Application of decision tools to ethical analysis in biodiversity conservation.

Bateson's cube análisis ético conservation ethics cubo de Bateson decision tree ethical analysis ethical matrix matriz ética northern white rhino rinoceronte blanco del norte árbol de decisión ética de la conservación 伦理分析 伦理矩阵 保护伦理 决策树 北方白犀牛 贝特森方块模型

Journal

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
ISSN: 1523-1739
Titre abrégé: Conserv Biol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9882301

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2023
Historique:
revised: 10 09 2022
received: 04 06 2022
accepted: 14 09 2022
medline: 30 3 2023
pubmed: 2 11 2022
entrez: 1 11 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Achieving ethically responsible decisions is crucial for the success of biodiversity conservation projects. We adapted the ethical matrix, decision tree, and Bateson's cube to assist in the ethical analysis of complex conservation scenarios by structuring these tools so that they can implement the different value dimensions (environmental, social, and animal welfare) involved in conservation ethics. We then applied them to a case study relative to the decision-making process regarding whether or not to continue collecting biomaterial on the oldest of the two remaining northern white rhinoceroses (Ceratotherium simum cottoni), a functionally extinct subspecies of the white rhinoceros. We used the ethical matrix to gather ethical pros and cons and as a starting point for a participatory approach to ethical decision-making. We used decision trees to compare the different options at stake on the basis of a set of ethical desiderata. We used Bateson's cube to establish a threshold of ethical acceptability and model the results of a simple survey. The application of these tools proved to be pivotal in structuring the decision-making process and in helping reach a shared, reasoned, and transparent decision on the best option from an ethical point of view among those available. Que se logren decisiones éticamente responsables es crucial para el éxito de los proyectos de conservación de la biodiversidad. Adaptamos la matriz ética, el árbol de decisión y el cubo de Bateson para apoyar con el análisis ético de escenarios de conservación compleja mediante la estructuración de estas herramientas de tal manera que puedan ejecutar las diferentes dimensiones de valor (ambiental, social y bienestar animal) involucradas en la ética de la conservación. Después aplicamos las herramientas a un estudio de caso relacionado con el proceso de toma de decisiones respecto a si se debe seguir o no recolectando material biológico del rinoceronte blanco del norte (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) más viejo (una subespecie funcionalmente extinta) de los dos que existen. Usamos la matriz ética como un punto de partida para una estrategia participativa para la toma ética de decisiones y para recopilar los pros y contras éticos. Usamos el árbol de decisión para comparar las diferentes opciones en juego con base en un conjunto de deseos éticos. Usamos el cubo de Bateson para establecer un umbral de aceptación ética y modelar los resultados de una encuesta simple. La aplicación de estas herramientas demostró ser central en la estructuración del proceso de toma de decisiones y en el apoyo para lograr una decisión compartida, razonada y transparente sobre la mejor opción a partir de un punto de vista ético entre aquellos disponibles. 做出符合伦理的决策对于生物多样性保护项目的成功至关重要。本研究改进了伦理矩阵、决策树和贝特森方块模型, 并通过这些工具的结构化, 将其用于保护伦理涉及的不同价值维度(环境、社会和动物福利), 以协助复杂保护情景的伦理分析。接下来, 我们将该方法应用到关于是否继续采集仅存的两头北方白犀牛 (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) (白犀牛的一个功能性灭绝亚种) 老年个体生物样本的决策过程的案例研究之中。我们使用伦理矩阵收集了伦理方面的利弊因素, 并将其作为参与式伦理决策方法的出发点, 并使用决策树比较了基于一系列伦理需求的不同选择。此外, 我们使用贝特森方块模型建立了一个伦理上可接受性的阈值, 并对一项简单的调查结果进行了建模。结果表明, 这些工具的应用在构建决策过程和帮助站在伦理角度、从现有选项中最优地达成共同、合理且透明的决策方面发挥了重要作用。【翻译:胡怡思;审校:聂永刚】.

Autres résumés

Type: Publisher (spa)
Que se logren decisiones éticamente responsables es crucial para el éxito de los proyectos de conservación de la biodiversidad. Adaptamos la matriz ética, el árbol de decisión y el cubo de Bateson para apoyar con el análisis ético de escenarios de conservación compleja mediante la estructuración de estas herramientas de tal manera que puedan ejecutar las diferentes dimensiones de valor (ambiental, social y bienestar animal) involucradas en la ética de la conservación. Después aplicamos las herramientas a un estudio de caso relacionado con el proceso de toma de decisiones respecto a si se debe seguir o no recolectando material biológico del rinoceronte blanco del norte (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) más viejo (una subespecie funcionalmente extinta) de los dos que existen. Usamos la matriz ética como un punto de partida para una estrategia participativa para la toma ética de decisiones y para recopilar los pros y contras éticos. Usamos el árbol de decisión para comparar las diferentes opciones en juego con base en un conjunto de deseos éticos. Usamos el cubo de Bateson para establecer un umbral de aceptación ética y modelar los resultados de una encuesta simple. La aplicación de estas herramientas demostró ser central en la estructuración del proceso de toma de decisiones y en el apoyo para lograr una decisión compartida, razonada y transparente sobre la mejor opción a partir de un punto de vista ético entre aquellos disponibles.
Type: Publisher (chi)
做出符合伦理的决策对于生物多样性保护项目的成功至关重要。本研究改进了伦理矩阵、决策树和贝特森方块模型, 并通过这些工具的结构化, 将其用于保护伦理涉及的不同价值维度(环境、社会和动物福利), 以协助复杂保护情景的伦理分析。接下来, 我们将该方法应用到关于是否继续采集仅存的两头北方白犀牛 (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) (白犀牛的一个功能性灭绝亚种) 老年个体生物样本的决策过程的案例研究之中。我们使用伦理矩阵收集了伦理方面的利弊因素, 并将其作为参与式伦理决策方法的出发点, 并使用决策树比较了基于一系列伦理需求的不同选择。此外, 我们使用贝特森方块模型建立了一个伦理上可接受性的阈值, 并对一项简单的调查结果进行了建模。结果表明, 这些工具的应用在构建决策过程和帮助站在伦理角度、从现有选项中最优地达成共同、合理且透明的决策方面发挥了重要作用。【翻译:胡怡思;审校:聂永刚】.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36317722
doi: 10.1111/cobi.14029
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e14029

Informations de copyright

© 2022 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.

Références

Bateson, P. (1986). When to experiment on animals. New Scientist, 30-32.
Bateson, P. (2005). Ethics and behavioral biology. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 35, 211-233.
Beauchamp, T. L. (2010). Standing on principles. Oxford University Press.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1985). Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press.
Biasetti, P., & de Mori, B. (2020). Towards a conservation ethics. Iride, 33, 471-486.
Biasetti, P., & de Mori, B. (2021). The ethical matrix as a tool for decision-making process in conservation. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 9, 584636.
Biasetti, P., Ferrante, L., Bonelli, M., Manenti, R., Scaccin, D., & de Mori, B. (2021). Value-conflicts in the conservation of a native species: A case study based on the endangered whiteclawed crayfish in Europe. Rendiconti Lincei. Scienze Fisiche e Naturali, 32, 389-406.
Biasetti, P., Hildebrandt, T. B., Göritz, F., Hermes, R., Holtze, S., Galli, C., Lazzari, G., Colleoni, S., Pollastri, I., Spiriti, M. M., Stejskal, J., Seet, S., Zwilling, J., Ngulu, S., Mutisya, S., Kariuki, L., Lokolool, I., Omondo, P., Ndeereh, D., & de Mori, B. (2022). Ethical analysis of the application of assisted reproduction technologies in biodiversity conservation and the case of white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) ovum pick-up procedures. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 9, 831675.
Biorescue. (2021). The role of Najin in the Biorescue project: An ethical assessment. https://www.izw-berlin.de/files/biorescue/FINAL_Report_Najin_October_2021.pdf
Bracke, M. B. M., & Hopster, H. (2006). Assessing the importance of natural behavior for animal welfare. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics, 19, 77-89.
Canessa, S., Converse, S. J., West, M., Clemann, N., Gillespie, G., McFadden, M., Silla, A. J., Parris, K. M., & McCarthy, M. A. (2016). Planning for ex situ conservation in the face of uncertainty. Conservation Biology, 30, 599-609.
Catalano, A. S., Lyons-White, J., Mills, M. M., & Knight, A. T. (2019). Learning from published project failures in conservation. Biological Conservation, 238, 108223.
Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Diaz, S., Gomez-Baggethune, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S., Luck, G. W., Martin-Lopez, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K., Pascualo, U., Satterfield, T., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J., & Turner, N. (2016). Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 1462-1465.
Chan, K. M. A., Pringle, R. M., Ranganathan, J., Boggs, C. L., Chan, Y. L., Ehrlich, P. R., Haff, P. K., Heller, N. E., Al-Khafaji, K., & Macmynowski, D. P. (2007). When agendas collide: Human welfare and biological conservation. Conservation Biology, 21, 59-68.
Cromsigt, J., & Beest, M. T. (2014). Restoration of a megaherbivore: Landscape-level impacts of white rhinoceros in Kruger National Park, South Africa. Journal of Ecology, 102, 566-575.
De Mori, B., Spiriti, M. M., Pollastri, I., Normando, S., Biasetti, P., Florio, D., Andreucci, F., Colleoni, S., Galli, C., Göritz, F., Hermes, R., Holtze, S., Lazzari, G., Seet, S., Zwilling, J., Stejskal, J., Mutisya, S., Ndeereh, D., Ngulu, S., & Hildebrandt, T. B. (2021). An Ethical Assessment Tool (ETHAS) to evaluate the application of assisted reproductive technologies in mammals’ conservation: The case of the northern white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum cottoni). Animals, 11(2), 312.
Driscoll, J. W., & Bateson, P. (1988). Animal in behavioural research. Animal Behavior, 36, 1569-1574.
Emslie, R. (2020). Ceratotherium simum cottoni. IUCN Red List Threat Species.
Fassbender, M., Hildebrandt, T. B., Paris, M. C. J., Colenbrander, B., & Jewgenow, K. (2007). High-resolution ultrasonography of xenografted domestic cat ovarian cortex. Journal of Reproduction and Development, 53, 1023-1034.
Fraser, D. (2008). Understanding animal welfare. Wiley-Blackwell.
Gamborg, C., Palmer, C., & Sandøe, P. (2012). Ethics of wildlife management and conservation: What should we try to protect? Nature Education Knowledge, 3, 10.
Greggor, A. L., Vicino, G. A., Swaisgood, R. R., Fidgett, A., Brenner, D., Kinney, M. E., Farabaugh, S., Masada, B., & Lamberski, N. (2018). Animal welfare in conservation breeding: Applications and challenges. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 5, 323.
Hampton, J. O., Warburton, B., & Sandøe, P. (2018). Compassionate versus consequentialist conservation. Conservation Biology, 33, 751-759.
Hermes, R., Göritz, F., Portas, T. J., Bryant, B. R., Kelly, J. M., Maclellan, L. J., Keeley, T., Schwarzenberger, F., Walzer, C., Schnorrenberg, A., Spindler, R. E., Saragusty, J., Kaandorp, S., & Hildebrandt, T. B. (2009). Ovarian superstimulation, transrectal ultrasound-guided oocyte recovery, and IVF in rhinoceros. Theriogenology, 72, 959-968.
Hermes, R., Hildebrandt, T. B., & Göritz, F. (2018). Cryopreservation in rhinoceros-Setting a new benchmark for sperm cryosurvival. PLoS ONE, 13, 1-12.
Hermes, R., Hildebrandt, T. B., Walzer, C., Göritz, F., Patton, M. L., Silinski, S., Anderson, M. J., Reid, C. E., Wirbelt, G., Tomasova, K., & Schwarzenberger, F. (2006). The effect of long non-reproductive periods on the genital health in captive female white rhinoceroses. Theriogenology, 65, 1492-1515.
Hickling, G. (1994). Animal welfare and vertebrate pest management: Compromise or conflict? In R. M. Baker, D. J. Mellor, & A. M. Nichol (Eds.), Animal welfare in the twenty-first century: Ethical, educational and scientific challenges (pp. 345-359). ANZCAART.
Hildebrandt, T. B., Hermes, R., Colleoni, S., Diecke, S., Holtze, S., Renfree, M. B., Stejskal, J., Hayashi, K., Drukker, M., Loi, P., Göritz, F., Lazzari, G., & Galli, C. (2018). Embryos and embryonic stem cells from the white rhinoceros. Nature Communication, 9, 2589.
Hildebrandt, T. B., Hermes, R., Göritz, F., Appeltant, R., Colleoni, S., de Mori, B., Diecke, S., Drukker, M., Galli, C., Hayashi, K., Lazzari, G., Loi, P., Payne, J., Renfree, M., Seet, S., Stejskal, J., Swegen, A., Williams, S. A., Zainuddin, Z. Z., & Holtze, S. (2021a). The ART of bringing extinction to a freeze-History and future of species conservation, exemplified by rhinos. Theriogenology, 169, 76-88.
Hildebrandt, T. B., Holtze, S., Biasetti, P., Colleoni, S., de Mori, B., Diecke, S., Göritz, F., Hayashi, K., Hayashi, M., Hermes, R., Kariuki, L., Lazzari, G., Mijele, D., Mutisya, S., Ndeereh, D., Ngulu, S., Seet, S., Zwilling, J., Zywitza, V., & Galli, C. (2021b). Conservation research in times of COVID-19-The rescue of the northern white rhino. Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research, 3, 1-22.
Johnson, P. J., Adams, V. M., Armstrong, D. P., Baker, S. E., Biggs, D., Boitani, L., Cotterill, A., Dale, E., O'Donnell, H., Douglas, D. J. T., Droge, E., Ewen, J. G., Feber, R. E., Genovesi, P., Hambler, C., Harmsen, B. J., Harrington, L. A., Hinks, A., Hughes, J., & Dickman, A. (2019). Consequences matter: Compassion in conservation means caring for individuals, populations and species. Animals, 9, 1115.
Kaiser, M., & Forsberg, E. M. (2001). Assessing fisheries-Using an ethical matrix in a participatory process. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14, 191-200.
Kaiser, M., Millar, K., Thorstensen, E., & Tomkins, S. (2007). Developing the ethical matrix as a decision support framework: GM fish as a case study. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20, 65-80.
Maguire, L. A. (1991). Risk analysis for conservation biologists. Conservation Biology, 5, 123-125.
Maguire, L. A., Seal, U. S., & Brussard, P. F. (1987). Managing critically endangered species: The Sumatran rhino as a case study. In M. Soulé (Ed.), Viable population for conservation (pp. 345-359). Cambridge University Press.
McMahon, C. R., Harcourt, R., Bateson, P., & Hindell, M. A. (2012). Animal welfare and decision making in wildlife research. Biological Conservation, 153, 254-256.
McShane, T. O., Hirsch, P. D., Trung, T. C., Songorwa, A., King, A., Monteferri, B., Mutekanga, D., Van Thang, H., Dammert, J. L., Pulgar-Vidal, M., Welch-Devine, M., Brosius, P., Coppolillo, P., & O'Connor, S. (2011). Hard choices: Making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biological Conservation, 144, 966-972.
Mepham, B. (1996). Food ethics. Routledge.
Mepham, B., Kaiser, M., Thorstensen, E., Tomkins, S., & Millar, K. (2006). Ethical matrix manual. LEI.
Minteer, B. A., & Collins, J. P. (2005a). Why we need an “Ecological ethics”. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 3, 332.
Minteer, B. A., & Collins, J. P. (2005b). Ecological ethics: Building a new tool kit for ecologists and biodiversity managers. Conservation Biology, 19, 1803-1812.
Owen-Smih, R. N. (1988). Megaherbivores. In The influence of very large body size on ecology. Cambridge University Press.
Pearson, R. G. (2016). Reasons to conserve nature. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 31, 366-371.
Pennington, P. M., & Durrant, B. S. (2019). Assisted reproductive technologies in captive rhinoceroses. Mammals Review, 49, 1-15.
Redpath, S. M., Young, J., Evely, A., Adams, W. M., Sutherland, W. J., Whitehouse, A., Amar, A., Lambert, R. A., Linnell, J. D. C., Watt, A., & Gutierrez, R. J. (2013). Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 28, 100-109.
Regan, H. M., Ben-Haim, Y., Langford, B., Wilson, W. G., Lundberg, P., Andelman, S. J., & Burgman, M. A. (2005). Robust decision-making under severe uncertainty for conservation management. Ecological Applications, 15, 1471-1477.
Saragusty, J., Diecke, S., Drukker, M., Durrant, B., Ben-Nun, I. B., Galli, C., Göritz, F., Hayashi, K., Hermes, R., Holtze, S., Johnson, S., Lazzari, G., Loi, P., Loring, J. F., Okita, K., Renfree, M. B., Seet, S., Voracek, T., Sejskal, J., & Hildebrandt, T. B. (2016). Rewinding the process of mammalian extinction. Zoo Biology, 35, 280-292.
Shoreman-Ouimet, E., & Kopnina, H. (2015). Reconciling ecological and social justice to promote biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation, 184, 320-326.
Waldram, M. S., Bond, W. J., & Stock, W. D. (2008). Ecological engineering by a mega-grazer: White rhino impacts on a South African savanna. Ecosystems, 11, 101-112.

Auteurs

Pierfrancesco Biasetti (P)

Department of Reproduction Management, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, Germany.
Ethics Laboratory for Veterinary Medicine, Conservation and Animal Welfare, Padua University, Padua, Italy.

Thomas B Hildebrandt (TB)

Department of Reproduction Management, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, Germany.
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität, Berlin, Germany.

Frank Göritz (F)

Department of Reproduction Management, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, Germany.

Robert Hermes (R)

Department of Reproduction Management, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, Germany.

Susanne Holtze (S)

Department of Reproduction Management, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, Germany.

Jan Stejskal (J)

ZOO Dvůr Králové, Králové nad Labem, Czech Republic.

Cesare Galli (C)

Avantea, Laboratory of Reproductive Technologies, Cremona, Italy.

Ilaria Pollastri (I)

Ethics Laboratory for Veterinary Medicine, Conservation and Animal Welfare, Padua University, Padua, Italy.
Department of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padua, Legnaro, Italy.

Alessia Muzzo (A)

Department of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padua, Legnaro, Italy.

Isaac Lekolool (I)

Kenya Wildlife Service, Nairobi, Kenya.

David Ndereeh (D)

Wildlife Research and Training Institute, Karagita, Kenya.

Patrick Omondi (P)

Kenya Wildlife Service, Nairobi, Kenya.

Linus Kariuki (L)

Kenya Wildlife Service, Nairobi, Kenya.

Domnic Mijele (D)

Kenya Wildlife Service, Nairobi, Kenya.

Samuel Mutisya (S)

Ol Pejeta Wildlife Conservancy, Nanyuki, Kenya.

Stephen Ngulu (S)

Ol Pejeta Wildlife Conservancy, Nanyuki, Kenya.

Barbara de Mori (B)

Ethics Laboratory for Veterinary Medicine, Conservation and Animal Welfare, Padua University, Padua, Italy.
Department of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padua, Legnaro, Italy.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH