Research for social impact and the contra-ethic of national frameworks

LCJ 23 cover

Judith Lovell

LCJ: Special Issue:

Ethical relationships, ethical research in Aboriginal contexts: Perspectives from central Australia, 23, pp. 92-105
https://doi.org/10.18793/LCJ2018.23.08

View full text (pdf 245 KB)

Citation
Lovell, J. (2018). Research for social impact and the contra-ethic of national frameworks. Learning Communities: International Journal of Learning in Social Contexts [Special Issue: Ethical relationships, ethical research in Aboriginal contexts: Perspectives from central Australia], 23, 92-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18793/LCJ2018.23.08

 

Abstract

Iteration is a factor of the human research ethical clearance through which research and evaluation with humans is undertaken in Australia. In remote community research contexts, iteration has helped us to redress some features of the cultural dissonance that occurs between western and Aboriginal research paradigms and between remote and urban contexts. Without a commensurate ethic of feedback between national programs and remote research settings, the uptake or non-uptake of findings from short-term or rapid-contract research often remain a mystery. The proposition this paper puts forward is for a post-research process whereby research commissioners and administrators provide feedback as to the uptake or not of research findings. This would produce a meta-data, as well as make accessible the rationale for research findings being accepted or rejected. The meta-data would provide baselines for further research, an ongoing record of areas of research and neglect, and assist in the uptake of research knowledge useful at a community level. However, this proposition would require non-partisan support which is highly unlikely to be realised in the current political climate.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA