Friday, 3 March 2017

International Association for promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog


Silvia Peppoloni

Silvia Peppoloni
Researcher of the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Rome (Italy); Secretary General of IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics

From an article published in 112 Emergencies Journal. 
Disclaimer: the views expressed in this paper solemnly engage the author

Picture credit:
Above: Damages in Accumoli after the Central Italy earthquake in August 2017 

All the piuctures from: 112 Emergencies journal.

Italy has always been exposed to disastrous natural events, in the collective imagination it has become the symbol of living exposed to risk, almost as if it was inevitably condemned to suffer the natural catastrophe. Are things still this way? 

Following the great emotional impact that accompanied the dramatic events like the earthquakes in Belice, the Po and Arno floods, and continued with the earthquakes in Friuli and Irpinia, from the end of the sixties in Italy the need to create a technical structure that was able to coordinate the operational phases of an environmental emergency in a systematic way and with appropriate procedures became apparent. That's why the Civil Protection was founded. 

The term "Civil Protection" encompasses the concept and the ethical value for which a Government protects its citizens: the State is made of citizens, who, if necessary, protect each other. From this reference point, many other concepts started to enrich and strengthen the meaning of this institution, so that today we all recognize its irreplaceable value. 

Flood in Northern Italy in November 2017.
Prevention activities in the last years
have mitigated damages and avoided victims.
With the progress of science and with it, the possibility of protection from natural hazards, the concept of emergency started to move side by side other important concepts, such as risk prediction and prevention, which unequivocally demonstrate a significant change in the way we conceive the meaning of protection of society from danger. In fact, the modern Civil Protection doesn't only manage operations during an emergency, but has a new ethical and social function that sees it as a constantly active body in changing the culture of rescue and emergency into the culture of prevention and risk reduction. The current Department of Civil Protection is certainly busy managing the several emergencies in our territory, but it is also involved in forecasting, warning and prevention activities, that are carried out through financing scientific research projects, the issuance of guidelines for possible studies as well as the plans of action to undertake to achieve risk reduction, the management of environmental monitoring networks, and especially through the implementation of educational campaigns and by providing the population at risk with valuable information. It is precisely the awareness and education of the population, with projects and campaigns such as "Io no rischio" ("I don't risk") and Edurisk, that lay down the first stones to set a new relationship between institutions, citizens, science and territory. 

Recent studies have clearly established that the Italian population has gained very little awareness of the seismic risk to which it is exposed. That is why education through capillary and continuous information campaigns to the population is the key to facilitate new ways of tackling these risks and to promote the culture of prevention. 

Earthquake training for risk reduction
in a Japanese school.
The concept of risk also includes the social vulnerability and thus the resilience of a community, in other words its ability to respond to a disaster and to recover by restoring the material and spiritual conditions that existed before the event occurred. This ability can also be enhanced by informing and educating about the existence of these dangers and on how to prevent them. The tragic events that continue to affect Italy, from earthquakes to floods or landslides, indicate that there is still much to do in terms of prevention. There is no culture of risk culture in our country, nor the full awareness of the fragility and value of our land. This ignorance is reflected in our constant lack of preparation to deal with not only the most rare extreme events, but also the most common and frequent natural disasters. 

Who has the responsibility to sort out these issues? Through which tools? And in light of which criteria? Prevention involves both the entire social body and each individual. Everyone has their own share of responsibility in taking care of the common good. There are aspects of which the State must necessarily take charge, through a structure like the Civil Protection, with its operational mission and ethics. But there is also an ethical duty of each person to improve their preparation and to get ready to cooperate, a duty that as well as having value in itself and for themselves has the advantage of producing positive effects on the whole community. Therefore, the lack of preparation in the face of a potentially disastrous event is not just a political or technical issue, but more generally of all of us citizens, that we too often tend to delegate our safety to the responsibilities of others, or even, to entrust ourselves to fate. Defense against natural hazards is a form of respect for our human intelligence and a civic duty towards society.

