ORCID Profile
0000-0002-5170-2091
Current Organisation
Griffith University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Law | Legal Institutions (incl. Courts and Justice Systems) | Human Rights and Justice Issues | Migration | Health Care Administration | Policy and Administration | International Relations | Health Policy |
Social Impacts of Climate Change and Variability | Workforce Transition and Employment | Workplace and Organisational Ethics | Justice and the Law not elsewhere classified | International Organisations | Health Policy Evaluation
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 05-12-2018
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 10-2009
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 23-05-2015
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-05-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 30-01-2016
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Date: 05-11-2015
Publisher: United Nations Publications
Date: 24-01-2012
DOI: 10.18356/1B496508-EN
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 03-2009
DOI: 10.1017/S0953820808003373
Abstract: A recurring objection confronting utilitarianism is that its dictates require information that lies beyond the bounds of human epistemic wherewithal. Utilitarians require reliable knowledge of the social consequences of various policies, and of people's preferences and utilities. Agreeing partly with the sceptics, I concur that the general rules of thumb offered by social science do not provide sufficient justification for the utilitarian legislator to rationally recommend a particular political regime, such as liberalism. Actual data about human preference-structures and utilities is required to bridge this evidentiary gap. I offer two arguments to support the availability of such information. First, I contend that ordinary human beings have a clear method of epistemic access to reliable information about commensurable preference-structures. Second, in an attempt to shift the onus of philosophic argument, I show that the utilitarian legislator's requirements do not differ in kind from those implicitly called upon by the sceptical deontic liberal.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 07-06-2014
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Date: 04-08-2016
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 26-09-2013
Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
Date: 16-05-2017
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 21-03-2023
DOI: 10.1007/S10677-023-10382-4
Abstract: Rational manipulation is constituted by the following conditions: (i) A aims to persuade B of thesis X (ii) A holds X to be true and rationally justifiable (iii) A knows of the existence of evidence, argument or information Y. While Y is not itself misinformation (Y is factually correct), A suspects B might take Y as important evidence for not-X (iv) A deliberately chooses not to mention Y to B, out of a concern that it could mislead B into believing not-X and, (v) B has no compelling reason to expect A will avoid mentioning Y in this way. A’s behavior is rational insofar as A aims to use reasons to persuade B to believe a thesis that A holds as true and justified. Yet it is manipulation because A deliberately avoids furnishing B with information that B might regard as relevant, to ensure B arrives at the correct belief. I argue that we have good reason to think that A’s action will be wrongly manipulative because it disrespects B’s consent, epistemic autonomy, and personal autonomy. That said, context is critical, and there are many times evidence is intentionally occluded that are not rational manipulation. Even so, ethical arguers should beware of ambiguous contexts, such as when there are conflicting expectations about argumentation roles and goals.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 08-02-2018
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 03-09-2021
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 03-2022
DOI: 10.1007/S11098-022-01802-9
Abstract: People give surprising weight to others’ expectations about their behaviour. I argue the practice of conforming to others’ expectations is ethically well-grounded. A special class of ‘reasonable expectations’ can create prima facie obligations even in cases where the expectations arise from contingent pre-existing practices, and the duty-bearer has not created them, or directly benefited from them. The obligation arises because of the substantial goods that follow from such conformity—goods capable of being endorsed from many different ethical perspectives and implicating key moral factors such as consent, fairness, respect, autonomy, and reciprocity. Given the innumerable situations where such expectations can arise, their ethical significance is critical both practically and philosophically.
Publisher: Cognizant, LLC
Date: 20-12-2013
DOI: 10.3727/108354213X13824558470943
Abstract: With international tourist numbers surpassing 1 billion in 2012, the increasing consideration of the ethical issues in the Tourism Studies literature, and the investigation of “rights” in the broader context, it is surprising that the right to tourism has remained a relatively unexamined philosophical question. Indeed, even broader rights, such as the right to leisure, the right to freedom of movement, and the right to the pursuit of happiness, have little philosophical treatment—compared to the well-trammeled ground of rights of property, free speech, and suffrage, for ex le. While it is not possible (in a short review article) to mount a comprehensive case, in this review article Noreen and Hugh Breakey position their argument in the context of the international law of human rights, and offer a prima facie justification of the right to tourism on a number of ethical grounds, and present what they argue to be the philosophical right to pursue tourism. (Abstract by the Reviews Editor) [Readers of this journal who may wish to respond to these views (emanating from the east coast of Australia) are encouraged to send their short critiques to The Review Editor of Tourism Analysis , viz., to Prof. Keith Hollinshead at khdeva@btopenworld. com. The editors will be particularly pleased to receive critiques/commentaries/challenges to Is There a Right to Tourism? that are under 1,000 words.]
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2016
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 26-09-2019
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 2018
DOI: 10.1093/OJLS/GQY020
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Date: 04-10-2014
Publisher: University of South Florida Libraries
Date: 10-2016
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 02-08-2011
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 27-05-2014
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 03-2010
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-08-2014
DOI: 10.1111/THEO.12022
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 09-08-2021
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 05-10-2016
DOI: 10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198717133.013.42
Abstract: C. B. Macpherson’s 1962 The Political Theory of Possessive In idualism: Hobbes to Locke challenged the canonical interpretation of seventeenth-century English political theorists by exploring their allegiance to “possessive in idualism,” the idea that man’s normative essence consists in his self-ownership. After surveying the work’s impact, this chapter analyzes Macpherson’s concept of possessive in idualism and considers the inter-relations amongst its economic, ontological, and psychological postulates. The chapter argues that—while Macpherson’s exegesis erred in trying to graft the concept onto early modern political theorists like John Locke—his core idea remains significant today. Possessive in idualism accurately describes an influential normative perspective increasingly pervading and facilitated by contemporary global capitalism, as exemplified in the global financial crisis of 2007–09.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 23-06-2015
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Date: 25-07-2015
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 08-08-2015
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-01-2023
DOI: 10.1111/FAF.12729
Abstract: This paper investigates the ethical values, moral principles, methods and reform proposals in aquaculture ethics scholarship to develop a comprehensive and balanced list of aquaculture ethical principles. A Systematic Quantitative Literature Review methodology is employed to parse 150 journal articles on aquaculture ethics. Methodologies, specific ethical values, broad principles, recommended reforms and trends over time are quantified and assessed. Through analysis of invoked values and recommended reforms, six core marine economy ethics principles are identified: Environmental Protection, Fairness, Stakeholder Participation, Harm Prevention, Beneficence and Trustworthiness. A comprehensive multidimensional legitimacy model is employed to uncover ethical gaps and identify promising areas for future aquaculture ethics research.
Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
Date: 24-10-2019
Publisher: De Gruyter
Date: 05-09-2022
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-01-2021
DOI: 10.1111/IMIG.12816
Abstract: This article investigates whether the methods by which states implement citizens’ human rights possess serious weaknesses for ensuring migrant health professionals’ rights. Stemming from the discipline of normative philosophy, the moral approach to human rights sees rights as implemented through multiple waves of duties delivered by state‐managed integrity systems. We argue that this otherwise comparatively reliable method can fail to deliver adequate outcomes to migrant health professionals. These professionals can encounter problems stemming from the following: their lack of political priority as non‐citizens the challenges to effective monitoring of migrant health professional pathways and outcomes the incapacity of federal lawmakers to impact on key policy levers the ever‐present threat of “pathways to nowhere” and state‐enabled employee exploitation. The findings provide a philosophically grounded foundation for acknowledging the human rights concerns of even high‐skilled migrants, and show why special regimes for rights protection, facilitation and monitoring are necessary for migrant health professionals.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 29-06-2009
Abstract: Justifications for intellectual property rights are typically made in terms of utility or natural property rights. In this article, I justify limited regimes of copyright and patent grounded in no more than the rights to use our ideas and to contract, conjoined at times with a weak right to hold property in tangibles. I describe the Contracting Situation plausibly arising from vesting rational agents with these rights. I go on to consider whether in order to provide the best protection for the voluntary activities and consensual interactions occurring within the Contracting Situation, it might be appropriate or even necessary to move to institutions qualitatively similar to copyright and patent. I conclude that in at least some circumstances limited regimes of copyright and patent may be defendable solely on the basis of these very basic rights.
Publisher: United Nations
Date: 24-01-2012
DOI: 10.18356/81587E05-EN
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-07-2023
Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
Date: 12-07-2022
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 23-09-2016
DOI: 10.3390/F7100212
Publisher: Brill
Date: 2012
DOI: 10.1163/1875984X-00403003
Abstract: In the international context, human rights are rarely secured by the black letter of law, but rather by the soft laws, political policies and moral prescriptions of protection norms . Two key international protection norms are the well-established Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict (PoC) and – recently added in the last decade – the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP). Yet there is substantial confusion about the specific nature of these two norms, their relationship to one another, and their relationship to the human rights that are held to ground and shape each of them. These questions are complex not merely because there are several distinct PoC norms, nor because all these norms differ one from another. The complexity arises because the relevant differences apply to separate dimensions of each norm. In this way it is possible for a norm to be in one sense narrower than another, yet in another sense to be deeper, and in distinct further senses to be both broader and weaker. With such intricacies in mind, this paper develops a five-dimensional rights-based analysis of norms and uses it to differentiate RtoP from three separate PoC norms, and to illustrate the distinct ways each protection norm provides multi-layered rights protection.
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Date: 12-09-2014
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 04-10-2016
Publisher: Lexxion Verlag
Date: 2018
Publisher: Philosophy Documentation Center
Date: 2011
Start Date: 03-2014
End Date: 07-2019
Amount: $364,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 05-2016
End Date: 06-2023
Amount: $621,496.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity