[Last modified: December, 5 2024 05:53 PM]
This week, my writing will be about ethics advice that I would give as a member of the Anthropology Ethics Committee to a student that proposes to study the indigenous experience and perception of indigenous land rights in Brazil. The student plans to collect information on political opinions and life experiences of his/her/their interlocutors.
First, the study entails high risk for the interlocutors, as the issue around indigenous land rights is very contentious and the impact of the research could lead to risks of those who’re involved. And the student should make sure that the benefits of the research must outweigh the risks and no harm should be incurred. The potential of the research in raising awareness of the issue of indigenous rights must be weighed against the risks incurred on interlocutors who might become targets of the far-right state or groups.
One big concern in the proposed research is the participants’ ability to give free and informed consent. First, there are power relations between the economically powerful student and the indigenous interlocutors, with the former being potentially able to give economic rewards to the latter for their participation in the research. And the student may represent knowledge and authority in relation to the interlocutors. The language barrier and the practicality of complete mutual understandings of the impact of the research may significantly undermine the confidence in the consent collection. The student should also contact the relevant local authorities and/or universities to make sure that an adequate ethical approval will be in place.
Granting that free and informed consent is possible, there are critical steps the student has to take in order to uphold the ethical standards. First, the student must inform the interlocutors how the research is going to be disseminated. This is also related to the sensitive nature of the issue, which is politically contentious and the personal opinions the student aims at collecting may endanger the interlocutors once the information shared publicly. Second, when such information is collected, the student has to make sure that the way the data is stored is secure and no incidental leak would happen and then lead to the aforementioned danger to the interlocutors. Third, the names of the participants should be pseudonymised to prevent the interlocutors from being identified by potential groups that may cause harm. And if activists the student is going to interview ask to have their names unchanged, there needs to be serious consideration of when it would be safe to do so.