Governments must keep agricultural systems free of pests that threaten agricultural production and international trade. Biosecurity surveillance already makes use of a wide range of technologies, such as insect traps and lures, geographic information systems, and diagnostic biochemical tests. The rise of cheap and usable surveillance technologies such as remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) presents value conflicts not addressed in international biosurveillance guidelines. The costs of keeping agriculture pest-free include privacy violations and reduced autonomy for farmers. We argue that physical and digital privacy in the age of ubiquitous aerial and ground surveillance is a natural right to allow people to function freely on their land. Surveillance methods must be co-created and justified through using ethically defensible processes such as discourse theory, value-centred design and responsible innovation to forge a cooperative social contract between diverse stakeholders. We propose an ethical framework for biosurveillance activities that balances the collective benefits for food security with individual privacy: (1) establish the boundaries of a biosurveillance social contract; (2) justify surveillance operations for the farmers, researchers, industry, the public and regulators; (3) give decision makers a reasonable measure of control over their personal and agricultural data; and (4) choose surveillance methodologies that give the appropriate information. The benefits of incorporating an ethical framework for responsible biosurveillance innovation include increased participation and accumulated trust over time. Long term trust and cooperation will support food security, producing higher quality data overall and mitigating against anticipated information gaps that may emerge due to disrespecting landholder rights
翻译:生物安全监测已经利用了各种各样的技术,例如昆虫陷阱和诱饵、地理信息系统和诊断性生化测试; 廉价和可用的监测技术,例如遥控飞机系统(RPAS)的兴起,造成了国际生物监视准则中未涉及的价值冲突; 保持农业无虫害的成本包括侵犯隐私和降低农民的自主权; 我们争辩说,在无处不在的空中和地面监测时代,有形和数字隐私是允许人们在其土地上自由运作的自然权利; 监测方法必须共同创建和合理,必须使用道德上可减损的程序,例如讨论理论、以价值为中心的设计和负责任的创新,以便在不同的利益攸关方之间形成合作性社会契约; 我们提出生物监视活动道德框架,将粮食安全的集体利益与个人隐私相平衡:(1) 确定生物监视社会合同的界限;(2) 为农民、研究人员、产业、公众和监管者开展不公开的监视行动,是允许人们在自己的土地上自由运作的自然权利; 监督方法必须共同创建和合理的总体措施,通过使用道德上可减损的程序,例如讨论理论、以价值为中心的设计和负责任的创新,以便在不同的利益攸关方之间订立合作社会契约; 我们提议生物监视活动时,把集体安全的集体利益与个人和监视范围纳入适当的安全; 选择信任; 将增加数据,以便适当减少数据和信任; 选择对土地和信任期。