Omissions, causation and responsibility

In this paper I discuss a recent exchange of articles between Hugh McLachlan and John Coggon on the relationship between omissions, causation and moral responsibility. My aim is to contribute to their debate by isolating a presupposition I believe they both share, and by questioning that presupposition. The presupposition is that, at any given moment, there are countless things that I am omitting to do. This leads them both to give a distorted account of the relationship between causation and moral or (as the case may be) legal responsibility, and, in the case of Coggon, to claim that the law’s conception of causation is a fiction based on policy. Once it is seen that this presupposition is faulty, we can attain a more accurate view of the logical relationship between causation and moral responsibility in the case of omissions. This is important because it will enable us, in turn, to understand why the law continues to regard omissions as different, both logically and morally, from acts, and why the law seeks to track that logical and moral difference in the legal distinction it draws between withholding life-sustaining measures and euthanasia.

Libya and the international community’s 'responsibility to protect'

The Libyan regime’s attacks on its own civilian population are a test case for the international community’s commitment to the notion of a “responsibility to protect” (R2P). The UN Security Council’s statement on 22 February 2011 explicitly invoked this concept by calling on “the Government of Libya to meet its responsibility to protect its population”. Yet, with Muammar Gaddafi encouraging further violence against protesters and threatening to fight “until the last drop of blood” it seems unlikely that the Security Council’s warning will be heeded. Greater pressure from the international community will be needed to bring an end to the atrocities in Libya. The international response to the Libyan crisis represents an opportunity to translate the theory of R2P into practice.

Responsibility to Protect and Sovereignty

The responsibility to protect ('R2P') principle articulates the obligations of the international community to prevent conflict occurring, to intervene in conflicts, and to assist in rebuilding after conflicts. The doctrine is about protecting civilians in armed conflicts from four mass atrocity crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. This book examines interventions in East Timor, Sri Lanka, Sudan and Kosovo. The chapters explore and question UN debates with respect to the doctrine both before and after its adoption in 2005; contrasting state attitudes to international military intervention; and what takes place after intervention. It also discusses the ability of the Security Council to access reliable information and credible and transparent processes to enable it to make a determination on the occurrence of atrocities in a Member State. Questioning whether there is a need to find a closer operational link between the responsibilities to prevent and react and a normative link between R2P and principles of international law, the contributions examine the effectiveness of the framework of R2P for international decision-making in response to mass atrocity crimes and ask how an international system to deal with threats and mass atrocities can be developed in the absence of a central authority. This book will be valuable to those interested in international law, human rights, and security, peace and conflict studies

Parental responsibility and Australian legislative attempts to curb truancy

Statistical and anecdotal evidence suggests that truancy is a significant problem for Australian schools. This paper considers the efficacy of legislative attempts to curb truancy, focussing in particular on the Queensland experience. Both Queensland legislation and the Commonwealth Improving School Enrolment and Attendance Through Welfare reform Measure (SEAM) pilot program are explained and evaluated. The paper considers in particular the utility of parental responsibility strategies as a response to truancy - under the Education (General Provisions) Act 12006 (Queensland) parents of persistent truants may be prosecuted and fined; under the SEAM initiative parents may have their social security payments suspended. Despite the availability of these seemingly draconian penalties, there is a reluctance, in practice, to hold parents accountable. The paper attempts to explain this reluctance and asks whether parental responsibility legislation can deliver a solution to truancy.

Punishing 'poor parents': 'Respect', 'responsibility' and parenting orders in Scotland

This article critiques the rise of parenting orders in Scotland within New Labour’s self-styled model of ‘respect’ and ‘responsibility’. It examines the emergence of parenting orders in Scotland, which became available in April 2005, and argues that Scottish local authorities are sceptical of an approach they perceive as an ideological and legislative mix premised on punitive notions of individual responsibility and justice.

Parental responsibility and removal of life sustaining treatment : Re Baby D

The case of Re Baby D (No. 2) has been described as a “landmark decision” as to whether parents themselves can authorise medical staff to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from their child or are required to seek the permission of a court or tribunal. The reasons for the decision that the removal of an endotracheal tube from the airway of Baby D was to treat “a bodily malfunction or disease” and therefore could be authorised by the parents will be explored.

The rise of co-creative consumers : user experience sharing behaviour in online communities

This thesis examines consumer initiated value co-creation behaviour in the context of convergent mobile online services using a Service-Dominant logic (SD logic) theoretical framework. It focuses on non-reciprocal marketing phenomena such as open innovation and user generated content whereby new viable business models are derived and consumer roles and community become essential to the success of business. Attention to customers. roles and personalised experiences in value co-creation has been recognised in the literature (e.g., Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2000; Prahalad, 2004; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004). Similarly, in a subsequent iteration of their 2004 version of the foundations of SD logic, Vargo and Lusch (2006) replaced the concept of value co-production with value co-creation and suggested that a value co-creation mindset is essential to underpin the firm-customer value creation relationship. Much of this focus, however, has been limited to firm initiated value co-creation (e.g., B2B or B2C), while consumer initiated value creation, particularly consumer-to-consumer (C2C) has received little attention in the SD logic literature. While it is recognised that not every consumer wishes to make the effort to engage extensively in co-creation processes (MacDonald & Uncles, 2009), some consumers may not be satisfied with a standard product, instead they engage in the effort required for personalisation that potentially leads to greater value for themselves, and which may benefit not only the firm, but other consumers as well. Literature suggests that there are consumers who do, and as a result initiate such behaviour and expend effort to engage in co-creation activity (e.g., Gruen, Osmonbekov and Czaplewski, 2006; 2007 MacDonald & Uncles, 2009). In terms of consumers. engagement in value proposition (co-production) and value actualisation (co-creation), SD logic (Vargo & Lusch, 2004, 2008) provides a new lens that enables marketing scholars to transcend existing marketing theory and facilitates marketing practitioners to initiate service centric and value co-creation oriented marketing practices. Although the active role of the consumer is acknowledged in the SD logic oriented literature, we know little about how and why consumers participate in a value co-creation process (Payne, Storbacka, & Frow, 2008). Literature suggests that researchers should focus on areas such as C2C interaction (Gummesson 2007; Nicholls 2010) and consumer experience sharing and co-creation (Belk 2009; Prahalad & Ramaswamy 2004). In particular, this thesis seeks to better understand consumer initiated value co-creation, which is aligned with the notion that consumers can be resource integrators (Baron & Harris, 2008) and more. The reason for this focus is that consumers today are more empowered in both online and offline contexts (Füller, Mühlbacher, Matzler, & Jawecki, 2009; Sweeney, 2007). Active consumers take initiatives to engage and co-create solutions with other active actors in the market for their betterment of life (Ballantyne & Varey, 2006; Grönroos & Ravald, 2009). In terms of the organisation of the thesis, this thesis first takes a „zoom-out. (Vargo & Lusch, 2011) approach and develops the Experience Co-Creation (ECo) framework that is aligned with balanced centricity (Gummesson, 2008) and Actor-to-Actor worldview (Vargo & Lusch, 2011). This ECo framework is based on an extended „SD logic friendly lexicon. (Lusch & Vargo, 2006): value initiation and value initiator, value-in-experience, betterment centricity and betterment outcomes, and experience co-creation contexts derived from five gaps identified from the SD logic literature review. The framework is also designed to accommodate broader marketing phenomena (i.e., both reciprocal and non-reciprocal marketing phenomena). After zooming out and establishing the ECo framework, the thesis takes a zoom-in approach and places attention back on the value co-creation process. Owing to the scope of the current research, this thesis focuses specifically on non-reciprocal value co-creation phenomena initiated by consumers in online communities. Two emergent concepts: User Experience Sharing (UES) and Co-Creative Consumers are proposed grounded in the ECo framework. Together, these two theorised concepts shed light on the following two propositions: (1) User Experience Sharing derives value-in-experience as consumers make initiative efforts to participate in value co-creation, and (2) Co-Creative Consumers are value initiators who perform UES. Three research questions were identified underpinning the scope of this research: RQ1: What factors influence consumers to exhibit User Experience Sharing behaviour? RQ2: Why do Co-Creative Consumers participate in User Experience Sharing as part of value co-creation behaviour? RQ3: What are the characteristics of Co-Creative Consumers? To answer these research questions, two theoretical models were developed: the User Experience Sharing Behaviour Model (UESBM) grounded in the Theory of Planned Behaviour framework, and the Co-Creative Consumer Motivation Model (CCMM) grounded in the Motivation, Opportunity, Ability framework. The models use SD logic consistent constructs and draw upon multiple streams of literature including consumer education, consumer psychology and consumer behaviour, and organisational psychology and organisational behaviour. These constructs include User Experience Sharing with Other Consumers (UESC), User Experience Sharing with Firms (UESF), Enjoyment in Helping Others (EIHO), Consumer Empowerment (EMP), Consumer Competence (COMP), and Intention to Engage in User Experience Sharing (INT), Attitudes toward User Experience Sharing (ATT) and Subjective Norm (SN) in the UESBM, and User Experience Sharing (UES), Consumer Citizenship (CIT), Relating Needs of Self (RELS) and Relating Needs of Others (RELO), Newness (NEW), Mavenism (MAV), Use Innovativeness (UI), Personal Initiative (PIN) and Communality (COMU) in the CCMM. Many of these constructs are relatively new to marketing and require further empirical evidence for support. Two studies were conducted to underpin the corresponding research questions. Study One was conducted to calibrate and re-specify the proposed models. Study Two was a replica study to confirm the proposed models. In Study One, data were collected from a PC DIY online community. In Study Two, a majority of data were collected from Apple product online communities. The data were examined using structural equation modelling and cluster analysis. Considering the nature of the forums, the Study One data is considered to reflect some characteristics of Prosumers and the Study Two data is considered to reflect some characteristics of Innovators. The results drawn from two independent samples (N = 326 and N = 294) provide empirical support for the overall structure theorised in the research models. The results in both models show that Enjoyment in Helping Others and Consumer Competence in the UESBM, and Consumer Citizenship and Relating Needs in CCMM have significant impacts on UES. The consistent results appeared in both Study One and Study Two. The results also support the conceptualisation of Co-Creative Consumers and indicate Co-Creative Consumers are individuals who are able to relate the needs of themselves and others and feel a responsibility to share their valuable personal experiences. In general, the results shed light on "How and why consumers voluntarily participate in the value co-creation process?. The findings provide evidence to conceptualise User Experience Sharing behaviour as well as the Co-Creative Consumer using the lens of SD logic. This research is a pioneering study that incorporates and empirically tests SD logic consistent constructs to examine a particular area of the logic – that is consumer initiated value co-creation behaviour. This thesis also informs practitioners about how to facilitate and understand factors that engage with either firm or consumer initiated online communities.

Community beliefs about intentional injury and responsibility for prevention

Community beliefs related to intentional injury inflicted by others were examined in a population-based telephone survey (n= 1032) in Queensland, Australia. Young adults 18-24 years were nominated as the most likely to be intentionally injured. 89.1% of respondents nominating this group believed that the injury incidents occur in alcohol environments. Though respondents from this age group also identified 18-24 yo as most likely to be intentionally injured, this was at a significantly lower level than did parents or 25-64 yo respondents. Responsibility for preventing injuries was placed on proprietors of licensed premises, schools and parents/family of the victim for alcohol, school and home environments respectively. Beliefs were aligned with prevalence data on intentional injury demonstrating a high level of awareness in the community about likely victims and situations where intentional injuries occur. Interventions could target families of young adults to capitalize on high levels of awareness about young adult vulnerability.

Capacity-building workshops on the responsibility to protect (R2P) and the protection of civilians (POC) in armed conflict - Summary Report

In June 2011, a research project team from the Institute for Ethics, Governance and Law (IEGL), Queensland University of Technology, the United Nations University, and the Australian Government’s Asia Pacific Civil-Military Centre of Excellence (APCMCOE) held three Capacity-Building Workshops (the Workshops) on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and the Protection of Civilians (POC) in Armed Conflict in Manila, Kuala Lumpur, and Jakarta. The research project is funded by the Australian Responsibility to Protect Fund, with support from APCMCOE. Developments in Libya and Cote d’Ivoire and the actions of the United Nations Security Council have given new significance to the relationship between R2P and POC, providing impetus to the relevance and application of the POC principle recognised in numerous Security Council resolutions, and the R2P principle, which was recognised by the United Nations General Assembly in 2005 and, now, by the Security Council. The Workshops considered the relationship between R2P and POC. The project team presented the preliminary findings of their study and sought contributions and feedback from Workshop participants. Prior to the Workshops, members of the project team undertook interviews with UN offices and agencies, international organisations (IOs) and non-government organisations (NGOs) in Geneva and New York as part of the process of mapping the relationship between R2P and POC. Initial findings were considered at an Academic-Practitioner Workshop held at the University of Sydney in November 2010. In addition to an extensive literature review and a series of academic publications, the project team is preparing a practical guidance text (the Guide) on the relationship between R2P and POC to assist the United Nations, governments, regional bodies, IOs and NGOs in considering and applying appropriate protection strategies. It is intended that the Guide be presented to the United Nations Secretariat in New York in early 2012. The primary aim of the Workshops was to test the project’s initial findings among an audience of diplomats, military, police, civilian policy-makers, practitioners, researchers and experts from within the region. Through dialogue and discussion, the project team gathered feedback – comments, questions, critique and suggestions – to help shape the development of practical guidance about when, how and by whom R2P and POC might be implemented.

Assessment of operability and maintainability success factors in provision of extended constructability principles

The concept of constructability integrates individual construction functions and experiences through suitable and timely inputs into early stages of project planning and design. It aims to ease construction processes for a more effective and efficient achievement of overall project objectives. Similarly, the concepts of operability and maintainability integrate the functions and experiences of Operation and Maintenance (O&M) into project planning and design. Various studies suggested that these concepts have been implemented in isolation of each other and thus preventing optimum result in delivering infrastructure projects. This paper explores the integration of these three concepts in order to maximize the benefits of their implementation. It reviews the literature to identify the main O&M concerns, and assesses their association with constructability principles. This provides a structure to develop an extended constructability model that includes O&M concerns. It is anticipated that an extended constructability model that include O&M considerations can lead to a more efficient and effective delivery of infrastructure projects.