Can cognitive dissonance explain beliefs regarding meritocracy?

Why do economically disadvantaged people often regard inequality as fair? The literature on deliberative justice suggests that people regard inequality as fair when it is proportional to inequality in effort or other inputs - i.e. when it is meritocratic. But in the real-world there is substantial uncertainty over the distribution of income and merit - so what compels disadvantaged people to legitimate their own disadvantage? This paper suggests it is a reaction to cognitive dissonance. When inequality is high, and when people lack control, their only way to reduce dissonance is to convince themselves the distribution is fair. I implement an online experiment to test this theory. Results do not support a cognitive dissonance mechanism behind meritocracy. But they do indicate that disadvantaged individuals are more likely to regard inequality as fair when they lack control. Analysis of qualitative data indicates that deprivation of control engenders a fatalistic response to inequality.

The influence of distributive justice on job attitudes and life satisfaction of hotel workers

This study uses the social exchange and spillover theories to examine the interrelationships between distributive justice, work attitudes, and life satisfaction of hotel employees in Accra, Ghana. Paper-and-pencil questionnaires were used to collect data from 321 respondents after which descriptive statistics and partial least square structural equation modelling were used to analyse the data. Distributive justice and work attitudes were positively related to the life satisfaction levels of hotel employees. This study adds to the scant literature on how workplace goings-on spillover to affect the life satisfaction of hotel workers. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

When abusive supervision affects creative idea sharing: Understanding the role of employee cheating and organizational justice

Getting employees to share their creative ideas has long been recognized as a vital source of organizational effectiveness. This research uses the conservation of resources theory to investigate how employee's creative idea sharing is affected by abusive supervision. Data for this research was collected from 209 employees and their immediate supervisors of generic nurses and medical dispensers of Southern Punjab public sector hospitals working under the Ministry of national health services regulation and Coordination. Data were then analyzed with the AMOS software package for simple regression and moderated mediation. This study found that with the increase in abusive supervision, employees develop cheating behavior, diminishing probability of sharing their creative ideas with coworkers. Along these lines, organizational justice moderates this relationship and attenuates the negative indirect effect of abusive supervision on creative idea sharing. The researchers recommended that organizations should develop training programs or coaching sessions for leaders to make them equip with essential interpersonal skills that can eradicate abusive supervision. Research implications, limitations, and future research directions are also discussed.

Unraveling the perceived overqualification puzzle: The role of distributive justice and leader political skill in influencing knowledge sharing

Perceived overqualification is a prevalent phenomenon in any type of organization due to overeducation and worldwide economic downturn. Despite numerous empirical examinations of such phenomenon, the impact of perceived overqualification on individual behaviors is inconsistent and inconclusive. We draw on equity theory to examine the negative effect of perceived overqualification on knowledge sharing through distributive justice. In addition, we investigate a leader's political skill as a boundary condition that influences the impact of perceived overqualification on distributive justice and subsequent knowledge sharing. Using a sample of 339 team members in South Korea, we found that perceived overqualification negatively impacts distributive justice, subsequently deteriorating employees' knowledge-sharing behaviors. Furthermore, when team leader is politically skilled, the negative impact of perceived overqualification on knowledge sharing is weakened. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

A guide to formulating fairness in an optimization model

Optimization models typically seek to maximize overall benefit or minimize total cost. Yet fairness is an important element of many practical decisions, and it is much less obvious how to express it mathematically. We provide a critical survey of various schemes that have been proposed for formulating ethics-related criteria, including those that integrate efficiency and fairness concerns. The survey covers inequality measures, Rawlsian maximin and leximax criteria, convex combinations of fairness and efficiency, alpha fairness and proportional fairness (also known as the Nash bargaining solution), Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining, and recently proposed utility-threshold and fairness-threshold schemes for combining utilitarian with maximin or leximax criteria. The paper also examines group parity metrics that are popular in machine learning. We present what appears to be the best practical approach to formulating each criterion in a linear, nonlinear, or mixed integer programming model. We also survey axiomatic and bargaining derivations of fairness criteria from the social choice literature while taking into account interpersonal comparability of utilities. Finally, we cite relevant philosophical and ethical literature where appropriate.

Covid-19 and age discrimination: benefit maximization, fairness, and justified age-based rationing

Age-based rationing remains highly controversial. This question has been paramount during the Covid-19 pandemic. Analyzing the practices, proposals, and guidelines applied or put forward during the current pandemic, three kinds of age-based rationing are identified: an age-based cut-off, age as a tiebreaker, and indirect age rationing, where age matters to the extent that it affects prognosis. Where age is allowed to play a role in terms of who gets treated, it is justified either because this is believed to maximize benefits from scarce resources or because it is believed to be in accordance with the value of fairness understood as (a) fair innings, where less priority is given to those who have lived a full life or (b) an egalitarian concern for the worse off. By critically assessing prominent frameworks and practices for pandemic rationing, this article considers the balance the three kinds of age-based rationing strike between maximizing benefits and fairness. It evaluates whether elements in the proposals are, in fact, contrary to the justifications of these measures. Such shortcomings are highlighted, and it is proposed to adjust prominent proposals to care for the worse off more appropriately and better consider whether the acquired benefits befalls the young or the old.

