IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocxx/v8y2013i3p263-277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Everyday ethics in community-based participatory research

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Banks
  • Andrea Armstrong
  • Kathleen Carter
  • Helen Graham
  • Peter Hayward
  • Alex Henry
  • Tessa Holland
  • Claire Holmes
  • Amelia Lee
  • Ann McNulty
  • Niamh Moore
  • Nigel Nayling
  • Ann Stokoe
  • Aileen Strachan

Abstract

This article explores a range of ethical issues that arise in community-based participatory research (CBPR), drawing on literature and examples from practice. The experience of CBPR practitioners adds further weight to the growing critique by many other social researchers of regulatory approaches to research ethics (which focus on rule following in accordance with research governance frameworks, codes of conduct and ethics review procedures). Yet, whilst many of the ethical challenges in CBPR are common to social research generally (informed consent, anonymity, issues of ownership of data and findings), the dynamic, complex and value-based nature of CBPR gives them particular prominence. There are also specific issues relating to the ethics of partnership working, collaboration, blurring of boundaries between researchers and researched, community rights, community conflict and democratic participation that are more frequently encountered in CBPR. Four practice examples are used to demonstrate this argument. These are taken from a young women's community allotment, a community organisation researching poverty, a youth peer research project and a museum-based digital storytelling project. The article concludes that current institutional ethical codes, guidelines and ethical review procedures are not particularly well-suited to CBPR, in that they adopt principle-based and regulatory approaches to ethics; whereas character- and relationship-based approaches to ethics are also very important in CBPR, which is adopted by many researchers with a strong value commitment to social justice.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Banks & Andrea Armstrong & Kathleen Carter & Helen Graham & Peter Hayward & Alex Henry & Tessa Holland & Claire Holmes & Amelia Lee & Ann McNulty & Niamh Moore & Nigel Nayling & Ann Stokoe & Ail, 2013. "Everyday ethics in community-based participatory research," Contemporary Social Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 263-277, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocxx:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:263-277
    DOI: 10.1080/21582041.2013.769618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21582041.2013.769618
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21582041.2013.769618?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paulina Rytkönen & Håkan Tunón, 2020. "Summer Farmers, Diversification and Rural Tourism—Challenges and Opportunities in the Wake of the Entrepreneurial Turn in Swedish Policies (1991–2019)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-26, June.
    2. Jessica Pykett & Benjamin Chrisinger & Kalliopi Kyriakou & Tess Osborne & Bernd Resch & Afroditi Stathi & Eszter Toth & Anna C. Whittaker, 2020. "Developing a Citizen Social Science approach to understand urban stress and promote wellbeing in urban communities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Jeffries, Jayne M., 2018. "Negotiating acquired spinal conditions: Recovery with/in bodily materiality and fluids," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 61-69.
    4. María Inés Cubides Kovacsics & Alejandro Lanz Sánchez, 2014. "Police Abuse and Sex Workers – The Two Wings of the Butterfly: Negotiating Ethical Dilemmas in Participatory Action Research (PAR) in Bogotá, Colombia," Documentos de trabajo 17681, Escuela de Gobierno - Universidad de los Andes.
    5. Pearson Nkhoma & Helen Charnley, 2018. "Child Protection and Social Inequality: Understanding Child Prostitution in Malawi," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Emmons, Karen M. & Mendez, Samuel & Lee, Rebekka M. & Erani, Diana & Mascioli, Lynette & Abreu, Marlene & Adams, Susan & Daly, James & Bierer, Barbara E., 2023. "Data sharing in the context of community-engaged research partnerships," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    7. Dagogo Legg-Jack & Clever Ndebele, 2022. "Relevance of industry stakeholder partnership in the production of skilled electrical engineering trade graduates," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(10), pages 398-409, December.
    8. Dennehy, Rebecca & Meaney, Sarah & Cronin, Mary & Arensman, Ella, 2020. "The psychosocial impacts of cybervictimisation and barriers to seeking social support: Young people’s perspectives," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    9. Leila Maria Kehl, 2018. "Participatory Ethics in Biotech Research Decisions," Working Papers 39, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2021.
    10. Diana Mitlin & Jhono Bennett & Philipp Horn & Sophie King & Jack Makau & George Masimba Nyama, 2019. "Knowledge Matters - the potential contribution of the co-production of research to urban transformation," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 392019, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    11. Trbus, Marina & Zečević, Ivana & Wright, Laura Helen Virginia, 2023. "Perspectives of children and young people from Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina on their role in challenging perceived social and gender norms impacting school related gender-based violence," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsocxx:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:263-277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsoc21 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.