Governing for research integrity: some theoretical and practical lessons from an industry-funded unconventional gas research centre in Australia

Abstract

There are mounting concerns that industry-funding leads research groups to produce biased or trivial research. Recent thinking suggests that research organisations must assume some responsibility for preserving the integrity of industry-funded research, particularly in areas where industry, government, science and community interests in research do not fully align. Knowledge gaps in how university-industry research centres (UIRCs) safeguard research integrity are approached through drawing a provisional conceptual model of research integrity governance from the university-industry engagement (UIE) literature. Empirical data comes from a qualitative case study of a UIRC conducting research into contentious coal seam gas developments in Queensland, Australia, which is partially funded by gas producers. Findings from the fieldwork conducted 2014-2016 inform a refined conceptual model for research integrity. Additionally, the thesis proposes a framework for socially responsible UIE to integrate research integrity concerns into the UIRC governance arrangements.University-industry research partnerships are generally hidden behind confidentiality agreements and of little concern to those beyond the partnership. Yet, there are mounting concerns among academics, activists and diverse groups with a stake in the research topics, that industry-funding leads research groups to produce biased or trivial research. There is a perception that universities must take steps to safeguard the integrity of industry-funded research and not leave the responsibility for research integrity with individual researchers. Without suitable governance structures in university-industry research partnerships, it is presumed that the research will inevitably favour the funder’s goals to the detriment of university, public, national or environmental interests. Knowledge gaps in this domain are approached through drawing a provisional conceptual model of research integrity governance from the university-industry engagement (UIE) literature. The Provisional Model is drawn from content analysis of 1758 peer-reviewed journal articles, from 537 journals, dated from 1986 to 2016 using the qualitative data analysis software, Leximancer. The UIE literature reveals that regardless of the nature of research partnership, the requisite research integrity is assured by:1) ensuring the veracity of scientific processes (‘microethics’); 2) managing the industry partnerships; and 3)providing research outputs of value to the industry partner.Empirical data for this research comes from a qualitative case study of an AUD$25.5 million, 5-year university-industry research centre (UIRC) conducting research into a coal seam gas (CSG) development in southern Queensland, Australia. The extensive fieldwork conducted from 2014-2016 provided opportunities for observations, semi-structured interviews and document analysis. Stakeholders expected the UIRC not only to demonstrate the ‘microethics’ of research behaviours and practices, but also to address community issues and attend to the ethical implications of their work in a larger societalcontext, which can be termed ‘macroethics’. The empirical data confirms the provisional conceptual model for research integrity governance drawn from the UIE literature, but also exposes other elements of the research integrity governance regime in the UIRC. The fieldwork reveals that UIRC research is accepted by diverse stakeholders with interests in CSG, not only because of its accuracy and commercial value, but also because of its perceived benefit to society. The revised model for research integrity governance proposes that, in addition to adhering to national funding body / university conventions for preventing research misconduct (identifying and resolve integrity breaches and the provision of research training), there are three other ‘macroethic’ elements of research integrity governance in UIRCs. They are: 1) establishing and promoting corporate governance mechanisms that integrate the contractual, professional and social responsibilities of the UIRC; 2) creating unified multi-party community-facing technological solutions or objects; and 3) communicating scientific methods and research findings for various publics whilst engaging with multiple research collaborators and end-users. In response to the UIE management and governance challenges identified by the members of the UIRC, the body that partially funded the researcher during the PhD, a further step is taken in this thesis. That is, to develop an analytical framework for socially responsible university-industry engagement to explicitly integrate research integrity concerns into the governance arrangements of UIRCs. The Framework for UniversityIndustry Engagement with Social Responsibility (FUIESR) aims to guide and facilitate understanding of the ‘macroethics’ elements of UIRC governance. This exploratory study concludes that where UIRCs engage with multiple unaligned stakeholder groups, additional governance mechanisms are needed to ensure research integrity. This finding is consistent with notions of socially responsible universities and research that are emerging from the Social Responsibility and the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) agenda from the United States, along with the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) paradigm from Europe. Through integrating ‘social responsibility’ approaches into UIRC operations, it is envisaged that the integrity of industry-funded research can be established, even in highly contested areas.