GCRI · 社会と人間開発
包摂的な研究倫理
Research with people, especially those affected by crises, poverty or discrimination, raises questions of consent, harm, power and benefit. Inclusive research ethics asks that participants be respected and protected, that communities share in shaping and benefiting from research, and that data be governed responsibly. This page sets out the principles and practices involved, how they are assessed, and what evidence serves researchers, ethics committees and funders.
Inclusive research ethics on the record.
Inclusive research ethics: how the risk develops.
Participation, consent and local knowledge. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Consent must be informed and free
Participants need to understand what research involves and be free to refuse. Crises, dependence on aid and power differences can undermine free consent.
Harms can follow research
Data can be used to identify, stigmatise or target people. Protecting confidentiality and minimising data collection reduce these risks.
Communities should shape research
Research designed with communities is more relevant and more likely to benefit them, and helps correct imbalances between researchers and participants.
Benefits should be shared
Results, data and capacity should return to the communities and countries where research takes place.
How inclusive research ethics is modelled, measured and tested.
モデル、その仮定、データ、不確実性を、科学者やエンジニアが確認する形で示します。構造は公表された手法に従っています。描かれた値は例示であり、知見ではありません。
システム・モデル
The couplings between the systems in inclusive research ethics: signs of influence, a reinforcing and a balancing loop, and cross-links where stress jumps.
Ethics govern research with people in every domain.
Practice is designed for the 手法と技術シリーズ. The Belmont Report (1979), the Declaration of Helsinki (revised 2024) and the CARE Principles (2020) set the ethics.
- Ethics review lessons.
- Community research agreements.
何を、どの程度うまく測定しているか。
各指標には、その単位、更新頻度、背後にある出典の種類、値が持つことになるエビデンスのラベルが付いています。値は表示しません：プログラムが自らの権限のもとで値を提供します。
| 指標 | 単位 | 周期 | 出典の種類 | ラベル |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies with ethics review | percent of published studies reporting approval | レビューごと | Publication audits | 観測 |
| Research with community engagement documented | percent of projects | レビューごと | Project records | 申告済み |
| Local researchers in authorship | share of authors from study countries | レビューごと | Bibliometric analysis | 観測 |
| Data management plans with protection measures | percent of funded projects | レビューごと | Funder records | 申告済み |
| Results returned to participants or communities | percent of projects | レビューごと | Project records | 申告済み |
| Ethics committees with capacity for social research | 件数 | 評価ごと | Institutional records | 報告値 |
エビデンスの出所。
名前の明示された公開データセットと機関の記録。それぞれにライセンス区分があります。合意に基づく出典は、その条件のもとでのみ使用し、再公開することはありません。
| 出典 | 提供するもの | ライセンス区分 |
|---|---|---|
| CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans | Ethical guidance for research in diverse settings | Public, CIOMS terms |
| Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings | Principles of fairness, respect, care and honesty | Public, terms to check |
| UNESCO オープンサイエンスに関する勧告 | Principles on inclusion and equity in science | Public, UNESCO terms |
| 先住民データ・ガバナンスのための CARE 原則 | Collective rights in data | Public, GIDA terms |
| Bibliometric databases such as OpenAlex | Authorship and collaboration patterns | オープン、CC0 |
誰が決め、エビデンスが何に役立つか。
Society and Human Development prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| 誰が決定するか | 質問 | このページが提供するエビデンス |
|---|---|---|
| Ethics committees | Whether research is ethical and how to monitor it | Checklists; protection plans |
| Researchers and research teams | How to design inclusive and protective research | Engagement and benefit-sharing guides |
| Funders | What ethics and equity conditions to set | Audit evidence |
このトピックが生み出す成果物
- Ethics review checklists for research in crises
- Community engagement and benefit-sharing guides
- Data protection plans for research with vulnerable groups
- Audits of authorship and benefit sharing
専門家が問う問い。
- Who defines the research question, and do affected people have a voice in it?
- Is consent truly informed and voluntary, especially in crises and unequal relationships?
- How is local and Indigenous knowledge recognised, credited and protected?
- What data are collected, who controls them and how could they cause harm?
- What do participants and communities receive from the research?
Principles in practice.
Ethical research begins with respect for persons, beneficence and justice, principles long established in research ethics, applied with care to settings of crisis and inequality. Consent must be informed, voluntary and ongoing, which is difficult when people depend on assistance or fear consequences. Research should minimise burden, avoid repeated assessment of the same communities and stop when risks outweigh benefits.
Participation ranges from consultation to co-design and community-led research. Indigenous data sovereignty principles assert the rights of Indigenous peoples to govern data about them. Local knowledge of hazards, ecosystems and coping often precedes and complements scientific data, and should be credited and used only with permission. Data protection, including minimisation, anonymisation and secure storage, protects participants from identification and misuse.
Crisis settings add specific duties. Researchers must avoid diverting resources from response, coordinate to prevent over-assessment, protect staff and participants, and recognise that people in distress may agree to take part because they hope for assistance. Clear explanation that research is separate from aid is part of valid consent.
Methods and safeguards.
Ethical review
Independent review of protocols before research starts, with attention to risk and consent.
Co-design
Communities shape questions, methods and interpretation.
Protection by design
Collect only what is needed, protect identities and agree retention and use.
Limits: ethical review cannot anticipate every situation, power imbalances persist even with good procedures, and anonymisation can fail when small groups or locations are described.
Where this page’s references lead.
このページの読解の基準となる機関と文書。状態と版は変わります。各リンクは発行機関へ移動します。
質問と回答。
What is informed consent?
What is benefit sharing in research?
Why is research in crises ethically sensitive?
Can participants withdraw?
Who owns community knowledge?
How do I report an ethical concern?
このページからエビデンスを提供する。
報告書 is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- メールゲートウェイ GW-GCRIこのページから送信するエビデンス、訂正、事例、手法、レビュー、翻訳、プロファイルへの入力。このページのタグが付いて届くため、担当の編集者が受け取ります。
- Zenodoオープンな寄託寄託してコミュニティに提出するORCID iD を使って Zenodo に自分の記録を公開し、そこから Reports コミュニティに提出してください。キュレーターが審査し、DOI は引き続きあなたのものです。
- 報告書GCRI貢献のすべての方法を見る貢献の種類、それぞれの審査方法、受け取るクレジット、ライセンス、決して受け付けないもの。
個人データ、重要インフラの機微な詳細、共有する権利のないものは決して送らないでください。寄稿は利用前にレビューされます。送付によって著作者としての権利や編集上の権利が生じることはなく、スポンサーシップで調査結果を買うことは決してできません。
手法、データセット、または問いを持ち込んでください。
情報提供と問い合わせは本日から受け付けています。問い合わせには参照番号が付き、次の手順が示されます。申請、支払い、計算資源の割り当て、登録は、担当チーム、規約、審査体制が整ってから開始します。
法的文書。
このサイトの地図、データ、図表は、背景と一般的な情報として示すものです。助言、予報、警報ではありません。情報の限界は免責事項とデータに関する注意事項に記載しています。