Select method of evaluation:

“In this step, the ethical issues identified before must be evaluated. This should be done through a combination of desk research by the EIA-team and online participatory approaches. If appropriate, external experts may additionally be consulted and live stakeholder events may be organised.”

“Update the reference list (Link) with literature on ethical principles and values.”

“Analyse ethical values and principles”

“Clarify the ethical principles and values at stake”

“An ethicist should clarify these principles and values using conceptual analysis and the application of ethical theories.”

“Assess the likelihood and intensity of violation of ethical values”

“The ethicist should assess the degree to which the ethical value or principle is likely to be violated or benefited in the expected ethical impact. This analysis can be supported by a decision tree as illustrated in the next table.”

Degree of violation
(1 = minor; 2 = moderate;
3 =medium; 4= high; 5=severe)

Degree of benefit
(1 = minor; 2 = moderate;
3 =medium; 4= high; 5=extreme)

“Identify value conflicts and propose ways of resolving them”

“Proposing ways to resolve value conflicts should follow rules of thumb”

1. “Fundamental values including basic human rights such as the right to life, civil liberties, justice, security, etc. take precedence over non-fundamental values …
2. Assess the degree of violation and choose the action that least compromises a fundamental value …
3. Project moral values into situations when two fundamental values seem to be equally violated to determine which value appears more important in the particular situation …
4. Negotiate conflicts of moral values between different parties, who constitute or represent stakeholders in the situation …
5. Avoid the value conflict by reconfiguring the situation.” (CEN, 2017, p23)

Rule of thumb 1: Fundamental values take precedence over non-fundamental values.

List all sets of two values at stake which conflict with each other Examine the first set of conflicting values. Which of these values is a fundamental value? Refer to a list of fundamental values and human rights treaties If one value is fundamental and the other is non-fundamental, select the fundamental value. If both are fundamental, keep the value conflict marked as important. If both are non-fundamental, keep the value conflict marked as normal. Then compare the next set of conflicting values, until all sets of conflicting values are assessed. Then move to rule of thumb 2.

Rule of thumb 2: Assess the degree of violation of conflicting fundamental values and choose the action that least compromises a fundamental value.

Identify the value conflict

Describe likely scenarios
where the value conflict occurs

For each scenario, identify
alternative remediation actions

Estimate the degree of violation
of the conflicting fundamental values
in each alternative action (1 = minor;
2 = moderate; 3 =medium; 4= high;
5=severe)

Compare the degrees of violation
in alternative actions and select
the option with the lowest degree of
violation of both fundamental values

Rule of thumb 3: Project moral values into situations when two fundamental values seem to be equally violated to determine which value appears more important in the particular situation.

Identify the value conflict

Describe likely scenarios where both fundamental
values are equally violated

Which value appears more important in
the particular situation and why?

Rule of thumb 4: (in medium or large scale EIAs) Negotiate conflicts of moral values between different parties, who constitute or represent stakeholders in the situation.

Identify the value conflict

Describe likely scenarios where
the value conflict occurs

Identify the stakeholders

Let each stakeholder representative
estimate the importance of each of
the conflicting fundamental values
(1 = minor; 2 = moderate;
3 =medium; 4= high;
5=extreme)

Organise dialogue and report
any changes inperceived importance
for each stakeholder representative

Rule of thumb 5: (in medium or large scale EIAs) Avoid the value conflict by reconfiguring the situation.

Describe likely scenarios
where the valueconflict occurs

Describe social or
organisational options

Consult stakeholders (and experts) by asking them to comment on the pdf of the draft evaluation report and include the minutes of this consultation in section Outcome of discussion of the ethical impact analysis with stakeholders of the final report.

Draft the report on evaluating ethical impacts by filling in the following table.

Title:

[Insert the title filled in during the identification of ethical issues in page #5 as default, which the user can modify.]

Authors:

[Insert the authors filled in during identification of ethical issues in page #5 as default, which the user can modify.]

Abstract:

[Insert the abstract filled in during the identification of ethical issues in page #5 as default, which the user can modify.]

Introduction:

[Insert the introduction filled in during the identification of ethical issues in page #5 as default, which the user can modify.]

Method of evaluation:

[Insert the section evaluate ethical impacts filled in during the EIA-plan writing in page #4 as default, which the user can modify.]

Analysis of ethical values and principles:

[Insert the completed table resulting from step 2]

Identified value conflicts and proposed ways of resolving them:

[Insert the completed table resulting from step 3]

Outcome of discussion of the ethical impact analysis with stakeholders:

[The user should fill in text]

References:

[Insert the reference list resulting from page #4, which the user can modify.]

Consulted persons:

[Insert the list of consulted persons resulting from page #4, which the user can modify.]

**This work project has received funding from European Union Horizon 2020 Programme (H2020) via RiskGONE project under grant agreement nº 814425