A new vaccine supply chain network under COVID-19 conditions considering system dynamic: Artificial intelligence algorithms

With the discovery of the COVID-19 vaccine, what has always been worrying the decision-makers is related to the distribution management, the vaccination centers' location, and the inventory control of all types of vaccines. As the COVID-19 vaccine is highly demanded, planning for its fair distribution is a must. University is one of the most densely populated areas in a city, so it is critical to vaccinate university students so that the spread of this virus is curbed. As a result, in the present study, a new stochastic multi-objective, multi-period, and multi-commodity simulation-optimization model has been developed for the COVID-19 vaccine's production, distribution, location, allocation, and inventory control decisions. In this study, the proposed supply chain network includes four echelons of manufacturers, hospitals, vaccination centers, and volunteer vaccine students. Vaccine manufacturers send the vaccines to the vaccination centers and hospitals after production. The students with a history of special diseases such as heart disease, corticosteroids, blood clots, etc. are vaccinated in hospitals because of accessing more medical care, and the rest of the students are vaccinated in the vaccination centers. Then, a system dynamic structure of the prevalence of COVID -19 in universities is developed and the vaccine demand is estimated using simulation, in which the demand enters the mathematical model as a given stochastic parameter. Thus, the model pursues some goals, namely, to minimize supply chain costs, maximize student desirability for vaccination, and maximize justice in vaccine distribution. To solve the proposed model, Variable Neighborhood Search (VNS) and Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA) algorithms are used. In terms of novelties, the most important novelties in the simulation model are considering the virtual education and exerted quarantine effect on estimating the number of the vaccines. In terms of the mathematical model, one of the remarkable contributions is paying attention to social distancing while receiving the injection and the possibility of the injection during working and non-working hours, and regarding the novelties in the solution methodology, a new heuristic method based on a meta-heuristic algorithm called Modified WOA with VNS (MVWOA) is developed. In terms of the performance metrics and the CPU time, the MOWOA is discovered with a superior performance than other given algorithms. Moreover, regarding the data, a case study related to the COVID-19 pandemic period in Tehran/Iran is provided to validate the proposed algorithm. The outcomes indicate that with the demand increase, the costs increase sharply while the vaccination desirability for students decreases with a slight slope.

[Sustainable prescription and implementation practices in clinical practice guidelines]

BACKGROUND

Despite broad agreement on the health impact of climate change, climatic considerations are still not widespread in the domain of medical practice. Methods to compile and assess climate-related evidence in guidelines are, although desirable for the protection of both humans and the environment, not yet available.

OBJECTIVES

The present article explores the conflict between ethical and clinical implications of climate change comparing two guidelines. This comparison highlights barriers and opportunities to guideline development and their significance to prescription practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A selective literature search and analysis of two clinical practice guidelines was performed.

RESULTS

Despite partly rigorous appraisal of existing evidence, both guidelines offer consensus-based recommendations only. Narrative evidence syntheses, in which the climate models underlying the reported data are made explicit, enable readers to draw independent conclusions regarding the validity of recommendations made. Educational efforts of this kind play a special role, given the current paucity of unambiguous information on climatic trends.

CONCLUSION

The urgency of climate change requires actions on all fronts. As contributions to the public discourse, guidelines should discuss adaptation strategies to climate change as well as mitigation measures and discuss them in a way that empowers their readers to make independent decisions. In doing so, it is important to keep in mind that informed patients may not necessarily prefer the most medically effective intervention, but may be willing to give priority to the health of the planet.

"Just" accuracy? Procedural fairness demands explainability in AI-based medical resource allocations

The increasing application of artificial intelligence (AI) to healthcare raises both hope and ethical concerns. Some advanced machine learning methods provide accurate clinical predictions at the expense of a significant lack of explainability. Alex John London has defended that accuracy is a more important value than explainability in AI medicine. In this article, we locate the trade-off between accurate performance and explainable algorithms in the context of distributive justice. We acknowledge that accuracy is cardinal from outcome-oriented justice because it helps to maximize patients' benefits and optimizes limited resources. However, we claim that the opaqueness of the algorithmic black box and its absence of explainability threatens core commitments of procedural fairness such as accountability, avoidance of bias, and transparency. To illustrate this, we discuss liver transplantation as a case of critical medical resources in which the lack of explainability in AI-based allocation algorithms is procedurally unfair. Finally, we provide a number of ethical recommendations for when considering the use of unexplainable algorithms in the distribution of health-related resources.

Systemising triage: COVID-19 guidelines and their underlying theories of distributive justice

The COVID-19 pandemic has been overwhelming public health-care systems around the world. With demand exceeding the availability of medical resources in several regions, hospitals have been forced to invoke triage. To ensure that this difficult task proceeds in a fair and organised manner, governments scrambled experts to draft triage guidelines under enormous time pressure. Although there are similarities between the documents, they vary considerably in how much weight their respective authors place on the different criteria that they propose. Since most of the recommendations do not come with ethical justifications, analysing them requires that one traces back these criteria to their underlying theories of distributive justice. In the literature, COVID-19 triage has been portrayed as a value conflict solely between utilitarian and egalitarian elements. While these two accounts are indeed the main antipodes, I shall show that in fact all four classic theories of distributive justice are involved: utilitarianism, egalitarianism, libertarianism, and communitarianism. Detecting these in the documents and classifying the suggested criteria accordingly enables one to understand the balancing between the different approaches to distributive justice-which is crucial for both managing the current pandemic and in preparation for the next global health crisis.

Solidaristic behavior and its limits: A qualitative study about German and Swiss residents' behaviors towards public health measures during COVID-19 lockdown in April 2020

Politicians, policymakers, and mass media alike have emphasized the importance of solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic, calling for the need of social cohesion in society to protect risk groups and national healthcare systems. In this study, which is part of an international Consortium, we analyzed 77 qualitative interviews with members of the general public in Germany and German-speaking areas of Switzerland on solidaristic behavior and its limits during the first COVID-19 related lockdown in April 2020. We found interdependencies between the interpersonal, group, and state tiers of solidarity that offer insights into what promotes solidaristic practice and what does not. We argue that because solidarity does not have a necessary and sufficient normative value in itself, those wanting to promote solidarity need to consider these interdependencies to effectively implement policy measures. Our study shows that inter-societal solidarity was based on individual voluntary agency and promoted through recognizing a shared goal, shared values, or other communalities including group effort. It also shows that individuals held state authorities accountable for the same values and expect inter-societal reciprocity from the contractual level. Tensions between those complying or willing to follow recommendations voluntarily and those perceived as not promoting the shared goal, posed challenges for solidarity. Another challenge for solidaristic behavior was when acting in solidarity with others was in direct conflict with the needs of close ones. Our study provides a clearer picture of promoting and limiting factors concerning solidarity which is relevant when communicating health policy measures to individuals and groups.

