Research Ethics Workshop
Thursday 16 February 2006
Notes on Key Points
Rosalind Eyben
Ethical Challenges in the global context (DFID funded process of change)
Women’s empowerment – subjects as co-researchers
Value of the research – snowballing effects mean that those further down the process are no
longer co-researchers
Engaging participants in discussion of the values that researchers are promoting
Process involves potential development of more effective engagement in policy – but what
right do researchers have to try to change those being researched?
Cannot assume shared understandings of concepts across cultures in which you have been
working. e.g. 3 concepts of bodily integrity, work, voice - political issues in differences
between how these are perceived in different cultures.
Traditionally, anthropologists suggest that ethical issues arise at the point of publication.
Ethical issues around reporting – how to incorporate range of views, how are voices
represented – consult people about how they wish to be represented – e.g. if participant is
trying to change organisation from within, anonymity might be a problem.
Values evident at start – in how research question etc is approached. Come clean at start
about where researcher is coming from.
Specific issues for action research in which explicitly aiming to change people, etc.
James Fairhead
Research involving clinical trials in Gambia
How did research ‘subjects’ in a medical trial understand what it was about?
Cross-cultural – is that what we mean? e.g. Salary differential between researcher and
researched makes notion of ‘partnership’ between researcher and researched unrealistic?
Signed consent forms is not a reassurance of ethical understanding – signature is not
something that people in different cultures regard in same way – significance of a signature
28% of participants thought research council was ‘stealing’ their blood.
Thought they were joining MRC as a health provider – by joining the trial – confusion
between research participation as service using. This trial didn’t offer any medical support.
Why people understood it like this – if you work hard you lose blood, the more you have the
stronger etc., relatedness, valuable commodity.
Why particular participants are selected – framing of relationship between researcher and
researched in economically differentiated context means that MRC relying on signatures is of
dubious ethical value. But would it be ethical not to conduct trials?
Compliance issue – pressured to sign as seen as meeting national expectation
Interplay between economics & culture
Role of funders – poorly understood by participants?
Violence – didn’t want this exposed
Sara Humphreys
Colonization of research approaches –
4 junior secondary schools in Botswana
Anonymity – is this a Western construct – ethical conflict where promises are made to give
feedback/voice/ etc to views that then can’t be delivered – conflict between individual and
the community.
Reciprocity – what if participants don’t want to be involved in reciprocal relationship –
researcher benefits more than researched.
Consent – who should have the right to agree or not?
Issues raised in discussion
Contractual issues – who owns the data? Intellectual property rights?
When studying violence, ethical issues look very different.
Richard Jolly
Dominance of research – not just imperialism – where data are mined in developing countries
by developed countries, exploitation of partners in developing countries.
Meeting which identified the issues – why 30 years later things haven’t moved that far:
1. Lack of funding for third world research in universities
2. Bias in funding - Dominance of World Bank in Africa within neo-classical,
Washington consensus paradigm.
3. Pressures of publish or perish in developed countries diminishes capacity to work
collaboratively with researchers in developing countries.