Other articles published in the IAPG blog:

IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics

Wednesday, 22 February 2017

International Association for Promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog

Ethics and Fracking

by Stephen Crittenden
Stephen Crittenden

Independent consultant - TEFL and Geoscience

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this paper solemnly engage the author

Picture credit:

As a geologist in the oil and gas exploration industry for over forty years I have had many opportunities to work with unconventional gas and oil targets: coal, organic rich shales and low permeability rocks (Carboniferous to Tertiary) in the Middle East, Far East and Europe. Colleagues and I have published articles in academia and have written many reports for clients including lacustrine source rocks (eg Cole and Crittenden, 1997)

I have compiled a few paragraphs that are pertinent to all of us in the Oil and Gas industry. I have worked in the industry and it has put food on the table for my family and me and provided energy, warmth and clothing and has in general given us a "good life". I have worldwide seen a lot of rocks, a lot of fossils and a lot of oil and gas and in general most people I have lived with and worked with have been caring, responsible and decent human beings both rich and poor. I have witnessed exemplary Corporate Social responsibility ..... But, I have also seen with my own eyes some "bad practices" both deliberate and accidental (avoidable) and some due to ignorance. In the world today Oil and Gas explorers and producers more often than not suffer negative publicity for, in my opinion, three main reasons.

1) The lack of clarity in explaining to the public what it is we actually do, why we do-it, where we do-it and how we do-it and what are the risks to people, infrastructure and the environment. Energy is required by all and energy poverty (and of course energy greed) is the cause of most of the woes suffered by human-kind in this world. Never-the-less our current world since the mid 19th century from a human perspective is driven by oil and gas; not just for energy but for a vast range of products that keeps our global economy and society alive and functioning. In fact we should say "all that we do is for you" ...... with addenda reflecting the attitude of normal business sense "as long as we make money" with "no damage to people, infrastructure and the environment" plus "safe job analyses" and "risk assessments" and as an industry "we mean what we say".

Attempts for clarity in explanations of "fracking" have been made but invariably most suffer from the use of undefined terminology and of "jargon" that is not understood by the general public. A lack of clarity leads the general reader to not just a lack of a full understanding but in many cases to a false understanding; getting it wrong, and often called in colloquial English language as "grasping the wrong end of the stick". In addition the situation is further confused and clouded by some well-meaning celebrities, some self serving politicians (local and national), organisations and journalists all jumping upon controversy bandwagons in order to blow their own ( often misinterpretations and misunderstandings) out-of-tune trumpets.

(For an explanation of the "stick" metaphor please refer to google for the many and varied references and understandings / misunderstandings of the etymology and meaning for the phrase. Thus, my point regarding clarification of terminology has been made!).

This leads to my second point:

2) For most of us ethics and compliance at work is not lip-service ( is that jargon?) and Corporate Social Responsibility is a reality. However, am I being too cynical if I make the observation that "Corporate Ethics and Compliance" is an industry in itself to provide a form of Corporate Protection smokescreen? I have worked for numerous companies and in the last ten years have noticed that their Ethics and Compliance Programmes are almost identical: a product of "cut and paste" from a common provider with little attempt at tailoring to a specific company's specific needs.. An Ethics and Compliance Programme within organisations is commonplace but far too often is regarded as a necessary annual one day (one hour?) diversion from the established norms of the business. Indeed in my experience employees display a corporate mistrust as most are in agreement that an ethical workplace and company is more than just a compliance programme completed "on-line". The highest ethical standards must be the norm throughout the company hierarchy and anything less should not be tolerated.

