Article Text
Abstract
Research projects sponsored by rich countries or companies and carried out in developing countries are often described as exploitative. One important debate about the prevention of exploitation in research centres on whether and how clinical research in developing countries should be responsive to local health problems. This paper analyses the responsiveness debate and draws out more general lessons for how policy makers can prevent exploitation in various research contexts. There are two independent ways to do this in the face of entrenched power differences: to impose restrictions on the content of benefit-sharing arrangements, and to institute independent effective oversight. Which method should be chosen is highly dependent on context.
- Research ethics
- health policy
- benefit sharing
- exploitation
- responsiveness
- distributive justice
- informed consent
- philosophical ethics
- political philosophy
- research ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Fair and equitable subject selection in concurrent COVID-19 clinical trials
- Clinical research with economically disadvantaged populations
- Diversity and inclusion for rodents: how animal ethics committees can help improve translation
- A framework for the promotion of ethical benefit sharing in health research
- Viewing benefit sharing in global health research through the lens of Aristotelian justice
- A comparison of justice frameworks for international research
- Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis
- HIV prevention research and global inequality: steps towards improved standards of care*
- Sharing the benefits of genetic research
- A public health perspective on research ethics