Wealth Without Limits: in Defense of Billionaires

In this essay we argue against preventing people from amassing extreme wealth via increased taxation. The first argument in favor of such a proposal, recently advanced by Ingrid Robeyns (2018), states that billionaires' resources would be better spent addressing morally important goals such as meeting disadvantaged people's needs and solving collective action problems. In response to this claim, we argue that billionaires are typically in a better position to benefit the poor and to solve collective action problems than public officials. The second argument in favor of preventing extreme wealth accumulation, advanced by Robeyns and Robert Reich (2018), states that billionaires have an inappropriate amount of influence in public life, which undermines political equality. We argue that corporate leaders tend to be more accountable to their fellow citizens than public officials. We then consider and criticize the objection that billionaires' success is typically a result of public investment, which entitles public officials to enforce taxes that demand a return on the public investment.

Worlds of distributive justice preferences: Individual- and country-level profiles of support for equality, equity and need

Based on welfare regime theory, scholars have tried to understand cross-national differences in solidarity by constructing 'worlds of welfare attitudes'. Most studies use a variable-centred logic to examine quantitative differences in support for the delivery of welfare provisions. Yet, the worlds of attitudes approach implies that qualitatively distinct logics of social justice exist. Thus, an alternative person-centred approach is needed that uncovers clusters of beliefs about the preferred type of welfare system. This article assesses individual- and country-level profiles of preferences for the principles of equality, equity and need to dissect worlds of distributive justice preferences. Multilevel latent profile analysis is applied to European Social Survey data (2018/2019). Results reveal four individual profiles that each combine distinct preferences for equality, equity and need. On the basis of the distribution of these individual profiles, three country profiles or worlds of distributive justice preferences are identified, which are not institutionally structured.

Occupational stress, distributive justice and turnover intention among public hospital nurses in China: A cross-sectional study

AIM

To examine the mediating role of distributive justice on the relation between occupational stress and turnover intention, and the regional role in moderating the relationship between distributive justice and turnover intention.

BACKGROUND

Turnover intention is an effective indicator of job departure and has been widely studied. Identification of methods to reduce turnover intention among nurses is a focus of the new round of medical and health system reform in China and in the realization of the "Healthy China 2030" policy. However, few studies have examined the present situation of Chinese nurse's turnover intention and corresponding influencing factors.

METHODS

Data were collected on-site by using questionnaires designed by anonymous researchers. A total of 718 effective questionnaires were allocated from representative public hospitals. Data were collected for the "Challenge and Hindrance-Related Self-Reported Stress Scale", "Distributive Justice Scale" and "Turnover Intention Scale".

RESULTS

Challenge stress was significantly inversely correlated with turnover intention, while hindrance stress was significantly positively correlated with turnover intention. Moreover, there was a significant inverse correlation between the two types of occupational stress and distributive justice and an inverse correlation between distributive justice and turnover intention. Regional role had a moderating effect on the correlation between distributive justice and turnover intention.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese nurses' turnover intention is directly or indirectly influenced by occupational stress and distributive justice. Managers should set reasonable goals to cope with challenging stress. Proper intervention measures should be designed such as reducing barrier pressure, increasing remuneration, and promoting the matching between workload and job value to reduce the turnover intention. Finally, balancing the treatment towards nurses in different regions may help achieve relative fairness.

Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: A discrete choice experiment

This study aimed to assess public preferences for the allocation of donor organs in Germany with the focus on ethical principles of distributive justice. We performed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) using a self-completed online questionnaire. Based on a systematic review and focus group discussions, six attributes, each with two-four levels, were selected (corresponding principle of distributive justice in brackets), including (1) life years gained after transplantation (principle of distributive justice: effectiveness/benefit - utilitarianism), (2) quality of life after transplantation (effectiveness/benefit - utilitarianism), (3) chance for a further donor organ offer (principle of distributive justice: medical urgency - favouring the worst-off), (4) age (medical and social risk factors: sociodemographic status), (5) registered donor (principle of distributive justice: value for society), and (6) individual role in causing organ failure (principle of distributive justice: own fault). Each respondent was presented with eight choice sets and asked to choose between two hypothetical patients without an opt-out. Data were analysed using conditional logit, mixed logit and latent class models. The final sample comprised 1028 respondents. Choice decisions were significantly influenced by all attributes except chance for a further donor organ offer. The attributes of good quality of life after transplantation, younger age, and no individual role in causing organ failure had the greatest impact on choice decisions. Life years gained after transplantation and being a registered donor were less important for the public. The latent class model identified four classes with preference heterogeneities. Respondents preferred to allocate deceased donor organs by criteria related to effectiveness/benefit, whereas medical urgency was of minor importance. Therefore, a public propensity for a rational, utilitarian, ethical model of allocation could be identified. Public preferences can help to inform policy to warrant socially responsible allocation systems and thus improve organ donation rates.

Distributive Justice in Family Relations

The aim of this paper is to highlight the important contribution of the lens of distributive justice to an understanding of family relations. Existent justice research in the family tends to focus on specific family relations: spouses, parents and young children, elderly parents and adult children, with most research addressing the division of labor between spouses. We seek to go beyond the specific family relations in order to highlight justice-related themes that are common across family relations. We elaborate upon three claims. First, we show that while the ideal of equality underpins justice in contemporary Western societies, actual distribution practices across family relations are characterized by persistent inequality. Second, although the gap between the ideal of equality and unequal distribution practices may create a sense of injustice among family members, we show why this is not necessarily the case. Third, we elaborate upon the positive and negative consequences that result from feelings of justice or injustice across family relations. We conclude by discussing the interweaving of love and justice in the family.

Liver transplantation during global COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory disease respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has significantly impacted the health care systems globally. Liver transplantation (LT) has faced an unequivocal challenge during this unprecedented time. This targeted review aims to cover most of the clinical issues, challenges and concerns about LT during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss the most updated literature on this rapidly emerging subject.

The "Economic Battle" Now and Then: (E)valuation Patterns of Distributive Justice in Cuban State-Socialism

This article disentangles and explores some commonly made assumptions about egalitarian state-socialist ideologies. Based on the conceptual framework of the multiprinciple approach of justice, it presents the results of an in-depth analysis of (e)valuation patterns of distributive justice in Cuban state-socialism. The analysis mainly focuses on ideational conceptions of distributive justice (just rewards), but it also accounts for distribution outcomes and resulting (in)equalities (actual rewards). The results of the comparative case study of the Cuban framework of institutions and political leaders' views in two periods of time, the early 1960s and the 2010s, point to (e)valuation patterns that are generally labelled as egalitarian, such as the allocation rules of outcome equality and (non-functional) needs. However, contrary to common assumptions about egalitarian state-socialist ideologies, the results also point to several other patterns, including equity rules as well as functional and productivist allocation rules. I argue that many of these (e)valuation patterns, in their connection to the discursive storyline of the Cuban economic battle, are indeed compatible with egalitarian state-socialist ideology.

Pledging Patent Rights for Fighting Against the COVID-19: From the Ethical and Efficiency Perspective

In response to the great crises of the COVID-19 coronavirus, virtually all new technologies protected by patent rights have been used in practice from diagnostics, therapeutic, medical equipment, and vaccine to prevention, tracking, and containment of COVID-19. However, the moral justification of patent rights is questioned when pharmaceutical patents conflict with public health. This paper proposes a revised approach of deciding on how to address the conflicts between business ethics and patent protections and then compares the different mechanisms of clearing patent thickets. Our findings highlight that patent pledges may not only contribute to achieving the maximized substantive justice of the public but also help patent pledgors fulfill procedural justice. The advantages of patent pledges have attracted many patent holders to make public statements during the COVID-19 pandemic. In contrast, the disadvantages of a free license may make patent pledges not sustainable for a long time without the related supporting measures. Our findings will be helpful for policymakers or company managers to make an appropriate decision on rationally utilizing patent portfolios for fighting against public health crises.

Downloaded Work, Sideloaded Work, and Financial Circumstances: The Contemporary Worker's Experience of Equity and Need Principles

People value being paid appropriately for their work-but national surveys indicate that many working adults report a discrepancy between what they actually earn and what they think they should justly earn. This evidence provides an impetus for examining the factors that shape workers' justice perceptions of earnings. The present study elaborates on two key distributive justice principles-equity and need-that guide people's ideas about their just reward. We ask: How do contemporary workers experience and understand the nature of work effort and need? We employ a mixed methods research design to answer this question. First, we analyze focus group interviews among workers in Toronto, Ontario (N = 22), and generate two novel hypotheses about the factors that shape workers' expectation for greater rewards: "downloaded" and "sideloaded" extra work that induce feelings of overwork, and rising cost of living and the associated financial strain. Second, drawing upon focus group narratives, we operationalize these concepts and test our hypotheses with a 2019 nationally representative sample of Canadian workers (N = 2,111). The results show that downloaded and sideloaded extra work shape greater reward expectations partly through the sense of overload, and rising cost of living and the associated financial strain also shape reward expectations. Furthermore, financial strain amplifies the link between extra work and greater reward expectations. We situate these findings within a broader discussion of the nature of effort and need among contemporary workers and its implications for justice perceptions.

Ethics, morality, and the psychology of climate justice

Climate change is increasingly understood as a social justice issue by academics, policymakers, and the public; however, the nature of these perceptions and their implications for cooperation and decision-making have only recently begun to receive empirical attention. We review emerging empirical work that suggests that morality and justice perceptions can serve as both a bridge and a barrier to cooperation around climate change and highlight two critical areas for future development, identifying psychological processes that promote and impede climate vulnerability and that enhance equity in the design and implementation of climate solutions. We argue that conceptualizing climate justice as a multidimensional process addressing both social and structural barriers can stimulate new psychological research and help align disparate approaches within the social sciences.

A less objectionable greed? Work-life conflict and unjust pay during a pandemic

Perceptions of unjust pay represent a central feature in research on distributive justice. Prior studies document that work-life conflict (WLC) is a strong predictor of unjustly low pay. We extend that work by asking: Did the social and economic changes associated with the coronavirus pandemic 2019 (COVID-19) modify the relationship between WLC and perceptions of unjust pay? In September 2019, we collected data from a nationally representative sample of workers to profile the quality of work and economic life. Then, during a critical period of widespread economic and social shockwaves, we re-interviewed these same study participants in May 2020 to evaluate change. We observe that the strong positive association between WLC and unjustly low pay decreased overall in the population-but the strength and direction of that association differed significantly across several dimensions of social stratification. Specifically, we found a weaker relationship among visible minorities, younger workers, and individuals with lower socioeconomic status. We interpret these patterns as suggesting that-at least among more vulnerable groups-the "greed" represented in the process of work interfering with non-work was unevenly experienced during peak period of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nudge for justice: An ERP investigation of default effects on trade-offs between equity and efficiency

Default options are an increasingly common tool used by organizations, managers, and policymakers to guide individuals' behavior. We wondered whether the known preference for default options could constitute a nudge to achieve more equitable or more efficient results. Combining with event-related potentials, we found that both the default option and distributive justice contributed significantly to decision-making. The N200s and P300s were extracted using the tensor decomposition, which showed superiority in terms of capturing multi-domain features. The results demonstrated that greater brain activity associated with conflict monitoring was elicited in the trade-off between equity and efficiency when the default could not represent a socially desirable action. Besides, participants attached more motivational/affective significance to equitable defaults than inequitable default options. Further, individuals with larger neural response differences between equitable and inequitable defaults appeared to be more inequity aversion in behavior. These findings offer a novel perspective on the role of default effects on distributive justice, while contributing to both organizational policy and practice by using the default to improve social welfare.

Fertility Technology Research and the Use of Human Beings as Property

In January 2020, an article in the Journal of Human Reproduction exploring whether human embryos could be obtained via uterine lavage and to compare their quality to embryos created via in vitro fertilization. Any embryo that was not removed via lavage was either prevented from implanting by giving the women injections of gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists or aborted with either methotrexate or uterine curettage. This research was done using women in Mexico, who were paid the equivalent of over two months' wages and who signed away their rights to their embryos, including agreeing to have an abortion if implantation did occur. Not only is this another instance of human beings being treated as property but is against the dignity of these women by turning them into, as one ethicist says, "human petri dishes."

SUMMARY

Researchers continue to use people as objects to obtain their goals. In this case, it was poor women in Mexico and their embryos. The Editors of Journal of Human Reproduction enabled this by publishing the report.

REST framework: A modelling approach towards cooling energy stress mitigation plans for future cities in warming Global South

Future cities of the Global South will not only rapidly urbanise but will also get warmer from climate change and urbanisation induced effects. It will trigger a multi-fold increase in cooling demand, especially at a residential level, mitigation to which remains a policy and research gap. This study forwards a novel residential energy stress mitigation framework called REST to estimate warming climate-induced energy stress in residential buildings using a GIS-driven urban heat island and energy modelling approach. REST further estimates rooftop solar potential to enable solar photo-voltaic (PV) based decentralised energy solutions and establish an optimised routine for peer-to-peer energy sharing at a neighbourhood scale. The optimised network is classified through a decision tree algorithm to derive sustainability rules for mitigating energy stress at an urban planning scale. These sustainability rules established distributive energy justice variables in urban planning context. The REST framework is applied as a proof-of-concept on a future smart city of India, named Amaravati. Results show that cooling energy stress can be reduced by 80 % in the study area through sensitive use of planning variables like Floor Space Index (FSI) and built-up density. It has crucial policy implications towards the design and implementation of a national level cooling action plans in the future cities of the Global South to meet the UN-SDG - 7 (clean and affordable energy) and SDG - 11 (sustainable cities and communities) targets.

Consent in the time of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic crisis has necessitated widespread adaptation of revised treatment regimens for both urgent and routine medical problems in patients with and without COVID-19. Some of these alternative treatments maybe second-best. Treatments that are known to be superior might not be appropriate to deliver during a pandemic when consideration must be given to distributive justice and protection of patients and their medical teams as well the importance given to individual benefit and autonomy. What is required of the doctor discussing these alternative, potentially inferior treatments and seeking consent to proceed? Should doctors share information about unavailable but standard treatment alternatives when seeking consent? There are arguments in defence of non-disclosure; information about unavailable treatments may not aid a patient to weigh up options that are available to them. There might be justified concern about distress for patients who are informed that they are receiving second-best therapies. However, we argue that doctors should tailor information according to the needs of the individual patient. For most patients that will include a nuanced discussion about treatments that would be considered in other times but currently unavailable. That will sometimes be a difficult conversation, and require clinicians to be frank about limited resources and necessary rationing. However, transparency and honesty will usually be the best policy.

An Analysis of Charlie's Law and Alfie's Law

The Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans cases were high-profile cases involving disagreements between the parents of young infants and medical practitioners, which have given impetus to pre-existing calls for law reform that have been rebranded as 'Charlie's Law' and 'Alfie's Law'. I argue against the proposal to replace the best interest test, which is currently determinative in such contentious cases, with a significant harm test, as it would render UK law divergent from international law. I also employ critical theory to rebut the notion that parents are the best decision makers and refute criticisms of clinicians (who reflexively acknowledged the limits of medicine). I utilise theories of distributive justice to demonstrate that legal reform may exacerbate unfairness, and case law to show that it may be unworkable. Nonetheless, I apply critical and Foucauldian theory to critique the lack of patient and public empowerment within the NHS and I endorse the proposal to ensure that mediation is offered in contentious cases, as this may empower patients and their carers. I also aver that the best interests test should be informed by clearer criteria regarding the allocation of finite resources, which the public should influence via the democratisation of the NHS.

Ethical values supporting the disclosure of incidental and secondary findings in clinical genomic testing: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Incidental findings (IFs) and secondary findings (SFs), being results that are unrelated to the diagnostic question, are the subject of an important debate in the practice of clinical genomic medicine. Arguments for reporting these results or not doing so typically relate to the principles of autonomy, non-maleficence and beneficence. However, these principles frequently conflict and are insufficient by themselves to come to a conclusion. This study investigates empirically how ethical principles are considered when actually reporting IFs or SFs and how value conflicts are weighed.

METHODS

A qualitative focus group study has been undertaken, including a multidisciplinary group of professionals from Belgian centres for medical genetics. The data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

All eight Belgian centres participated in this study. Ethical values were frequently referred to for disclosure policies on IFs and SFs. Participants invoked respect for patient autonomy to support the disclosure of IFs and opt-out options for IFs and SFs, non-maleficence for the professional delineation of reportable IFs and opt-out options for IFs and SFs and (the particular scope of) beneficence for the mandatory reporting of actionable IFs, the delineation of reportable IFs and a current decline of actively pursued SFs. Professional assumptions about patients' genetic literacy were an important factor in the weighing of values.

CONCLUSIONS

In line with the traditional bioethical discourse, the mandatory reporting of actionable IFs might be interpreted as a "technological, soft paternalism". Restricting patients' choices might be acceptable, but then its motives should be valid and its beneficent outcomes highly plausible. Hence, the presuppositions of technological, soft paternalism - patients' inability to make informed decisions, normative rationality, the efficacy of beneficent outcomes and the delineated spectrum of beneficence - should be approached critically. Moreover, distributive justice should be considered an important value in the delineation of the current scope of the ethical debate on IFs and SFs. This study of guiding values may stimulate the debate on the ethical grounds for a solid policy on IFs and SFs internationally.

