Recommendations for Conducting Ethical Impact Evaluations

Abstract

No AccessJan 2022Recommendations for Conducting Ethical Impact EvaluationsAuthors/Editors: Paul Glewwe, Petra ToddPaul GlewweSearch for more papers by this author, Petra ToddSearch for more papers by this authorhttps://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1497-6_ch10AboutView ChaptersFull TextPDF (0.7 MB) ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Abstract: Provides an overview of key ethical issues that arise when conducting impact evaluations and, more generally, when conducting research on human subjects. The principles of ethical research come from two key documents: the Nuremberg Code and the Belmont Report. The principles set forth in these documents provide a starting point, but the responsibility of the researcher includes remaining aware of local dynamics and legal requirements in the area where he or she works. Furthermore, the researcher remains responsible for identifying potential conflicts of interest that may generate incentives for not conducting rigorous, unbiased research. Although some types of research may involve risks, the potential harm to society of not doing research could well prove greater. Researchers, and the institutional review boards (IRBs) or ethics committees supervising the research, have the important task of identifying the occasions when the potential benefit of learning from research outweighs the potential risks the research poses. ReferencesGlennerster, Rachel and Shawn Powers. 2016. “Balancing Risk and Benefit: Ethical Tradeoffs in Running Randomized Evaluations.” In The Oxford Handbook of Professional Economic Ethics, edited by DeMartino, G and D McCloskey, 367–401. New York: Oxford University Press. Google ScholarJones, James H. 2008. “The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.” In The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics, edited by Emanuel, Ezekiel J., Christine Grady, Robert A. Crouch, Reidar Lie, Franklin G. Miller, and David Wendler, 86–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google ScholarLaughland, Oliver. 2015. “Guatemalans Deliberately Infected with STDs Sue Johns Hopkins University for $1bn.” The Guardian, April 3, 2015. https://web.archive.org/web/20150412134055/http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/02/johns-hopkins-lawsuit-deliberate-std-infections-Guatemala. Google ScholarU.S. Government Printing Office. 1949. Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, The Medical Case, 181–82. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/nuremberg.pdf. Accessed October 9, 2019. Google ScholarU.S. Health and Human Services Office for Human Research Protections. 1979. “Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research.” Published April 18, 1979. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html. Accessed October 9, 2019. Google Scholar Previous chapterNext chapter FiguresreferencesRecommendeddetails View Published: January 2022ISBN: 978-1-4648-1497-6e-ISBN: 978-1-4648-1498-3 Copyright & Permissions Related TopicsMacroeconomics and Economic GrowthScience and Technology Development KeywordsIMPACT EVALUATIONMONITORING AND EVALUATIONM&EPERFORMANCE EVALUATIONEVALUATION APPROACHESETHICSHUMAN RESEARCH ETHICSCONFLICT OF INTERESTINSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDIRB PDF DownloadLoading ...