|
|
Katrina Petersen. (2019). Managing Risk Across Borders: ethical implications of engaging information technology for transboundary disaster collaboration. In Z. Franco, J. J. González, & J. H. Canós (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response And Management. Valencia, Spain: Iscram.
Abstract: Disaster management is increasingly becoming a project in managing diversity, from cross-organisational collaboration to inclusivity of voices. This is particularly prevalent when dealing with transboundary risks. New information technologies support these transboundary interactions by compiling diverse information and sources to build collaborative insight beyond what any individual organisation can know. This paper explores the ethical concerns that planners and responders face as they work with these collaborative information technologies to engage with data from other organisations, based in different data frameworks, socio-political priorities, goals, and cultures of risk. It draws on the ethical impact assessment of a cross-border collaborative crisis planning platform currently under development in the H2020 project IN-PREP to examine ethical tensions around equity, inclusion, diversity, solidarity, accountability and transparency. It discusses the consequences of such design foci for an agency?s ability to notice ethical risks that emerge from working in diversity.
|
|
|
|
Xaroula Kerasidou, Monika Büscher, & Michael Liegl. (2015). Don?t Drone? Negotiating Ethics of RPAS in Emergency Response. In L. Palen, M. Buscher, T. Comes, & A. Hughes (Eds.), ISCRAM 2015 Conference Proceedings ? 12th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Kristiansand, Norway: University of Agder (UiA).
Abstract: This paper explores discourses of automation as a key ethical concern in the development of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems for disaster response. We discuss problems arising from ?humanistic? dichotomies that pit human against machine, military against civil uses and experts against laypersons. We explore how it may be possible to overcome human-technology dichotomies.
|
|
