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

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesPrimary materials

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) Research and Documentation Guidelines, Philippines (NCIP | 2012)0

Posted by Admin in on July 5, 2018
 

National Commission for Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) Administrative Order No. 1 Series of 2012

I. PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
Section 1. Title. This guideline shall be known as “The Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) Research and Documentation Guidelines of 2012.

Section 2. Legal Bases.
This Guidelines is hereby promulgated pursuant to the Constitution, Republic Act No. 8371 and other pertinent and applicable laws, international covenants, treaties and declarations.

Section 3. Policy Statement.

It is the policy of the Commission to:

a. Promote, protect and recognize the rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) to cultural integrity and to prescribe protection mechanisms at the international and national government levels and within the context of relevant customary laws;

b. Ensure and guarantee the due exercise by the concerned ICCs/IPs of their right to allow or reject, through free and prior informed consent (FPIC), research and documentation of their IKSPs and customary laws and their derivatives; and

c. Regulate the use of IKSPs and customary laws, and ensure that the ICCs/IPs benefit from the use of research output/outcome.

Read the rest of the Filipino guidelines

 

National Commission for Indigenous Peoples, Philippines (2012) The Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) Research and Documentation Guidelines of 2012. NCIP Administrative Order No. 1 Series of 2012.
http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ph/ph190en.pdf

Addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices: current knowledge and issues (Books: NAP | 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on March 30, 2018
 

The integrity of knowledge that emerges from research is based on individual and collective adherence to core values of objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. Integrity in science means that the organizations in which research is conducted encourage those involved to exemplify these values in every step of the research process. Understanding the dynamics that support – or distort – practices that uphold the integrity of research by all participants ensures that the research enterprise advances knowledge.

The 1992 report Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process evaluated issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provided a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which science is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated.

Responsible Science served as a valuable benchmark to set the context for this most recent analysis and to help guide the committee’s thought process. Fostering Integrity in Research identifies best practices in research and recommends practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices: current knowledge and issues. In:  Fostering Integrity of Research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2017.
Publisher: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21896/fostering-integrity-in-research

Fostering Integrity in Research – The National Academies Press (Resource Material | 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on July 11, 2017
 

Description

The integrity of knowledge that emerges from research is based on individual and collective adherence to core values of objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. Integrity in science means that the organizations in which research is conducted encourage those involved to exemplify these values in every step of the research process. Understanding the dynamics that support – or distort – practices that uphold the integrity of research by all participants ensures that the research enterprise advances knowledge.

“…the experience of the past several decades shows that it may be insufficient to rely on classroom or online education as the primary tool to address research misconduct.”

The AHRECS team agree and believe this reinforces that research integrity professional development needs to be more than compliance-driven transfer of information. Researchers need to develop skills and attributes associated with research integrity and that means practical discipline-, methodology-, institution- and jurisdiction-specific resource material and policies.

That’s why our services include desktop audits, drafting policy/resource material, and facilitating the creation of hypotheticals and case studies relevant to specific contexts (from Science at an Australian national research organisation, to Creative Arts at a Queensland university, Law in Hong Kong to Social Sciences in Taiwan and Health Sciences in Vietnam), as well as to institutions as a whole (a leading NSW university).

The 1992 report Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process evaluated issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provided a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which science is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated.
.
Responsible Science served as a valuable benchmark to set the context for this most recent analysis and to help guide the committee’s thought process. Fostering Integrity in Research identifies best practices in research and recommends practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices.
.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017) Fostering Integrity in Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/21896.

2017 UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology POSTNOTE 544 January 2017 Integrity in Research0

Posted by Admin in on March 17, 2017
 

A  POSTnote that considers current approaches to promoting integrity in research.

Integrity in research refers to the behaviours and values that result in high quality, ethical and valuable research. This POSTnote considers current approaches to fostering an environment conducive to good research in the UK, and detecting and preventing practices that fall short of expected standards. It also examines the current mechanisms for supporting integrity in the UK, whether these are sufficient, or if another form of oversight, such as regulation, might be preferable.

Poor practice ranges from minor errors to serious misconduct. While deliberate fraud does occur, it is thought to be extremely rare. Questionable research practices are a more widespread concern, as they are thought to be more prevalent and have a greater impact on the research record.

There are concerns about how to maintain integrity in research, because of fears that the ‘publish or perish’ culture leads to poor or questionable research practices. While many mechanisms do exist for reducing poor practice, and these are thought to have a positive effect on reducing such behaviour, there remain concerns that the system is disjointed, lacks openness and transparency, and that the incentive structure is such that good practice is not recognised or rewarded. Strategies for tackling this therefore focused on reducing institutional pressures on researchers, through enhancing openness and transparency, improving oversight and training, and re-aligning incentives for researchers so that they are rewarded for engaging in rigorous and accurate research.

Read the rest of this discussion paper

0