Matching Items (66)
Filtering by
- Member of: ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Description
With global environmental systems under increasing Anthropogenic influence, conservationists and environmental managers are under immense pressure to protect and recover the world’s imperiled species and ecosystems. This effort is often motivated by a sense of moral responsibility, either to nature itself, or to the end of promoting human wellbeing over the long run. In other words, it is the purview of environmental ethics, a branch of applied philosophy that emerged in the 1970s and that for decades has been devoted to understanding and defending an attitude of respect for nature, usually for its own sake. Yet from the very start, environmental ethics has promoted itself as contributing to the resolution of real-world management and policy problems. By most accounts, however, the field has historically failed to deliver on this original promise, and environmental ethicists continue to miss opportunities to make intellectual inroads with key environmental decisionmakers. Inspired by classical and contemporary American philosophers such as Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, John Dewey, and Richard Rorty, I defend in this dissertation the virtues of a more explicitly pragmatic approach to environmental ethics. Specifically, I argue that environmental pragmatism is not only commensurate with pro-environmental attitudes but that it is more likely to lead to viable and sustainable outcomes, particularly in the context of eco-social resilience-building activities (e.g., local experimentation, adaptation, cooperation). In doing so, I call for a recasting of environmental ethics, a project that entails: 1) a conceptual reorientation involving the application of pragmatism applied to environmental problems; 2) a methodological approach linking a pragmatist environmentalism to the tradition and process of adaptive co-management; and 3) an empirical study of stakeholder values and perspectives in conservation collaboratives in Arizona. I conclude that a more pragmatic environmental ethics has the potential to bring a powerful set of ethical and methodological tools to bear in real-world management contexts and, where appropriate, can ground and justify coordinated conservation efforts. Finally, this research responds to critics who suggest that, because it strays too far from the ideological purity of traditional environmental ethics, the pragmatic decision-making process will, in the long run, weaken rather than bolster our commitment to conservation and environmental protection.
ContributorsRojas, Christopher A (Author) / Minteer, Ben A (Thesis advisor) / Carr Kelman, Candice (Committee member) / Kinzig, Ann (Committee member) / Schoon, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
The history of research in Indigenous populations is deeply problematic. Power imbalances have led Non-Indigenous researchers and outside institutions to enter Indigenous communities with their own research agendas and without prior consultation with the people and communities being researched. As a consequence, Indigenous scholars are moving to take control and reclaim ownership of the research that occurs in our communities. This study, conducted by a Pueblo researcher with Pueblo leaders, investigates their definitions of and perspectives on research. Eleven semi-formal interviews were conducted in 2017 with a subset of tribal leaders from the 19 Pueblos of New Mexico. Results show that Pueblo leaders define research using action words such as compiling, gathering, or looking for information to determine a cause or to find out more about a situation. Leaders state that research is “inherent to our beings” and gave examples such as “singing to plants,” “knowing when to plant and hunt” and sustaining our cultural ways as Pueblo activities considered research.
ContributorsBird, Doreen Margaret (Author) / Brayboy, Bryan MJ (Thesis advisor) / Fonow, Mary M (Thesis advisor) / Lomawaima, K. Tsianina (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
In a contemporary socioeconomic context that pushes universities toward a more neoliberal agenda, some are answering a call to reinvest in the public purpose of higher education. Their strategies increasingly integrate teaching, research, and service through university-community partnerships. Within this movement, several initiatives aim to support a qualitative transformational shift toward a more egalitarian paradigm of collaboration. However, the literature and knowledge-building around these aims is largely insular to higher education and may be insufficient for the task. Thus, this study situates these aspirations in the community development literature and theories of power to better conceptualize and operationalize what is meant by reciprocal, mutually-beneficial approaches to university-community partnerships.
First, a theoretically grounded analytical framework was developed using both higher education and community development literatures to build two ideal-typical approaches to community practice characterized by power-over versus power-with. Within power-over, the institution exclusively holds authority, control, and legitimacy. Power-with is built through partnerships that share these elements with communities. Second, the resulting theoretical framework was developed further through a multi-stage deductive-inductive content analysis of written data readily available from university websites about their community partnerships. This process operationalized the framework by identifying and clarifying specific indicators within the power-over and power-with ideal-types.
The analytical framework was then compared to the aspirational community empowerment goals found in materials about the Carnegie elective classification for Community Engagement and materials from both the Anchor Initiatives Task Force and Anchor Initiatives Dashboard Learning Cohort. This comparative analysis found that while these initiatives aspire to transform power dynamics between universities and communities, they are vague on the meaning of these practices and their antitheses. This gap in clarity hinders these initiatives from distinguishing transformative work from the status quo, potentially inadvertently allowing the perpetuation of power-over dynamics in university-community partnerships.
The more robust analytical framework developed herein will enable these initiatives to better assess the quality of university-community partnerships against the aspirations of equity, social justice, democratic practice, mutual respect, shared authority, and co-creation. Such assessment will enable more effective knowledge-building toward transformational practice.
First, a theoretically grounded analytical framework was developed using both higher education and community development literatures to build two ideal-typical approaches to community practice characterized by power-over versus power-with. Within power-over, the institution exclusively holds authority, control, and legitimacy. Power-with is built through partnerships that share these elements with communities. Second, the resulting theoretical framework was developed further through a multi-stage deductive-inductive content analysis of written data readily available from university websites about their community partnerships. This process operationalized the framework by identifying and clarifying specific indicators within the power-over and power-with ideal-types.
The analytical framework was then compared to the aspirational community empowerment goals found in materials about the Carnegie elective classification for Community Engagement and materials from both the Anchor Initiatives Task Force and Anchor Initiatives Dashboard Learning Cohort. This comparative analysis found that while these initiatives aspire to transform power dynamics between universities and communities, they are vague on the meaning of these practices and their antitheses. This gap in clarity hinders these initiatives from distinguishing transformative work from the status quo, potentially inadvertently allowing the perpetuation of power-over dynamics in university-community partnerships.
The more robust analytical framework developed herein will enable these initiatives to better assess the quality of university-community partnerships against the aspirations of equity, social justice, democratic practice, mutual respect, shared authority, and co-creation. Such assessment will enable more effective knowledge-building toward transformational practice.
ContributorsTchida, Celina V (Author) / Knopf, Richard C. (Thesis advisor) / Buzinde, Christine N (Committee member) / Feeney, Mary K. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Societies seeking sustainability are transitioning from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy sources to mitigate dangerous climate change. Energy transitions involve ethically controversial decisions that affect current and future generations’ well-being. As energy systems in the United States transition towards renewable energy, American Indian reservations with abundant energy sources are some of the most significantly impacted communities. Strikingly, energy ethicists have not yet developed a systematic approach for prescribing ethical action within the context of energy decisions. This dissertation reinvents energy ethics as a distinct sub-discipline of applied ethics, integrating virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism with Sioux, Navajo, and Hopi ethical perspectives. On this new account, applied energy ethics is the analysis of questions of right and wrong using a framework for prescribing action and proper policies within private and public energy decisions. To demonstrate the usefulness of applied energy ethics, this dissertation analyzes two case studies situated on American Indian reservations: the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Navajo Generating Station.
ContributorsBethem, Jacob (Author) / DesRoches, Tyler (Thesis advisor) / Pasqualetti, Martin J (Committee member) / Graffy, Elisabeth (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Advocacy groups work across many aspects of “death with dignity” practice and treatment, and provide insight across multiple aspects of “death with dignity”. This study argues that key advocacy groups in the American death with dignity movement influenced the broader conceptualization of death with dignity in a way that makes patients more able to achieve it. This influence has been a dynamic process across different periods of practice starting the discussion of “death with dignity” in 1985 through today, although this thesis extends only to 2011. The question in this study is how do the three main historical advocacy groups in the US: the Hemlock Society, Compassion in Dying, and Compassion and Choices, conceptualize death with dignity with regards to patient and doctor relationship, legal and policy factors, and medical technologies and protocols? This study found that the Hemlock Society (1980-2005) characterized death with dignity as a terminally ill patient being able to “self-deliver” from suffering via autoeuthanasia regardless of medical community approval or legality. Compassion in Dying (1993-2007) characterized death with dignity as involved advocacy work with terminal patients and their communities to pursue palliative care and hospice up to the point of assisted death. This organization was also involved in the passing of Oregon Death with Dignity Act. Compassion and Choices (2007-present) characterized death with dignity similarly to Compassion in Dying but also advocated for adequate management of pain and suffering symptoms in palliative care to prevent people from desiring death over the illness. Conceptualizing death with dignity is important for understanding why patients want death with dignity and better accommodating their end of life needs when they are suffering with terminal illness.
ContributorsCohan, Hailey Elizabeth (Author) / Ellison, Karin (Thesis advisor) / O'Neil, Erica (Committee member) / Piemonte, Nicole (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Scenario planning originally garnered attention within the corporate sector as a tool to manage energy transitions, but it has gained traction within the field of sustainability. It is a process for exploring potential futures and thinking critically about complex decisions that involve high degrees of uncertainty. It is also effective in shifting mental models, engaging diverse stakeholders, and enhancing organizational learning, making it ideal for the complex problems that sustainability seeks to address. The resulting insights from scenario planning are typically used in strategic planning, which further aligns it with sustainability’s commitments to action-oriented solutions.
As a highly participative process, its success hinges on inclusive and just engagement of participants. This dissertation employed a multimethod approach to address the question, “What impacts do social dynamics have on participation in scenario planning for sustainability?” First, I conducted an ethical exploration of participation, looking to the systemic societal factors that might function as barriers to authentic participation. Next, I conducted an ethnographic study of a scenario planning workshop to identify ways in which social influence and authority impact participation in the process. Finally, I piloted a psychology study that explored the impact of explicit acknowledgement of status differential and the use of pre-event brainstorming on participation in a small group task that parallels scenario planning interactions.
In doing so, this dissertation presents a conceptual framework from which to understand the role of participation in scenario planning for sustainability and coins the term “strawman participation,” drawing attention to the role and function of social influence in participatory processes. If “token participation” arises from participants not being granted decision-making power, strawman participation develops from social/structural barriers, then “authentic participation” allows for both decision-making power and social capacity for participation. Though my findings suggest that scenario planning utilizes methods to equalize participation and engage diverse participants, factors such as status differentials and gender dynamics impact authentic participation. Results of the pilot study point to the utility of status concealment and individual-level brainstorming to bolster participation. Ultimately, this work contributes to a more nuanced understanding of participation in service of more robust, pluralistic sustainability decision making.
As a highly participative process, its success hinges on inclusive and just engagement of participants. This dissertation employed a multimethod approach to address the question, “What impacts do social dynamics have on participation in scenario planning for sustainability?” First, I conducted an ethical exploration of participation, looking to the systemic societal factors that might function as barriers to authentic participation. Next, I conducted an ethnographic study of a scenario planning workshop to identify ways in which social influence and authority impact participation in the process. Finally, I piloted a psychology study that explored the impact of explicit acknowledgement of status differential and the use of pre-event brainstorming on participation in a small group task that parallels scenario planning interactions.
In doing so, this dissertation presents a conceptual framework from which to understand the role of participation in scenario planning for sustainability and coins the term “strawman participation,” drawing attention to the role and function of social influence in participatory processes. If “token participation” arises from participants not being granted decision-making power, strawman participation develops from social/structural barriers, then “authentic participation” allows for both decision-making power and social capacity for participation. Though my findings suggest that scenario planning utilizes methods to equalize participation and engage diverse participants, factors such as status differentials and gender dynamics impact authentic participation. Results of the pilot study point to the utility of status concealment and individual-level brainstorming to bolster participation. Ultimately, this work contributes to a more nuanced understanding of participation in service of more robust, pluralistic sustainability decision making.
ContributorsRodegher, Sandra Lina (Author) / Selin, Cynthia L (Thesis advisor) / Shiota, Michelle (Committee member) / McGregor, Joan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Engineering ethics is preoccupied with technical failure. To ameliorate the risk that engineering works might either blow up or fall down, the engineering code of ethics provides guidance of how engineers should conduct themselves. For example, the Fundamental Canons in the National Society of Professional Engineers code of ethics states that engineers should hold paramount the health, safety and welfare of the public. As a result, engineering designs meet basic human needs such as food, water and shelter -- at risks that are generally considered acceptable. However, even safe designs fail to meet our needs ranked higher in Maslow's hierarchy -- such as belonging, esteem and self-actualization. While these have historically not been ethical priorities, increasing expectations in developed countries now include more complex ethical concepts such as sustainability and social justice. We can expect these trends toward higher and more complex human needs to continue -- although the profession seems ill-prepared. We argue that an empathic approach to engineering design is necessary to meet these higher needs of developed and developing societies. To guide engineers towards this approach, we propose a pluralistic interpretation of empathy grounded in an understanding of the three parts of the mind: cognitive, affective, and conative. In fact, product designers already use empathy in their design processes. However, an exemplar of an empathic design is harder to find in civil engineering disciplines. This paper discusses an example of the Hoover Dam Bypass, which resulted in an award-winning design and construction that improved traffic flow, reduced vulnerability to terrorist attack, and accounted for historical factors and environmental impacts. However, this technical success is an empathic failure. Although project leaders commissioned ethnographic studies to understand the impact the bridge would have on the local Native American populations and their cultural sites, the eventual design showed little consideration of the concerns that were revealed. For engineering designs such as bridges, other infrastructure and systems to meet the needs of the various populations in which they serve, engineers need to incorporate empathy into their designs.
ContributorsVortherms, Kaitlin (Author) / Seager, Thomas (Thesis advisor) / Tracy, Sarah (Committee member) / Spierre/Clark, Susan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
American Indian literature is replete with language that refers to broken or hollow promises the US government has made to American Indians, one of the most prominent being that the US government has not kept its promises regarding health services for American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/AN). Some commenters refer to treaties between tribes and the US government as the origin of the promise for health services to AI/AN. Others point to the trust relationship between the sovereign nations of American Indian tribes and the US government, while still others assert that the Snyder Act of 1921 or the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA) contained the promise for health care. While the US has provided some form of health care for AI/AN since the country was in its infancy, and continues to do so through the Indian Health Service, the promise of health services for AI/AN is not explicit.
Philosophers have articulated that a promise contains a moral obligation to fulfill it because of others’ expectations created by that promise. As the US government made its first promises in early treaties with AI/AN tribes and subsequently made promises in the years since, it is morally obligated to fulfill those promises, be they lying promises or not, because of resulting expectations. Yet, the US government has historically acted to restrict the rights of AI/AN—rights that include access to health services—through assimilation, separation, or termination policies. Further, the policies of the US government have kept the AI/AN populations socioeconomically impoverished, dependent on the US government for basic needs, and susceptible to health-compromising conditions.
Using case studies, this dissertation looks not only at the policies and events that directly affected health services and health status, but also at how those policies and events contributed to health outcomes and the expectations of AI/AN. Given the history of the US government in fulfilling (or not fulfilling) its promises, this dissertation examines the expectations of AI/AN for their own future health outcomes under the policy of self-governance.
Philosophers have articulated that a promise contains a moral obligation to fulfill it because of others’ expectations created by that promise. As the US government made its first promises in early treaties with AI/AN tribes and subsequently made promises in the years since, it is morally obligated to fulfill those promises, be they lying promises or not, because of resulting expectations. Yet, the US government has historically acted to restrict the rights of AI/AN—rights that include access to health services—through assimilation, separation, or termination policies. Further, the policies of the US government have kept the AI/AN populations socioeconomically impoverished, dependent on the US government for basic needs, and susceptible to health-compromising conditions.
Using case studies, this dissertation looks not only at the policies and events that directly affected health services and health status, but also at how those policies and events contributed to health outcomes and the expectations of AI/AN. Given the history of the US government in fulfilling (or not fulfilling) its promises, this dissertation examines the expectations of AI/AN for their own future health outcomes under the policy of self-governance.
ContributorsDrago, Mary (Author) / Maienschein, Jane (Thesis advisor) / Ellison, Karin (Committee member) / Herkert, Joseph (Committee member) / Hurlbut, James (Committee member) / Robert, Jason (Committee member) / Trujillo, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
This dissertation research investigates the social implications of computing artifacts that make use of sensor driven self-quantification to implicitly or explicitly direct user behaviors. These technologies are referred to here as self-sensoring prescriptive applications (SSPA’s). This genre of technological application has a strong presence in healthcare as a means to monitor health, modify behavior, improve health outcomes, and reduce medical costs. However, the commercial sector is quickly adopting SSPA’s as a means to monitor and/or modify consumer behaviors as well (Swan, 2013). These wearable devices typically monitor factors such as movement, heartrate, and respiration; ostensibly to guide the users to better or more informed choices about their physical fitness (Lee & Drake, 2013; Swan, 2012b). However, applications that claim to use biosensor data to assist in mood maintenance and control are entering the market (Bolluyt, 2015), and applications to aid in decision making about consumer products are on the horizon as well (Swan, 2012b). Interestingly, there is little existing research that investigates the direct impact biosensor data have on decision making, nor on the risks, benefits, or regulation of such technologies. The research presented here is inspired by a number of separate but related gaps in existing literature about the social implications of SSPA’s. First, how SSPA’s impact individual and group decision making and attitude formation within non-medical-care domains (e.g. will a message about what product to buy be more persuasive if it claims to have based the recommendation on your biometric information?). Second, how the design and designers of SSPA’s shape social behaviors and third, how these factors are or are not being considered in future design and public policy decisions.
ContributorsBaker, Denise A (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas J (Thesis advisor) / Wise, J. MacGregor (Thesis advisor) / Herkert, Joseph R (Committee member) / McDaniel, Troy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Effective Altruism (EA), a moral philosophy concerned with accomplishing the greatest possible good in one’s lifetime, sees little utilitarian and/or humanitarian value in the arts. EA suggests that amidst so much global strife, the time, energy, and finances expended to create fleeting art would be put to better, more practical use in the fight against poverty. However, EA has yet to sufficiently account for sustainable art practice — an art form deeply rooted in utilitarianism and humanitarianism — and the possibility of its accompanying aesthetics as a constituent of utilitarian/humanitarian theories. The first chapter of this thesis illustrates an intersection of EA, sustainability, and aesthetics, detailing ways in which sustainable art and EA philosophy overlap, as well as problematizing EA’s dismissal of contemporary art practice. This chapter also points to sustainable art as one possible alternative art route for practicing artists with EA interests. Chapters two and three present case studies of Danish art collective SUPERFLEX and an American non-profit called the Land Art Generator Initiative (LAGI) and how their sustainable goals fit the utilitarian and humanitarian scope through which EA functions.
ContributorsNemelka, Kevin (Author) / Hoy, Meredith (Thesis advisor) / Mesch, Claudia (Committee member) / Sweeney, Gray (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017