3) Poor Corporate Communication (coupled perhaps with public perceived corporate greed and lack of corporate ethics) with the general public has generated a lack of respect and a profound cynical distrust by the general public of all actions and statements by the Oil and Gas Industry and some local and national regulatory authorities. In the past (and indeed in the present) the Oil and Gas industry has suffered a poor reputation summarised as; "rape and pillage", environmental destruction, pollution and greed. This infamy (excused initially as a result of corporate ignorance, but nowadays that is no excuse) has with hindsight been well deserved but such infamy has not been the monopoly of the Oil and Gas Industry. Industry (and humanity) as a whole also fully deserves such a poor reputation. This stems from "destructive" practices established in pre-classical and classical times (eg prehistoric forest clearance, mining, quarrying, over-hunting, soil erosion and so-on) in addition to those established throughout subsequent history, the Industrial Revolution and up to the present day (eg poor agricultural practice, over fishing, colonialisation, globalisation, pollution of air, rivers, sea and land, war and ethnic cleansing / genocide), with little thought given to the consequences for humanity and the planet as a whole - nature. Woody Guthrie in his book "Bound for Glory" describes the Boom Towns of the oil field early days in the USA - the pollution, the riches and the poverty - he was one of the boom town rats.

One does not have to hazard a guess why the area in the midlands of the United Kingdom where the Industrial Revolution was born in the early 18th century is called the "Black Country". Equally one only has to consider the current pipeline ethical controversy in the USA (Dakota), the current pollution situation in the oil fields of the Niger Delta onshore, and the massive pollution caused by the Macondo disaster to realise that throughout human history while there has been over time change for the better, bad practice does persist - the common denominator is human greed.

It is no wonder that "fracking" within unconventional oil and gas exploration and "normal" production onshore is causing so much controversy within the general public. Oil and gas exploration and production is not without risk and is admitted but an operation correctly conducted has (and indeed must have) strategies in place that are designed to mitigate any risk to almost zero or to an acceptable (?) level. This simple concept needs to be explained openly and honestly to the general public. It is indeed ironic that most protesters do not fully understand the basic science, technology and engineering used in the Oil and Gas Industry for fracking practices; the subjects of their protest. However, to site a fracking zone beneath a Nuclear Power Station does not make good sense

My very simple explanation (KISS - google it) of what is "unconventional oil and natural gas and fracking" is as follows. (The ethics behind it I will not discuss. These concepts have been gleaned from numerous reports from various legislative authorities).

tight oil and gas: oil and natural gas found in low-permeability rock, including sandstones, siltstones, and carbonates.
shale oil and shale gas: oil and natural gas locked in fine-grained, organic-rich rocks - potential source rocks.
coalbed methane (CBM): natural gas contained in coal seams.
To allow it to move through rock to a well and to be pumped to the surface, hydraulic fracturing is used to crack the rock to create permeability flow paths. The fracturing (“fracking”) is achieved by pumping fluid into a well bore to create enough pressure to crack the rock layer. The pumped fluid usually contains a “proppant,” like sand, that helps keep the fractures open when the pumping pressure is released, to allow oil and gas to be produced to the well. To produce unconventional oil and natural gas, multiple horizontal wells (many drilled from a single pad) and multi-zone fracturing are used. These wells are started by drilling vertically (straight down) and then steering the drill bit so that it drills "horizontally" through the desired formation. The formations being targeted are often hundreds to thousands of metres below ground / seabed level and well below any usable groundwater aquifers and a good distance from natural fracture and fault zones. Horizontal well drilling and reservoir hydraulic fracturing has been used for decades in normal field development (eg Valhall Field offshore Norway - tight chalk), Improvements have made it possible to use these techniques to develop the flow of oil and natural gas out of fine grained low permeability rocks.

The hydraulic fracturing fluids used must be non toxic and the chemical additives and water contents of the fluids and the source and volume used recorded accurately in the daily record of operations for any well. The key is the protection of groundwater and surface water resources. Wells are designed (including a geomechanics and pore pressure study) with a full set of steel casing (total depth to surface) with a full cementing plan for the well bore annulus that will act as a barrier and prevent any hydraulic fracturing fluid regardless of whether or not it contains toxic chemicals, and the produced salt water and oil and gas from entering the penetrated rock formations and mixing with groundwater or surface water . Produced fluids that are returned to surface, such as oil and gas, hydraulic fracturing fluid and salt water from the producing rock formation, are monitored, separated, handled, stored, and disposed of under strict regulations. No fluids, including those that have been treated, should ever be allowed to be released into a natural water body. Unlined storage pits should never be used to store fluids produced from fracturing operations. All fluids that cannot be recycled or reused must be re-injected and stored in rock formations deep underground, far below groundwater sources.

Any vertical fractures that result from hydraulic fracturing are mostly in the range of tens of metres and rarely up to 200 metres. It is therefore extremely unlikely that correctly placed fractures in a correctly placed well bore could impact groundwater. No shallow hydraulic fracturing operations should be allowed, and the the borehole should never be close to any water wells.

Induced seismicity refers to earthquakes (ie seismic events) resulting from human activity. Typically, these earthquake events are low in magnitude and are rarely felt at the surface. Historically, earthquake events have been associated with coal mining, salt mining, oil and gas extraction activities and deep well disposal of waste-water. The evidence is very obvious in the salt mining and coal mining districts of the UK, in Kuwait and in the area above the Groningen Gas Field in the Netherlands, Hydraulic fracturing has been linked as a possible cause of earthquakes in North America.

IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics

Wednesday, 15 February 2017

International Association for Promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog

Geoethics and Nigeria’s developmental challenges

(published in Punch, on 26 January 2017)

by Greg Odogwu
Greg Odogwu

Member / IAPG-Nigeria

Picture credit:

Even if one tries to discard everything that the New Age Movement brought to contemporary civilisation, the one thing that still hits home with certainty is the perception that the Earth has a life of its own. In those days when the world was still giddy with excitement at the novel idea of the spirit-cum-psycho consciousness, a certain chemist, James Lovelock, scientifically organised the awareness in a proposition known as the Gaia Theory.

As a matter of fact, even those that are not given to religious proclivities would still acknowledge that it seems the Earth is paying humanity back for years of rape and disregard through rapid industrialisation without sustainability considerations. Climate change and global warming are with us as a sore nemesis; to survive would entail retracing our footsteps to where we lost basic geoethical senses in our pursuit for refined things.

And, while we delay, more havoc is being done right before us. Ironically, it is a developing country like ours that suffers it the most. Artisanal mining kills women and children through lead poisoning. Oil spillage in the Niger Delta destroys not only the farms, waters and livelihood of our poor compatriots, but ensures that the youths in the region totally lose hope in the future. Rapacious coal mining is a new threat in far-flung rural communities.

Surely, it seems everybody is ready to go up in flames with the ecosystem that God has given us for our nourishment. This is why the advent of Geoethics as a scientific discipline has become so auspicious.

Geoethics is an emerging subject. It consists of research and reflection on the values which underpin appropriate behaviours and practices, wherever human activities interact with the Earth system. It deals with the ethical, social and cultural implications of geoscience knowledge, education, research and practice, providing a point of intersection for Geosciences, Sociology, Philosophy and Economy.

At the heart of Geoethics is Geosciences, because it is actually a geoscientific creation. However, in order to vividly understand what Geosciences is all about, I will like to describe it as the University of Utrecht, The Netherlands, describes it on its website. "The Faculty of Geosciences studies the Earth: from the Earth's core to its surface, including man's spatial and material utilisation of the Earth – always with a focus on sustainability and innovation. Research Focus. Future Energy and Resources. Healthy Urban Living. Water, Climate and Ecosystems."

Geoethics represents an opportunity for geoscientists to become more conscious of their social roles and responsibilities in conducting their activity. It is a tool to influence the awareness of society regarding problems related to geo-resources and geo-environment.

Geosciences have major impacts on the functioning and knowledge-base of modern societies. Geoscientists have specific knowledge and skills, which are required to investigate, manage and intervene in various components of the Earth system to support human life and well-being, to defend people against geo-hazards and to ensure natural resources are managed and used sustainably. This entails ethical obligations. Therefore, geoscientists must embrace ethical values in order best to serve the public good.

Geoethics therefore promotes a way of thinking and practising geosciences, within the wider context of the roles of geoscientists interacting with colleagues, society and the planet.

The International Association for Promoting Geoethics was born in 2012, during the 34th International Geological Congress in Brisbane, Australia, from an idea conceived on April 2012 during the European Geosciences Union – General Assembly in Vienna. The IAPG is an international, scientific, multidisciplinary platform, created to widen the discussion on ethical issues related to the Geosciences. It is becoming an important space in which many geoscientists can share experiences, ideas, reflections and information on geoethical issues.

The IAPG was born to try to answer to the questions: How can we articulate the ethical criterion for geoscientists? How can the freedom of research and actions be combined with the principles of sustainability? Where should the line be drawn between preservation and economic development of the geosphere, especially in low-income countries? How can the relationships between geoscientists, media, politicians and citizens be made more profitable, particularly in the defence against natural hazards? What communication and educational strategies should be adopted to transfer the value of the geosciences to society?

The mission of the IAPG is to promote Geoethics values and principles through international cooperation, encouraging the involvement and debate of geoscientists, especially those belonging to less developed countries, and assuring a good coordination among these nations. It intends to foster the dissemination of Geoethics through a dedicated website, the publication of scientific papers, the organisation of meetings and sessions/symposia on Geoethics within national and international geoscientific events.

During the 35th International Geological Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, (August 27 – September 4, 2016), a seminal document, known as, the "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics", was prepared. It reads in part:

"It is essential to enrich the roles and responsibilities of geoscientists towards communities and the environments in which they dwell, as well as paying attention to each scientist’s individual conscience and relationships with colleagues. Human communities will face great environmental challenges in the future. Geoscientists have know-how that is essential to orientate societies towards more sustainable practices in our conscious interactions with the Earth system. Applying a wider knowledge-base than natural sciences, geoscientists need to take multidisciplinary approaches to economic and environmental problems, embracing geo-ethical and social perspectives. Geoscientists are primarily at the service of society. This is the deeper purpose of their activity.
In the coming years, especially when addressing matters like energy supply, use of geo-resources, land management, pollution abatement, mitigation of geo-risks, and climate change adaptation and mitigation, ethical and social issues will be central in scientific discussion and in public debate. In addition, handling large quantities of data, science and risk communication, education strategies, issues of research integrity, anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies, gender balance and inclusion of those living with disabilities will be major topics for geoscientists.
Raising the geoethical awareness and competences of the members of the geoscience community is essential, also to increase trust and credibility among the public. This can best be achieved in the near future by two means: by promoting more effectively existing guidance such as codes of ethics/conduct and research integrity statements; and by introducing geoethics into geoscience curricula, to make geoethics a basic feature of the training and professional activity of geoscientists."

Thankfully, the IAPG has a Nigerian office which has already shown remarkable presence.

My view is that there is no time to waste for Nigeria to partake in the "Geoethical Revolution" by domesticating its tenets and operations. The Nigerian branch of the IAPG has to quickly design people-oriented programmes aimed at grassroots participation in the promotion of risk assessment and prevention of potential hazards from resources exploitation. This is so that people at the grassroots could be able to identify geoethical breaches, and have a channel for reporting the same. The government would then have the capacity to respond to such threats.

Both the public and the private sectors need to understand Geoethics processes in order to safeguard our natural resources and prevent undue exploitation. They need to also locate Geoethics in the existing global sustainable agenda. But more importantly, it is the duty of all of us to ensure that we are able to cover the aspects of food security, environmental stewardship and gender issues in promoting Geoethics. These, I believe, touch the crux of our present challenges.

IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics

Thursday, 5 January 2017

International Association for Promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog

The IAPG section of Romania

Welcome to the IAPG section of Romania! 

The section will work under the responsibility of Antoneta Seghedi, senior Researcher at the National Institute of Marine Geology and Geoecology (GeoEcoMar) in Bucharest and president of the Geological Society in Romania; and Dorina Camelia Ilies, Professor at University of Oradea, Department of Geography, Tourism and Territorial Planning.

Currently IAPG-Romania can count on 14 members.  

Antoneta Seghedi
Antoneta Seghedi is former manager of the National Museum of Geology of the Geological Institute of Romania, where she worked in educational and public programs for the Museum. She is also custodian of a Natura 2000 protected site in Romania and founder of the NGO "Association GeoD for promoting geodiversity". She started her scientific career in 1972, at the Geological Institute of Romania, working in the Department of Geological Maps. She was involved in mapping for more than 30 years, contributing to, or coordinating 9 published and 11 still unpublished geological maps in the areas of Dobrogea and the South Carpathians. She started with metamorphic petrology and structural geology, but working in low-grade and very low-grade metamorphic terranes, she also became interested in sedimentary petrology and sedimentology. She also studied borehole cores, especially those that penetrated the pre-Mesozoic basement both in North Dobrogea Orogen, and in the East Moesian Platform. She coordinated or contributed to geological report and studies and atlases of metamorphic structures. In the late nineties she was involved in several IGCP projects, as well as in the project TESZ of the EUROPROBE program. This fueled her curiosity in paleogeographic terrane affinities and reconstructions. In 2006 she became involved in projects on geohazards and geoheritage protection. For two and half years she was the manager of the National Museum of Geology. She realized that the museum, established in the eighties, was very appreciated by specialists but not really appealing to the public, the main target of the museum. Since a change of the permanent exhibitions was not possible, together with her team of young and very dedicated people, she started to elaborate educational and public programs and projects, in order to explain the museum exhibitions and make it easy to understand by school children and families. She also managed to accomplish several temporary exhibitions, deliver lectures and organize summer schools. In the summer of 2009 she started to work in the National Institute of Marine Geology and Geoecology – GeoEcoMar, on issues related to protected areas, but also did regional geological studies for CCS. Recently, she has started to coordinate a new educational project. She is project manager of the Transylvanian Dinosaur Museum, a project involving several NGOs and institutions, including GeoEcoMar, to valorise the most important paleontological heritage of Romania, the dwarf dinosaurs from Haţeg country. A project that blends science and art, the Transylvania Dinosaur Museum means reconstructing all terrestrial ecosystems found in the Late Cretaceous on Haţeg island, as well as developing educational and public programs and projects.

Dorina Camelia Ilies
Dorina Camelia Ilies has 23 years of experience in the didactic and research activity. Actual field of interest is the investigation and mapping of natural and cultural heritage and its valorization for touristic purpose (master courses and Ph.D. school in Geography); concerning the research activity:  she has published more than 80 scientific papers in national and international scientific journals; she has been collaborator in international research teams for geotourism and environmental tourism maps elaboration related to two natural protected areas in Italy. She has been coordinator of national and international projects concerning rural thematic tourism; and collaborator for the Crisana Maramures. She worked for the Geographical Atlas of Tourism Heritage (Coord. Ilies A., 2014), which received the Romanian Academy Award in 2016.

Other IAPG national sections:

Monday, 21 November 2016

International Association for Promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog


Geoethics at CoV-9

CoV-9: Cities on Volcanoes 9

Workshop (W7): "Volcanic hazards and monitoring techniques for the protection of the population: Public Health, Geoethics, Communication and Education". 

21 November, from 19:00.

Patagonico hotel - Calbuco room, Puerto Varas (Chile). 

Elizabeth Rovere, Claudia Vaamonde, Marcelo Vazquez Herrera, Roberto Violante

This Workshop is organized by GEVAS Network Argentina, Civil Association, in collaboration with IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics.

During the first hour of the workshop conveners will develop a clear understanding of the concepts of Volcanic Hazards, Geoethics ("Cape Town Statement on Geoethics" by IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics) and the objectives of GEVAS Network Argentina, Civil Association. In order to achieve that goal, they will have short presentations by colleagues covering various Social, Communication, Civil Protection and Volcano Monitoring projects currently underway. Following those presentations, a discussions will be developed.
During the second hour of the workshop, there will be four main breakout/discussion sessions, focused on 4 recent eruption case-studies, and a final general discussion. 

The aim of this workshop is to 1. Encourage the construction of links between society and geosciences from the awareness and training on best practices in the risk management facing volcanic eruptions, particularly in Latin American countries. 2. To perform basic scientific research aimed at generating new scientific knowledge and encouraging exchange with scientific organizations and institutions. 3. To promote interaction with medical, social and communicational sciences fostering transfer to society. 4. To collaborate with public and private agencies, institutions and actors involved in risk management. 5. To provide
links of technical support and collaborate to the management and monitoring of volcanoes on international borders. 6. To collaborate with civil protection institutions in order to assess and remediate the consequences of volcanic eruptions.

Invited Colleagues: 
- Ph D Dulce Vargas Bracamontes. Univ. Colima, Mexico. Geoph. Volcano Seismology, Leeds, UK.
- Dir. David Alberto Tressens Ripoll. Civil Protection Villa La Angostura, Argentina
- PhD Philippe Lesage. Géophysique des Volcans. Université de Savoie. ISTerre  France.

Download the programme of CoV-9:

IAPG - International Association for Promoting Geoethics:

Wednesday, 9 November 2016

International Association for Promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog

Nic Bilham is the new IAPG Continental Coordinator for Europe

Nic Bilham
Nic has worked at the Geological Society, the UK’s learned and professional society for geoscientists, since 1997. He now leads delivery of its policy, education, media and wider communications activities. He also works with the Society’s Council and senior staff to coordinate strategic planning and reporting. He graduated from the University of Cambridge with a BA in History and Philosophy of Science, and he holds an MSc in Science and Technology Policy from the University of Sussex. His research interests include debates around the roles scientists can and should play in policy-making; and the effective integration of specialist, stakeholder and public inputs to multi-disciplinary policy challenges such as radioactive waste management. He has been IAPG Corresponding Citizen Scientist on "Geoscience communication".

Members of the IAPG Executive Council:

Wednesday, 2 November 2016

International Association for Promoting Geoethics Nigeria - Official blog

The "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics"

IAPG considers the 35th IGC - International Geological Congress, held in Cape Town (South Africa), the event that opens a new phase for Geoethics and for the Association. In order to celebrate this passage, the IAPG Drafting Committee, formed by Giuseppe Di Capua, Peter Bobrowsky and Silvia Peppoloni, has put together the "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics" (CTSG), a document to be considered as the product of an international effort to focus the attention of geoscientists on the development of shared policies, guidelines, strategies and tools, with the long-range goal of fostering the adoption of ethical practices in the geoscience community. The final document sums up all the values, concepts, contents developed in the first 4-year activity of IAPG, giving a perspective for the future development of geoethics. The CTSG has been announced during the opening keynote speech by Silvia Peppoloni (IAPG Secretary General) in the first IAPG session on geoethics at the 35th IGC. After the congress, the draft version has been sent for comments and suggestions to all the IAPG officers (members of the Executive Council, Coordinators of the National Sections, Corresponding Citizen Scientists) and to the 35th IGC Champions of the Theme "Geoscience Professionalism and Geoethics". Once improved (thanks to Nic Bilham, Martin Bohle, Oliver Bonham, Andy Clay, George Eynon, Emilia Hermelinda Lopera Parejas, David Mogk), the final version has been ratified by the Executive Council of the IAPG and finally published in the IAPG website.

Cape Town (South Africa)
The concepts, values and views on individual responsibilities of geoscientists, expressed in the "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics", reflect an international consensus. 

The statement aims to capture the attention of geoscientists and organisations, and to stimulate them to improve their shared policies, guidelines, strategies and tools to ensure they consciously embrace (geo)ethical professional conduct in their work.

The "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics" contains the new formula of the "Geoethical Promise".

Download the "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics (pdf version) at: