|
Applying for a subsidy |
|
|
|
The deadline for applying for a subsidy (April 1) has now passed. |
|
|
Criteria for membership |
|
|
|
Introduction
The present memorandum replaces the 2008 edition of an earlier memorandum regarding criteria for admission to membership and membership continuation as laid down by the Board in June 2005. The memorandum concerns criteria used to determine the eligibility of new Members, conversion of junior-membership to full membership, and continuation of full membership. The Science Committee annually evaluates the research output of the school’s Members in terms of these criteria. In addition, the Committee advises the Board on the basis of these criteria concerning admission, conversion and continuation of membership.
From a disciplinary point of view NSRPP (OZSE) is not homogeneous. For some of its researchers philosophy and ethics are not the only or, in some cases, not the primary disciplines. Also, researchers may be ethicists or philosophers participating in larger research programmes in scientific fields other than ethics or philosophy. Accordingly, the school is faced with diverse publication cultures and with different valuations of international publishing. Assessment of the publication output of the Members needs to take this into account. The evaluation includes consideration of the total spectrum of one’s scientific activities. Examples of other scientific activities are the editing of a scholarly journal and the organisation of a scientific conference.
Evaluation of publications
Scientific publications, trade publications and popular publications
Evaluation of publications relates to scientific and trade publications exclusively. Popularising publications are left out of consideration. Scientific publications are publications of research results primarily meant for fellow researchers/colleagues (‘peers’). Trade publications are publications presenting research results for a public of other specialised scientists and policy makers outside the own discipline who can apply the results in their own research, teaching or policy making. Trade publications also differ from popularising publications. Popularising publications are meant for a broad public (the readers of newspapers, weeklies and monthly magazines). Examples are editorials, columns, and the like. The school applauds Members who seek and maintain contact with the public at large. Popularising publications are however not included in the annual reports and evaluations of the Science Committee.
International publications
The school attaches great importance to international publications. International publications reach a large public of peers, so that the opportunities for academic discussion are greater than when one publishes in the Dutch language. Extensive opportunity for debate with colleagues is vitally important for the flourishing of academic philosophy and ethics. Nevertheless, the school also values publications in Dutch. For example, a Dutch journal is included in the list of A-journals. In addition, a special evaluation category is reserved for refereed Dutch publications. Currently classified as international publications and publishers are publications in English, German, French or Chinese, of publishing houses that serve these languages areas are at present.
Refereed publications
The school holds that ‘peer reviewed’ or ‘refereed’ is a very important, though certainly not the exclusive criterion for the quality of a publication. First, not all high-ranking journals apply a system of assessment by reviewers. Secondly, less-distinguished journals have now introduced a peer-review system as well. Being refereed is one important quality factor, next to others such as the publisher’s or the journal’s reputation. It is therefore insufficient to classify scientific journals as refereed and non-refereed. For this reason the school also utilises, next to categories for refereed journals, monographs and collections, mixed categories, including the A-category with high-ranking journals.
Being ‘refereed’ refers to a system of evaluation for acceptation aided by external peer review, that is, fellow scientists other than the editors who offer an argued judgement regarding the acceptance of the article, monograph or collection. Comment or judgement on the part of the editors of a journal or collection themselves does not count as being refereed.
The categories
Regarding scientific publications five categories are distinguished. An explanation is given below.
A-publications
A-publications are texts published in journals included in the NSRPP A-list, and monographs and publications from certain renowned international publishing houses such as Harvard University Press, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, Routledge, Ashgate, Brill, De Gruyter, Suhrkamp and Springer Verlag. The A-list includes journals that count as representing the scientific top in the area of practical philosophy and ethics. Both the list of A-journals and the list of comparable publishers mentioned here are periodically reviewed by the Science Committee. In view of the markedly interdisciplinary approach at NSRPP, the lists are not complete and (in some respects also) provisional in nature.
Applied ethicists frequently publish in high-ranking journals in the field in which they are active (medical ethicists for example publish in Lancet). Such journals address themselves to a discipline other than ethics, however. It is commendable that applied ethicists do publish in journals of that kind, but it is impossible to include all top journals in those specialisations in the NSRPP A-list. In this connection the Science Committee makes use of a case-by-case assessment, taking into account also the standards recognised in these areas.
Some areas of specialisation in applied ethics are in rapid development; consequently, journals with a history of high quality in these fields are not yet available. In these cases the NSRPP refers to journals that are currently considered ‘good’ – involving no pronouncement concerning that journal’s future reputation. The Science Committee regularly monitors the state of affairs as presented by experts in these fields and adjusts the list accordingly.
The list of A-journals is appended. The NSRPP website presents the latest version of the list. Recently A-status was accorded to the Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie and the Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung. Also added is the Flemish Tijdschrift voor Filosofie. The Algemeen Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte is included in the A-list as of early 2008, for a provisional period of two years. The expectation is that the quality of the journal will continue to develop positively over that period.
B-publications
B-publications are contributions to refereed international journals that cannot be designated as A-journal, refereed monographs and publications in refereed collections from an international publisher that are not ranked with A-listed journals.
C-publications
C-publications are publications in non-refereed international journals, monographs and publications in non-refereed collections from an international publisher.
D-publications
D-publications are publications in refereed Dutch journals of good quality that cannot be designated as A-journal, refereed Dutch-language monographs and publications in refereed Dutch-language collections of good quality (as evaluated by the Science Committee).
E-publications
E-publications are ‘other scientific publications’: non-refereed monographs and publications in journals or collections in whatever language, also, refereed Dutch publications with insufficient status for Category D (as evaluated by the Science Committee). Listed under Category E are journals such as Krisis, Filosofie en Praktijk, Ethische Perspectieven, Nederlands Juristenblad.
E-publications are scientific publications. Trade publications are listed separately, under
Category F.
Trade publications
F-publications
Trade publications are publications that present research results to a public of other specialised academics and policy makers outside the own field of study, who apply these results in their own research, teaching or policy making.
Trade publications differ from popularising publications. Popularising publications are meant for a broad public in for instance newspapers, weeklies and monthly magazines. In this connection one can think of editorials, columns, etc.
All publications that appeared in the course of the current recognition period will be listed in accordance with the above classification.
Assessment of publications
All publications are assigned a score (expressed in points). The score depends on the (sub)category in which the publication is classified. Type of publication
| code
| score# | Monograph with renowned international publisher (Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge UP, Suhrkamp and Springer are renowned publishers. LIT for example is not).
| A1
| 30 | | Articles in A-journals or comparable collections with a renowned publishing house. | A2 | 10 | Editorship of an A-collection or special issue A-journal
| A3 | 10 | Book review in an A-journal (>2 pp)
| A4 | 2 | Refereed monograph published by an international publisher
| B1 | 20 | | Articles in refereed journals or collections with an international publisher | B2 | 7,5
| Editorship of a B-collection or a special issue B-journal
| B3 | 7,5 | | Non-refereed monograph with an international publisher | C1 | 15 | Non-refereed articles in journals or collections with an international publisher
| C2
| 5
| Editorship of a C-collection or special issue C-journal
| C3 | 5
| Preprints, abstracts, and book reviews (> 2pp) in B- and C-journals
| C4 | 1
| Refereed Dutch-language monograph
| D1 | 15 | Refereed articles in Dutch journals or collections
| D2 | 5
| Editorship of Dutch-language refereed collections or special issue Dutch-language journals
| D3 | 5
| Monographs in a non-international language
| E1 | 10 | | Other scholarly articles and contributions to collections | E2 | 3
| | Editon of a non-refereed, non-international collection | E3 | 3 | | Preprint, abstract or book review (>2 pp.) in a non-international journal | E4 | 1 | Trade publications
| F | 2
|
*In case of multiple authors, the authors who are first and second in terms of contribution receive 75% of the points scored; the third and following authors receive 25%. For publications in the context of the medical sciences the first two and the last author are awarded 75%, the remaining authors 25% of the points scored. The same percentages apply in the case of multiple editors of a collection or a special issue of a journal.
Explanation of the assessment
1. For articles in a collection holds that per collection the author cannot be awarded a score higher than awarded for a monograph (for example, for an A-collection, maximally 30 points). The same holds when the author is also (co-)editor of the collection. In that case, too, the author cannot receive more points for the relevant articles and the editing jointly than for a monograph in the same category.
2. PhD theses are not classified and evaluated, because they are prerequisite to (junior) membership rather than publications by (junior) Members. An edited commercial edition of a PhD thesis classified in the A or B-category is eligible for assessment.
3. Monographs are awarded three times as many points as articles.
4. Editing of a special issue of a journal is evaluated equal to editing of a collection. In part editing is substantial scientific activity. Edition of a collection or a special issue should be distinguished from regular editorial membership of journals and publishing houses. These latter yield no points.
5. To be accepted as separate publication, reviews must be longer than 2 pages, and evaluated in according with the quality of the journal.
6. Prefaces, postscripts, introductions, afterwords, commentaries, must be of at least 5 pages in length.
7. Replies of less than 2 pages to comment on previously published articles yield no points.
8. Translations of previously published works yield no points, unless the translation is from a regional language such as Dutch to an international language.
9. Successive issues, other than translations into an international language, yield no points.
10. Preprints and abstracts that count as independent publication in some empirical areas of special study also count as such in the present classification, on condition that they appear in collections with an ISBN number or in journals with an ISSN number. The score is not high however. The Science Committee assumes that, if abstracts and preprints have substantial significance, they will be elaborated into fully fledged publications.
11. Papers published in Congress Proceedings are considered on a par with contributions to collections.
12. Publication of qualitatively good scientific work in the Dutch language should not be discouraged by too low a valuation of such publications. For this reason refereed publications in the Dutch language are awarded as many points as non-refereed publications in an international language.
Criteria for admission of new Members and for extension of memberships
One is admitted to NSRPP as Member, casu quo one’s membership is extended if:
in the course of 6 years, whereby 0.4 fte (full-time equivalent) is reserved for research, one has obtained
a score of 60 points, of which at least 40 A-points, or
a score of 80 points, of which at least 30 A-points.
In cases of a lower research time allotment, the criteria are calculated in accordance with the terms of the appointment (for example, instead of 60 points, of which 40 A-points for 0.4 fte, calculation for 0.3 fte becomes 45 points, of which 30 A-points).
In June of 2005 the standard was 6 A-publications and 5 good-quality scientific publications. The present standard is more relaxed. For the non A-points no further distinction is made concerning the type of publication scored. In this way trade publications count as well.
The Board is authorised to grant or extend membership even if an applicant or Member does not meet the above standard. The Board must present appropriate motivation for doing so. For example: an above-average number of important trade publications, or scholarly activities such as editing a journal, or organising congresses, and an above-average number of promotions.
NSRPP PhD candidates who obtained their PhD can apply for junior membership within a period of 3 years. Such membership is valid for a period of 3 further years, after which time the Board judges whether the Junior Member has published enough during that period to be eligible for full membership. The Board can also grant junior membership to PhD’s from other institutions, and in very special cases to persons who obtained their PhD more than 3 years previously, but due to special circumstances were unable to meet the publication requirements.
May 2009, Board of Directors, Netherlands School for Research in Practical Philosophy
|
|
|
Onderzoekprogramma OZSE |
|
|
Research Programme Netherlands School for Research in Practical Philosophy (NSRPP)
Introduction
The Netherlands School for Research in Practical Philosophy directs its research to issues in both the area of fundamental ethics and that of applied ethics. Fundamental ethics comprises meta-ethical issues and research into the presuppositions, foundations and applications of normative ethics, theological ethics and political philosophy. The research progresses from the various ethical traditions represented in the research school.
In the area of applied ethics research focuses on bio-ethical questions (medical ethics, health ethics, animal, food and nature ethics), on issues in the realm of social and political ethics (migration, business ethics), and technology ethics (information technology, nanotechnology).
Each of the diverse parts of the research programme is characterised by 1) emphasis on the interaction between fundamental and applied research, and 2) attention to the relation between ethics (both fundamental and applied) and the empirical sciences.
Build-up of ethical theory is the basis of applied ethics, but must also prove its fruitfulness there. Conversely, applied ethics cannot do without reflection on fundamental philosophical presuppositions. In areas where applied ethics already has a traditional bond with the empirical sciences, one may expect that fundamental ethics, too, reflects on the results and theoretical assumptions of the empirical sciences. High-quality ethical research therefore demands an interdisciplinary approach.
1. Principles of Ethics and Political Philosophy
Within the NSRPP, fundamental research increasingly occupies a central place. Meta-ethics for example analyses the structure of ‘reasoning’ and the characteristics of practical and moral ‘reasons’, analyses theories of rationality and investigates the meta-ethical presuppositions in moral discussions. The focus is on analysis of the epistemological status of moral assertions, the possibility of moral knowledge and the (im)possibility of moral foundings. In particular concepts are analysed that are of central significance in normative ethics and political philosophy, such as freedom, integrity, human skills and moral rights.
NSRPP considers it of special importance that this research takes place in the context of different ethical traditions; the variety of approaches represented in the school – cognitivistic, transcendental-philosophical, analytical, coherentistic and hermeneutical – inspire and complement each other.
It is of great importance for such fundamental research that explicit attention is paid to the historical traditions within moral philosophy. More recently discussion and exchange with specific disciplines has come to play an increasing role in the ethical research, for instance with moral psychology, the neuro- and cognition sciences, jurisprudence and political science. Great emphasis will be placed on the question as to the significance of the knowledge and insights from these disciplines for fundamental and applied ethics. Equally important is an ethical evaluation of developments within these sciences.
2. Methodological issues in applied ethics
Many fundamental-ethical problems are studied precisely in connection with questions in applied ethics. In applied ethics reflection on methodological assumptions looms large. An important discussion, which, incidentally, puts Dutch research on the international map, concerns the question as to the relevance of empirical research (about human capacities, psychological presuppositions and moral attitudes) for (fundamental and) applied ethics. Further, social-scientific theories concerning society, political actors or structures of knowledge generation are very important for many ethical issues. Internationally, this discussion about ethics and empirics is only now taking great strides in development.
In the NSRPP research over the next years various theories about empirically-informed ethics will be considered from a meta-ethical point of view. Specifically the studies will look into the relationship between psychology and ethics. Not only closer scrutiny of ‘moral psychology’ is desirable; also needed is deeper reflection on psychological presuppositions that are important for the formation of ethical theory (such as characteristics and conditions of actorship, the role of moral emotions, the role of integrity, etc.).
Applied ethics has paid attention to interdisciplinarity for some time already, and the relation with other disciplines such as technology assessment, philosophy of science, biological theory (evolution theory, neuroscience) or sociology of technology will be investigated more extensively in the next years. Crucial here is that applied ethics must be informed about other scientific research, but equally needed is ethical reflection on the assumptions and the research in these disciplines. In many areas questions arise that relate to the responsibility for the generation of knowledge. The more important knowledge and its technological applications become, the more important also becomes the question about responsibility for the accumulation of this knowledge.
3. Politics, economy and community
International and national developments play a part in renewed reflection on common value patterns, people’s rights, citizenship and justice. The frameworks for these discussions as such, however, are subject of discussion as well. In the near past traditional notions such as ‘recognition’, ‘freedom’, ‘rights’ or ‘enlightenment’ have been debated, both in light of their philosophical and historical wellsprings and in connection with their suitability for the analysis and critique of recent developments. Other important examples of social change that urge us to develop new moral frameworks are environmental changes and the worldwide spread of large and new technologies. Then too, a central point of discussion in many European countries is the moral evaluation of immigration. One consequence of the discussions about the problem of immigration and the success or failure of the multicultural society is the increasingly insistent call for thorough reflection on a shared value pattern within these societies. Religion plays an important role in this. For all of these developments holds true that ethical analysis should be carried out in teamwork with other sciences. In the analysis of ‘globalisation’, for example, the question of the moral status of actors like the state, NGOs or international organisations cannot be answered without proper insight into the actual role played by these actors. And again, fundamental research in these areas cannot be done independently of applied research. Analysis of the new relationships between market and state, to use another example, can hardly be carried out independently of systematic reflection on the role of the economy. In the NSRPP problems of business ethics have been considered for some time. More recently reflection on the fundamental level is increasingly addressing the very frameworks relating to moral boundaries of economic action, limits to commoditisation and responsibility of economic actors. It appears important to engage in more direct involvement on the part of normative ethics and political philosophy with actual discussions in business ethics.
4. Bio-ethics, health and care ethics
For many years now, the NSRPP has been playing an internationally recognised role in the field of bio-ethics. Three areas deserve special mention here. First, research is carried out in the traditional fields of medical ethics, such as issues in genetic diagnostics and euthanasia. These continue to demand attention, not only because the Dutch debate (concerning euthanasia for instance) has led to much discussion worldwide, but especially because technological developments continually give rise to new ethical questions. In particular the developments in gene-technology, genomics and nanomedicine will generate new applications the consequences of which are at present difficult to anticipate. In the near future therefore research will concern the so-called enhancement technologies. These are technological means to improve the human body in the absence of sickness or incapacity. Such developments prompt discussion of the legitimacy of medical intervention and the view of humanity in the art of medicine itself. Secondly, there are problems that continue to demand renewed attention and reflection, such as issues about justice in the system of health care. Developments in the field of Public Health and the fact of financial scarcity lead to questions concerning the normative criteria in terms of which the underlying concepts of political justice can be judged. This issue is considered both on the theoretical level (e.g. in Public Health ethics regarding the question of the limits of collective interest and collective responsibility) and on the applied level, as in questions about organ transplantation and organ donation. Thirdly, the NSRPP has built up a leading position and its own expertise in the area of animal, nature and nutrition ethics. Research by the school’s Members stakes out the frontline of international discussions. For the immediate future, therefore, this will continue to be a centre of gravity within the research school. The debate in animal ethics is in need of further, deeper elaboration of theoretical principles: for instance, the concept of ‘intrinsic value’ for animals still is moral-philosophically underdetermined. Also, in the field of nutrition ethics, a new arrival in the area of applied ethics, the need arises for theoretical reflection on practical issues, such as concerning responsible consumption, and an equitable food chain.
5. Ethics and technology
No longer are technological developments the domain of bio-ethics alone. Next to research in genomics there are important developments in the fields of ICT and nanotechnology as well. In recent years these too draw attention in political and ethical discussions. For the immediate future this topic will be a priority within the NSRPP. It should be noted that this is a field of research-in-development, where useful methodology to deal with issues in this domain is urgently needed. One reason for the lack of methodology so far is that an overview of concrete applications, for instance in nanotechnology, is often difficult to obtain, event though this is very important for the moral evaluation of knowledge in the area of technology assessment, philosophy of science, political philosophy and normative ethics. There is a decided need for closer reflection on the consequences of new technologies for both individual citizens and for society as a whole, at the same time technological innovation urges us to broaden the (moral) horizon. Our understanding of risk and responsibility for instance is markedly influenced by technological possibilities and insights. The complexity of structures and processes with which technology confronts us therefore demands further normative thinking and a broader approach. Ethical reflection will for example be directed at moral problems attending the introduction of new artefacts and systems. In the years ahead the NSRPP wants to gain international renown in this field.
|
|
|
Werkgroep Bedrijfsethiek |
|
|
A translation of the following content is not (yet) available
Coördinatie: dr. W. Dubbink
Thema/onderzoeksveld en werkwijze: De werkgroep bedrijfsethiek richt zich op theorievorming en reflectie op vraagstukken rondom het thema markt en moraal. Dit thema interpreteren we in de meest brede zin. Dit houdt onder andere in dat de werkgroep zich verdiept in theorievorming en reflectie op concrete morele vraagstukken die zich op het niveau van de persoon of het bedrijf voordoen in de markt. Daarnaast richt de werkgroep zich ook op institutionele en politiek-theoretische vraagstukken rond het thema. Daarnaast staat de werkgroep echter ook open voor vraagstukken die zich op het gebied van de filosofie van de economie bevinden of dat van de moderne (westerse) cultuur, voor zover deze gelieerd zijn het feit dat de moderne westerse samenleving een marktsamenleving is. De werkgroep bepaalt jaarlijks haar specifieke zwaartepunten. Hierbij zijn de onderzoeksinteresses van de leden doorslaggevend. De breedte van de thematiek laat onverlet dat de onderzoeksgroep bedrijfsethiek wel een formele voorwaarde stelt: alle bijdragen dienen primair de academische theorievorming van en reflectie op de bedrijfsethiek te willen stimuleren. De werkgroep bedrijfsethiek houdt jaarlijks drie bijeenkomsten. Tijdens deze bijeenkomsten staat telkens één boek of artikel centraal. Deze artikelen dienen nog niet gepubliceerd te zijn maar al wel bijna af, naar het oordeel van de auteur. De discussie wordt ingeleid door twee referenten. Eénmaal per jaar wordt een spreker van buiten gevraagd te komen spreken. In dat geval wordt een reeds bestaand boek of artikel besproken. Leden van de werkgroep: Wim Dubbink, Rutger Claassen, Ronald Jeurissen, Mandy Bosma, Kor Grit, Johan Graafland, Hans Bennink, Elena Cavargno, Bert van de Ven, Bas Kee, Andre Nijhof, Eduard Kinneman, Susan Langenberg |
|
|
List of quality journals |
|
|
|
De commissie wetenschap heeft recent een nieuwe tijdschriftenlijst samengesteld, nader uitgewerkt naar specialisatie. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Werkgroep Ethiek en technologie |
|
|
A translation of the following content is not (yet) available
Coördinatie: dr. Ph. Brey
Thema/onderzoeksveld en werkwijze:
Ethiek van technologie in brede zin. Naast (het ontwerp van) artefacten strekt het onderzoek zich tevens uit tot de processen, praktijken, organisaties en instituties waarbinnen technieken en technologieen worden aangewend. Daarnaast betreft het onderzoek eveneens de culturele en antropologische vooronderstellingen van de ontwikkeling, de productie en het gebruik van technologie en de reflectie op de methoden van technologie-ethiek. Leden van de werkgroep: D. Willems, W. Pieters, I. van de Poel, N. Manders-huits, L. Asveld, A. van Gorp, A. Vedder, S. Roeser, A. Pols, P. Sollie, T. Swierstra, P. Brey, K. Waelbers, M. Coeckelbergh, J. van den Hoven, A. Meijers, L. Royakkers, C. Illies, S. van der Burg, M. Derksen, P. Verbeek, N. Doorn, G. Valkenburg |
|
|
