Moral deliberation chamber on collaboration with the fossil fuel industry

What is moral deliberation?

Contrary to what many people expect, moral deliberation does not resemble a debate, or a citizen council. Instead, a moral deliberation is a method to investigate a situation that raises moral doubt. Participants are asked to postpone their judgment and approach the situation with an open mind.

A moral deliberation is not about a ‘big’ question (“should TU Delft continue to collaborate with the fossil industry?”) but is always about a specific situation (“should TU Delft work with fossil fuel company A on project B?”, or “should representatives from company X be welcome at on-campus event Y?”). Collecting the moral judgments that result from a series of deliberations can provide insight into the core dilemma’s facing the university, and will bring into view the guiding moral principles which are at play. These can be used to further develop TU Delft’s policy on collaboration with the fossil fuel industry.

Moral deliberation takes place through a seven-step process. The process starts at a crystal-clear formulation of the situation and the options to be considered (should I do X or Y?) and ends at a  decision. The goal of a moral deliberation is to decide which option does right by all those involved, which means taking into account their rights, interests and wishes.

A moral deliberation session takes about 3 to 4 hours. In each session, the participants, together with a qualified moderator, follow the seven-step process to investigate the case. They map the parties that are involved in the decision and collect all arguments. The arguments are categorised, and weighed against each other (for example, an argument that touches upon basic human rights weighs more than an argument about money or time) to determine which response to the situation is morally right.

Moral deliberation chamber for collaboration with the fossil fuel industry

The deliberation chamber consists of 12 members that have been carefully selected through an application procedure. They represent the diversity of perspectives that characterizes the TU Delft community. The members are:

• Sebastian Geiger, Professor of Sustainable Geoenergy (CEG)
• Sander Otte, Professor of Atomic Quantum Technology (AS)
• Sandra Verhagen, Associate Professor in Geoscience and Remote Sensing and director of studies for Applied Earth Sciences (CEG)
• Eveline Holla, lecturer Pedagogy of Design & Technology Education (Science Engineering & Education, AS)
• Anne van de Poel, research funding advisor (Impact & Innovation Centre)
• Anke Dählmann, research support officer Geoscience & Engineering (CEG)
• Walter Jansen, project developer/sustainability officer Campus South (Campus Real Estate & Facility Management)
• Helena Schmidt, PhD candidate in Environmental Psychology (AE)
• Hugo-Pieter Iglesias van Montfort, PhD candidate in Electrochemical Engineering (AS)
• Thomas Arblaster, MSc student Industrial Ecology (TPM)
• Meryem Altiner, MSc student Life Science & Technology (TNW)
• Alexander de Vet, BSc student Mechanical Engineering (3mE)

The secretary of the chamber is Doortje Lenders, policy officer integrity (Integrity Office).

The members have taken part in a one-day training in November, where they became acquainted with the method. From December through February, they will hold regular deliberation sessions in which one case is discussed. The training and the deliberation sessions are facilitated by Governance & Integrity, an external agency specialized in the application of moral deliberations to encourage the integrity of organizations.

The cases will be collected through the deans of the faculties. The definitive list of cases will cover many different aspects of the collaboration between TU Delft and the fossil fuel industry.

What happens with the results?

The outcomes of the moral deliberations are collected in one report, which also contains a detailed analysis of the principles and core dilemmas that emerge from the outcomes. This report will be published on the website. Furthermore, it will be added to the advice that will be handed over to the Executive Board, in the form of a sub report, together with the reports on the PVE and the dialogue sessions.