Abstract
A number of EU institutions and government committees across Europe have expressed interest in developing methods and decision-support tools to facilitate consideration of the ethical dimensions of biotechnology assessment. As part of the work conducted in the EC supported project on ethical tools (Ethical Bio-TA Tools), a number of ethical frameworks with the potential to support the work of public policy decision-makers has been characterized and evaluated. One of these potential tools is the Delphi method. The Delphi method was originally developed to assess variables that are intangible and/or shrouded in uncertainty by drawing on the knowledge and abilities of a diverse group of experts through a form of anonymous and iterative consultation. The method has hitherto been used by a diversity of practitioners to explore issues such as technology assessment, environmental planning, and public health measures. From the original (classical) Delphi, a family of Delphi-related processes has emerged. As a result of the evaluation of the various Delphi processes, it is proposed that the classical method can be further developed and applied as a form of ethical framework to assist policy-makers. Through a series of exercises and trials, an Ethical Delphi has been developed as a potential approach for characterizing ethical issues raised by the use of novel biotechnologies. Advantages and disadvantages of the method are discussed. Further work is needed to develop the procedural aspects of the Ethical Delphi method and to test its use in different cultural contexts. However, utilizing an ethical framework of this type combines the advantages of a methodical approach to capture ethical aspects with the democratic virtues of transparency and openness to criticism. Ethical frameworks such as the Ethical Delphi should contribute to better understanding of and decision-making on issues that involve decisive ethical dimensions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adler, M. and E. Ziglio (eds.). Gazing into the Oracle: The Delphi Method and its application to social policy and public health (Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, 1996)
COGEM. Farm scale evaluations evaluated. What can policy expect from science with respect to publicly-controversial technological innovations? COGEM report CGM/050408-04 (Bilthoven, The Netherlands: Netherlands Commission on Genetic Modification (COGEM), 2005) http://www.cogem.net/pdfdb/advies/FSE_evaluated.pdf
Crisp J., Pelletier D., Duffield C., Adams A., Nagy S. (1997). The Delphi Method? Nursing Research 46: 116–118
Funtowicz S., Ravetz J. (1993). Science for the Post-Normal Age. Futures 25(7): 739–755
Hasson F., Keeney S., McKenna H. (2000). Research Guidelines for the Delphi Survey Technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing 32: 1008–1015
Kaiser, M., K. Millar, E. -M. Forsberg, O. Baune, B. Mepham, E. Thorstensen, and S. Tomkins. “Decision-Making Frameworks,” in V. Beekman (ed.), Description of Ethical Bio-technology Assessment Tools for Agriculture and Food Production. Interim Report Ethical Bio-TA Tools (QLG6-CT-2002-02594) February, 2004 (Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI), The Hague, 2004a) pp. 9–30
Kaiser, M., K. Millar, E. -M. Forsberg, O. Baune, B. Mepham, E. Thorstensen, and S. Tomkins “Decision-Making Frameworks,” in V. Beekman (ed.), Evaluation of Ethical Bio-technology Assessment Tools for Agriculture and Food Production. Interim Report Ethical Bio-TA Tools (QLG6-CT-2002-02594) October, 2004 (Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI),The Hague, 2004b) pp. 8–30
Rauch W. (1979). The Decision Delphi. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 15: 159–169
Williams P. L., Webb C. (1994). The Delphi Technique: A Methodological Discussion. Journal of Advanced Nursing 19: 180–186
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Millar, K., Thorstensen, E., Tomkins, S. et al. Developing the Ethical Delphi. J Agric Environ Ethics 20, 53–63 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-006-9022-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-006-9022-9