Andreas Eriksen

• Eriksen, Andreas (2022). Evidensbaserte modeller krever praktisk refleksjon. Kontekstonline. ISSN 2535-4825.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Accountability and inter-institutional respect: The case of independent regulatory agencies. I Eriksen, Erik Oddvar (Red.), The Accountability of Expertise: Making the Un-Elected Safe for Democracy. Routledge. ISSN 9781003175490.
• Eriksen, Andreas & Katsaitis, Alexander (2020). Accountability through mutual attunement: How can parliamentary hearings connect the elected and the unelected? Public Policy and Administration. ISSN 0952-0767. doi: 10.1177/0952076720977606. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Eriksen, Andreas (2020). Political Values in Independent Agencies. Regulation & Governance. ISSN 1748-5983. doi: 10.1111/rego.12299. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Eriksen, Andreas (2020). Accountability and the Multidimensional Mandate. Political research quarterly. ISSN 1065-9129. doi: 10.1177/1065912920906880. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Eriksen, Andreas (2020). The political literacy of experts. Ratio Juris. ISSN 0952-1917. 33(1), s. 82–97. doi: 10.1111/raju.12269. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Eriksen, Andreas & Molander, Anders (2018). Welfare reform and public justification. Policy Studies. ISSN 0144-2872. s. 1–20. doi: 10.1080/01442872.2018.1538487.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Reclaiming Responsibility: The Case of Welfare-to-Work Policy. Journal of Social Policy. ISSN 0047-2794. s. 1–18. doi: 10.1017/S0047279418000612.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Conflicting duties and restitution of the trusting relationship. Journal of Medical Ethics. ISSN 0306-6800. 44(11), s. 1–6. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104682. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv Vis sammendrag

  It is often claimed that medical professionals are subject to conflicting duties in their role morality. Some hold that the overridden duty taints the professional and generates a patient claim to a form of moral compensation. This paper challenges such a ‘compensation view’ of conflict and argues that it misleadingly makes the role morality into a personal contract between professional and patient. Two competing views are therefore considered. The ‘unity view’ argues that there are no real conflicts between professional duties. Hence, there can be no residual duties that are impossible to discharge and no special claim on the part of the patient. It is argued that this fails because the institutional nature of the role morality requires us to accept possibility of conflict. The paper articulates and defends a third view, where conflict triggers a professional duty of restitution. This duty is not a matter of making amends for a previous wrong, but rather a matter of rebuilding a trusting relationship that has been damaged due to blameless circumstances.

• Eriksen, Andreas (2015). Should eudaimonia structure professional virtue? Journal of Philosophy of Education. ISSN 0309-8249. 50(4), s. 605–618. doi: 10.1111/1467-9752.12162.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2015). What is professional integrity? Etikk i praksis. ISSN 1890-3991. 9(2), s. 3–17. doi: 10.5324/eip.v9i2.1836. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Eriksen, Andreas (2015). The authority of professional roles. Journal of Social Philosophy. ISSN 0047-2786. 46(3), s. 373–391. doi: 10.1111/josp.12103. Fulltekst i vitenarkiv
• Eriksen, Andreas (2015). Beyond Professional Duty: Does Supererogation Belong to the Morality of Roles? International Journal of Applied Philosophy. ISSN 0739-098X. 29(1). doi: 10.5840/ijap201561842.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2011). Hva er moralsk forpliktelse? En drøfting av tre forslag. I Næss, Hans Erik & Eriksen, Thomas Hylland (Red.), Kulturell kompleksitet i det nye Norge. Unipub forlag. ISSN 9788274775282. s. 235–247.

Se alle arbeider i Cristin

• Eriksen, Andreas (2022). Hvordan skaper ansvarliggjøring legitimitet?
• Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Forskningsbasering og profesjonelt ethos: Hvordan kan de forenes i profesjonsutdanningene? .
• Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Hvem stoler på finansbransjen? Morgenbladet. ISSN 0805-3847.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Review: D. Demortain: The Science of Bureaucracy: Risk Decision-Making and the US Environmental Protection Agency. Governance. An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions. ISSN 0952-1895. doi: 10.1111/gove.12621.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Expert Networking of International Bodies and Democratic Legitimacy.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2020). Har politiske verdier en plass i forvaltningen? Stat og styring. ISSN 0803-0103. 30(3). Vis sammendrag

  Forvaltningen utøver stadig mer makt på armlengdes avstand fra folkevalgte politikere. Bør denne makten involvere politiske vurderinger i tillegg til faglige? Ja, demokratiet avhenger av at den gjør det.

• Katsaitis, Alexander & Eriksen, Andreas (2019). Accountability and the Forging of Agency Ends: The European Security and Markets Authority in the European Parliament’s Committee Hearings.
• Eriksen, Andreas & Katsaitis, Alexander (2019). Accountability through Mutual Attunement.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2019). The Accountability of Independent Agencies.
• Eriksen, Andreas & Katsaitis, Alexander (2019). Accountability through Mutual Attunement: Parliamentary Hearings & Agency Oversight in the European Union.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Blog: Have Welfare-to-Work Reforms Promoted Citizen Responsibility?
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). The Political Literacy of Experts.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Blog: “Accountability overload”: Too much of a good thing?
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Blog: Conflicts of duty: What do they mean?
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Political literacy. The concept and its application to the unelected.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). The Facts of Agency Accountability.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Conflicting Professional Duties and Blameworthiness.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Reclaiming Responsibility.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Legitimate Agency Reasoning .
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Moral philosophers and virtue: What is wrong with being bad? (Blog).
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Professional ethics in the age of AI: Upgrading to v3.0 (Blog).
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Bokanmeldelse: New Contractualism in European Welfare State Policies. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning. ISSN 0040-716X. 58(3), s. 357–360. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-291X-2017-03-08.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2017). Detaljstyring av moralfilosofien? Morgenbladet. ISSN 0805-3847.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2016). Lykkelig som engasjert i jobben.
• Eriksen, Andreas & Lassen, Kjersti (2016). Derfor er noen lykkeligere på jobb. [Internett]. forskning.no.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2016). Profesjonsroller og lykke.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2016). Lærerens dedikasjon og rolleforståelse. Bedre Skole. ISSN 0802-183X. s. 72–76.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2014). Tvilsom begrunnelse for reservasjonsmulighet. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening. ISSN 0029-2001. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.13.1512.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2014). A. Eriksen svarer:. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening. ISSN 0029-2001. 134(8), s. 808–809. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.14.0453.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2013). Om reservasjonsrett. [Radio]. NRK P1 Norgesglasset.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2013). Vi taper offentlig begrunnelse. Vårt land. ISSN 0805-5424.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2013). Profesjonsroller og moralsk divergens.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2012). The Force of Professional Obligations.
• Thue, Fredrik W.; Eriksen, Andreas; Høydal, Øyunn Syrstad; Vabø, Agnete & Messel, Jan (2022). Integrasjon og integritet. Tillit til forskning i et kunnskapssamfunn. . Senter for profesjonsstudier, OsloMet.
• Thue, Fredrik W.; Vabø, Agnete; Messel, Jan; Høydal, Øyunn Syrstad & Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Et ytringsklima under press? Akademisk frihet og ytringsfrihet i en brytningstid. Senter for profesjonsstudier, OsloMet.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2021). Expert Networking and International Governance: Questions of Democracy. Oxford University Press. ISSN 9780190228613. Vis sammendrag

  Networks of experts coordinated or orchestrated by international bodies have become so widespread and influential that they are said to shape a new world order. Standards for consumer safety, investor protection, and environmental sustainability are governed by appeals to the epistemic authority of experts. Typically, formal international organizations orchestrate cross-border constellations of public–private collaborations between groups that are deemed to have relevant knowledge. This trend is part of a depoliticization of decision- making; policy issues are framed as technical problems that should be kept at a distance from party politics. The question here is how to conceptualize and assess this development in democratic terms.

• Eriksen, Andreas (2019). Agency Accountability: Management of Expectations or Answerability to Mandate? ARENA.
• Eriksen, Andreas (2018). Legitimate Agency Reasoning . ARENA Centre for Europan Studies Oslo. 2018(1). Vis sammendrag

  The paper seeks to develop a framework for assessing the legitimacy reasoning in regulatory agencies. It starts by engaging critically with two prominent models. The first model sees the legitimacy of judgments as resting exclusively on their merits as sources of technical knowledge. By contrast, the second model acknowledges room for evaluative judgment, but construes this as a matter of specifying given policy ends. The paper argues that these models fail to capture how agency judgments should be governed by standards beyond both empirical science and ordinary politics. The proposal is to view the standards as flowing from the principle of reciprocity, familiar from public reason theory. The model advocated here highlights how responsiveness to policy ends is structured by a mandate and how fidelity to mandate requires ‘political literacy’, which is a distinct mode of disciplining evaluative judgments.

• Eriksen, Andreas (2016). Taking Roles Seriously. On Professional Duty and Virtue. Høgskolen i Oslo og Akershus.

Se alle arbeider i Cristin