Defining the agenda: Key lessons for funders and commissioners of ethical research in fragile and conflict-affected contexts

The document offers guidelines for ethical research in fragile and conflict-affected contexts, focusing on agenda setting, partnerships, review processes, and resourcing.

It emphasizes mitigating risks, involving local voices, and balancing power dynamics to ensure high-quality research outcomes.

Key content

Key takeaways from the resource include:

Introduction

The document by Groves-Williams /  UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) (2021) provides key lessons for funders and commissioners on conducting ethical research in fragile and conflict-affected contexts. It emphasizes the importance of ethical standards throughout the research process, from agenda setting to implementation, and aims to mitigate risks and maximize benefits for affected populations.

1. Ethical agenda setting

• Existing ethical issues: Ethical issues in agenda setting include the risk of predetermined research agendas driven by international mandates rather than local needs. This can lead to research that is irrelevant or even harmful to the communities involved. Additionally, power imbalances often place control with the grant holders, leading to potential exploitation of local researchers and communities.
• Mitigation strategies to address ethical issues: Strategies to address these issues involve ensuring broad and inclusive agenda setting that incorporates local voices and needs. Fair allocation of resources between local and international researchers, co-designing research projects, and emphasizing ethical considerations in all calls for proposals are recommended. Building local capacity and sharing leadership roles can also help mitigate power imbalances.

2. Ethical partnerships

• Existing ethical issues: Partnerships often suffer from a lack of clarity regarding the ethical responsibilities of each party. This includes the complexities of the context and the humanitarian systems within which researchers operate. There is also a tendency for ethical review to be seen as a risk management exercise rather than a rigorous ethical exploration.
• Mitigation strategies to address ethical issues: To mitigate these issues, the document suggests defining clear ethical criteria for partnerships and ensuring systematic use of ethical guidelines during the review process. Proposals should be comprehensive in addressing ethical issues at each stage of the research cycle. Ensuring that reviewers have the necessary expertise and that local reviewers are included can improve the ethical quality of the research.

3. Ethical review

• Existing ethical issues: Commitments to ethical commissioning are often not matched by adequate budgetary and time allocations. This can hinder the ability to conduct ethically sound research, as the complexities of working in fragile and conflict-affected contexts are not sufficiently accommodated.
• Mitigation strategies to address ethical issues: Mitigation strategies include allocating sufficient resources and time for ethical research processes, ensuring safeguarding measures are in place, and maintaining mechanisms for co-creation and feedback. Responsibilities for providing support to researchers and stakeholders should be clearly defined. Additionally, minimizing travel and shifting research ownership to local partners can reduce the carbon footprint and support local capacity.

4. Ethical resourcing

• Existing ethical issues: Resource allocation often does not consider the additional needs of ethical research in complex environments. This includes the lack of support for safeguarding, capacity building, and ensuring data protection.
• Mitigation strategies to address ethical issues: Strategies for ethical resourcing involve ensuring that budgets are adaptable to meet ethical requirements, providing comprehensive support for all stakeholders, and reflecting on methods to minimize environmental impacts. This includes considering the ethical implications of all budgetary decisions and ensuring that resources are used to build local capacity and knowledge.

Overall, the document emphasizes the need for ethical scrutiny at all stages of the research process, advocating for inclusive, transparent, and context-sensitive approaches to mitigate risks and enhance the positive impact of research in fragile and conflict-affected environments.