Code Of Conduct Research Articles

ASEAN’s Stakes: The South China Sea’s Challenge to Autonomy and Agency

ASEAN’s Stakes:The South China Sea’s Challenge to Autonomy and Agency Alice D. Ba (bio) The South China Sea has come to involve important stakes for all involved. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is no different—though its situation is also notably distinct. The South China Sea occupies what Michael Leifer once characterized as the geographic “heart of Southeast Asia.”1 Geography alone means that whatever happens in the South China Sea affects ASEAN states the most directly. Moreover, as smaller powers, these states confront much greater vulnerabilities when it comes to great-power demands, even as they may be particular beneficiaries of great-power association. China’s activities in the South China Sea have no doubt underscored these dilemmas as the ASEAN states all try to navigate between the strategic vulnerabilities and the economic opportunities associated with a rising, more confident China. Nor are ASEAN states’ great-power dilemmas limited to China: the latter’s activities in the South China Sea have also precipitated heightened attention from the United States. ASEAN’s challenge is thus compounded by the fact that the South China Sea has become an important focal point of rivalry and tension between the ASEAN region’s two most important great-power relationships. Maintaining a space between China and the United States—one in which Southeast Asian states can enjoy some range of maneuver and choice—may prove to be the greatest challenge confronting the ASEAN region. This essay considers what is at stake in the South China Sea disputes for ASEAN’s coalition of smaller powers, with special attention paid to institutional interests and constraints. It considers not only the more immediate challenges created by territorial disputes but also the more general great-power dilemmas that heightened tensions have recently thrown into sharp relief. [End Page 47] ASEAN’s Immediate Challenges Most immediately, China’s physical and jurisdictional assertions create the challenge for ASEAN of agreeing on a collective response. This challenge, however, is made more complicated by the fact that it is an intergovernmental organization. Tus, while other governments may have to manage a constellation of domestic interests and agencies, ASEAN as an institution is the expression of ten distinct sovereign actors. States differ not just in the importance they attach to the disputes but also in their relations with China and the kinds of regional responses they prioritize. ASEAN’s unprecedented and very public failure to produce a joint communiqué at its 2012 annual foreign ministers’ meeting chaired by Cambodia in Phnom Penh dramatically illustrated this challenge. Additionally complicating ASEAN’s response is the fact that critical differences exist even among the grouping’s four claimant states. The Philippines and Vietnam have been the most vocal and active in responding to China’s activities, while Brunei and Malaysia—even with recently growing Malaysian concerns—have generally favored softer approaches. Such differences challenge ASEAN’s efforts to adopt a collective position as well as implement possible ad hoc workarounds that might facilitate a way forward. In its response to the South China Sea disputes, ASEAN as a collective has prioritized the pursuit of a regional code of conduct (CoC) because it keeps attention on the principles of international law, as well as existing codes of conduct like ASEAN’s Treaty of Amity and Cooperation. Following the embarrassment of ASEAN’s 2012 meeting, Indonesia quickly moved to facilitate ASEAN’s Six-Point Principles on the South China Sea. This statement identifies the “early conclusion” of a CoC and the “full implementation” of both ASEAN’s 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and the 2011 guidelines as important priorities alongside self-restraint and the nonuse of force by all parties, “full respect” for the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and the peaceful resolution of disputes. These six principles continue to provide ASEAN states with an important basis for consensus and action. Indonesia’s moves to quickly correct the failures of the 2012 ASEAN ministers’ meeting under Cambodia’s chairmanship are indicative of the understood risks that the South China Sea disputes pose to the organization. Notably, however, the CoC is “not meant...

“Thou shall not...(dis)trust”: Codes of Conduct and Harmonization of Professional Standards in the EU

In the absence of the country of origin principle and thus quasi-automatic mutual recognition, the creation of codes of conduct (CoC) at a European level as an alternative, soft-law method of rule-making acquires new dynamics. CoC are an example of self-regulation by associations of undertakings. CoC, while voluntary, soft-law instruments, are considered as partaking in the effort to increase the ‘awareness of Europeanness’; pursue legitimate objectives that are accepted as valid at EU level; and ultimately guarantee a high level of quality commensurate with the ever-increasing expectations of the EU citizens with a view to enhancing trust among MS as to the equivalence of services and service suppliers originating in other MS. Such rules of conduct, which are typically adopted by non-state bodies (professional associations) when they exercise their legal autonomy, can hinder the intra-EU free movement of professionals. Hence, liberalization of factor mobility enshrined in primary and secondary EU law can be jeopardized by the adoption and application of such codes, which are also foreseen in the Services Directive. This paper aims to explore the impact of CoC on further liberalizing professional services within the EU. It critically reviews the soft-law approach adopted by the EU in this area. Finally, the paper analyses the possible content of such CoC and its compatibility with EU law, notably the rules on free movement and competition.

Thai Aquaculture: Achieving Quality and Safety through Management and Sustainability

Thailand designated the year 2004 as Safety Year. Responsible government sectors of food and agricultural commodities cooperatively initiated and strengthened their respective food safety control programs. Although the Food Safety Year is over, the concept is adopted as the national policy and the activities continue. Good Aquaculture Practice (GAP) and Code of Conduct (CoC) for sustainable shrimp culture have been developed by the Department of Fisheries (DOF) in 1999, based on the guideline of Codex Alimentarius Commission. The standard schemes compliment the policy of the fishery sector in achieving the Farm-to-Table concept. Currently, there are approximately 18,000 shrimp/fish hatcheries and farms certified for GAP/CoC by the department. The National Residue Control Program (NRCP) has been established to overcome the problems on prohibited chemicals and veterinary drug residues used in aquaculture such as chloramphenicol and nitrofurans. The use of Movement Document (MD) is enforced from hatcheries and farms through processing plants to ensure the effective tracing back from finished products to the farm of origin. Fish processing plants registered and approved by DOF shall effectively implement Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) concept. DOF has successfully implemented a trial computerized traceability system called TraceShrimp. The complete traceability involved sharing information from feed mills through farming, suppliers, processing plants, and finished products. This paper will address the policies and attempts of the Thai government made to control quality and safety of aquaculture products from Pond-to-Plate, through effective management system and sustainability.

'Ruggied' individualism: you're on your own

FOCUS □ BUSINESS AND HUMANRIGHTS 'Ruggieď individualism: you're on your own Don'tworry, we're tamingthe transnational JEFF BALLINGER isawriter and researcher on labour rights and globalisation The because meticulously logicis conscientious seductively monitors simple: consumers its supply a global -informed brand chain meticulouslymonitorsits supply chain becauseconscientious consumers -informed bythelatest technologies - willpunishitat the retail levelfor anytransgression. Rather, according to Jeffrey Swartz, the CEO of Timberland, consumers don'tcareat all aboutworkers' rights in the factories producingfor the footwearand apparelcompany: "With regard tohumanrights, theconsumer expectation todayissomewhere intheneighbourhood of, 'don'tdo anything horrible or despicable'... iftheissuedoesn't matter muchto theconsumer population, there's nota big incentive fortheconsumer-minded CEOstoact, proactively" . In a 2008interview he musedabouthisdesireto "seduceconsumers to care"so thathisCorporate SocialResponsibility (CSR) report was notmere "corporate cologne". The'dirty little secret' ofCSR is thatnobodyreadsthesereports; one of Sun Microsystems' teamlamented thefact that only247 outof38,000fellow-employees evenbothered to downloadits2007CSRreport. The cases ofNike (1996-2000)and the hand-stitched soccer ball industry (1996-98)areoutliers (see below). Reviewing thepastdecadeof'responsible business 'strategies oftheUnited Nations from a trade unionperspective requires a brief, broadlook at thedevelopment ofCSRas practiced bytransnational corporations sincetheearly 1990s.Sincethe earliest 'code ofconduct' requirements forsupplierfactories (i.e.,Levi's, Reebok,NikeandMattel), labour rights havedeclined nearly tothevanishing pointin production-for-export areas aroundthe world.Flexibilisation through contract-work has reached epidemic proportions; millions ofworkers arefinding workinforeign countries insituations akintobondedlabour;factory managers skipping out on severancepayments is becomingmore commonplace - inshort, workis becoming more andmoreprecarious with eachpassing year, even as corporations tweaktheir'codes' and trumpet new breakthroughs in 'freeassociation' rights in theirsupplychains.Parasitic 'social auditors' someoperating inan ostensible 'non-profit' mode - post thousandsof factory reports each year whileworkers continue tostrike andcorrupt governmentsjail and harass independentunion activists. Leavingaside the questionof 'why' former Secretary-General, KofiAnan,feltthe need to undertake a CSR programme, the 'what'can be characterised as ephemeral ornearly non-existent. Corporations join the UN's Global Compact (UNGC),paya feeand agreeto somevagueand unenforceable principles. The only'stick' is a risk ofde-listing - it'shappenedtomaybe1,000companies out of nearly10,000thathave joinedbecausethosefirms quitreporting (on thatcompany 'sownself-regulation regime), orquitpaying thefees,orboth. Launchedin early1999by Anan'sCSR pointman ,Prof. JohnGerard Ruggie, theUNGCdrew early criticism for'bluewash' but,bythis relatively latedateinthedevelopment ofcorporate self-regulationschemes , suchprojects had gainedwide acceptance byelitecommentators; injudicious participation bymanyNGOs,foundations and even tradeunionshadsignificantly moderated thestigma usuallyattached to discussions withcorporationsthat werenotnarrowly connected withcollective bargainingor specificrepresentational questions. Asa result, thefewcritics weremarginalisedand self-regulation rolledalongas ethical supply-chain management despitecontrary evidence from workplaces acrossthe globe.More thana bitdefensive, Ruggie tookaimatthoseof us whoraisedobjections: "If youwanttomake globalisation work for everyone, as wedo,then itisworthwhile. Butif youreject globalisation, globalcorporations, or eventhesystem ofcapitalism itself, then you won't likewhatwe're doingatall - anymore thanyour predecessors liked social Keynesianism orsocialdemocracy because suchpragmatic innovations inevitably reduce thesocialrationale andpolitical support for more polarised rejectionist postures". [To me, 'rejectionist' is not so pejorative and shouldnotprecludediscussions betweenthose who critique themonitoring modelandtheproponentsof corporateself-regulation. After all, mostcorporations claimto be 'uncompromising' aboutquality- can'tlabourrights campaigners resist compromise on basicrights suchas collectivebargaining ?] Within a fewyears, theGlobalCompact's annual meeting was a regular stopforCSRpractitioners ,whichis to sayitbecameone ofthedozen orso globalvenuesforinternational bureaucrats, politicians and corporate CEOs. Atthesemeetings , theparticipants (usually onlythose'invited') would hive offintoworking groupsto discuss 'continuous improvement', 'silo-wide' opportunities ,blendedvalue or topicssuchas 'The New Metrics'. By2005,Ruggie hadacquired thetitle of 'Special Representative of the UN SecretaryGeneralon Businessand HumanRights' (SRSG) andhe left theUNGCtoa lieutenant, GeorgKell, while embarking on a grand quest to write humanrights rulesforglobalbusiness.Harvard University granted hima special 'centre'at the KennedySchool of Government whichis wellINTERNATIONAL union rights Page 10Volume 17Issue 22010 FOCUS Li BUSINESSAND HUMANRIGHTS funded andstaffed with thelikesofSimonZadek who authored a Harvard BusinessReviewarticle withhighpraiseforNike'sworker-friendly supplierfactories . In 2008theSRSGlaidouta hierarchy ofproblematic industries, putting mining andoil/gas companiesatthetop ,withallothers fardownthelist - with foodanddrink a 'distant second'(hischaracterisation ). Whiletheextractive industries area popular target -with a ready list ofspectacular and graphic abuses- thefootwear/apparel/textile sectoris arguably moreresponsible fortheparlous state ofhuman rights intheworldtoday. Myreasoning - in businessschool terminology - is 'opportunity cost'.How diddeep démocratisation andKeynesian reforms gettraction inthemiddle decades of the20thcentury? Tradeunionsand massesoffed-up workers propelled thedrivefor economicjusticewithresponsive governance consumer regulations, healthand safety inspectionsand the like. Later, in the 1980s,defiant worker movements inPoland,Brazil, SouthKorea andSouth Africa pushedautocrats from power. 'Sweatshops', wrote MarcMiller inhisbiography ofYiddish writer Morris Rosenfeld, 'werea catalyst forchange'. After twodecadesdocumenting how...

