ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesCulture

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

500+ Resources – Part Three of Nominations of best resources0

Posted by Admin in on December 12, 2016
 

This third nomination of favourite resources is from one of the AHRECS  senior consultants Associate Professor Martin Tolich. This week we’re going to be sharing some more nominations of people’s nomination of favourite resources? Got your own favourite? Drop us a line to gary.allen@ahrecs.com with your suggestion.

Extremism is a research ethics minefield | AHRECS Resource Library entry

Researchers work through sensitive topics when researching children and death thinking they have advanced along the continuum reaching the third untouchable rail. In the United States Social Security is the untouchable third rail that politicians will not touch. In Canada no government dares to touch health care. In research ethic committees their third rail is death. Their resistance to permitting researchers to engage the bereaved in research, working from the self-fulfilling prophecy that any study investigating the vulnerability of the bereaved is undermined by the participants’ acute vulnerability. What the Norwegian article demonstrates is there are other third rails along the continuum. In Extremism is a research ethics minefield” the resource expands what there is to know about research ethics.

500+ Resources – Part One of Nominations of best resources0

Posted by Admin in on December 8, 2016
 

This week we hit the mark of 500 great resources in the Resource Library. Over the next few days we’re going to be sharing nominations of people’s nomination of favourite resources? Got your own favourite? Drop us a line to gary.allen@ahrecs.com with your suggestion.

Professor Mark Israel

Hudson M, Milne M, Reynolds P, Russell K and 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
AHRECS Resource Library entry

In 2010, Māori members of research ethics committees drafted Te Ara Tika, guidelines for Māori research ethics, for the Health Research Council of New Zealand (Hudson et al., 2010). Māori committee members are charged with responsibility both for acting as ethical reviewers and for acting as guardians and advocates (kaitiaki) for Māori ethical concerns, ethical issues, and interests.

Te Ara Tika calls for tikanga Māori (locally specific Māori protocols and practices) to encourage research that sustains relationships and preserves justice and equity. The authors argued this would be best (but not uniquely) achieved by research that is informed by kaupapa Māori which seeks ‘to restructure power relationships to the point where partners can be autonomous and interact from this position rather than from one of subordination or dominance’ (Bishop, 2008, p. 440). In Te Ara Tika, this is envisaged as research where Māori are significant participants, the research team is typically all Māori, Māori research methodologies are adopted where appropriate, and which produces Māori knowledge. Importantly, Te Ara Tika also considers how research that is not Māori-led might still be informed by ideas of respectful conduct, achieve tangible outcomes for Māori communities, and enable Māori communities to assume power in the research relationship and responsibility for the outcomes of a project.

While drafted with the needs of health and disability research ethics in mind, the framework could be relevant to all research in New Zealand. Sadly, Te Ara Tika has had limited impact there. The document has no formal standing with ethics committees or the Ministry of Health. One of the authors of Te Ara Tika recently described how the document has been marginalized by the HRC in NZ (Tolich and Smith, 2015), and how Māori interests have been reduced to a matter of culture by HDECs (the ‘cultural turn’).

Nevertheless, Te Ara Tika deserves to be taken seriously. It draws on and responds to indigenous values and interests in a way that is quite different from Values and Ethics or GERAIS in Australia and TCPS2 in Canada. Kaupapa Māori offers a well-articulated challenge to the universalist assumptions of much research ethics. It is elegantly constructed and written in a way that helps international and Pākehā readers engage with its ideas and concepts.

Bishop R (2008) Te Kotahitanga: Kaupapa Māori in Mainstream Classrooms. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS and Smith LT (eds) Handbook of Critical and Indigenous Methodologies. Los Angeles: Sage, pp. 439-458.

Hudson M, Milne M, Reynolds P, Russell K and 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

Tolich, M and Smith, B (2015) The Politicisation of Ethics Review in New Zealand. Auckland: Dunmore.

 

He Tangata Kei Tua Guidelines for Biobanking with Māori0

Posted by Admin in on December 6, 2016
 

Kei tua o te awe māpara he tangata kē, he mā?

Introduction

Māori ethical frameworks recognise that all research in New Zealand is of interest to Māori and outline community expectations of appropriate behavior in research to deliver the best outcomes for Māori. Research contributes to the broader development objectives of society and this endeavor is being supported by biobanking infrastructure. Ethics has a specific role in guiding key behaviours, processes and methodologies used in research. This document outlines a framework for addressing Māori ethical issues within the context of biobanking. It draws on a foundation of mātauranga (Indigenous knowledge) and tikanga Māori (Māori protocols and practices) and will be useful for researchers, ethics committee members and those who engage in consultation or advice about biobanking with Māori in local, regional, national or international settings.

Download this resource

Research ethics education in Korea for overcoming culture and value system differences (Papers: Hwan-Jin Nho 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on December 2, 2016
 

Abstract

Although ethical standards and procedures for research in Korea have developed closer to global standards, applying those standards and procedures have led significant conflicts widely due to the cultural differences. In Korea where relationship-centered East Asian values are crucial, it is difficult for ‘internal whistle-blowing’ and ‘conflicts of interest management’ to function properly. At universities, it is difficult to form an equal relationship to have a free discussion between professors and students. Also, the research community has been influenced by side effects such as ‘respect for quantity and speed’, ‘excessive competition’, and ‘mammonism’ that have permeated Korean society during its modernization process. Students have taken such values for granted, too. These circumstances disable research ethics system to function properly and have negative influence on organization development by discouraging open innovation.

In this context, how can we educate students to follow the global standards as well as dealing with conflicts derived from cultural differences wisely? I propose that the overarching principle of research ethics education should not be a ‘delivery of knowledge’ but be a ‘change in the way of thinking’. In this paper, five-stage education is proposed. As education methods, discussing of dilemma cases, avoiding remote online education and leading the whole team teaching classes by one head lecturer are recommended. In addition, classroom education should be provided together with social education to change the students’ ways of thinking.

As for social education, self-effort of universities and operational behaviour of research laboratories are two most important aspects. The government should establish legislation and expand financial support to facilitate these changes. It is very important that the universities should become key drivers that purify their member societies so that the nation may prosper.

Keyword
Research ethics Research ethics education Scope of research ethics Disparity in Korean society Educational method

Nho HJJ (2016) Research ethics education in Korea for overcoming culture and value system differences. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 2(4) DOI: 10.1186/s40852-016-0030-3
Publisher (Open access): https://jopeninnovation.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40852-016-0030-3 

0