A triple junction is a place where three lithospheric plates meet. Lithospheric plates are typically considered to be rigid except along narrow, discrete boundary zones with adjacent plates. A significant number of triple junctions in the current plate system involve distributed plate boundaries: broad zones across which the motion of one lithospheric plate relative to an adjacent plate is accommodated by deformation. Instantaneous velocities of plate-boundary points can be derived from global plate-motion models or from GPS/GNSS data. Such instantaneous velocities can help characterize whether an individual boundary at a triple junction is divergent, convergent, transform, or oblique (i.e., combining transform and divergent/convergent motion). There are 25 unique types of triple junction, defined by the types of boundaries that meet at the triple junction. In the 56-plate system that is frequently used to describe current tectonics, there are 108 triple junctions. First-generation models of triple junctions assumed that a point on one plate moves in a circular trajectory relative to an adjacent plate over finite time intervals, but we now know that this assumption is not generally valid. Triple junction geometry is now thought to evolve dynamically over time for most, if not all, triple junctions.

As ethics is a fundamental part of science, so too is geoethics at the centre of geoscience. Many university geoscience departments have not incorporated considerations of ethics or geoethics into their routine operations, strategies for student development, curriculum or research efforts. Starting to emphasize ethics within a departmental community takes an ongoing commitment to learn the vocabulary of ethics, engage in open and continuing conversations with all persons in the department and promote a shared understanding that ethics - geoethics - is an essential part of everything we do as geoscientists. Geoethics can be a common thread that helps to bind a geoscience department together.

It is the responsibility of each generation of mature geoscientists to help subsequent generations develop as ethical geoscientists. Society depends on professional geoscientists to provide reliable information and unbiased expert advice about some of the most vexing challenges involving our interactions with the natural world. If the results of geoscience are not reliable, if our results are driven by financial, political, or social agendas rather than solely by good science, the professional work of geoscientists will not be sought or valued by society. Ethics is central to science. Professional geologists have a commitment to advancing scientific knowledge and serving society, and we must develop and propagate a shared sense of geoethics to help guide our work. While mature geoscientists have a responsibility to act ethically and help in the development of novice geoscientists, the final responsibility for our ethical development rests with each of us alone. Geoscientists must accept, adopt, and internalize the imperative to act in an ethical manner every day of their academic and professional careers. The process of facilitating the ethical development of undergraduate geoscience students needs to be tailored to individual institutions and ranges from an interior strategy of infusing ethics education throughout an undergraduate curriculum to an exterior strategy that primarily uses online resources and short-course opportunities organized by professional societies to provide ethical content. Well-articulated case studies with an ethical dimension are particularly effective for ethics instruction. Major geoscience organizations should support and participate in the development of resources for in-class and online learning about geoethics.

Chapter 11 THE EMERGING FIELD OF GEOETHICS Peter Bobrowsky, Geological Survey of Canada, Sidney, British Columbia, Canada International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorVincent S. Cronin, Department of Geosciences, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorGiuseppe Di Capua, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (Italian Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology), Rome, Lazio, Italy International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorSusan W. Kieffer, Department of Geology, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois, USA International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorSilvia Peppoloni, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (Italian Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology), Rome, Lazio, Italy International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this author Peter Bobrowsky, Geological Survey of Canada, Sidney, British Columbia, Canada International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorVincent S. Cronin, Department of Geosciences, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorGiuseppe Di Capua, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (Italian Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology), Rome, Lazio, Italy International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorSusan W. Kieffer, Department of Geology, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois, USA International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this authorSilvia Peppoloni, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (Italian Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology), Rome, Lazio, Italy International Association for Promoting Geoethics, (www.geoethics.org).Search for more papers by this author Book Editor(s):Linda C. Gundersen, Search for more papers by this author First published: 20 October 2017 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119067825.ch11Citations: 32Book Series:Special Publications AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Summary The geosciences need practitioners who possess an ethical conscience and the desire to act responsibly. Ethically responsible geoscientists will achieve success and satisfaction by carrying out excellent research and professional activities, and by maintaining honest and open collaborations with colleagues. Such individuals will be able to contribute to building a resilient society, be better prepared to face global economic and environmental challenges and be willing to take concrete actions for the conservation of the geo-environment. Geoethics provides ethical, social, and cultural values for the scientific community and for society as a whole. Geoethics represents a new vision of a world in which it is possible to maintain a more balanced relationship between humans and nature, considering modern economic and social development expectations. This chapter illustrates some aspects of geoethics, provides an overview of its basic values and themes, and highlights prominent global issues that involve geoethics, including climate change, geo-risks, land management, exploitation of geo-resources, and sustainability. The International Association for Promoting Geoethics (IAPG) provides a multidisciplinary platform for discussion, a place where multidisciplinary collaboration can strengthen the development of geoethics from a scientific and philosophical perspective, in order to better introduce geoethical values into society. Citing Literature Scientific Integrity and Ethics in the Geosciences RelatedInformation

The need to promote ethical practice in the geosciences has long been recognized. Governmental boards for licensing professional geoscientists commonly require participation in continuing-education courses or workshops about professional ethics as part of the license-renewal processes. Geoscience-based companies and organizations of professional geoscientists have developed ethical codes for their members or employees. Ethical problems have been reported that involve the practice of science applied to Earth studies, interpersonal relationships within geoscience departments, business practices in geoscience-based companies, field work and the destructive modification of geologic sites, public policy development or implementation related to Earth resources, extractive resource industries, development that modifies landscapes in significant ways, interactions with the press and other media professionals, and even interactions with individuals or groups that have a significantly different worldview. We are working toward the creation of a modular semester-long course in GeoEthics. The modules will be free-standing, so each could be repurposed for use in a different course; however, the GeoEthics course will provide a useful overall introduction to a variety of topics in ethics applied in the context of geoscience. Such a course might be an excellent capstone course for undergraduate geoscientists, or an introductory course for graduate students. The first module will cover basics intended to provide a common vocabulary of words, ideas and practices that will be used throughout the course. The remaining 5-6 modules will focus on aspects of geoscience in which ethical considerations play an important role. We feel that the geoscience classroom can provide a safe, controlled environment in which students can confront a representative sample of the types of ethical issues they might encounter in their professional or academic careers. Our goal is to help students develop effective strategies for working through these dilemmas. Our modules will utilize formal discussion, role-playing, debate, and reflective writing, among other techniques. We hope that this will lead students to internalize these lessons so that they lead careers in which ethical practice is an essential element. You are part of this collaborative effort. Today, right now, tell us about a problem, an opportunity, a resource, a technique, a case study, a way of viewing the world that we might use in this course. Join us, and let us keep in touch with you as our project develops. We try to equip our students with the scientific knowledge and skills necessary to make a positive impact on our understanding of Earth and its processes and products. We should exert the same effort to prepare them for the ethical challenges they will face during their careers. Why a modular course? We want the educational resources we develop for geoethics to be used in a broad range of geoscience courses, only some of which might be devoted wholly or in large part to geoethics. Hence, we envision a strategy that will yield a granular array of resources that can be used in different ways, for different people over different time periods. Minutes. In some cases, we want to provide small bursts of information that students can use for homework or for a few minutes in class: text, video, slides. Tens of Minutes. In some cases, we want students to work with a little bit more information, or for a longer time, in a project that might take all or much of a class period, or that might be a homework project. Class Periods. A topic might over one or more class periods, use a variety of resources, and employ several learning strategies. 2-3 Weeks. A module would be an integrated set of resources considered over the course of two or three weeks that would provide students with the opportunity to develop a deeper and more multi-dimensional understanding of material with an ethical dimension. A Semester. A course in geoethics would be compiled from a selection of modules. An individual teacher would choose to adopt or adapt the resource that fits the situation. How will course resources be made available? We anticipate that course resources will be made available in association with the InTeGrate Program, utilizing the online resources maintained by SERC (serc.carleton.edu). We will also make resources available via the IAPG website (www.iapg.geoethics.org). We plan to collaborate with professional organizations to help us promote these resources through presentations, workshops, short courses, newsletter articles, and other appropriate means. These groups will include the SERC community, National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT; www.nagt.org), Geological Society of America (GSA; www.geosociety.org), American Geophysical Union (AGU; sites.agu.org), American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG; www.aapg.org), American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG; www.aipg.org), Association of Environmental and Engineering Geologists (AEG; www.aegweb.org). We welcome other suggestions for groups we might collaborate with in developing or promoting educational resources for geoethics. Is this aligned with other efforts in geoscience ethics? The coauthors are all members of the International Association for Promoting Geoethics (IAPG; www.iapg.geoethics.org). IAPG is affiliated with the International Union of Geological Sciences, and the American Geosciences Institute. The coauthors met as part of a workshop on Teaching Geoethics Across the Geoscience Curriculum that was organized by Dave Mogk and others, with sponsorship from the National Science Foundation and participation from SERC (serc.carleton.edu). The current group that is working on developing a geoethics course are active members of many prominent geosciences organizations, including organizations that have their own codes of ethics. We plan to build upon this community of interest in developing educational resources. “The only ethical principle which has made science possible is that the truth shall be told all the time. If we do not penalize false statements made in error, we open up the way, don’t you see, for false statements by intention. And of course a false statement of fact, made deliberately, is the most serious crime a scientist can commit.” Physicist and author C.P. Snow, quoted in Honor in Science, published in 2000 by Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society A functional knowledge of applied ethics is not imparted at birth or awarded along with academic diplomas. It is something that each generation must help the next generation to develop. It’s our generation’s turn now.

The Malibu Coast Fault Zone (MCFZ) is an east-west-trending fault system that marks the southern boundary of the western Transverse Ranges along the Santa Monica Mountains of southern California. Focal mechanism solutions for 107 earthquakes in the study area are mostly associated with thrusts or thrust-dominated oblique faults with a small left-lateral component of strike slip. The average azimuth of hanging-wall slip is 206°, which is approximately perpendicular to the trace of the San Andreas fault through the Transverse Ranges. Approximately 60% of the inferred slip vectors had azimuths between 180° and 240°. Six ML ≥5 earthquakes have...

Intuition suggests that all points on the same mid-ocean ridge should rotate around the relative pole of the two-plate system at the same instantaneous angular velocity. Contrary to intuition, the instantaneous angular velocity of a ridge varies from one point to another along the ridge, given the general case in which two plates move around different plate-specific poles of rotation. The variation in the instantaneous angular velocity of a ridge is a function of the motion characteristics of the plates and the position of the ridge relative to the poles of plate motion. The length or orientation of individual ridge segments is predicted to vary over time, leading to local changes in the shape of the ridge. The gradient in instantaneous angular velocity for the fast-spreading East Pacific Ridge, between the Cocos and Pacific plates, is an order of magnitude greater than the gradient along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, between the North American and African plates. This great contrast in ridge instantaneous velocity gradients may be reflected in the contrasting ridge geometries of the East Pacific and Mid-Atlantic Ridges.