[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v37y2009i6p1089-1099.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why good practice of OR is not enough--Ethical challenges for the OR practitioner

Author

Listed:
  • Rauschmayer, F.
  • Kavathatzopoulos, I.
  • Kunsch, P.L.
  • Le Menestrel, M.
Abstract
This paper develops the idea that following rules of good OR practice is necessary, but not sufficient for ethical OR. Several challenges of introducing ethical aspects into OR are discussed, evidencing difficulties and ambiguities in the relationship to be established between the OR practitioner and his/her clients, decision-makers or stakeholders. It shows that neither analysis nor modelling work nor the choice of analytical tools is entirely ethically neutral; incomparability, incommensurability and incertitude must be dealt with. The purpose of this article is to detail several difficulties or dilemmas an OR practitioner may be confronted with in the course of his or her assignment. In such situations, following rules of good practice may not be sufficient to indicate how to act in a morally good way. This paper aims at stimulating reflection by structuring the debate; it may leave the reader unsettled--unsettlement being a result and even aim of many discussions in moral philosophy.

Suggested Citation

  • Rauschmayer, F. & Kavathatzopoulos, I. & Kunsch, P.L. & Le Menestrel, M., 2009. "Why good practice of OR is not enough--Ethical challenges for the OR practitioner," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1089-1099, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:6:p:1089-1099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(08)00141-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Kunsch & M. Theys & J. Brans, 2007. "The importance of systems thinking in ethical and sustainable decision-making," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 15(3), pages 253-269, September.
    2. Geldermann, Jutta & Bertsch, Valentin & Treitz, Martin & French, Simon & Papamichail, Konstantinia N. & Hämäläinen, Raimo P., 2009. "Multi-criteria decision support and evaluation of strategies for nuclear remediation management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 238-251, February.
    3. Alberto Franco, L., 2009. "Problem structuring methods as intervention tools: Reflections from their use with multi-organisational teams," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 193-203, February.
    4. Rauschmayer, Felix, 2003. "Integrated assessment of biological invasions," UFZ Discussion Papers 1/2003, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    5. Landry, M. & Banville, C. & Oral, M., 1996. "Model legitimisation in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 443-457, August.
    6. Cook, David & Proctor, Wendy, 2007. "Assessing the threat of exotic plant pests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 594-604, August.
    7. van den Hove, Sybille, 2000. "Participatory approaches to environmental policy-making: the European Commission Climate Policy Process as a case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 457-472, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pierre L. Kunsch, 2016. "How system dynamics education may enhance virtue-based Ethics," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 4(1), pages 33-52, June.
    2. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    3. Dejana Zlatanović, 2015. "A Holistic Approach To Corporate Social Responsibility As A Prerequisite For Sustainable Development: Empirical Evidence," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 60(207), pages 69-94, September.
    4. Marc Le Menestrel & Luk N. Wassenhove, 2016. "Subjectively biased objective functions," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 4(1), pages 73-83, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    2. Kunsch, P.L. & Kavathatzopoulos, I. & Rauschmayer, F., 2009. "Modelling complex ethical decision problems with operations research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1100-1108, December.
    3. Wenstøp, Fred & Koppang, Haavard, 2009. "On operations research and value conflicts," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1109-1120, December.
    4. Kirsty L. Blackstock & Elizabeth A. Kirk & Alison D. Reeves, 2005. "Sociology, Science and Sustainability: Developing Relationships in Scotland," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 10(2), pages 125-140, July.
    5. Anne-Sophie Merot & Frédérique Grazzini & Jean-Pierre Boissin, 2014. "Gouvernance et développement durable : Le cas de la responsabilité élargie du producteur dans une filière de gestion des déchets," Post-Print halshs-01185814, HAL.
    6. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    7. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    8. Overholts II, Dale L. & Bell, John E. & Arostegui, Marvin A., 2009. "A location analysis approach for military maintenance scheduling with geographically dispersed service areas," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 838-852, August.
    9. Strong, Peter & Shenvi, Aditi & Yu, Xuewen & Papamichail, K. Nadia & Wynn, Henry P. & Smith, Jim Q., 2023. "Building a Bayesian decision support system for evaluating COVID-19 countermeasure strategies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113632, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Marie-Annick Montalan & Béatrice Vincent, 2010. "Proposition d'un modèle d'évaluation du capital immatériel pour les organisations transversales à l'hôpital : le cas des Equipes Mobiles de Gériatrie (EMG)," Post-Print hal-00476676, HAL.
    11. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Meinard, Y. & Tsoukiàs, A., 2019. "On the rationality of decision aiding processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1074-1084.
    13. Christian Engau & Volker Hoffmann, 2011. "Corporate response strategies to regulatory uncertainty: evidence from uncertainty about post-Kyoto regulation," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(1), pages 53-80, March.
    14. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    15. Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
    16. Stefano Capolongo & Leopoldo Sdino & Marta Dell’Ovo & Rossella Moioli & Stefano Della Torre, 2019. "How to Assess Urban Regeneration Proposals by Considering Conflicting Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-15, July.
    17. Pelenc, Jérôme & Etxano, Iker, 2021. "Capabilities, Ecosystem Services, and Strong Sustainability through SMCE: The Case of Haren (Belgium)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    18. Tim Schröder & Lars-Peter Lauven & Beatriz Beyer & Nils Lerche & Jutta Geldermann, 2019. "Using PROMETHEE to assess bioenergy pathways," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 287-309, June.
    19. Christos Zografos & Richard B. Howarth, 2010. "Deliberative Ecological Economics for Sustainability Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(11), pages 1-19, October.
    20. Felix Rauschmayer & Sybille van den Hove & Thomas Koetz, 2009. "Participation in EU Biodiversity Governance: How Far beyond Rhetoric?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 27(1), pages 42-58, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:6:p:1089-1099. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.