Aotearoa New Zealand does not have a national statement or standard for research with human participants. The National Ethical Standards for Health and Disability Research and Quality Improvement (NEAC Standards) are written for health and disability research rather than all research with human subjects, leaving universities and other research institutions to create their own policies to fill the gaps. Our research ethics system therefore lacks the coherence that Australia’s National Statement on Research Ethics provides to the Australian research ecosystem, the Tri-Council Policy Statement provides in Canada, and the Common Rule provides in the USA. As a result, specific research ethics challenges that are crucial for maintaining trust in research may go unaddressed or be tackled differently around the country. In public sector research spaces (eg. public research organisations or government departments) there is no regulation of human subject research (outside health and disability research) unless the institution sets up a review system.
This panel identifies several vulnerabilities in Aotearoa’s research ethics system, including issues related to insurance, AI and big data, systemic resilience, and workload challenges. We then explore the potential for a national research ethics statement to address key inconsistencies with international review processes. We consider how such a statement might be developed and how it could be administered and supported over time. We also identify issues likely to remain outstanding even after a consistent approach to research ethics is developed.
Timings: Moderator (5 minutes), panelist presentations (3x15 minutes each), panel discussion (15 minutes), audience Q&A (25 minutes).