Skip to main content

Ethics and the Threat to Infrastructure

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Critical Information Infrastructures Security (CRITIS 2023)

Abstract

The study discusses the essential aspects of ethics and the threat to infrastructure. The threat and thus possible destruction of infrastructure can be made by different causers, such as friendly forces actors, internationally organized actors, non-state actors, state-backed actors, and state-military actors, as well as means and methods. Depending on the means available to the causers, a threat or destruction can be by mechanical, kinetic, chemical, biological, nuclear, hybrid, data-based, or AI-based. This is an intrusion into the quality of life or existence of people or societies. It affects material resources but can also result in the death of people. The actions of causers can be evaluated ethically. Three main theories are available for this purpose within the framework of ethics: virtue ethics, deontological ethics, and consequentialist/utilitarian ethics. The study deals with the application of these theories to moral action and shows the conditions of the possibilities to ethically evaluate the destruction of infrastructure. In doing so it becomes clear that consequentialist/utilitarian ethics can be a generally accepted way of evaluating moral action. Rule utilitarianism offers itself. Thus, it provides a framework for action and the possibility of an operationalized comparison and shows the conditions of the possibilities of a framework. Further essential criteria of evaluation are human dignity, human rights, double effect, the doctrine of war, and collateral damage. The study also makes clear that actors can face an aporia. The agent or non-agent must bear responsibility for his actions, and he may become culpable. He must give account of his own free and autonomous action or non-action and its consequences before an authority. It is shown that attacking perpetrators of infrastructure destruction usually act morally reprehensible, while defending perpetrators usually, but not always, act morally acceptable. This is exemplified by a case study/dilemma situation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Directive (EU) 2022/2557 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on the resilience of critical entities and repealing Council Directive 2008/114/EC, page 176.In: Cardarilli, M., Jungwirth, R., Giannopoulos, G., Brandt, M. (eds.) Critical Infrastructure Resilience: News, Updates and Events. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, JRC131742 (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik: Was ist kritische Infrastruktur?. https://www.bsi.bund.de/EN/Home/home_node.html. Accessed 15 Apr 2023

  3. Europäisches Parlament. Parlament nimmt neue Regeln zum Schutz kritischer Infrastruktur in der EU an. Pressemitteilung (22-11-2022) (2022). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/de/press-room/20221118IPR55705/parlament-nimmt-neue-regeln-zum-schutz-kritischer-infrastruktur-in-der-eu-an. Accessed 15 Apr 2023

  4. Dutta, N.: Cyber Security. Issues and Current Trends. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 995, p. 3. Springer, Singapore (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6597-4

  5. UNRIC Regionales Informationszentrum der Vereinten Nationen für Westeuropa: Charta der Vereinten Nationen, Art. 2–4. http://www.unric.org/de/charta. Accessed 13 Sept 2023

  6. Kant, I., Kraft, B., Schönecker, D.: Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, p. 519. Meiner, Philosophische Bibliothek, Hamburg (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kant, I.: Werke in sechs Bänden, hrsg. von Wilhelm Weischedel, unveränd. Nachdr. der Sonderausgabe Darmstadt 1998, 7. unveränd. Aufl., p. 421. WBG 2011, Darmstadt (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kant, I.: Werke in sechs Bänden, hrsg. von Wilhelm Weischedel, unveränd. Nachdr. der Sonderausgabe Darmstadt 1998, 7. unveränd. Aufl., p. 337. WBG, Darmstadt (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Aristoteles. Philosophische Schriften. In: sechs Bänden. Meiner, Hamburg 1107a (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  10. MacIntyre, A.: After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory, 3rd edn., p. 191. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Birnbacher, D., Mill, J.S. (eds.): Utilitarianism/Der Utilitarismus. [Lacher.], p. 57. Reclam (Reclams Universal-Bibliothek, 18461), Stuttgart (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sidgwick, H.: The Methods of Ethics, 7th edn., p. 474.: MACMILLAN and CO., Limited/The Mac Millan Company, New York/London (1907)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hare, R.M.: Rules of war and moral reasoning. Philos. Public Affairs 1(2), 177 (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Institute for American Values (IAV): What We’re Fighting For. A Letter from America, New York (2002). http://americanvalues.org/catalog/pdfs/what-are-we-fighting-for.pdf. Accessed 03 Mar 2023

  15. McMahan, J., Walter, A.: Kann Töten gerecht sein? Krieg und Ethik, p. 115. WBG Wiss. Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Anscombe, G.E.M.: Intention, 2nd edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2000). (First Harvard University Press paperback edition), paragraph 26, p. 46 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mangan, J.T.: An historical analysis of the principle of double effect. Theol. Stud. X(1), 41–61 (1949). https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/ts-web-index-pdf-may22018/ts-pdf-index-tableofcontent-pdf/1949/volume10-issue-1.pdf. Accessed 13 Sept 2023

  18. Coates, A.J.: The Ethics of War, p. 238. Manchester University Press, Manchester (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bajarunas, E., Kersanskas, V.: Hybrid threats: analysis of content, challenges posed and measures to overcome. Lith. Annu. Strategic Rev. 16(2017–2018), 125–126 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  20. European Commission. Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council, Joint Framework on countering hybrid threats: a European Union Response, JOIN (2016) 18 final (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  21. NATO. Warsaw Summit Communique, Warsaw, 8–9 July 2016 (2016). https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_133169.htm. Accessed 21 Sept 2023

  22. Maglaras, L., Janicke, H., Ferrag, M.A. (eds.): Cyber Security and Critical Infrastructures (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bonhoeffer, D.: Gewissen und konkrete Verantwortung, zitiert nach Ethik, DBW, vol. 6, p. 283 (1989). dietrich-bonhoeffer.net. Accessed 30 Mar 2023

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dieter Budde .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Ethics declarations

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Budde, D., Alonso-Villota, M., Pickl, S. (2024). Ethics and the Threat to Infrastructure. In: Pickl, S., Hämmerli, B., Mattila, P., Sevillano, A. (eds) Critical Information Infrastructures Security. CRITIS 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14599. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-62139-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-62139-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-62138-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-62139-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics