Combatting neo-Colonialism in Health Research: What can Aboriginal Health Research Ethics and Global Health Research Ethics Teach Each Other?

IF 1.7 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Adrian Harper, Bridget Pratt
{"title":"Combatting neo-Colonialism in Health Research: What can Aboriginal Health Research Ethics and Global Health Research Ethics Teach Each Other?","authors":"Adrian Harper, Bridget Pratt","doi":"10.1177/15562646211058253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The ethics of research involving Aboriginal populations and low and middle-income country populations each developed out of a long history of exploitative research projects and partnerships. Commonalities and differences between the two fields have not yet been examined. This study undertook two independent literature searches for Aboriginal health research ethics and global health research ethics. Content analysis identified shared and differently emphasised ethical principles and concepts between the two fields. Shared ethical concepts like \"benefit\" and \"capacity development\" have been developed to guide collaborations in both Aboriginal health research and global health research. However, Aboriginal health research ethics gives much greater prominence to ethical principles that assist in decolonising research practice such as \"self-determination\", \"community-control\", and \"community ownership\". The paper argues that global health research ethics would benefit from giving greater emphasis to these principles to guide research practice, while justice as approached in global health research ethics may inform Aboriginal health research practice. With increasing attention being drawn to the need to decolonise global health research, the lessons Aboriginal health research ethics can offer may be especially timely.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211058253","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The ethics of research involving Aboriginal populations and low and middle-income country populations each developed out of a long history of exploitative research projects and partnerships. Commonalities and differences between the two fields have not yet been examined. This study undertook two independent literature searches for Aboriginal health research ethics and global health research ethics. Content analysis identified shared and differently emphasised ethical principles and concepts between the two fields. Shared ethical concepts like "benefit" and "capacity development" have been developed to guide collaborations in both Aboriginal health research and global health research. However, Aboriginal health research ethics gives much greater prominence to ethical principles that assist in decolonising research practice such as "self-determination", "community-control", and "community ownership". The paper argues that global health research ethics would benefit from giving greater emphasis to these principles to guide research practice, while justice as approached in global health research ethics may inform Aboriginal health research practice. With increasing attention being drawn to the need to decolonise global health research, the lessons Aboriginal health research ethics can offer may be especially timely.

打击健康研究中的新殖民主义:原住民健康研究伦理与全球健康研究伦理能相互学到什么?
涉及原住民和中低收入国家人口的研究伦理都是在长期的剥削性研究项目和伙伴关系的基础上发展起来的。这两个领域的共性和差异尚未得到研究。本研究对土著健康研究伦理和全球健康研究伦理进行了两次独立的文献检索。通过内容分析,确定了这两个领域共同强调和不同强调的伦理原则和概念。共同的伦理概念,如 "利益 "和 "能力发展",已被用来指导原住民健康研究和全球健康研究的合作。然而,原住民健康研究伦理更加强调有助于研究实践非殖民化的伦理原则,如 "自决"、"社区控制 "和 "社区所有权"。本文认为,全球健康研究伦理应更加重视这些指导研究实践的原则,而全球健康研究伦理中的公正原则也可为原住民健康研究实践提供借鉴。随着人们越来越关注全球健康研究非殖民化的必要性,土著健康研究伦理所能提供的经验教训可能尤为及时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
30
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics (JERHRE) is the only journal in the field of human research ethics dedicated exclusively to empirical research. Empirical knowledge translates ethical principles into procedures appropriate to specific cultures, contexts, and research topics. The journal''s distinguished editorial and advisory board brings a range of expertise and international perspective to provide high-quality double-blind peer-reviewed original articles.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信