...
首页> 外文期刊>Transport policy >Transport and ethics: Dilemmas for CBA researchers. An interview-based study from the Netherlands
【24h】

Transport and ethics: Dilemmas for CBA researchers. An interview-based study from the Netherlands

机译:运输与道德:CBA研究人员的困境。来自荷兰的基于访谈的研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This paper presents the results of an interview- and web questionnaire-based study into the ethics-related dilemmas of researchers in the field of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in the Netherlands. The results reveal first that ethical codes are only known to a limited extent by researchers in the Dutch CBA community, and formalized. Second, having the promoter of major infrastructure projects as the client for 'independent' ex ante CBA of those projects creates a conflict of interest, and limits the usefulness of CBA in modern societies. Third, respondents with a university background tend to value the interests of society more highly than consultants, who value the client's interests more. Fourth, role-related dilemmas can easily occur. A first dilemma in this category relates to the trade-off between the quality of research and constraints (on time, money, and delivery), a second dilemma relates to what research a university should or should not do, a third dilemma follows from the publication culture at universities. Fifth, the respondents believe that the Dutch OEI-guidelines (guidelines that explain that a CBA should be carried out for large national infrastructure projects, including how these CBAs should be carried out) increased the quality of CBAs for national projects in the Netherlands and reduced ethical dilemmas for researchers. We present several possible implications of our research, including arguments for developing codes of conduct for clients of research; doing CBA for more than only large national projects; and an independent second opinion or an independent committee supervising the CBA research.
机译:本文介绍了基于访谈和网络问卷的研究结果,以研究荷兰成本效益分析(CBA)领域研究人员与道德相关的困境。结果首先表明,道德规范仅在荷兰CBA社区的研究人员中得到了有限的了解,并被正式化。第二,让大型基础设施项目的发起人作为那些项目的“独立”事前CBA的客户会产生利益冲突,并限制了CBA在现代社会中的用处。第三,具有大学背景的被调查者倾向于比顾问更重视社会利益,顾问对顾问更重视客户的利益。第四,与角色相关的困境很容易发生。此类别中的第一个难题与研究质量和约束条件(时间,金钱和交付)之间的权衡有关,第二个难题与大学应做或不应该做的研究有关,第三个难题来自于大学的出版文化。第五,受访者认为荷兰的OEI指南(解释应针对大型国家基础设施项目进行CBA的指南,包括应如何执行这些CBA)提高了荷兰国家项目的CBA的质量,并降低了研究人员的道德困境。我们介绍了研究的几种可能含义,包括为研究客户制定行为准则的论点;为大型国家项目做CBA;以及独立的第二意见或监督CBA研究的独立委员会。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Transport policy 》 |2012年第2012期| 30-36| 共7页
  • 作者

    Bert Van Wee; Eric Molin;

  • 作者单位

    Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Section Transport and Logistics, PO Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands;

    Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Section Transport and Logistics, PO Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    CBA; ethics; codes of conduct; dilemmas;

    机译:CBA;伦理;行为准则;困境;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号