GEO 567
Responsible GIS Practice:
Ethics for Future Geospatial
Professionals
Overview
► Course
objectives
► Defining
► Core
some terms
activities
► Introductory
case study, student survey
Educational Objectives
► Recognize
ethical implications of geographic
technologies
► Develop stronger, more sophisticated
reasoning skills
► Understand “moral ecologies” of various
organizations and institutions
► Feel free to talk about ethics in the
workplace
Attributes of a Profession
(Pugh as reported in Obermeyer)
Specialized body of knowledge
► Mission
► Formal organization
► Common language
► Specialized training
► Culture and lore
► Code of ethics
► Licensing/Certification
►
Pugh, D.L. 1989. Professionalism in public administration, Public Administration Review, 49: 1-8.
Obermeyer, N. J. 1993. Certifying GIS professionals: Challenges and alternatives, URISA Journal, 5(1).
Ethics
The branch of philosophy that
deals with the nature of right and
wrong. A theory or set of
standards that inform moral
practice.
Realm of APPLIED ETHICS
Ethics is not what you do,
but why you do it.
VS.
Not a front-line of defense against wrong-doing.
Touchstone for professionals to identify and resolve
ethical dilemmas that they encounter in their work
Morals tied to what you actually do.
► Value
judgements applied to conduct
► Tied to a specific culture (while ethics are
more universal)
 Ethically, people being together is good.
►In
some cultures this is implemented via arranged
marriages.
 Ethically, women should cover themselves.
►In
some cultures women must cover all but the eyes.
Sidebar: What is legal may not
be ethical/moral.
Ethical
Conduct
LEGAL
ILLEGAL
Unethical
Conduct
Onsrud, H., 1995. Identifying unethical conduct in the use of GIS, Cartography and Geographic Information Systems,
22(1): 90-97.
Why a Code of Ethics?
► Deters
unethical behavior
► Provides a support system for members
► Serves as an enabling document
► Acts as a basis for adjudicating disputes
► Enhances a profession’s reputation
► Acts as a source for public evaluation
► Aids with professional socialization
Frankel, 1989
Based on Deontological
Principles
Treat others as ends,
never as means
Obligations (duty) to:
► Society
► Employers
► Colleagues
and the Profession
► Individuals
at Large
Always treat others with respect and
never merely as means to an end
Society
► Do
the best work possible
 Be objective
 Practice integrity
 Be aware of consequences, good and bad
► Contribute
to the community to the extent
possible, feasible, and advisable
 Make data & findings widely available
► Speak
out on issues
 Call attention to unprofessional work
 Admit when a mistake has been made & fix it
Employers
► Deliver
quality work
 Keep current in the field
 Document work (including metadata)
► Have
a professional relationship
 Hold information confidential
 Avoid conflicts of interest (disclose if there)
 Accept decisions unless illegal or unethical
► Be
honest in representations
 Complete work with requested resources
 State limitations of data, software, methods, etc.
Colleagues and the Profession
► Respect
the work of others
 Accept and provide fair comments on work
 Honor property rights (esp. software, data)
 Respect existing working relationships
► Contribute
to the discipline
 Publish results so others can learn of them
 Volunteer time to professional activities
 Support colleagues in professional development.
Special attention to underrepresented groups whose
diverse backgrounds will add to the strength of the
profession
Individuals
► Respect
privacy
 Protect individual privacy, esp. about sensitive
information.
 Be esp. careful with new information
► Respect
individuals
 Encourage individual autonomy
 Be truthful when disclosing individual data
 Treat all individuals equally, without regard to race,
gender, or other personal characteristic not related to
the task at hand.
Next Steps for GISCI:
Add Meaning
► Discussion
guide – function, interpretation, etc
► Case studies (our NSF project/course)
► Lesson plans (our NSF project/course)
► Develop a course (from our NSF project)
► Web resources; e.g.
 Poynter Center - www.indiana.edu/~poynter/
 Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions
www.iit.edu/departments/csep/
► Conference
sessions
Exercise to become fit
Case
Studies
135 lbs
170 lbs.
Example from Will Craig, U-Minnesota
Photos from http://www.musclegaintips.com/
Moral Dilemma
► Classic
Example
► Keep your promises
 Borrow a weapon
 Promise to return
► Dilemma
 Accessory to murder
 Violate promise
► What
Will Craig, U-Minnesota
would you do?
Jungle Theater Playbill for Lobby Hero, 2003
Moral Dilemma
► Jim
needs to choose
 Qualified friend
 Another candidate
► Factors
to consider
 Friendship
 Impartiality
► What
Will Craig, U-Minnesota
would you do?
Jungle Theater Playbill for Lobby Hero, 2003
Moral Dilemma
► Environmental
impact
of development
► Obligations to
 Client
 Community
► What
would you do?
International Federation of Surveyors
Will Craig, U-Minnesota
Moral Dilemma
►
►
►
►
►
►
co.hennepin.mn.us
Will Craig, U-Minnesota
GIS department has
quality system
Promised it would be selfsupporting
Users demand
new/improved data
Private sector duplicates
data
Citizen groups squeezed
out
What would you do?
Harlan Onsrud
Tough Choices
► Is
there a problem?
► Maybe 2 “right” actions are in conflict
► Society is paramount
► What about other philosophies?
► Talk to people (perpetrator, colleagues, friends)
► Is it worth taking radical action?
► Act
► Reflect
Kidder, 1995, How Good People Make Tough Choices
7 Step Process for Ethical
Decision-Making
► Step
1: State the problem.
 “There’s something about this decision that makes me
uncomfortable.” “Do I have a conflict of interest?”
► Step
2: Check the facts.
 Many problems disappear upon closer examination of a
situation, while others change radically.
► Step
3: Identify relevant factors.
 Persons involved, laws, professional code, other
practical constraints
Davis, 1999, Ethics and the University, London: Routledge
7 Step Process for Ethical Decision-Making
►
Step 4: Develop list of options.
 Be imaginative, try to avoid “dilemma,” not “yes” or “no” but whom
to go to, what to say
►
Step 5: Test options.
 Harm test: Does this option do less harm than alternatives?
 Publicity test: Would I want my choice of this option published in
the newspaper?
 Defensibility test: Could I defend my choice of option before a
Congressional committee or committee of peers?
 Reversibility test: Would I still think my choice of this option good,
if I were adversely affected by it?
Step 6: Make a choice based on step 1-5.
► Step 7: Review steps 1-6
►
 Would could you do to make it less likely that you would have to
make such a decision again?
Davis, 1999, Ethics and the University, London: Routledge
Questions for you
► Does
GISCI certification matter?
► What’s missing from the GISCI Code of
Ethics or Rules of Conduct?
► Can you describe a GIS dilemma?
► How would you know it’s a dilemma? How
would you resolve it?
► Should violators be sanctioned? How?
Case Studies and Interviews
► Examine/discuss
existing case studies
► IRB consent forms
► Report and evaluation of interview
► Write original case studies
 Some may result from interviews
Power of Case Studies
(Learning Outcomes)
► Ethical
sensitivity
 Ability to identify and discrimate among ethical
issues
► Ethical
knowledge:
 Familiarity with codes of ethics, rules of conduct
► Ethical
creativity:
 Ability to see beyond the dillema
► Judgment:
 Increased likelihood that you’ll act appropriately
Case Study Example
► Mapping
Muslim Neighborhoods in LA