Do Fair and Just Systems Require Compensation for the Disadvantages of the Natural Lottery? A Discussion on Society's Duties on the Provision of Gene Therapy

Genetic diseases have been thought to be acquired as a result of sheer bad luck. However, recent advances in medical science have demonstrated the mechanisms of genetic disorders, which enable us to intervene with their occurrence and treatment. Today, gene therapy, once considered too risky, has become safer and can save the lives of patients with previously untreatable and lethal genetic diseases. However, the positive expectations from gene therapy are overshadowed by their extremely high prices. Thus, the duty of society in the provision of gene therapies has been frequently discussed. The discussions mainly focus on how to meet the genetic treatment needs of patients without violating the notion of justice and fairness in society. This study discusses the theoretical grounds for society's duty to compensate for genetic disease patients' disadvantages by providing them with appropriate genetic treatment. The main question is whether a fair and just system requires society to provide available lifesaving gene therapy to patients in need. The discussion is constructed on the crucial notion of the fair equal opportunity principle in a just system and the plausibility of including disadvantages emerging from bad luck in the natural lottery in the domain of justice.

Should Gender Reassignment Surgery be Publicly Funded?

Transgender people have among the highest rates of suicide attempts of any group in society, driven strongly by the perception that they do not belong in the sex of their physical body. Gender reassignment surgery (GRS) is a procedure that can change the transgender person's physical body to accord with their gender identity. The procedure raises important ethical and distributive justice concerns, given the controversy of whether it is a cosmetic or medical procedure and the economic costs associated with performing the procedure. This paper argues that there is a strong case for funding GRS as a matter of clinical necessity and justice. This paper will be divided in four key sections: First, the state of transgender health will be outlined, including the role of GRS and common objections to it. Second, a number of common objections to GRS will be analysed at the outset and shown to be unconvincing. Third, a constructive argument will be advanced, arguing that publicly funded GRS is clinically necessary, cost-effective, and demanded by principles of justice. Fourth, the paper will briefly discuss moralistic biases and why we demand a higher burden of justification for funding GRS compared with other analogous procedures.

Large-scale environmental degradation results in inequitable impacts to already impoverished communities: A case study from the floating villages of Cambodia

Cambodian subsistence communities within the Tonle Sap Great Lake area rely on resource extraction from the lake to meet livelihood needs. These fishing communities-many of which consist of dwellings floating on the lake-face potentially profound livelihood challenges because of climate change and changing hydrology due to dam construction for hydroelectricity within the Mekong Basin. We conducted interviews across five village communities, with local subsistence fisher people in the Tonle Sap in 2015, and used thematic analysis methods to reveal a fishery system that is undergoing rapid ecological decline, with local fishing communities increasingly experiencing reductions in available fish stocks. As a result, over 100 000 people living in these communities are experiencing a direct loss of well-being and livelihood. We discuss these losses and consider their implications for the future viability of Cambodian floating village communities.

Defending the Democratic Argument for Limitarianism: A Reply to Volacu and Dumitru

In this paper, I argue that limitarian policies are a good means to further political equality. Limitarianism, which is a view coined and defended by Robeyns (2017), is a partial view in distributive justice which claims that under non-ideal circumstances it is morally impermissible to be rich. In a recent paper, Volacu and Dumitru (2018) level two arguments against Robeyns' Democratic Argument for limitarianism. The Democratic Argument states that limitarianism is called for given the undermining influence current inequalities in income and wealth have for the value of democracy and political equality. Volacu and Dumitru's Incentive Objection holds that limitarianism places an excessive and inefficient burden on the rich in ensuring political equality. The Efficacy Objection holds that even if limitarianism limits excessive wealth it still fails to ensure the preservation of political equality. In this paper, I will argue that both of these objections fail, but on separate grounds. I argue that the Incentive objection fails because one could appeal to limitarian policies that are different from the ones discussed by Volacu and Dumitru and which escape the problem of reduced productivity. I argue against the Efficacy Objection that limitarian policies are a partial but highly valuable step towards establishing political equality, and that they can and should complement or be complemented by other strategies.

Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice

Science communication, as a field and as a practice, is fundamentally about knowledge distribution; it is about the access to, and the sharing of knowledge. All distribution (science communication included) brings with it issues of ethics and justice. Indeed, whether science communicators acknowledge it or not, they get to decide both which knowledge is shared (by choosing which topic is communicated), and who gets access to this knowledge (by choosing which audience it is presented to). As a result, the decisions of science communicators have important implications for epistemic justice: how knowledge is distributed fairly and equitably. This paper presents an overview of issues related to epistemic justice for science communication, and argues that there are two quite distinct ways in which science communicators can be just (or unjust) in the way they distribute knowledge. Both of these paths will be considered before concluding that, at least on one of these accounts, science communication as a field and as a practice is fundamentally epistemically unjust. Possible ways to redress this injustice are suggested.

The construction of feelings of justice in environmental management: An empirical study of multiple biodiversity conflicts in Calakmul, Mexico

A failure to address social concerns in biodiversity conservation can lead to feelings of injustice among some actors, and hence jeopardize conservation goals. The complex socio-cultural and political context of the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve, Mexico, has historically led to multiple biodiversity conflicts. Our goal, in this case study, was to explore perceptions of justice held by local actors in relation to biodiversity conflicts. We then aimed to determine the following: 1) people's definitions of their feelings of justice; 2) the criteria used in this assessment; 3) variability in the criteria influencing them; and 4) implications for environmental management in the region and beyond. We worked with five focus groups, exploring three examples of biodiversity conflict around forest, water and jaguar management with a total of 41 ranchers, farmers and representatives of local producers. Our results demonstrated that people constructed their feelings of justice around four dimensions of justice: recognition (acknowledging individuals' rights, values, cultures and knowledge systems); ecological (fair and respectful treatment of the natural environment), procedural (fairness in processes of environmental management), distributive (fairness in the distribution of costs and benefits). We identified a list of criteria the participants used in their appraisal of justice and sources of variation such as the social scale of focus and participant role, and whom they perceived to be responsible for resource management. We propose a new framework that conceptualizes justice-as-recognition and ecological justice as forms of conditional justices, and procedural and distributive justices as forms of practical justice. Conditional justice allows us to define who is a legitimate source of justice norms and if nature should be integrated in the scope of justice; hence, conditional justice underpins other dimensions of justice. On the other hand, procedural and distributive address the daily practices of fair processes and distribution. We propose that the perception of justice is a neglected but important aspect to include in integrative approaches to managing biodiversity conflicts. Addressing demands of justice in environmental management will require us to consider more than the distribution of costs and benefits among actors. We also need to respect the plurality of fairness perspectives and to recognize the benefits of dialogical approaches to achieve more successful environmental management.

Rent increase strategies and distributive justice: the socio-spatial effects of rent control policy in Amsterdam

Rent controls and rent setting regulation in different contexts incorporate and balance different aims, in particular when securing affordability and the effective distribution of scarce housing by incorporating market mechanisms. As rent policy is frequently discussed in terms of affordability or market functioning in broad terms, small-scale distributive socio-spatial effects are often not regarded. In this paper, three strategies under the new rent sum policy are compared against the former policy and practice for Amsterdam, the Netherlands, to observe the effects of distributive justice. The new rent policy partly decentralizes rent increase decisions from the national level to local authorities and housing associations. Using microdata on all social housing units and their tenants' distributive justice, outcomes under the former policy and practice are observed for a 6-year period (2008-2014) and the effects of three different rent increase strategies under the new rent sum policy are forecasted for the same period, combining an ex ante and an ex post evaluation. The possibilities for housing associations to vary rent increases for different groups of tenants in order to improve distributive justice outcomes are explored. Results show that all three possible strategies decrease the observed affordability gap between new and long-term tenants. Valuing the distributions of these strategies by applying two different standards for distributive justice shows the rent sum policy may only result in modest improvements.

Relationship between perceived organizational justice and moral distress in intensive care unit nurses

BACKGROUND:

The nature of the nursing profession pays more attention to ethics of healthcare than its therapeutic dimension. One of the prevalent moral issues in this profession is moral distress. Moral distress appears more in intensive care units due to the widespread need for moral decision-making regarding treatment and care in emergency situations. In this connection, organizational justice is of high importance and, as a significant motivational tool, leaves important impacts upon attitude and behavior of personnel.

AIM/OBJECTIVE:

This study aimed at investigation of the relationship between perceived organizational justice and moral distress in intensive care unit nurses.

RESEARCH DESIGN:

This is a descriptive-correlational research which examined the relationship between perceived organizational justice and moral distress in intensive care unit nurses.

PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT:

A total of 284 intensive care unit nurses were selected via census sampling. The data were collected through questionnaires and then were analyzed via SPSS-20 using Pearson and Spearman correlation tests.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS:

This study was approved by the Committee of Ethics in Medical Research. Completion of informed consent form, guarantee of the confidentiality of information, explanation on purposes of the research, and voluntary participation in the study were moral considerations observed in this study.

FINDINGS:

There was a statistically significant negative correlation between the total perceived organizational justice and the total moral distress (p = 0.024, r = -0.137) and also between "procedural and interactional justice and errors" and "not respecting the ethics principles." Meanwhile, no relationship was found by the findings between distributive justice and dimensions of moral distress.

CONCLUSION:

According to the results of the study, there was a reverse significant relationship between moral distress and perceived organizational justice; therefore, the head nurses are expected to contribute to reduce moral distress and to increase perceived organizational justice in nurses.

Conceptualizations of fairness and legitimacy in the context of Ethiopian health priority setting: Reflections on the applicability of accountability for reasonableness

A critical element in building stronger health systems involves strengthening good governance to build capacity for transparent and fair health planning and priority setting. Over the past 20 years, the ethical framework Accountability for Reasonableness (A4R) has been a prominent conceptual guide in strengthening fair and legitimate processes of health decision-making. While many of the principles embedded within the framework are congruent with Western conceptualizations of what constitutes procedural fairness, there is a paucity in the literature that captures the degree of resonance between these principles and the views of decision makers from non-Western settings; particularly in Africa, where many countries have only recently, within the last 20-30 years, become more democratic. This paper contributes to the ethics literature by examining how Ethiopian decision makers conceptualize fair and legitimate health decision-making, and reflects on the degree of conceptual resonance between these views and the principles embedded in A4R. A qualitative case study approach from three districts in Ethiopia was undertaken. Fifty-eight decision makers from district, regional, zonal, and national levels were interviewed to describe their conceptualization of fairness and legitimacy in the district health planning process. Findings revealed that Ethiopians have a broad conception of fairness and legitimacy that while congruent with procedural justice, also aligned with principles of distributive and organizational justice. Researchers and practitioners seeking to strengthen procedural fairness in health priority setting must therefore recognize the significance of other philosophical dimensions influencing how fairness and legitimacy of health decision-making are constructed within the Ethiopian setting.

The views of ethics committee members and medical researchers on the return of individual research results and incidental findings, ownership issues and benefit sharing in biobanking research in a South Indian city

The return of individual research results and incidental findings from biobanking research is a much debated ethical issue globally but has extensive relevance in India where the burden of out of pocket health care expenses is high for the majority. The views of 21 ethics committee (EC) members and 22 researchers from Bengaluru, India, concerning the ethics of biobanking research were sought through in-depth interviews using an unfolding case vignette with probes. A shared view among most was that individual research results which are 'actionable' or have 'clinical significance' should be returned to the sample contributors through their treating physicians. This was seen as an ethical obligation and a moral duty on the side of the researcher to "give back" to the person who contributed to the research. The challenges foreseen were that of resources, both financial and personnel, for the time and counseling needed to accompany the disclosure of results. Perceptions of 'ownership' appear to influence the concept of benefit sharing. While benefit sharing in financial terms was considered ethically challenging, certain researchers and ethics committee members made a case for "two way altruism" where the researcher in return for the altruistic 'valuable contribution', shares with the contributor/ community, benefits of the research which could include research findings, improved patient care, and more affordable access to the new diagnostic tests or products arising from the research. This defines the emerging ethic of "giving back" which goes beyond individual rights and ensures reciprocity and distributive justice.

