Responsibility for Risks: Theory and Practice

The project Responsibility for Risks: Theory and Practice aims to develop a normative framework for the justified allocation and assessment of responsibility for risks on both individual and collective levels. The project utilizes philosophical methods in order to answer its central research question: How can standard models of responsibility, which operate on harm- and wrong-done bases, be adjusted in order to account for the specific problems posed by risk? The novelty of the project is apparent not in the least because moral theories have traditionally addressed backward-looking responsibility ascriptions in contexts of complete certainty, where actual harms or wrongs are assumed to have occurred. These theories have implemented and relied on standard models of responsibility (SMR) that, by virtue of the assumption of certainty, omit the significance, moral implications, and grounds for responsibility attributions when it comes to cases of risk. On the face of it, then, it appears that SMR are unable to address the moral and ethical nuances of risks because of their built-in suppositions. Thus, this project starts from the assumption that SMR are wanting when it comes to cases of risk. However, in lieu of forsaking such conceptions wholesale, the projects working hypothesis is that SMR can be modified and extended to accommodate risk cases. First, the project conceptualizes SMR through the isolation of common criteria of justified responsibility allocations across prominent individual and collective models of responsibility. Second, the project provides the identification and normative assessment of SMRs shortcomings vis-à-vis risks, which pinpoints the challenges that SMR need to overcome in order to accommodate risk cases. Third, the project re-conceptualizes SMR on both individual and collective levels so that risks and the specific problems they pose can be properly addressed. This step results in the projects provisional normative framework of responsibility for risks. The framework is then applied to specific risk-related challenges associated with climate change and climate engineering. This application helps to establish the moral justifiability of holding agents responsible for such risks. Finally, the projects responsibility framework is refined and calibrated to take into account the insights gained from its application. This culminates in the projects comprehensive normative framework for justified responsibility ascriptions for risks. In revealing and addressing problems of responsibility in contexts of less- than-complete certainty and linking theoretical to practical applications, this project provides a comprehensive analysis, synthesis, and guide to an under-explored topic.

Philosophical concern with the topic of risk has increased steadily over the last decades. This growing interest is understandable given the pervasiveness of risks that seem specific to contemporary ways of living (e.g., climate change, new and emerging technologies). In spite of this, many of the philosophical debates surrounding responsibility have remained wedded to a fictional world of certainty, where outcomes are either known in advance or are knowable. Perhaps as a direct result of this, theories of responsibility have been ill-equipped to handle the moral and ethical dimensions of risks. This project helped to correct this deficiency by examining philosophical aspects of responsibility for risks. The project's primary aim was to extend standard models of responsibility, which were taken to be those that operated under certainty assumptions, such that they could better accommodate risk-laden cases and enable the justifiable allocation and assessment of responsibility for the creation of risks. To achieve its primary aim, the project's research and publications developed and advanced a normative framework of responsibility for risks and applied this to different cases, notably climate change and specifically carbon offsetting and climate engineering technologies. Elaborating the project's normative framework and then applying it to cases was organized around research questions such as "What are the moral and ethical shortcomings of standard models of responsibility vis-à-vis risks?"; "How can standard models of responsibility be adjusted in order to account for the specific problems posed by risk?"; and, "What can we learn from applying the project's normative framework of responsibility for risks to ethical problems associated with climate change and climate engineering?" Through collaboration with scholars from around the world, the project expanded its focus on responsibility for risks beyond climate change and addressed risk and responsibility in other contexts, such as law, technology (e.g., AI and nuclear waste management), and healthcare. (These results can be found in the 2023 edited volume, Risk and Responsibility in Context, published by Routledge). Working with other scholars helped to increase awareness of the issues surrounding responsibility and risk and highlighted the topic's applicability to a wide range of ethical problems. In addition to publications (e.g., edited volume, book chapters, journal articles), the project held public events such as a conference, workshop, and online talk. The project's results succeeded in advancing the state of the art, awareness, and engagement with the topic of responsibility for risks.