Dianne Quigley, Brown University
NSF-EESE Funded Project:
10/1/10- 09/30/13
Renewed for 8/15/13-8/15/16
(center panel heading)
NEEP and its collaborators have developed a new
regional initiative for promoting research
ethics/cultural competence and communitybased research training for environmental
science, environmental studies and engineering
graduate students in central New York,
Massachusetts and at Brown University,
Providence, RI

Basic human subject protections are mainly
regulated for individual human subjects without
consideration for group or place-based identities
and local contexts.

NBAC and other international guidelines (CIOMS)
do make recommendations for cultural protections
and protections for communities, mostly for
assessing risks/benefits of research and
publication/dissemination of results..

In environmental sciences and health, placebased communities and cultural groups will
require special considerations in research
ethics.

These ethical concerns can be addressed
through improved ethics training for
graduate students in these fields.
Beneficence:
-
Fair allocation of benefits for place-based
communities as well as generalized beneficence
and fair assessments of risks/burdens.
-
Need for research approaches with more local
benefits and long-term commitment to prolonged
or chronic environmental management or health
problems
Nonmaleficence:
- Overcoming community or cultural
exploitation, forms of stigmatization
- Avoiding Inappropriate or harmful
treatment, including culturally-inappropriate
research
- Avoiding forms of cultural ignorance,
arrogance, ethnocentrism
Respect for Community (Informed Consent):
-
Need for community consultation or
partnership models for community approval
or support with research needs.
-
Need for specialized methods for community
or individual consent
Justice:
- Need for intercultural methods, approaches
and accommodating linguistic diversity
needs, local knowledges and traditions.
- Need for fair recruitment of research
populations and fair representation and
decision-making.
Need for data management and dissemination
protocols with sensitive community or cultural
data.
 Realize that many disadvantaged communities or
cultural groups are vulnerable groups in research
requiring more protections.

(See training slide on Research Ethics Protections for Place-based Communities and
Cultural Groups” for expanded discussion)

The Northeast Ethics Education Partnership (NEEP) has
organized over thirty training slide shows to promote
graduate student and faculty training with individual and
group protections for place-based communities and
cultural groups.

These training slides are incorporated into 4- 6 modules
in short course or blended on-line training, using applied
ethics articles and case studies from the appropriate fields
of study.
Source: Hilary Rosenthal/The Brown Daily Herald
Training in Human Subjects Protections and the
Common Morality for Individuals, Groups,
Communities and Ecosystems.
3 hour module (using slides, applied guidance, case studies
and regulations for beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect
for persons/informed consent and justice; customized to
envir studies, engineering, soon for marine sciences).
Applying individual protections to group protections and
extending respect for persons to communities.
Training in Cultural Competence Theory and Cultural
Reflexivity/Humility
(cultural knowledge, cultural skill, cultural sensitivity,
cultural humility, cultural desire – applying these to
field studies in environmental and engineering
research).
Photo by Kwintessential UK

3 hours - theory and case studies from culturallydiverse field studies in environmental studies and
sciences

Informed Consent with Cultural Considerations

Intercultural Emphasis: Review of culturallyappropriate research approaches and traditional
ecological knowledge (TEK).

Training in community-based and participatory
theory from environmental health, natural
resource management, conservation biology,
sustainability, marine sciences and engineering.

4 hour module with theory and case studies from
eight environmental disciplines



Training in Defining Communities of Identity (Who is the
Community for Collaborative Forestry, Fishing,
Engineering Projects)
Measuring Community Capacities for Research
Engagement.
3 hour module using theory and case studies from
environmental fields.
Source: Diana Themath
.
Training in Research Integrity and Scientific
Misconduct in environmental and engineering
research (data falsification, fabrication,
plagiarism, authorship, conflict of interest).
Training in Ethical Theories of Justice (liberalindividualism, deontology, utilitarianism,
consequentialism, communitarianism, care
ethics, virtue ethics, and postmodern ethics)

Training in Intellectual Property Rights, Software
Proprietary Rights, Free and Prior Informed Consent

Training in Privacy and Confidentiality, Data Management

Training in Animal Protections

Training in Environmental Justice, Environmental Ethics

Training in Sustainability and Ethics for Engineering,
Marine Sciences, and Environmental Sciences
Course Syllabi - Also for review are short courses
and long semester courses on research ethics,
culture and community-based research.
 Course Readers or Blackboard/MyCourse On-line
or Blended Training can be developed with specific
modules and case studies and applied ethics articles
and regulatory guidance.
 Student Incentives: Research Ethics Certificate,
stipends, 1-3 academic credits.

Conversational powerpoint lectures, case analysis
with students in small groups or as a class,
community/field researchers as speakers,
youtube/film presentations.
 Student presentations from research
 Student research with assigned short essays and
final paper, doing mock IRB application or
ethical/cultural/CBPR analyses of cases.


One on one faculty meetings: co-create or follow
advice for specific slide show designs, may require
cases and articles related to specific disciplines or
locations. Assist faculty in organizing ethical
dilemmas in their disciplines and identifying training
needs to deal with these dilemmas.