Drinking in the last chance saloon: luck egalitarianism, alcohol consumption, and the organ transplant waiting list

The scarcity of livers available for transplants forces tough choices upon us. Lives for those not receiving a transplant are likely to be short. One large group of potential recipients needs a new liver because of alcohol consumption, while others suffer for reasons unrelated to their own behaviour. Should the former group receive lower priority when scarce livers are allocated? This discussion connects with one of the most pertinent issues in contemporary political philosophy; the role of personal responsibility in distributive justice. One prominent theory of distributive justice, luck egalitarianism, assesses distributions as just if, and only if, people's relative positions reflect their exercises of responsibility. There is a principled luck egalitarian case for giving lower priority to those who are responsible for their need. Compared to the existing literature favouring such differentiation, luck egalitarianism provides a clearer rationale of fairness, acknowledges the need for individual assessments of responsibility, and requires initiatives both inside and outside of the allocation systems aimed at mitigating the influence from social circumstances. Furthermore, the concrete policies that luck egalitarians can recommend are neither too harsh on those who make imprudent choices nor excessively intrusive towards those whose exercises of responsibility are assessed.

Struggles for Equal Rights and Social Justice as Unrepresented and Represented in Psychological Research

Issues of equality and social justice remain important concerns for contemporary societies. Struggles for equal rights and fair treatment continue in both organized movements and in acts of everyday life. We first consider trends in psychological research that fail to address such struggles and may even impede theoretical understanding of the complex processes of thought and action involved when individuals confront situations of welfare, justice, and rights. Then, we consider research, which attempts to address these issues. We review studies on the development of moral judgments and on understandings of equality and distributive justice. We also discuss research that accounts for the varying social contexts of individual lives and conceives of human behavior as engaged in moral judgments, which often produce resistance and opposition to injustice. In conclusion, we call for more attention in psychological research to issues of equity and social justice.

Luck Egalitarianism, Individual Responsibility and Health

Luck Egalitarianism has frequently been discussed in the recent literature because of the potential impact of this theory on health financing. Luck Egalitarianism puts forth a theory of distributive justice which says that the fundamental aim of equality is to compensate people for undeserved bad luck such as being born with poor native endowments, having difficult family circumstances or suffering from accidents and illness. On the other hand, if individuals face ill health because of faults of their own, then society has no duty to supply health services to them. Many arguments for and against this theory have been raised since it was first introduced. The proponents of Luck Egalitarianism focus on the concepts that free choice and respecting the autonomy of the individual determine whether health services are deserved. The criticisms against the concept of Luck Egalitarianism are that it is harsh to the needy and abandons the wretched, discriminates against the disabled, is against basic humanitarian principles, is incompatible with human dignity, and is in dissonance with real life. We agree with the basic proposition of Luck Egalitarian theory, which states that "inequalities deriving from unchosen features of people's circumstances are unjust and therefore should be compensated for". Our agreement leads us to an opposite conclusion. We propose that the "unchosen features of people's circumstances" include more than personal disadvantages. The social features to be included in the context of inequalities deriving from unchosen features of peoples circumstances are, socioeconomic status (SES), access to social determinants of health, and the ethnic, cultural and religious identity of individuals. Our other propositions are the mutable character of choices which makes individual responsibility of preferences implausible; the problematic causal relationship between responsibility and ill-health; the disregard of the motives behind decisions; problems with implementation in real health service circumstances; and the contradictory nature of Luck Egalitarianism for principles of medical ethics. These arguments draw attention to possible ethical and practical consequences of implementation of health policies arising from Luck Egalitarian view for patients and for health care providers. In this paper, we will first define Luck Egalitarianism. Then, we will discuss arguments for and against the theory in the literature. Our final task is to suggest additional criticisms of the theory and justify them.

Gender, justice and work: a distributive approach to perceptions of housework fairness

Most women and men report that the division of domestic labor in their household is fair, despite women undertaking approximately seventy percent of housework. This raises questions about how fairness is evaluated within partnerships. We explore how parenthood and relationship transitions affect perceptions of housework fairness using panel data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey and panel regression models. Our results indicate that net of actual housework divisions, socio-demographic factors, time availability and relative resources, the transition to parenthood increases women's perceptions of housework fairness immediately following the birth of a child, but decreases them in the long run. Relationship transitions have no independent effects. Our findings suggest that parenthood transitions are associated with changes in women's identity, cognitive evaluations of fairness and feelings of entitlement, as indicated by distributive justice theory.

A framework for luck egalitarianism in health and healthcare

Several attempts have been made to apply the choice-sensitive theory of distributive justice, luck egalitarianism, in the context of health and healthcare. This article presents a framework for this discussion by highlighting different normative decisions to be made in such an application, some of the objections to which luck egalitarians must provide answers and some of the practical implications associated with applying such an approach in the real world. It is argued that luck egalitarians should address distributions of health rather than healthcare, endorse an integrationist theory that combines health concerns with general distributive concerns and be pluralist in their approach. It further suggests that choice-sensitive policies need not be the result of applying luck egalitarianism in this context.

Is the social volcano still dormant? Trends in Chinese attitudes toward inequality

Data from two China national surveys, in 2004 and 2009, focusing on popular attitudes toward current inequalities and mobility opportunities, are compared to examine two key questions: (1) Did the continued rise in income gaps and the impact within China of the global financial crisis lead to rising popular anger about the unfairness of current inequality patterns in 2009? and (2) Did the social contours of attitudes toward current inequalities shift over the five years between surveys? Through systematic comparisons of data from both surveys, we conclude that there is no general increase in anger about inequalities in the 2009 survey, and that the predictors of variations in these attitudes had changed relatively little, with the unexpectedly positive views of villagers still visible in 2009, although a bit muted. Trends in Chinese society between 2004 and 2009, and in the personal experience of survey respondents, are used to explain why popular acceptance of current inequalities remains widespread, despite continuing increases in China's income gaps.