An official website of the United States government
In this workshop, we seek to facilitate a shared understanding regarding the role of ethics and values in design practice and research, using this shared understanding to develop methods to investigate ethical decision-making. While existing study of ethics and values has largely focused on design methods for implementation in practice in an explicit and structured way (e.g., value-sensitive design, values at play), our focus is on the ways in which values might be discovered and generatively explored through qualitative and critical means, both by researchers and practitioners. Through collaborative activities and discussions, workshop participants will be engaged in analyzing existing design artifacts and processes, critiquing them through ethical lenses, and subsequently visualizing their process of value discovery. Outcomes from this workshop are expected to further deepen existing methods for uncovering ethics and values in a design process, highlighting potential opportunities for supporting practitioners’ work and ethical awareness.
more »
« less
Ethical considerations of urban ecological design and planning experiments
Societal Impact Statement It is increasingly common for plant scientists and urban planning and design professionals to collaborate on interdisciplinary teams that integrate scientific experiments into public and social urban spaces. However, neither the procedural ethics that govern scientific experimentation, nor the professional ethics of urban design and planning practice, fully account for the possible impacts of urban ecological experiments on local residents and communities. Scientists that participate in design and planning teams act as decision‐makers, and must expand their domain of ethical consideration accordingly. Conversely, practitioners who engage in ecological experiments take on the moral responsibilities inherent in generation of knowledge. To avoid potential harm to human and non‐human inhabitants of cities while maintaining scientific and professional integrity in research and practice, an integrated ethical framework is needed for urban ecological planning and design. SummaryWhile there are many ethical and procedural guidelines for scientists who wish to inform decision‐making and public policy, urban ecologists are increasingly embedded in planning and design teams to integrate scientific measurements and experiments into urban landscapes. These scientists are not just informing decision‐making – they are themselves acting as decision‐makers. As such, researchers take on additional moral obligations beyond scientific procedural ethics when designing and conducting ecological design and planning experiments. We describe the growing field of urban ecological design and planning and present a framework for expanding the ethical considerations of socioecological researchers and urban practitioners who collaborate on interdisciplinary teams. Drawing on existing ethical frameworks from a range of disciplines, we outline possible ways in which ecologists, social scientists, and practitioners should expand the traditional ethical considerations of their work to ensure that urban residents, communities, and non‐human entities are not harmed as researchers and practitioners carry out their individual obligations to clients, municipalities, and scientific practice. We present an integrated framework to aid in the development of ethical codes for research, practice, and education in integrated urban ecology, socioenvironmental sciences, and design and planning.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2006308
- PAR ID:
- 10359858
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
- Volume:
- 3
- Issue:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 2572-2611
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 737-746
- Size(s):
- p. 737-746
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Climate vulnerability is higher in coastal regions. Communities can largely reduce their hazard vulnerabilities and increase their social resilience through design and planning, which could put cities on a trajectory for long-term stability. However, the silos within the design and planning communities and the gap between research and practice have made it difficult to achieve the goal for a flood resilient environment. Therefore, this paper suggests an AI (Artificial Intelligence)-driven platform to facilitate the flood resilience design and planning. This platform, with the active engagement of local residents, experts, policy makers, and practitioners, will break the aforementioned silos and close the knowledge gaps, which ultimately increases public awareness, improves collaboration effectiveness, and achieves the best design and planning outcomes. We suggest a holistic and integrated approach, bringing multiple disciplines (architectural design, landscape architecture, urban planning, geography, and computer science), and examining the pressing resilient issues at the macro, meso, and micro scales.more » « less
-
Purpose This conversation presents the reflections from five prominent disaster scholars and practitioners on the opportunities and challenges associated with research following disasters and explores the importance of ethics in disaster research. Design/methodology/approach This paper is based on the conversations that took place on Disasters: Deconstructed Podcast livestream on the 11th of June 2021. Findings The prominent themes in this conversation include ethical approaches to research, how we–as disaster researchers and practitioners–collaborate, engage, and cooperate, and whose voices are centred in a post-disaster research context. Originality/value The conversation contributes to ongoing discussions around the conduct and practice of disaster research.more » « less
-
Numerous methods and tools have been proposed to motivate or support ethical awareness in design practice. However, many existing resources are not easily discoverable by practitioners, and are often framed using language that is not accessible or resonant with everyday practice. In this paper, we present three complementary strands of work with the goal of increasing the ability of design and technology practitioners to locate and activate methods to support ethically-focused work practices. We first constructed a set of empirically-supported “intentions” to frame practitioners’ selection of relevant ethics-focused methods based on interviews with practitioners from a range of technology and design professions. We then leveraged these intentions in the design and iterative evaluation of a website that supports practitioners in identifying opportunities for ethics-focused action. Building on these findings, we propose a set of design considerations to evaluate the practice resonance of resources in supporting ethics-focused practice, laying the groundwork for increased ecological resonance of ethics-focused methods and method selection tools.more » « less