A Strange Case

REPORIG EUROPEANCOMPANIESANDLABOURRIGHTSINTHE US A Strange Case When cised equipment workers their right factory atRobert to strike in Bosch's Wisconsin against packaging compaexer equipmentfactory in Wisconsinexercisedtheir right to strike against company demands for wage and benefitcuts in December2004,management sentletters threateningto hirepermanent replacements to take theirjobs. Alone in the world, permanent replacements tobreakstrikes arelegalunderUS labourlaw.Facedwiththis'nuclear option'available to American bosses, workersreturned to their jobson management's terms. Based in Germany, Robert Bosch GmBhis a multinational firm with270,000 employees worldwide .Itiswidely regarded as a socially responsible company. Last year, the Robert Bosch Foundation donated$100 millionto non-profit organisations serving humanneeds aroundthe world.In keepingwithits sociallyresponsible profile, Boschhas publicly declareditscommitmentto ILO corelabourstandards. Butcontrary to itscommitment, Boschviolatedan important ILOstandard whichsaysthat threatening orusing permanent replacements to breakstrikes violates workers' freedom ofassociation. Thedisconnect reflected inBosch'saction atthe Wisconsin plantbetweenpromiseand performanceisthetheme ofa newHumanRights Watch report titled A Strange Case:Violations ofWorkers' FreedomofAssociation in the UnitedStatesby European Multinational Corporations. The report details waysinwhich European firms haveexploited weak US labourlaws to carry out aggressive campaigns againstworkers' organising and bargainingin the UnitedStates."A Strange Case" comesfrom Robert LouisStevenson's famousThe Strange CaseofDr.fekyll andMr.Hyde. Companies cited include Germany-based Deutsche Telekom's T-Mobile USAand Deutsche Post's DHL, UK-based Tesco's Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Markets andG4SWackenhut security , France-based Sodexofoodservices andSaintGobain industrialequipment,Norway-based KongsbergAutomotive, and the Dutch firm Gamma Holding. Ineachcasethecompanies' tacticsand actionsviolatedinternational standards while remaining in compliancewithweak US laws.Overand above that, management actions violatedUS labourlaws, makingthe disparity between wordsanddeedsevenmoredramatic. TheHumanRights Watch report was based on workerinterviews and workers'testimony in legalproceedings, findings and decisionsof US labourlaw authorities, company documents, and written exchangeswithcompanymanagement. The reportnotedthatall the companiescited endorsesome combination of the core labour standards of the International Labour Organisation, theindustrial relations guidelines of theOrganisation forEconomicCooperation and Development, and the freedomof association normsof the Universal Declarationof Human Rights and theUnitedNationsGlobalCompact, andother international humanrights instruments. Herearesomemoreexamplesfrom thereport: ■ DeutscheTelekomhas a SocialCharter based on ILO standards andtheOECD Guidelines statements on freedom ofassociation, butTMobileUSAmanagement spiedon workers engagedinorganising and defined 'employees engaging ingroupbehaviour' and 'talking aboutrights' as dangerous activity tobe immediately reported tomanagement. ■ Deutsche Posthasa code ofconduct basedon theUniversal Declaration ofHumanRights, ILO conventions, andtheUNGlobalCompact, but itsDHL management threatened anddiscriminatedagainst workers whosought toexercise therights setforth intheseinstruments. ■ Saint-Gobain proclaims 'Principles ofConduct respecting thephilosophy and spirit ofthe GlobalCompact', butUS management refused tobargain withworkers' chosenunionabout keyterms ofemployment. ■ Sodexosays,'Sinceitscreation, Sodexohas alwaysrecognised and respected trade unions', butitthreatened, interrogated, and fired workers who tried toform tradeunions intheUnitedStates. ■ Teseo saysit'is committed toupholding basic HumanRights and supports infulltheUnited Nations Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights and theInternational Labour Organisation CoreConventions', butitsUS Fresh& Easymanagement seta priority of 'maintaining non-union status' and stifled workers' organisational activity. ■ Group4Securicor holdsup a 'Business Ethics Policy'committed totheUniversal Declaration ofHumanRights, butitsUS Wackenhut management threatened, spiedon,andfired workersexercising rights established intheUDHR. ■ Kongsberg Automotive citestheUN Global Compact, ILO corelabourstandards, and OECD guidelines initscorporate social responsibility pledges,butUS management in VanWert, Ohio offensively lockedoutunion members whilenegotiations werestill ongoingand brought inreplacement workers. ■ GammaHoldingsigneda code ofconduct thatembraces theright toorganise underILO Conventions 87 and 98,butitsmanagement atNational WireFabricinStarCity, Arkansas, hiredpermanent replacements, incontraventionofILO standards, totakethejobs of workers who exercised theright tostrike. ■ A Dutchfirm, GammaHolding, wentahead and hiredpermanent replacements forUnited Steelworkers unionmembers who exercised theright to strike atan Arkansas factory. The HRWreportconcludedwithrecommendationsforstronger 'due diligence'by European headquarters overAmerican managers to ensure application ofcompany commitments to international labour standards.It also called for a strengthened complaint mechanism underOECD guidelines and stronger oversight bygovernment and EuropeanUnionofficials ofEuropeanmultinationalsin theirUS and otherforeign operations .Finally, thereport recommended reforms in US labourlaw to come intocompliance with international labournorms. A new report details ways in which European firmshave carried out aggressive campaigns against workers' organisingand bargainingin the US LANCE C0MPA teaches labour law and International labour rights atCornell University's School off Industrial and Labor Relations In Ithaca, New York. He Isauthor off the Human Rights Watch report summarised here Page 5Volume 17Issue 3201 0 INTERNATIONAL union rights ...

‘Thou Shall Not…(Dis)Trust’: Codes of Conduct and Harmonization of Professional Standards in the EU

In the absence of the country of origin principle and thus quasi-automatic mutual recognition, the creation of codes of conduct (CoC) at a European level as an alternative, soft method of rule-making acquires new dynamics. Pan-European CoC are an instrument that can be used to reinforce trust in the quality of the legal regimes and qualification or licensing requirements of the other MS dealing notably with issues such as commercial communications or rules of professional ethos. CoC, while voluntary, soft-law instruments, are considered as partaking in the effort to increase the ‘awareness of Europeanness’, pursue legitimate objectives that are accepted as valid at Community level and ultimately guarantee a high level of quality commensurate with the ever-increasing expectations of the EU citizens with a view to enhancing trust among MS as to the equivalence of services and service suppliers originating in other MS. Nevertheless, effective market access for service suppliers can depend heavily on such codes, which are typically adopted by non-state bodies when they exercise their legal autonomy. SUH (mostly voluntary) rules of conduct can hinder the intra-EU movement of professionals. Hence, liberalization of factor mobility enshrined in primary and secondary EC law or agreed on during state-to-state negotiations at a multilateral level can be jeopardized by the adoption and application of such codes. This paper aims to explore the impact of CoC on the liberalization of professional services.

The competency movement within psychology: An historical perspective.

The authors provide a recitation of events in recent years that document an increased focus oncompetency-based models of education, training, and assessment in professional psychology, particularlyclinical, counseling, and school psychology, based on the work of the American Psychological Associ-ation’s (APA’s) Task Force on Assessment of Competence in Professional Psychology. The articlebegins with the inclusion of competencies as part of the “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Codeof Conduct” (APA, 2002). Next, accreditation practices in the United States and Canada are summarized.Competency-based education, training, and credentialing efforts in professional psychology are re-viewed, including graduate, practicum, internship, and postdoctoral levels; licensure; postlicensureN

VOLUNTARY MANAGEMENT IN THAI SHRIMP FARMING

The implementation of the voluntary adoption of the Code of Conduct (CoC) to promote environmental responsibility and sustainable development of Thai shrimp industry is examined. Farmers' perceived benefits, risks and uncertainties associated with the adoption and their perceived extra fixed cost are found to be the critical conditions to the success of the program. Improvement of farmers' perceptions through increased information and knowledge, development of supportive policies and mechanisms (i.e., a “Group CoC” system, insurance program, a combination of environmental policy approaches) and strengthening farmers organizations, as well as establishing networks among and between the players throughout the market chain are suggested to enhance the adoption and implementation of the scheme.

From a weak letter of intent to prevalence: the toy industries' code of conduct

Abstract In 2003, the global toy industry started a new attempt to implement common standards on working conditions in the notorious ‘sweatshop‐factories’ especially in China, where up to three million people from rural provinces produce toys for Western brand name companies. This article explores, why and how the common industry code of conduct (CoC) of the International Council of the Toy Industries (ICTI) gathered momentum and who will benefit from this dynamic. One reason for this harmonization is the uncontrolled growth of unilateral CoC in the industry, that makes it impossible for suppliers to comply with all the requirements, particularly when they deliver to many different brand name companies. Credibility gaps of‐ and critical reports about the CoC‐record of major brand name companies like Disney, Mattel and Hasbro were continuously issued by Nongovernmental Organisations (NGOs) from Hong Kong (the Hong Kong Christian Industrial Committee, HKCIC), its Northern network partner, the German Catholic Organization Misereor under the umbrella of the ‘fair‐play’ campaign and, by several media reports in reputable newspapers in the USA. Since 2004, even Mattel as a widely acknowledged ambitious company on codes of conduct, supports the less ambitious sector code. Moreover, the ICTI CoC enjoys support from some big retailers like Karstadt‐Quelle, Argos and Woolworth, that give the industry code real authority within the industry. ICTI negotiates with the biggest toy retailers Toys'R'Us and Walmart to accept the code like their own. The coordination between the big retailers and the brand name companies can potentially end current weaknesses of single codes of conduct, that leaves the managerial thesis about ‘first‐mover‐advantages’ or reputation effects for the brand name companies as a myth. In the long run, the major brand companies may benefit of a better reputation of the whole industry, due to the fact that the image of a brand is strongly connected with the image of the whole sector. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Corporate Governance in Transition Economies: The Theory and Practice of Corporate Governance in Eastern Europe

ABSTRACT Corporate governance issues are especially important intransition economies, since these countries do not havethe long-established financial institution infrastructure todeal with corporate governance issues. Before the fall ofthe Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union,there was no need to discuss corporate governance issuesbecause all enterprises were owned by the state and therewere no shareholders. All that has changed since 1989.This paper discusses how transition economies aredealing with corporate governance issues and the extraobstacles they have to overcome due to a lack ofestablished financial institution infrastructure. Severalcase studies from Eastern Europe are examined. INTRODUCTION Corporate governance has become an important topic intransition economies in recent years. Directors, ownersand corporate managers have started to realize that thereare benefits that can accrue from having a good corporategovernance structure. Good corporate governance helpsto increase share price and makes it easier to obtaincapital. International investors are hesitant to lend moneyor buy shares in a corporation that does not subscribe togood corporate governance principles. Transparency,independent directors and a separate audit committee areespecially important. Some international investors willnot seriously consider investing in a company that doesnot have these things.Several organizations have popped up in recent years tohelp adopt and implement good corporate governanceprinciples. The Organisation for Economic Cooperationand Development, the World Bank, the InternationalFinance Corporation, the U.S. Commerce and StateDepartments and numerous other organizations havebeen encouraging governments and firms in EasternEurope to adopt and implement corporate codes ofconduct and good corporate governance principles.The Center for International Private Enterprise [7] listssome of the main attributes of good corporategovernance. These include:• Reduction of risk• Stimulation of performance• Improved access to capital markets• Enhancement of marketability of goods andservices• Improved leadership• Demonstration of transparency and socialaccountabilityThis list is by no means exhaustive. However, it doessummarize some of the most important benefits of goodcorporate governance. All countries, whether developedor developing face similar issues when it comes tocorporate governance. However, transition economiesface additional hurdles because their corporate boardslack the institutional memory and experience that boardsin developed market economies have. They also have

Female Urinary Incontinence Health Education on the Internet: Pitfalls and Opportunities

The prevalence and demographics of urinary incontinence(UI) in Canada demand new initiatives to provide bothhealth education and care to the growing number of incontinentwomen. The Internet, and the Web sites on it, offer anopportunity to provide information on female UI health topatients, health-care professionals, and other caregivers in atime and location convenient to them. Internet usage inCanada is increasing, and women are more Iikely than men toaccess Web health information. However, problems such asaccess to reliable health information do exist, as the quality ofWeb sites and the information on them varies from excellentto poor. Potential quality control mechanisms include codes ofconduct, quality labels, user guides, and filtering systems, butthere is uncertainty about which method is best. As theInternet precipitates a shift in care toward prevention of disease,and enhancement of health, a new role for health professionalsemerges: to educate patients about and guide themto wise use of the Internet.

National fisheries chart 2000: a new instrument for fisheries management in inland waters

Institutional and legal frameworks have a widescope and need for improving or refiningexisting fisheries management tools, and forincreasing capabilities of the public andprivate sectors to better manage thedevelopment of fisheries activities, either inmarine or freshwater ecosystems. Despite thelarge surface area covered by inland waters inMexico, its production during the last 20 yearsremained at the same level, i.e. productionused for local consumption in rural areassupports food for the poorest communities. Thepresent document deals with the most recentlegal exercise that shows that there are manyopportunities to strengthen technicalcooperation and develop policies and commercialissues related to freshwater fish in inlandwaters. The Mexican federal administration during theyears 1994 to 2000 fully endorsed policies thatbenefited the relationship between thegovernment and fisheries sector. The Code ofConduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF), wasadopted in 1995 as a global intergovernmentalconsensus on the promotion of sustainablefisheries and aquaculture developments.Following its basic principles and norms, theNational Fisheries Institute (INP) elaboratedthe National Fisheries Chart in 2000. This isan example of recent advances to develop legalinstruments that fit the need for fisheriesmanagement. Such efforts and theirimplementation can be seen through technicaldata sheets in the (CNP) as well as othersuggestions provided to further promote thesustainable development of inland fisheries inMexico.

The Ethical Relationship between Humans and Other Organisms.

THE ETHICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMANS AND OTHER ORGANISMS R. D. GUTHRIE* Thenature ofour responsibiUties toward other organisms is certainlyno new issue, but the controversy has been re-ignited recently by legislative action to regulate the care and maintenance oflaboratory stock. Although this specific issue involves a decision ofimmediate concern to scientists, it also raises the even more basic question as to the general role that other organisms should occupy in our ethical system. It seems prudent that we should first examine the problem in its broadest context before further legislative action and the firm lines ofpoUtical alignment are drawn. An analysis ofone aspect ofour ethical system necessarily involves some dealings withthe systemas a whole.Unfortunately,the areaofethicaltheory can sometimes be an ideological quagmire from which few return enlightened . Much ofthe difficulty arisesfrom our being drawn, bytradition, into minking that ourmoral scaffoldingis suspendedfromsomeoutsideagency. Rather, I would subscribe to the concept that moral principles, and the standards by which they arejudged, are human constructs and thus can be evaluated on an empirical basis, even though the criteria are complex and thejudgments sometimes difficult. Inherent in this position is the idea that ourjudgments are dependent upon generalizations from past experiences and may have to be altered as new situations are encountered. The only aprioristicelementis theunderlying assumptionthat man'srules ofconduct are to be to his benefit. For the limited purposes ofthis essay, I wiU thus assume that the most desirable rules governing human behavior are those which, now and in the future, promote the welfare ofthe human population as an aggregate ofindividuals and contribute to the smooth functioning ofits social machinery, whüeat thesametimeaUowingforthe greatest freedom of individual expression and fulfilment. Such a conceptual distillationnecessarilyincludesacademicdeficiencieswithwhichphilosophers * Department ofBiological Sciences, University ofAlaska, College, Alaska. 52 R. D. Guthrie · Ethics and Non-Human Organisms Perspectives in Biology and Medicine · Autumn 1967 ofethical theory wiU quibble; but, by and large, this has become the gauge by which we evaluate poUtical systems, economic poUcies, codes ofsexual behavior, technological innovations, planned parenthood, and so forth. This assumption ofthe most desirable code ofconduct forms the basis of the idea that I wish to present. My thesis is that the inclusion of other organisms as primary participants in our ethical system is both logicaUy unsound and operationaUy unfeasible. It is iUogical because we cannot consider other organisms as moral bodies and amoral bodies simultaneously. By moral bodies I mean thoseentities ultimatelyto be considered in evaluating theaction. As an example ofthis categorization, let us say that, as part ofan experiment, a mineralogist wishes to dissolve a unique crystal. On what basis does he decide that the destruction wiU be worthwhile? Thejudgment has to be madeon theeffectofhis action onUving and futurehumans—the immediate benefits derived from the crystal's destruction weighed against the assets ofits continued existence. The rare crystal is an amoral body, since our concern is with the ultimate effect on humans (the moral bodies which made this a moral question) and not with the welfare ofthe rock per se. The relationships among non-human organisms are also not generaUy defined as moral or immoral. Most would agree that a wild wolfkiUing a wild deer is, in and ofitself, not subject to moral analysis. We as humans may wish to keep the wolffrom killing a game species, or the weeds from stunting the turnips, but we do not contend that the wolves and weeds are immoral for so doing. We wish to curtail the wolfand weed population, not ultimately for the sake ofthe deer and turnips, but for our own ends. In my categorization, then, rare crystals, wolves, deer, weeds, and turnips areaUamoralbodies. Likewise, an act ofanotherorganismtowardhumans, say a mosquito bite, could also be classified as amoral. The mosquito is an amoral body, and we do not hold it moraUy responsible for having bitten us. Thus, attwo bondsofa triangularrelationship, werecognizetheamoral nature ofthe non-human's act toward another non-human organism and, second, a non-human organism's act toward a human as being amoral. It is difficult not to conclude that the final bond—a human's act toward other organisms—is, in and ofitself, an amoral one. It becomes a moral art only when humans are affected, because our moral...