Search results

Achieving equity in international research is one of the pressing concerns of the twenty-first century. In this era of progressive globalization, there are many opportunities for the deliberate or accidental export of unethical research practices from high-income regions to low- and middle-income countries and emerging economies. The export of unethical practices, termed “ethics dumping,” may occur through all forms of research and can affect individuals, communities, countries, animals, and the environment. Ethics dumping may be the result of purposeful exploitation but often arises from lack of awareness of good ethical and governance practice.

This chapter describes the work of the TRUST project toward counteracting the practice of ethics dumping through the development of tools for the improvement of research governance structures. Multi-stakeholder consultation informs all of TRUST’s developments. Most importantly, this gives voice to marginalized vulnerable groups and indigenous people, who have been equal and active partners throughout the project.

At the heart of the TRUST project is an ambitious aim to develop a Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings. Uniquely, the Code provides guidance across all research disciplines in clear, short statements, focusing on research collaborations that entail considerable imbalances of power, resources and knowledge and using a new framework based on the values of fairness, respect, care, and honesty. The code was recently adopted by the European Commission as a reference document for Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe.

Explores the question of whether initiating an anti‐dumping action constitutes unethical conduct. Suggests that it is generally accepted that stealing and destroying the property of others are wrong, and that hiring someone to do the stealing or destruction for you is also wrong. Concludes that initiating an anti‐dumping action constitutes unethical conduct, since anti‐dumping actions involve theft and the destruction of property, not to mention the violation of contract and property rights and the freedom of association.

Most research ethic review procedures refer to the principles of safety and security only as sub-criteria of other ethical principles such as the protection of human subjects in research, thereby ignoring the public good aspect of safety and security. In addition, Research Ethics Review Committees (RECs) are usually dominated by philosophers, ethicists, medical doctors, and lawyers with limited practical backgrounds in safety and security risk management. This gap of knowledge restricts ethics reviews in carrying out project-specific safety and security risk management and defers this responsibility to lawmakers and national legal authorities. What might be sufficient in well-regulated and well-understood environments, such as the safety of individuals during clinical research, is insufficient in managing rapidly changing and emerging risks – such as with emerging biotechnologies – as well as addressing the public good dimension of safety and security.

This chapter considers governance approaches to safety and security in research. It concludes that legal mechanisms are insufficient to cope with the complexity of and the fast progress made in emerging technologies. The chapter also addresses the role and potential of research ethics as a safety and security governance approach. It concludes that research ethics can play an important role in the governance of such risks arising from emerging technologies, for example through fundamental rights and public good considerations. However, in reality the current capacity of ethics in the safety and security governance of emerging technologies is limited. It is argued that in newly emerging areas of research currently applied legal compliance–based approaches are insufficient. Instead, inclusion of fundamental risk management knowledge and closer interactions between scientists, safety, and security experts are needed for effective risk management. Safety and Security Culture provide frameworks for such interactions and would well complement the current legal compliance–based governance approaches in research ethics.

This paper explores the different open science policy effects on the knowledge generation process of researchers in basic sciences: biology, chemistry and physics.

This paper uses a qualitative methodology with a content analysis approach. It uses seventeen semi-directed interviews.

The main perceived effect of open science is access to research inputs, with open access, open research data and code reuse as primary sources. Another issue is the increase of collaboration with other colleagues in terms of the ability to collaborate faster and encouraging the exchange of ideas. However, this benefit does not translate to the division of labor in large transnational teams. Time spent on tasks like cleaning up data and code, scooping and other ethical issues are unfavorable aspects noted.

Policymakers could use this study to enhance current open science policies in the countries.

This study analyzes the perspectives of basic sciences researchers from two countries about open science policies. The main conclusion is the fact that open science policies should focus on the research process itself – rather than research outputs – in order to effectively tackle inequalities in science.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-03-2023-0135

This paper aims to provide a discussion on the interface and interactions between data, analytical techniques and impactful research in humanitarian health supply chains. New techniques for data capturing, processing and analytics, such as big data, blockchain technology and artificial intelligence, are increasingly put forward as potential “game changers” in the humanitarian field. Yet while they have potential to improve data analytics in the future, larger data sets and quantification per se are no “silver bullet” for complex and wicked problems in humanitarian health settings. Humanitarian health supply chains provide health care and medical aid to the most vulnerable in development and disaster relief settings alike. Unlike commercial supply chains, they often lack resources and long-term collaborations to enable learning from the past and to improve further.

Based on a combination of the authors’ research experience, interactions with practitioners throughout projects and academic literature, the authors consider the interface between data and analytical techniques and highlight some of the challenges inherent to humanitarian health settings. The authors apply a systems approach to represent the multiple factors and interactions between data, analytical techniques and collaboration in impactful research.

Based on this representation, the authors discuss relevant debates and suggest directions for future research to increase the impact of data analytics and collaborations in fostering sustainable solutions.

This study distinguishes itself and contributes by bringing the interface and interactions between data, analytical techniques and impactful research together in a systems approach, emphasizing the interconnectedness.

Is there a sound philosophical foundation in the nature of professional activity for resolving the tension between altruism and self‐interest in favor of virtue and character? I believe there is, and I ground my proposal in six characteristics of the relationship of professionals to those who seek their help. Considered individually, none of these phenomena is unique in kind or degree. They may exist individually in other human relationships and occupations. But as a moral cluster they are, in fact, unique; they generate a kind of “internal morality”—a grounding for the ethics of the professions that is in some way impervious to vacillations in philosophical fashions, as well as social, economic, or political change. This internal morality explains why the ethics of medicine, for example, remained until two decades ago firmly rooted in the ethics of character and virtue, as were the ethics of the Hippocratic and Stoic schools. It is found in the seminal texts of Moslem, Jewish, and Christian medical moralists. It persisted in the eighteenth century in the writings of John Gregory, Thomas Percival, and Samuel Bard, who, although cognizant of the philosophies of Hobbes, Adam Smith, and Hume, nonetheless maintained the traditional dedication of the profession to the welfare of the patient and to a certain set of values. Only in the last two decades has there been—to use Hume's terms—a “sentiment of approbation” regarding self‐interest.