Ethical analysis of three methods for destruction of ammunition created by Karin Alverbro, Göran Finnveden and Per Sandin
Material type: TextSeries: Risk management ; Volume 13, number 1/2Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011Content type:- text
- unmediated
- volume
- 14603799
- HD61 RIS
Item type | Current library | Call number | Vol info | Copy number | Status | Notes | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Journal Article | Main Library - Special Collections | HD61 RIS (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Vol. 13, no. 1/2 (pages 63-80) | SP11450 | Not for loan | For in house use |
A comparative ethical analysis of three different methods for destroying ammunition was performed using a three-party model for ethical risk analysis presented by Hermansson and Hansson. The model was also evaluated by applying it for the case of destruction of a 40-mm grenade in Sweden. A general observation is that future generations and people in foreign countries will be negatively affected by the destruction of ammunition, although they quite often receive no benefit or compensation. A number of groups exposed to risks or environmental impacts will have some benefits from the destruction. However, it is difficult to determine the extent of this benefit or the fairness of the distribution of risks and benefits. This highlights some important limitations of the Hermansson and Hansson model.
There are no comments on this title.