In class presentations: contact teaching faculty to
insert one or more presentations in their regular
course offerings.

Faculty Teaching Data-base: provide access to
teaching slides and articles/cases for each faculty’s
use in the classroom; Blackboard Page.

Series of Luncheon Workshops: recruiting multiple
speakers covering research ethics, culture and
community-based topics.

Listservs of Faculty:
Advertise training resources to faculty through
emails.

Student recruitment has been conducted
through encouragement from faculty
advisors, through email listserv
announcements, flyers posted in academic
departments, special campus-wide seminars
to attract students, also class visits to inform
students of course training.
Brown CES and SUNY-ESF Training
Activities (2010-2014)
Course Training in “Ethics, Culture and
Community-based Research”
Three one credit spring semester courses (2011-2014)
Three summer 3-day workshops for graduate students at
SUNY- ESF and other universities in the central NY (20112014).
Ongoing faculty outreach/mentoring

CES graduate student mentoring workshops in-person
and on-line Blackboard (Canvas) training.

Certificate of Completion in Research Ethics and Cultural
Competence Self-Paced Online Training
(campus-wide enrollment – 29 students )

Annual workshops and faculty mentoring outreach



Over 225 grad students were trained at
both campuses.
10 grad students were research assistants.
Grad students also received Certificates of
Completion for Research Ethics and
Cultural Competence Training
(15- 20 hours of training)
Train-the-trainer" national workshops
Held at ten national professional annual meetings
in the environmental sciences and studies to
share resources with participating faculty and
graduate students for research ethics/cultural
competence training
60 total faculty participated.
New Course Development/Implementation

UMASS-Dartmouth, Bioengineering

Spring 2014: EAS 602, EGR 501


“ETHICS FOR ENGINEERS”
- 10 graduate students enrolled for on-line training and
one credit course with five modules
- Overview of Ethics and Engineering Ethics
- Human Subjects and Animal Ethics Protections
- Research and Professional Integrity
- Intellectual Property Rights and Data
Management
 - Sustainability and Engineering Ethics
(incorporating cultural competence, environmental
justice and community-based partnerships)





UMASS- DARTMOUTH BIOENGINEERING AND
MARINE SCIENCES (SMAST)

“MARINE SCIENCE AND ETHICS”

Fall 2014, MAR 599, Three Credit Blended Course

Topics in research integrity, human/animal subjects,
ethics of modeling, ethics of marine/fishing governance,
marine pollution and sustainability ethics, and intellectual
property rights, community-based collaborations and
cultural relativity.

On-Line Training to be Underway:

“Ethics, Culture and Community-based Research for
Environmental Studies and Sciences” for Certificate of
Completion for Graduate Students
(Spring/Summer semesters, 2014 on)

Online “ Ethics for Engineers” for
Certificate of Completion for Graduate
Students (Summer 2014 on).

New 2 credit course in Marine Science
Ethics

Topics in research integrity, human/animal
subjects, ethics of modeling, ethics of
marine/fishing governance, marine pollution and
sustainability ethics, and intellectual property
rights, community-based collaborations and
cultural relativity.
Webinars for Research Ethics Topical Trainings
through Superfund Research Project.
Campus-Wide Workshops for Topical Research
Ethics, Culture and Community-based Research
Training
A NEEP project website
(www.brown.edu/research/research-ethics)
with research ethics/cultural competence and
CBPR powerpoints training slide shows (over
30 training topics), syllabi and bibliographies.
Achieving national and international resource
dissemination to hundreds of faculty/grad
students.

With this increased visibility and broad
dissemination of available training materials
database and training venues, NEEP provides the
resources needed to

Advance graduate researcher skills in complex
settings with diverse cultural groups,
communities and ecosystems.

NEEP is improving sensitivity and equity in
research approaches, and providing models
for graduate students
to improve designs, methods and
outcomes in place-based research with
cultural groups

NEEP is funded through the National
Science Foundation’s (NSF) Ethics
Education in Science and Engineering
(EESE) from 2010 to 2016.
Dianne Quigley, PhD, Principal Investigator,
Brown University, RI
 David Sonnenfeld, PhD, Sub-Award Principal
Investigator, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY,
Environmental Studies
 Phil Brown, PhD, Co-investigator, subaward
principal investigator, Northeastern University,
Sociology

Tracie Ferreira, PhD. Subcontract PI, UMASSDartmouth, Bioengineering
 Sankha Bohmick, PhD, co-investigator UMASSDartmouth, Engineering
 Tom Sheehan, PhD, co-investigator,Engineering,
NEU
 Geoffrey Trussell,PhD, co-investigator,
Enviromental Studies and Marine Science, NEU

Linda Silka, PhD. University of Maine, Consultant
Julianne Hanavan, PhD. Brown University,
Consultant
 Ernest Wallwork, PhD. Bioethics Consultant,
Syracuse University
 Phil Arnold, PhD. Consultant, Syracuse University



Contact: Dianne Quigley,
Dianne_Quigley_1@brown.edu
Dianne Quigley, PhD
Adjunct Assistant Professor
NEEP Principal Investigator
Center for Environmental Studies
Brown University
PO Box 1943, 135 Angell St.
Providence, RI 02912
Dianne_Quigley_1@brown.edu
NEEPethics@yahoo.com
http://brown.edu/research/research-ethics/neep

The following slides are a description of our
new training emphases in marine science
ethics.

Ethics and Modeling for Fishing Regulations,
Marine Species and Habitat Sustainability

Ethics of Fishing Governance

Marine Environmental Ethics

Marine Sustainability

Recent literature discusses ethical obligations
in modeling the complexity of ocean, coastal
and estuarine ecosystems as assemblages of
biota, chemical processes and physical
dynamics, influenced by human and
environmental activities which are often
nonlinear and include varied feedback
systems.



Models must be tested on historical data,
must be scrutinized in a collaborative peer
review process, and will require an evaluation
of possible errors.
What is the purpose of the model, what are
management needs for models and who is
represented in the model-making?
What is the integrity of data being used in the
models
Is the data gathered from a handful of species
vs. a broader representation of a diversity of
species, how is the need to account for
increasing complexity balanced with increasing
uncertainty?
 How can increasing complexity and concurrent
uncertainty be honestly handled to overcome
violations of research or professional integrity?
 Values are inherent in any model so that
rigorous model evaluation is needed for modelbuilders and model-users.


Principles of the common morality must take
precedence so that models developed
consider safety, accuracy, nonmaleficence .

In some cases, informed consent is needed
from those who are directly at risk from
modeling.


Perspectives from utilitarian justice vs.
deontological (distributive justice) are
relevant in the implied impacts of certain
models.
Research integrity and scientific misconduct
cases in marine sciences illustrate the need
for strong ethical obligations in scientific
modeling of marine research topics


Some ethical challenges and obligations to
consider in fishing governance include the
reliability of knowledge assumptions about
fish stocks (academic knowledge vs. local
fisher knowledge),
Issues of fair representation on government
committees that oversee regulatory activities
(is power shared among stakeholders in a fair
determination)?

How is the collective decision-making fair and
objective, how is compliance and
enforcement ethically conducted?

What are determinations of fairness in
research and knowledge generation,( i.e.
research grant funding)?

What discourse ethics are needed in these
settings?

What are participatory strategies for fair
governance,

What are ethical benefits/risk in comanagement strategies and participatory
fishing?

What are contemporary ethical perspectives and
consensus regulations for marine conservation
and species preservation?

Anthropocentric (human utilitarian value) and
biocentric (intrinsic value) perspectives/demands
have emerged from many diverse sectors such
as marine ecologists, environmentalists,
industrial fisheries, governance bodies, and
animal rights activists?

What international and national bodies are
governing marine conservation, what are
significant policy recommendations from
such bodies as: United Nations Law of the
Sea, Convention of Biological Diversity, FAO
Codes of Conduct for responsible fisheries?

Research underway on coastal management
issues with sustainability.

Other issues: energy development, climate
change impacts on marine environments.

What are continued pressures on endangered
and recovering species (sea mammals –
whales, dolphins, seals,..)?

What are benefits and risks of ecosystembased approaches to fisheries vs. singlespecies approaches?

How are stakeholders involved in
conservation decisions, who are affected
human communities?

What are ethical obligations to these human
communities and marine species?

NEEP Publications:

Quigley, D. (2014) Promoting Human Subjects Training for Placebased Communities and Cultural Groups in Environmental Research –
Curriculum Approaches for Graduate Student/Faculty Training.
Science and Engineering Ethics, January.

With this increased visibility and broad
dissemination of available training materials
database and training venues, NEEP provides the
resources needed to

Advance graduate researcher skills in complex
settings with diverse cultural groups,
communities and ecosystems.

NEEP is improving sensitivity and equity in
research approaches, and providing models
for graduate students
to improve designs, methods and
outcomes in place-based research with
cultural groups

NEEP is funded through the National
Science Foundation’s (NSF) Ethics
Education in Science and Engineering
(EESE) from 2010 to 2016.
Dianne Quigley, PhD, Principal Investigator,
Brown University, RI
 David Sonnenfeld, PhD, Sub-Award Principal
Investigator, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY,
Environmental Studies
 Phil Brown, PhD, Co-investigator, subaward
principal investigator, Northeastern University,
Sociology

Tracie Ferreira, PhD. Subcontract PI, UMASSDartmouth, Bioengineering
 Sankha Bohmick, PhD, co-investigator UMASSDartmouth, Engineering
 Tom Sheehan, PhD, co-investigator,Engineering,
NEU
 Geoffrey Trussell,PhD, co-investigator,
Enviromental Studies and Marine Science, NEU

Linda Silka, PhD. University of Maine, Consultant
Julianne Hanavan, PhD. Brown University,
Consultant
 Ernest Wallwork, PhD. Bioethics Consultant,
Syracuse University
 Phil Arnold, PhD. Consultant, Syracuse University



Contact: Dianne Quigley,
Dianne_Quigley_1@brown.edu