Ethical considerations of disaster research in conflict-affected areas

Abstract

Purpose Debates on the ethics of disaster and humanitarian studies concern unequal relations in research (among research institutes/researchers/stakeholders); the physical and psychological well-being of research participants and researchers; and the imposition of western methods, frameworks and epistemologies to the study of disasters. This paper focuses on everyday ethics: how they need to be translated throughout the everyday practices of research and how researchers can deal with the ethical dilemmas that inevitably occur. Design/methodology/approach This paper analyses the process of addressing ethics-related dilemmas from the first author's experiences researching disaster governance in high-intensity conflict settings, in particular drawing from 4 to 6 months of fieldwork in South Sudan and Afghanistan. In addition, ethical issues around remote research are discussed, drawing on the example of research conducted in Yemen. It is based on the personal notes taken by the first author and on the experience of both authors translating guidelines for research in remote and hazardous areas into research practices. Findings The paper concerns translating ethics into the everyday practices of research planning, implementation and communication. It argues for the importance of adaptive research processes with space for continuous reflection in order to advance disaster studies based on (1) equitable collaboration; (2) participatory methodologies wherever possible; (3) safety and security for all involved; (4) ethical approaches of remote research and (5) responsible and inclusive research communication and research-uptake. Openness about gaps and limitations of ethical standards, discussions with peers about dilemmas and reporting on these in research outcomes should be embedded in everyday ethics. Originality/value The paper contributes to discussions on everyday ethics, where ethics are integral to the epistemologies and everyday practices of research.

Recognition and ethical research practices: The role of community specialists

“…Discussions regarding the capability of IRBs to provide necessary oversight for ethical post-disaster research have been present for decades and are ongoing (Kendra and Gregory 2019). However, scholars increasingly agree that standard IRB processes and ethics review committees are currently inadequate to guide and promote the ongoing, reflexive, and community-driven ethics processes that are needed in long-term disaster research settings (Ferreira, Buttell, and Cannon 2018; Mena and Hilhorst 2021; Packenham et al 2017; Peek et al 2021). While disagreement remains about how IRBs should be structured to address disaster contexts, this literature suggests strategies that can address recognition challenges through increased reflexivity and community collaboration.…”

“…Despite these safeguards, current long-term disaster research practices can unintentionally harm communities because of gaps in institutional requirements, ethical toolkits and frameworks, and research design guidance, which can ultimately fail to protect communities and, at times, magnify inequities through data collection and dissemination. In other words, researchers can become agents of disaster risk creation if they do not take their ethical responsibility seriously (Mena and Hilhorst 2021).…”

Introduction

“…Une fois le terrain clos, a fortiori dans des zones de conflit ou de fortes tensions politiques, y a-t-il des informations qu'il vaut mieux taire pour protéger les stratégies humanitaires ? De la prise de contact à la rédaction en passant par l'analyse des données, les dilemmes sont nombreux et le chercheur qui mène une enquête sur les terrains d'intervention humanitaire peut osciller entre différents rôles, tour à tour perçu comme chercheur, lanceur d'alerte, agent de l'état, journaliste d'investigation ou même espion… Des contributions méthodologiques faites au sujet de terrains de recherche menés par exemple au Rwanda (Fujii, 2010 ;Chakravarty, 2012), en Birmanie (Matelski 2014), en Afghanistan et au Soudan du Sud (Mena et Hilhorst, 2021), ou plus largement dans des contextes à pratiques autoritaires (Glasius et al, 2019) donnent de nombreux éléments de réponse. Toutefois, le sujet mériterait d'être encore davantage creusé, spécifiquement concernant l'étude des dynamiques humanitaires et leur rapport au politique.…”

The transition from development and disaster risk reduction to humanitarian relief: the case of Yemen during high‐intensity conflict

“…66Ethical considerations were taken into account, and ethical clearance obtained. See Mena and Hilhorst (2021b) for a reflection on the ethical considerations and strategies involved when researching disasters in conflict‐affected areas.…”