Guiding values (measure 1 of EKLIPSE ethical framework)
The guiding values of the EKLIPSE ethical framework include:
- Credibility
- Legitimacy
- Relevance
- Transparency
- Innovation
- Independence
- Integration
- Integrity
- Reflective learning
- Inclusiveness
- Quality
- Trust and Network
| Criteria | Definition | Sources |
| Credibility | The (perceived) credibility refers to the quality, validity and adequacy and reliability of the knowledge, evidence and arguments exchanged at the interface. Credibility of knowledge is linked to the credibility of the knowledge production and knowledge exchange processes. | Sarkki et al. 2015 |
| Legitimacy | The (perceived) legitimacy refers to the fairness and balance of the SPI processes. | Sarkki et al. 2015 |
| Relevance | The relevance (or salience) refers to the ability to match knowledge with policy and societal needs, and the extent to which knowledge is usable. | Sarkki et al. 2015 |
| Transparency | Disclosure of sources, processes and related stakeholder involvement. | Sarkki et al. 2015, adapted |
| Innovation | New methods, products or formats for knowledge production and presentation of results. | Own definition |
| Independence | Freedom from external control, neutrality or bias in position, range of membership. | Young et al. 2013, |
| Integration | Biodiversity and ecosystem services issues are considered from a three dimensional perspective: social, economic and ecological, that comprises scientific knowledge and other types of knowledge, including local, traditional and practitioner's knowledge. Our integrative approach also ensures that perspectives from different geographical regions, disciplines, and cultures are taken into consideration with particular attention to gender balance | Own definition |
| Integrity | The integrity of research is based on adherence to core values—objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. | National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017 |
| Reflective learning | The process of internally examining and exploring an issue of concern, triggered by an experience, which creates and clarifies meaning in terms of self, and which results in a changed conceptual perspective. | Boyd & Fales 1983 |
| Inclusiveness | Processes and actions that ensure the involvement and participation of relevant stakeholders to produce up-to date assessments, through exchange of knowledge and expertise through advice-seeking and advice-giving. | Adapted from Smith 2005 and Oubenal, et al. 2017
|
| Quality | Guarantee of the use of unbiased, credible, and consistent knowledge, implementing a transparent and peer-reviewed process, and building on a reliable and trusted network of knowledge holders that is easily and efficiently mobilized. | Adapted from Rohstein et al., (2008) |
| Trust & Network | Our approach anchors itself in the building of relationships and trust that allows decision makers to access evidence for policy dialogue, and stands to capture the expanding range of people and institutions operating at the science-policy interface. This approach finds its strength in the interactions between actors and institutions. | Adapted from Chilvers and Evans (2009); and Drime and Quitan (2011) |
Integration, quality and trust & network are guiding values proposed by the participants of the workshop “Implementing an ethical infrastructure” at the POCC conference. As a result, the EKLIPSE team decided to include those three guiding values on our ethical framework.
The guiding values will be further specified in the Code of Ethics (measure 2), which is currently under development.
As current description, we have adapted the following principles developed for BiodiversityKnowledge:
1. Enable OPENNESS and INCLUSIVENESS through wide participation from all potential actors, including relevant experts and knowledge holders, through open invitations for participation, building on participants’ enthusiasm and diversity, and ensuring open access to the EKLIPSE products.
2. ENSURE QUALITY and EXCELLENCE, by applying established and tailored methodologies, developing systems for quality assurance including extended peer-review, and responding to feedback.
3. MINIMISE BIAS and ENSURE FAIR and TRANSPARENT PROCESSES, by ensuring scientific rigour, broad participation, and by avoiding conflicts of interest, through clear rules and procedures.
4. AVOID DUPLICATION and foster COOPERATION by collaborating with relevant established institutions to maximize efficiency and minimize costs in science-policy interactions.
5. Integrate CAPACITY BUILDING as an essential component to improve collaborative working and information sharing.
6. Integrate REFLEXIVITY and LEARNING, by ensuring that processes and results are continuously and formatively evaluated.
7. ENSURE INTEGRITY of the overall EKLIPSE Mechanism by avoiding and/or disclosing conflict of interests and by continuously revisiting and revising its structures, rules and processes based on these principles.
Chilvers, J. and Evans, J., 2009. Understanding networks at the science-policy interface. Geoforum, 40(3), pp.355-362.
Drimie, S. and Quinlan, T., 2011. Playing the role of a ‘boundary organisation’: getting smarter with networking. Health Research Policy and Systems, 9(1), p.S11.
McFadden, L., Priest, S., Green, C. and Sandberg, A.(2009) Basic principlesof science and policy integration, Spicosa Project Report, London, Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University.
Rothstein, Bo O., and Jan ANTeorell. "What is quality of government? A theory of impartialgovernmentinstitutions." Governance 21.2 (2008): 165-190.