首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Ethical considerations when conservation research involves people
Authors:Stephanie Brittain  Harriet Ibbett  Emiel de Lange  Leejiah Dorward  Simon Hoyte  Agnese Marino  E. J. Milner-Gulland  Julia Newth  Sarobidy Rakotonarivo  Diogo Veríssimo  Jerome Lewis
Affiliation:1. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, 11a Mansfield Rd, Oxford, OX1 3SZ U.K.;2. School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Old College, South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL U.K.;3. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, 11a Mansfield Rd, Oxford, OX1 3SZ U.K.

School of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, LL57 2DG U.K.;4. Department of Anthropology, University College London, Gower St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 6BT U.K.;5. Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Outer Cir, London, NW1 4RY U.K.

Department of Anthropology, University College London, Gower St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 6BT U.K.;6. Environment and Sustainability Institute, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Cornwall, TR10 9FE U.K.;7. Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA U.K.

Abstract:Social science is becoming increasingly important in conservation, with more studies involving methodologies that collect data from and about people. Conservation science is a normative and applied discipline designed to support and inform management and practice. Poor research practice risks harming participants and, researchers, and can leave negative legacies. Often, those at the forefront of field-based research are early-career researchers, many of whom enter their first research experience ill-prepared for the ethical conundrums they may face. We draw on our own experiences as early-career researchers to illuminate how ethical challenges arise during conservation research that involves human participants. Specifically, we considered ethical review procedures, conflicts of values, and power relations, and devised broad recommendations on how to navigate ethical challenges when they arise during research. In particular, we recommend researchers apply reflexivity (i.e., thinking that allows researchers to recognize the effect researchers have on the research) to help navigate ethical challenges and encourage greater engagement with ethical review processes and the development of ethical guidelines for conservation research that involves human participants. Such guidelines must be accompanied by the integration of rigorous ethical training into conservation education. We believe our experiences are not uncommon and can be avoided and hope to spark discussion to contribute to a more socially just conservation.
Keywords:fieldwork  institutional review boards  legacy  power dynamics  reflexivity  social science  values  ciencias sociales  comités institucionales de revisión  dinámicas de poder  legado  reflexividad  trabajo de campo  valores  机构审查委员会  权力动力学  价值观  遗留问题  社会科学  反身性  田野调查
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号