“Ethics Ready”? Governing Research Through Informed Consent Procedures

Abstract

Social Scientists using ethnographic methods are increasingly confronted with ethical clearance procedures imposed by universities, national authorities, professional organizations and funders. In this article, we focus on informed consent procedures in particular and discuss how they govern fieldwork interactions. To do so, we first show how ethical clearance procedures in Europe have been influenced by biomedical science, creating a risk of “governing the social science research in the name of ethics” (Haggerty, 2004) through “anticipatory regulatory regimes” (Murphy and Dingwall, 2007). We subsequently discuss the implementation of ethical procedures negotiated with an ethical review panel in the framework of an EU-funded project in migration studies. In doing so, we show how Research Ethics Committees (RECs) can incentivize researchers to comply with ethical guidelines and procedures in order to be considered as “ethics ready” by the funder. Providing examples of different ethnographic situations, we argue that —while informed consent procedures might reinforce participants’ vulnerabilities— they can also activate their desire to assert power. The article concludes with three recommendations that call for a redefinition of the relationships between institutions, researchers and participants through a co-construction of research ethics.

Mapping the Landscape of Data Collection: A Reflection on the Dynamics of Fieldwork in Qualitative Research

“…In the initial stages of my fieldwork, I thought that the 'ethical considerations' were a stand-alone thing; however, during the progression of fieldwork, I found my earlier assumption was wrong. I realized that ethical concerns are relational and based on 'mutual trust and reciprocity' (Caeymaex et al, 2023) between the researcher and the participants. For instance, Hammersley and Traianou (2012) are cautious about the relational nature of qualitative research that "asymmetrical dependence rather than mutual independence, and the concept of need, rather than right or even obligation, comes to prominence" (p. 29).…”

“…However, I learned that being hurried to obtain the signed written consent is not an appropriate task initially. I experienced that the participants feared to form the consent form as other researchers experienced elsewhere (Caeymaex et al, 2023;Ghimire, 2021;Riessman, 2005;Yuill, 2018), that's why I started the interview with oral consent. Instead, building rapport and gaining their confidence through informal conversations and meetings could lead to obtaining signed consent during and after the data collection.…”

The development and evolution of ethics review boards – Israel as a case study

“…The critics of ERBs also point out the inappropriateness of importing biomedical ethics into SBS, which, it is claimed, has resulted in perverse consequences (American Association of University Professors [AAUP], 2006;Caeymaex et al, 2023;Dingwall, 2008). In medical research ethics, continue the critics, a knowledge gap favoring researchers is assumed, and with it the need to predetermine hypotheses and procedures prior to the research, an interventional purpose for every study, and a weighty ethical duty to do no harm.…”