Back to REPORT ON STUDENT AFFAIRS FROM THE 2004 ANNUAL MEETING

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY--CODE OF MEMBER ETHICS

SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY ADOPTS A CODE OF MEMBER ETHICS

In an important milestone for SCB, the membership unanimously approved a Code of Member Ethics during the annual Members' Meeting on 1 August. This is a major step in our development as an organization and as individuals committed to scientific honesty, conservation, and fairness. Please clip the Code from this newsletter and post it in your office, distribute it in your classes, and discuss it with your colleagues.

Please consult the May 2004 newsletter for an earlier draft of the Code and details about the ad hoc committee and our process up to that point. In response to our invitation, 93 SCB members, including individuals from every continent, commented on the draft between April and June. All respondents supported the spirit and intent of the document. Most respondents also suggested thoughtful, constructive modifications. We were pleased with the large number of helpful criticisms, and substantially revised the document in light of the comments. A point-by-point compilation of comments, and the pre- and post-comment versions of each sentence in the Code, is available at www.conbio.org/SCB/Information/Ethics/Comments_and_revision.pdf.

In early July, the revised document was posted on the SCB Web site and sent to all SCB members with e-mail addresses in our directory. At its 29 July meeting, the Board of Governors made some small changes and forwarded the Code to the members for ratification. At the Members' Meeting, with only a small amount of additional discussion and a large amount of pride, the members approved the Code. Not a single "nay" vote was recorded.

The Code is not perfect. Doubtless some members were starting the process of revision even while casting their vote of approval--and that is good! Such a revisionist impulse is a healthy sign that we care about these issues and about our society.

Besides the inevitable revision, what are the next steps? Most immediately, the Code should help each SCB member be aware of, think about, and discuss the responsibilities related to our professional work. These activities certainly engaged each person who commented on and drafted the Code--and each of us is a better person for the experience. We certainly hope that SCB members will turn to the Code when facing ethical dilemmas and that the Code will be taught in classes related to conservation biology around the world. I know it will be a topic of discussion among my research group in the first week of our next semester.

Another step for SCB will be development of specific policies to ensure that our behavior as an organization reflects the Code. SCB provides scientific expertise (sometimes for pay), publishes journals, accepts corporate sponsorships for annual meetings, and works around the globe. Our Code of Member Ethics contains statements relevant to each of these activities, and SCB must be an exemplar of the conduct our members have endorsed.

Another step advocated by many SCB members was to make the Code binding on individual members, complete with consequences for transgressions. Although most members of the ad hoc committee felt that such an approach could create more problems than it would solve, we expect that SCB will reconsider this issue after a few years of experience with the new Code. Doubtless many other steps will follow from our first Code of Member Ethics. Although some steps cannot be predicted, we are confident that we have taken a first big step in the correct direction.

Paul Beier, for the ad hoc committee

Back to REPORT ON STUDENT AFFAIRS FROM THE 2004 ANNUAL MEETING

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY--CODE OF MEMBER ETHICS