Research Ethics in Evolutionary Biological Sciences

Abstract

In this talk we will consider ethical issues facing scientists during research on the (behavioural) ecology of wild mammals and birds. We will discuss criteria to choose between traditional and alternative non-invasive and minimally invasive approaches and their consequences. We will illuminate these by a detailed look at handling and manipulating animals for the purpose of individual recognition and the study of their movements using examples from the history of research in the Serengeti. We conclude that (1) scientists need to carefully consider how their actions affect their research outcomes and to what extent they are guided in this by the methodological traditions of their respective scientific subdisciplines; (2) non-invasive or minimally invasive approaches can provide scientific evidence of equal or – in many cases – superior quality for many of today’s research questions.

Abstract

In this presentation I will discuss various aspects of working with human participants, drawing largely on my own experiences in conducting research on human genetic history. The topics that will be addressed include:
- research permits and formal ethical review
- contacting communities and informed consent
- addressing community and individual concerns
- making genetic data publicly available
- working with archival samples
- community benefits: returning results

Abstract

I talk about ethical considerations in combining activist involvement with scientific research, address the ontological politics of cultural/social anthropology and what it means to politicize science and anthropology. The ethical politics of activist research, I argue, is crucial for an engaged research design, in particular when we are concerned with issues of a strong sustainable future/society. Empirically I will focus on the work of engaged anthopology and speak about my own activist research in, with and for Degrowth, a socio-ecological movement.

Abstract

In this presentation, I will describe the multiple social roles the researcher plays in the course of typical field research in anthropology, and demonstrate how these roles are interconnected through a set of ethical obligations embedded in a framework of relationships. In particular, I will focus on four sets of relationships—the Researcher-Research Participant, Researcher-Research Assistant, Researcher-Student, and Researcher-Scientific Community relationships—and I will discuss some of the ethical obligations inherent to each. Drawing on published ethnographic examples, quantitative studies, and my own field experience, I aim to help outline a set of principles that field researchers must minimally follow to meet these obligations. For example, one key principle is to use careful and deliberate self-reflection as a tool of ethical conduct. Whether a field researcher intends to stay at a site two weeks or two years, I argue that self-reflection regarding one’s social positionality and the quality of relationships with members of the local community, research team, and wider scientific community will lead to the highest quality data. This is because the researcher is forced to confront the close linkage between the data and their own and others’ understanding of the social role(s) the research plays. Ultimately, I assert that real or perceived ethical misconduct on the part of the researcher in the context of any one of the specified relationships can impact the others and draws into question the scientific merit of the data collected.

Abstract

Juggling Responsibilities (and Failing Sometimes)
Around 150 years have passed since Europeans first came to West Asia in search of the ruins of the Assyrian Empire. Starting as enterprises deeply rooted in colonialism, archaeological excavations eventually became more scientific with time: methods were refined on many scales, attitudes and approaches evolved. Today most scholars agree that we have responsibilities beyond the methods we use to collect, prepare and publish data. Many agree that reflection of our research history and self-reflection are integral elements and influence our approach to diverse fields:
- In which way do we collaborate with local experts and local communities?
- How do we handle cultural and political differences?
- How do we organize sampling and publication?
- How do we communicate our research to the public?
- I am going to give an overview on these topics based on my personal experiences in the “International Chehrābād Saltmummy & Saltmine Exploration Project”.

Literature:
Editorial Collective, 2012. Beyond Affirmation: Perspectives for critical archaeologies. Forum Kritische Archäologie, 1, pp.167-183 (English pp.184-196).
Gnecco, C. and Lippert, D. (eds.), 2016. Ethics and Archaeological Praxis. Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing.
Trigger, B., 2008. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Abstract

In this talk I will argue that the development of an 'ethnographic sensibility' is the single most important component of ethical fieldwork with human populations. Researchers must find ways to understand their interventions in other people’s lives “from the inside”. Doing so will help design all aspects of a field project, from the framing of scientific questions to identifying participant benefits. This is not an easy or a quick task. In many cases the best solution is to collaborate or consult with ethnographers from the beginning, and there are mutual scientific benefits to doing so. Drawing on my own experiences developing a multidisciplinary study on population history in Vanuatu, I will highlight some of the risks and benefits of this kind of design.