Abstract
The machinery of research ethics oversight has grown in size, disciplinary ambit, and geographical reach over the last 50 years, generating overlapping patterns of regulation, statements, and guidelines that operate at supranational, national, local, community, discipline, topic, and institutional levels. These documents generate intersections as well as leaving interstitial spaces as governments, research agencies, institutions, associations, and supranational bodies attempt to assert, extend, and sometimes deny their authority over particular practices. While commentators have noted the widening control and intensification of the gaze that has occurred, the nature of, philosophical and actuarial support for, and the effectiveness of this oversight have been contested by researchers, research institutions, and communities of participants.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) (2012) Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies (GERAIS). Available at: http://www.aiatsis.gov.au/research/docs/GERAIS.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2013
Beecher HK (1966) Ethics and clinical research. N Engl J Med 274(24):1354–1360
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) (2016) International ethical guidelines for health-related research involving human subjects. Available at: https://cioms.ch/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/WEB-CIOMS-EthicalGuidelines.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2018
Department of Health (2015) Ethics in health research: principles, processes and structures, 2nd edn. Department of Health, Pretoria
Dingwall R, Rozelle V (2011) The ethical governance of German physicians, 1890–1939: are there lessons from history? J Policy Hist 23(1):29–52
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) (United Kingdom) (2015) Framework for research ethics. Economic and Social Research Council, Swindon. Available at: https://esrc.ukri.org/files/funding/guidance-for-applicants/esrc-framework-for-research-ethics-2015/. Accessed 13 May 2018
First Nations Information Governance Centre (2007) OCAP: ownership, control, access and possession. National Aboriginal Health Organization, Ottawa
Gan Z-R, Israel M (2019) Transnational policy migration, interdisciplinary policy transfer and decolonization: tracing the patterns of research ethics regulation in Taiwan. Dev World Bioeth. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12224
Gillon R (1994) Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope. BMJ Br Med J 309(6948):184–188
Guerriero ICZ, Bosi MLM (2015) Research ethics in the dynamic of scientific field: challenges in the building of guidelines for social sciences and humanities. Cien Saude Colet 20(9):2615–2624
Guta A, Nixon SA, Wilson MG (2013) Resisting the seduction of ‘ethics creep’: using Foucault to surface complexity and contradiction in research ethics review. Soc Sci Med 98:301–310
Haggerty K (2004) Ethics creep: governing social science research in the name of ethics. Qual Sociol 27(4):391–414
Hedgecoe A (2008) Research ethics review and the sociological research relationship. Sociology 42(5):873–886
Hedgecoe A (2009) ‘A Form of Practical Machinery’: the origins of research ethics committees in the UK, 1967–1972. Med Hist 53:331–350
Hedgecoe A (2012) The problems of presumed isomorphism and the ethics review of social science: a response to Schrag. Res Ethics 8(2):79–86
Hudson M, Milne M, Reynolds P, Russell K, Smith B (2010) Te Ara Tika. Guidelines for Māori research ethics: a framework for researchers and ethics committee members. Final Draft. Available at: http://www.hrc.govt.nz/sites/default/files/Te%20Ara%20Tika%20Guidelines%20for%20Maori%20Research%20Ethics.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2013
Hunter D (2018) Research ethics committees: what are they good for? In: Iphofen R, Tolich M (eds) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research ethics. Sage, London, pp 289–300
Indian Council of Medical Research (2017) National ethical guidelines for biomedical and health research involving human participants. ICMR, New Delhi. Available at: http://icmr.nic.in/sites/default/files/guidelines/ICMR_Ethical_Guidelines_2017.pdf. Accessed 22 May 2019
Israel M (2015) Research ethics and integrity for social scientists: beyond regulatory compliance. Sage, London
Israel M (2019) Ethical imperialism? Exporting research ethics to the global south. In: Iphofen R, Tolich M (eds) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research ethics. Sage, London, pp 89–102
Israel M, Fozdar F (2019) The ethics of the study of Social Problems. In Marvasti, A & Treviño, J (eds) Researching social problems. New York: Routledge pp. 188–204
Israel M, Allen G, Thomson C (2016) Australian research ethics governance: plotting the demise of the adversarial culture. In: van den Hoonaard W, Hamilton A (eds) The ethics rupture: exploring alternatives to formal research-ethics review. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 285–316
Jennings S (2012) Response to Schrag: what are ethics committees for anyway? A defence of social science research ethics review. Res Ethics 8(2):87–96
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (NCPHSBBR) (1979) Belmont report: ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Report, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of the Secretary, Protection of Human Subjects, Michigan. Available at: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html. Accessed 13 May 2018
National Health and Medical Research Council (2018) Ethical conduct in research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and communities: guidelines for researchers and stakeholders. Canberra. Available at: https://nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/ethical-conduct-research-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-peoples-and-communities. Accessed 5 Nov 2018
Office for Human Research Protections (2019) International compilation of human research standards. Office for Human Research Protections, Washington, DC. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/international/compilation-human-research-standards/index.html. Accessed 22 May 2019
Pappworth MH (1967) Human guinea pigs: experimentation on man. Routledge, London
Philippine Health Research Ethics Board (2017) National ethical guidelines for health and health related research. Department of Science and Technology – Philippine Council for Health Research and Development, Manila. http://www.ethics.healthresearch.ph/index.php/phoca-downloads/category/4-neg. Accessed 7 Nov 2018
Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (2011) ‘Ethically Impossible’: STD research in Guatemala from 1946 to 1948. PCSBI, Washington, DC. Available at: https://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/EthicallyImpossible_PCSBI_110913.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2018
Qatar Supreme Council of Health (2009) Policies, regulations and guidelines for research involving human subjects. Available at: http://www.sch.gov.qa/sch/UserFiles/File/Research%20Department/PoliciesandRegulations.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2013
Schrag ZM (2010) Ethical imperialism: institutional review boards and the social sciences, 1965–2009. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Smith LT (2012) Decolonising methodologies: research and indigenous peoples, 2nd edn. Zed, London
Social Science Task Force (1990) Principles for the conduct of Arctic research. National Science Foundation. Available at: https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/arctic/conduct.jsp#implementation. Accessed 4 Jul 2018
South African San Institute (2017) San code of ethics. http://trust-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/San-Code-of-RESEARCH-Ethics-Booklet-final.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2018
Stark L (2012) Behind closed doors: IRBs and the making of ethical research. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Tauri JM (2018) Research ethics, informed consent and the disempowerment of First Nation peoples. Res Ethics 14(3):1–14
Tri-Council (Canadian Institutes of Health Research, National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada) (2010) Tri-council policy statement: ethical conduct for research involving humans. Public Works and Government Services, Ottawa. Available at: http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2013
TRUST Project (2018) Global code of conduct for research in resource-poor settings. Available at: http://www.globalcodeofconduct.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Global-Code-of-Conduct-Brochure.pdf. Accessed 5 Nov 2018
UNESCO (2005) Universal declaration on bioethics and human rights. UNESCO, Paris. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180E.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2018
World Medical Association (WMA) (1964) Declaration of Helsinki. Adopted by the 18th WMA General Assembly, Helsinki, Finland
Acknowledgments
This chapter draws and expands on material Israel (2015, 2019), originally published in Research Ethics and Integrity for Social Scientists: Beyond Regulatory Compliance and The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics. Any material originally from these works has been modified and reproduced with permission of SAGE Publications Ltd. It also draws on material drafted for and to be published in Gan and Israel (2019) and Israel and Fozdar (2019).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Israel, M. (2019). Organizing and Contesting Research Ethics. In: Iphofen, R. (eds) Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_63-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_63-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities