Export-oriented illegal logging has been recognized as a major global problem in environmental, social, and economic terms. It has been argued that export-oriented illegal logging does not benefit the community or government that should be benefited by its own natural resources. The emergence of policy initiatives targeting illegal logging could have the potential to increase the competitiveness of legally sourced timber products by removing illegal products from the market of the consuming country. The US Lacey Act amendments of 2008 set a precedent for the global trade in plants and plant products by putting in place incentives for US wood products importing companies to demand legally sourced and traded wood. This research addresses how the 2008 Lacey Act amendments have impacted the US wood industry, and how those affected by the amendments view the future of environmental policy and global illegal logging as impacted by the amendments. The majority of respondents in this study agree that steps should be taken to decrease global illegal logging, but some aren't convinced that the Lacey Act amendments will ultimately have the desired effect. According to this research, most US wood importers have made small changes to their operational practices. This study indicates the possibility that though US wood importers feel the responsibility to ensure their companies are compliant with legislation, they are not sure the 2008 Lacey Act amendments will ultimately hinder global illegal logging. Included in this study are also suggestions from US wood importers regarding policy implementation. These suggestions include an increase in communication between the US government and US wood products companies, an increase in future research, and the possibility of focusing the Lacey Act on certain high-risk regions. / Graduation date: 2012

The study has the interest to investigate the existing values in science and analyze the possibility of promotion of ethics in the scientific pratices in the contemporaneity. The basis for this analysis is on Hugh Lacey s studies on the search for an epistemological model based on the adequacy of present values in scientific practices to social projection and human needs. This analysis shows that to have a better understanding of science and its objective, we should distinguish the values, the moments and the decisive strategies for the development of science. The Lacey s proposed has two articulations a distinction of values (cognitive and noncognitive) and a distinguish of the proper times of scientific practice that would enable a better explanation and justification of the problem of ―value-free science‖. To Lacey, there are three moments of scientific activity that allow us to analyse the performance of values: the moment M1, to adopt ways and strategies for research; the moment M2, to accept theories; and the moment M3, to apply scientific knowledge. The distinction of values is needed to support the view that scientific knowledge can be impartial and still serve as social values. Already, the distinction of moments of scientific activity allows the author to indicate the suitable place for investigating social influences in the research (at the moments M1 and M3). We realize that the modern tradition of science used a materialist understanding that selected restricted and one-dimensional strategies of research, overly linked to noncongnitive values of control of natural objects that privilege capitalists values, that, almost always, do not guarantee the enjoyment of other values essential for the human welfare. Therefore, this discussion suggests the importance of rethink the present values in science for a scientific activity that balances the ideal of the understanding of the world, together with the ability to generate useful Technologies for the flourishing of humanity. / O estudo tem por interesse investigar os valores existentes na ciência e analisar a possibilidade da promoção de uma prática científica ética na contemporaneidade. A base para essa análise fundamenta-se nos estudos de Hugh Lacey sobre a busca de um modelo epistemológico pautado na adequação de valores presentes nas práticas científicas às projeções sociais e necessidades humanas. Tal análise aponta que para termos uma melhor compreensão da ciência e do seu objetivo devemos distinguir tanto os valores quanto os momentos e as estratégias decisivas para o desenvolvimento da ciência. A proposta de Lacey apresenta duas articulações - uma distinção dos valores (cognitivos e não cognitivos); e uma distinção dos devidos momentos da prática científica que possibilitariam uma melhor explanação e justificação do problema da ―ciência livre de valores‖. Para Lacey há três momentos da atividade científica que nos permitem analisar a atuação dos valores: o momento M1, de adotar caminhos e estratégias para a pesquisa; o momento M2, de aceitar teorias e; o momento M3, de aplicar o conhecimento científico. A distinção dos valores é necessária para apoiar a visão de que o conhecimento científico pode ser imparcial e ainda se servir de valores sociais. Já a distinção dos momentos da atividade científica permite ao autor indicar o local adequado para se investigar influências sociais no interior das pesquisas (nos momentos M1 e M3). Perceberemos que a tradição moderna de ciência se utilizou de um entendimento materialista que selecionou estratégias de pesquisa restritas e unidimensionais, exageradamente ligadas a valores não cognitivos de controle dos objetos naturais que acabam por privilegiar valores capitalistas que, quase sempre, não garantem a apreciação de estratégias múltiplas de pesquisa e de outros valores essenciais para o bem-estar humano. Por isso esta reflexão propõe a importância de repensarmos os valores presentes na ciência para almejarmos uma atividade científica que equilibre o ideal de entendimento do mundo juntamente à capacidade de gerar tecnologias úteis ao florescimento da humanidade. / Mestre em Filosofia