 48911 USA;7. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 625 Broadway, Albany, NY, 12233 USA;8. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 620 South Meridian Street, Tallahassee, FL, 32399 USA;9. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, 480 Wilson Road #13, East Lansing, MI, 48909 USA;10. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, 5107 Edmondson Pike, Nashville, TN, 37211 USA;11. Division of Wildlife, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 625 Broadway, Albany, NY, 12233 USA;12. Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 5400 Bishop Boulevard, Cheyenne, WY, 82006 USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Wildlife professionals lack a framework and process for incorporating ethical considerations in a systematic and transparent way, along with ecological and social science, to support wildlife management decision-making. We provide such a framework and process based on 3 of the major theoretical branches ethicists have developed in Western culture: consequentialist moral theory, which focuses on consequences and outcomes; principle- and rule-based approaches that deal with what is considered right or wrong; and virtue ethical theory, which considers factors such as character, virtue, and aesthetics. The framework can be used to anticipate the ethical consequences of alternative courses of action or taking no action. If wildlife professionals use this framework as an assessment tool to provide input into decision-making, resulting decisions will be more transparent, better understood by stakeholders, and more consistent with public trust responsibilities. |
| |
| Keywords: | decision-making ethics human dimensions human values management policy |
|
|
