ESDiT Publications

@article{nokey,

title = {“It takes a village to write a really good paper”: A normative framework for peer reviewing in philosophy},

author = {Samantha Copeland and Lavinia Marin},

url = {https://www.esdit.nl/metaphilosophy-2024-copeland-it-takes-a-village-to-write-a-really-good-paper-a-normative-framework-for-peer/},

doi = {10.1111/meta.12670},

issn = {0026-1068},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-03-18},

urldate = {2024-03-18},

journal = {Metaphilosophy},

volume = {n/a},

issue = {n/a},

abstract = {That there is a "crisis of peer review" at the moment is not in dispute, but sufficient attention has not yet been paid to the normative potential that lies in current calls for reform. In contrast to approaches to "fixing" the problems in peer review, which tend to maintain the status quo in terms of professionalising opportunities, this paper addresses the needs of philosophers and how peer-review reform can be an opportunity to improve the academic discipline of philosophy, whereby progress is understood as making the discipline more fair to the global academic community and more conducive to the flourishing of academic philosophers. The paper evaluates recent categories of relevant norms and correlating reforms. In conclusion, it recommends that philosophy pursue the norms of transparency and democracy explicitly when proposing peer-review reform and suggest that proposals for forum-based models of peer review are most likely to support those norms.},

keywords = {Academic Philosophy, Fairness, Flourishing, Normativity, Peer Review},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {Unequal means more unfair means more negative emotions? Ethical concerns and emotions about an unequal distribution of negative outcomes of a local energy project},

author = {Nicole M. A. Huijts and Nadja Contzen and Sabine Roeser},

doi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112963},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-06-16},

journal = {Energy Policy},

volume = {165},

number = {112963},

keywords = {Distribution, Emotions, Fairness, Geothermal energy, Justice, Risks},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {Ethics of digital contact tracing and COVID-19: who is (not) free to go? },

author = {Michael Klenk and Hein Duijf},

url = {https://www.esdit.nl/s10676-020-09544-0/},

doi = {10.1007/s10676-020-09544-0 },

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-11-01},

urldate = {2021-11-01},

journal = {Ethics and Information Technology},

volume = {23},

pages = {69-77},

abstract = {Digital tracing technologies are heralded as an effective way of containing SARS-CoV-2 faster than it is spreading, thereby allowing the possibility of easing draconic measures of population-wide quarantine. But existing technological proposals risk addressing the wrong problem. The proper objective is not solely to maximise the ratio of people freed from quarantine but to also ensure that the composition of the freed group is fair. We identify several factors that pose a risk for fair group composition along with an analysis of general lessons for a philosophy of technology. Policymakers, epidemiologists, and developers can use these risk factors to benchmark proposal technologies, curb the pandemic, and keep public trust.},

keywords = {Active responsibility, COVID-19, Digital contract tracing, Digital Ethics, Fairness},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Pesch2021b,

title = {Institutions of justice and intuitions of fairness: contesting goods, rules and inequalities},

author = {Udo Pesch},

doi = {10.1080/13698230.2021.1913887},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-09},

journal = {Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy},

keywords = {Equality, Fairness, Institutions, Justice, Public/private distinction},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}