Recent demands for accountability in 'data management' by funding agencies, universities, international journals and other academic institutions have worried many anthropologists and ethnographers. While their demands for transparency and integrity in opening up data for scrutiny seem to enhance scientific integrity, such principles do not always consider the way the social relationships of research are properly maintained. As a springboard, the present Forum, triggered by such recent demands to account for the use of 'data', discusses the present state of anthropological research and academic ethics/integrity in a broader perspective. It specifically gives voice to our disciplinary concerns and leads to a principled statement that clarifies a particularly ethnographic position. This position is then discussed by several commentators who treat its viability and necessity against the background of wider developments in anthropology -sustaining the original insight that in ethnography, research materials have been coproduced before they become commoditised into 'data'. Finally, in moving beyond such a position, the Forum broadens the issue to the point where other methodologies and forms of ownership of research materials will also need consideration.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. 25 See Baud et al. (2013). It might have made a difference if the committee could have seen Bax's original materials (which he claimed to have destroyed), but only after the fact. FO RU M 4 01

No abstract

Vulnerable populations have been defined as those who face a significant probability of incurring an identifiable harm while substantially lacking ability and/or means to protect themselves. Vulnerabilities within population groups can be differentiated by factors that determine the different probabilities of incurring identifiable harms (risks) people face and the means available to them to protect themselves (their protective capacity). Among these factors is gender.

No abstract

Given the harsh realities that people live through in southern Philippines, where there is rife human rights violations and violent political conflict, it becomes difficult and arguably unethical for anthropologists to assume a position of neutrality. Following calls for engaged anthropology, I contend that engagement entails simultaneously an emotional, political, and analytical labor and troubles the separation of the self and other. I suggest that a way to labor through these challenges of researching suffering, and the reciprocal obligations this implicates, is to utilize feminist reflexivity and epistemic reflexivity. These necessitate an objectification of the self and one's intellectual field to achieve an epistemological break that would lead to an understanding of the other and their realities.