Recently, Indigenous scholars have raised a number of concerns with the activities of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) and their members, including the preference of REBs for Eurocentric conceptualizations of what does or does not constitute “ethical research conduct”, and the privilege accorded liberal notions of the “autonomous individual participant”. Informed by the author's reflections on the REB process, those of Indigenous Canadian and New Zealand research participants, and the extant literature, this paper begins by critiquing the processes employed by New Zealand REBs to assess Indigenous-focused or Indigenous-led research in the criminological realm. The paper ends with a call for Indigenous peoples to resist the condescending ethos of the academy's ethics processes by developing processes that focus on empowering their institutions and communities.
AbsolonK. (2008). Kaandosswin, this is how we come to know! Indigenous graduate research in the academy: Worldviews and methodologies (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
2.
AgozinoB. (2003). Counter-colonial criminology: A critique of imperialist reason.London, England: Pluto Press.
3.
AnthonyR. (2004). Consistency of ethics review.Forum Qualitative Sozialforshung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(1), online.
4.
BattisteM. (2000). Introduction: Unfolding the lessons of colonisation. In BattisteM. (Ed.), Reclaiming indigenous voices and vision (pp. xvi–xxx). Vancouver, Canada: University of British Columbia Press.
5.
BattisteM. (2007). Research ethics for protecting indigenous knowledge and heritage: Institutional and researcher responsibilities. In DenzinN., & GiardinaM. (Eds.), Ethical futures in qualitative research: Decolonising the politics of knowledge (pp. 111–132). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
6.
BattisteM., & HendersonJ. (2000). Protecting indigenous knowledge and heritage: A global challenge.Saskatoon, Canada: Purich.
7.
BergL., EvansM., & FullerD. (2007). Ethics, hegemonic whiteness, and the contested imagination of “Aboriginal community” in social science research in Canada.ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 6(3), 395–410.
8.
BishopG. (1998). Freeing ourselves from neo-colonial domination in research: A Māori approach to creating knowledge.Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(2), 199–219.
9.
BradleyM. (2007). Silenced for their own protection: How the IRB marginalises those it feigns to protect.ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 6(3), 339–349.
10.
Brant-CastellanoM. (2004). Ethics of Aboriginal research.Journal of Aboriginal Health, 103, 98–114.
11.
Brant-CastellanoM., & ReadingJ. (2010). Policy writing as dialogue: Drafting an Aboriginal chapter for Canada's Tri-Council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans.The International Indigenous Policy Journal, 1(2), online.
12.
ButzD. (2008). Sidelined by the guidelines: Reflections on the limitations of standard informed consent procedures for the conduct of research.ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 7(2), 239–259.
13.
ChristiansC. (2007). Cultural continuity as an ethical imperative.Qualitative Inquiry, 13(3), 437–444.
14.
CoramS. (2011). Rethinking indigenous research approval.Qualitative Research Journal, 11(2), 38–47.
15.
DenzinN. (2008). IRBs and the turn to indigenous research ethics.Access: A Zone of Comprehension and Intrusion, 12, 97–123.
16.
DerridaJ. (1982). White mythologies. In BassA. (Ed.), Margins of Philosophy (pp. 213). Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
17.
EikelandO. (2006). Condescending ethics and action research.Action Research, 4(1), 37–47.
18.
EllisJ., & EarleyM. (2006). Reciprocity and constructions of informed consent: Researching with indigenous populations.International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(4), 2–13.
19.
ErmineJ. (2000). A critical examination of the ethics in research involving indigenous peoples (Unpublished master's thesis). Saskatoon University, Saskatchewan, Canada.
20.
GlassK., & KaufertJ. (2007). Research ethics review and Aboriginal community values: Can the two be reconciled?Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2(2), 25–40.
21.
HaggertyK. (2003). Ethical drift: Governing social research in the name of ethics. Paper presented at the American Law and Society meeting, Pittsburgh, 5-8 June.
22.
HammersleyM. (2006). Are ethics committees ethical?Qualitative Researcher, 2, 4–7.
23.
HendersonJ. (1997). The Mi'kmaw Concordat.Halifax, Canada: Fernwood.
24.
HudsonM. (2004). He Matatika Māori: Māori and ethical research in health (Unpublished master's thesis). AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand.
25.
JuritzenT., GrimenH., & HeggenK. (2011). Protecting vulnerable research participants: A Foucault-inspired analysis of ethics committees.Nursing Ethics, 18(5), 640–650.
26.
KatzJ. (2007). Toward a natural history of ethical censorship.Law and Society Review, 41(4), 797–810.
27.
Kieth-SpiegelP., & KoocherG. (1985). Ethics in psychology.New York, NY: Random House.
28.
KnightM., BentleyC., NortonN., & DixonI. (2004). (De)constructing (in)visible parent/guardian consent forms: Negotiating power, reflexivity, and the collective within qualitative research.Qualitative Inquiry, 10(3), 684–699.
29.
LorenzC. (2012). If you're so smart, why are you under surveillance? Universities, neoliberalism, and new public management.Critical Inquiry, 38, 599–629.
30.
MaddocksI. (1992). Ethics in Aboriginal research: A model for minorities or for all?Medical Journal of Australia, 157(8), 553–555.
31.
MansonS., GarroutteE., GoinsR., & HendersonP. (2004). Access, relevance and control in the research process: Lessons from Indian country.Journal of Aging and Health, 16(5), 58S–77S.
32.
MarkerM. (2003). Indigenous voice, community, and epistemic violence: The ethnographer's “interests” and what “interests” the ethnographer.Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(3), 361–375.
33.
MarkerM. (2004). Theories and disciplines as sites of struggle: The reproduction of colonial dominance through the controlling of knowledge in the academy.Canadian Journal of Native Education, 28(1/2), 102–110.
34.
McIntoshT. (2011). Māori and cross-cultural research: Criticality, ethicality and generosity.New Zealand Sociology, 26(Special Edition), 61–75.
35.
MenziesC. (2001). Reflections on research with, for, and among indigenous peoples.Canadian Journal of Native Education, 25(1), 19–36.
36.
Mi'kmaw Ethics Watch. (2000). Mi'kmaw research principles and protocols conducting research with and/or among Mi'kmaw people—Principles. Retrieved from http://www.cbu.ca/unamaki/research
37.
Ministry of Social Development. (2001). Responsiveness to Maori strategy—Phase 1.Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
National Ethics Advisory Committee. (2012). Ethical guidelines for observational studies: Observational research, audits and related activities (Revised ed.). Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Health.
40.
PiquemalN. (2000). Four principles to guide research with Aboriginals.Policy Options, 21(10), 49–51.
41.
ReidC., & BriefE. (2009). Confronting condescending ethics: How community-based research challenges traditional approaches to consent, confidentiality, and capacity.Journal of Academic Ethics, 7, 75–85.
42.
SchnarchB. (2004). Ownership, control, access, and possession (OCAP) or self-determination applied to research: A critical analysis of contemporary First Nations research and some options for First Nation communities.Journal of Aboriginal Health (January), 80–95.
43.
SchwandtT. (2007). The pressing need for ethical education: A commentary on the growing IRB controversy. In DenzinN., & GiardinaM. (Eds.), Ethical futures in qualitative research: Decolonising the politics of knowledge (pp. 85–98). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
44.
SmithA. (1997). Indigenous research ethics: Policy, protocol and practice.The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 25(1), 23–29.
45.
SmithL. (1999a). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples.Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press.
46.
SmithL. (1999b). Kaupapa Māori methodology: Our power to define ourselves. Seminar presentation to the School of Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
TauriJ. (2012). Indigenous critique of authoritarian criminology. In CarringtonK., O'BrienE., BallM., & TauriJ. (Eds.), Crime, justice and social democracy (pp. 217–233). London, England: Palgrave.
49.
TuckE., & FineM. (2007). Inner angles: A range of ethical responses to/with indigenous/decolonising theories. In DenzinN., & GiardinaM. (Eds.), Ethical futures in qualitative research: Decolonising the politics of knowledge (145–169). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
50.
United Nations. (2007). United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. General Assembly Resolution 61/295, 13 September.
51.
van den HoonardW. (2001). Is research-ethics review a moral panic?The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology / Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et d'Anthropologie, 38(1), 19–35.
52.
van den HoonardW. (2006). New angles and tangles in the ethics review of research.Journal of Academic Ethics, 4, 261–274.
53.
Walsh-TapiataW. (2003). The praxis of research: What can social services learn from the practice of research in an iwi setting?Social Work Review, 15(3), 25–29.
54.
WattD. (2007). On becoming a qualitative researcher: The value of reflexivity.The Qualitative Report, 12(1), 82–101.
55.
WaxM. (1991). The ethics of research in American Indian communities.American Indian Quarterly, 15(4), 431–455.
56.
WilsonW. (2004). Indigenous knowledge recovery as indigenous empowerment.American Indian Quarterly, 28, 359–372.
57.
WiwicharD. (2004). Nuu-chah-nulth blood returns to west coast.Ha-Shilth-Sa, 16 December.
