ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Generic filters
Exact text matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research integrity
Filter by Categories
Human Research Ethics

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us


Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

The vulnerable object of Indigenous research ethics (Papers: Emma Kowal 2014)0

Posted by Admin in on March 30, 2016

Excerpt: The origin story of Indigenous health research ethics, like many tales of regulation, begins in a meeting room. In this case it was the Araluen Centre, Alice Springs in 1986, the site of the first conference on Aboriginal health organized by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and the newly established Menzies School of Health Research. At that point, research ethics review was still in its institutional infancy. Although the first Statement on Human Experimentation was published by the NHMRC in the mid-1960s, it was not until 1973 that ethics committees were first mentioned, at which time there were few in existence. Only in 1985 did the NHMRC require that all human research be approved by an ethics committee. The final day of that Alice Springs conference was famously ‘taken over’ by Aboriginal people who tabled a list of 87 recommendations, foremost among them the need for separate ethical guidelines for Indigenous health research (Humphery 2002). The first guidelines followed in 1991, followed by the most recent version in 2003 (which is currently under review). Those events in the mid-1980s set the pattern for a separate system of Indigenous health research running parallel to mainstream research. Researchers working in Indigenous health tend to do it exclusively from the start of their career. They develop expertise in the language and processes of the field. Those outside the established groups of Indigenous health researchers are likely to intentionally exclude Indigenous research participants to avoid being drawn in to the Indigenous- specific process of NHMRC grant review.

Kowal Emma (2014) The vulnerable object of Indigenous research ethics. The Australian Journal of Anthropology 25 (3): 390-392

Research ethics training on place-based communities and cultural groups (Dianne Quigley, et al 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on March 28, 2016

Abstract: Funded by the National Science Foundation’s Ethics Education in Science and Engineering program, the Northeast Ethics Education Partnership (NEEP) has developed and implemented expanded human subjects training for graduate student researchers and faculty engaging with individuals and groups representing place-based communities and cultural groups. This paper reports on the importance of training graduate students in a series of short courses in environmental science, environmental engineering, and related fields including environmental studies, with an emphasis on research ethics involving place-based communities, cultural competence, and community-based research. New course content, recruitment, implementation strategies, and outcomes for this training effort at the two partnering universities are provided for this initiative

Research ethics Group protections Cultural competence Culturally appropriate research Community-based environmental research

Quigley D, Sonnenfeld D, Brown P, Silka L, He L and Tian Q (2015) Research ethics training on place-based  communities and cultural groups. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences. DOI: 10.1007/s13412-015-0236-x . pp 1-11

When the Anths Come Marching In (Papers: Michelle Trudgett and Susan Page 2014)0

Posted by Admin in on March 28, 2016

Excerpt: This essay provides a first-hand account of why it is important to have Indigenous representation on Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs), and more importantly why some research simply should not go ahead. Collectively we have 10 years experience serving on HRECs, extensive Indigenous Higher Education research, as well as our lived experience as Indigenous Australians. Despite such experience and expertise, we find ourselves too often in the firing lines of unhappy researchers whose breathtaking sense of entitlement underlines their claims to ‘know’ a particular community. As a noted Native American scholar notes in relation research on Indigenous peoples:
We have been observed, noted, taped, and videoed. Our behaviors have been recorded in every possible way known to Western Science, and I suppose we could learn to live with this if we had not become imprisoned in the anthropologist’s words. The language that anthropologists use to explain us traps us in linguistic cages because we must explain our ways through alien hypothetical constructs and theoretical frameworks (King 2012: 207).

Trudgett M and Page S (2014) When the Anths Come Marching In. The Australian Journal of Anthropology 25 (3): 388-390

The Ethics Rupture: Exploring Alternatives to Formal Research-Ethics Review (Books: Will C. van den Hoonaard (editor) and Ann Hamilton 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on March 26, 2016

For decades now, researchers in the social sciences and humanities have been expressing a deep dissatisfaction with the process of research-ethics review in academia. Continuing the ongoing critique of ethics review begun in Will C. van den Hoonaard’s Walking the Tightrope and The Seduction of Ethics, The Ethics Rupture offers both an account of the system’s failings and a series of proposals on how to ensure that social research is ethical, rather than merely compliant with institutional requirements. Containing twenty-five essays written by leading experts from around the world in various disciplines, The Ethics Rupture is a landmark study of the problems caused by our current research-ethics system and the ways in which scholars are seeking solutions.

This excellent book includes a chapter (15) by Mark Israel, Gary Allen, and Colin Thomson Australian Research Ethics Governance: Plotting the Demise of the Adversarial Culture

van den Hoonaard W and Hamilton A (2016) The Ethics Rupture: Exploring Alternatives to Formal Research-Ethics Review. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.