
Open access. This open-access book discusses vulnerability and the protection-inclusion dilemma of including those who suffer from serious poverty, severe stigma, and structural violence in research. Co-written with representatives from indigenous peoples in South Africa and sex workers in Nairobi, the authors come down firmly on the side of inclusion. In the spirit of leaving no one behind in research, the team experimented with data collection methods that prioritize research participant needs over researcher needs. This involved foregoing the collection of personal data and community researchers being involved in all stages of the research. In the process, the term ‘vulnerability’ was illuminated across significant language barriers as it was defined by indigenous peoples and sex workers themselves. The book describes a potential alternative to exclusion from research that moves away from traditional research methods. By ensuring that the research is led by vulnerable groups for vulnerable groups, it offers an approach that fosters trust and collaboration with benefits for the community researchers, the wider community as well as research academics. Those living in low-income settings, in dire situations that are summarized with the term ‘vulnerability’ know best what their problems are and which priorities they have. To exclude them from research for their own protection is a patronizing approach which insinuates that researchers and research ethics committees know best. The team from this book have shown that minimally risky and minimally burdensome research tailored towards the needs of highly marginalized and stigmatized communities can be scientifically valuable as well as inclusive and equitable. I congratulate them. Prof. Klaus Leisinger, President Global Values Alliance, Former personal advisor to Kofi Annan on corporate responsibility
thema EDItEUR::R Earth Sciences, Geography, Environment, Planning::RN The environment::RNU Sustainability, Research governance, thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MQ Nursing and ancillary services, Vulnerable populations, thema EDItEUR::Q Philosophy and Religion::QD Philosophy::QDT Topics in philosophy::QDTQ Ethics and moral philosophy, Low and middle-income countries, Global research ethics, thema EDItEUR::P Mathematics and Science::PD Science: general issues::PDA Philosophy of science, Non-clinical health research, thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBD Medical profession::MBDC Medical ethics and professional conduct
thema EDItEUR::R Earth Sciences, Geography, Environment, Planning::RN The environment::RNU Sustainability, Research governance, thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MQ Nursing and ancillary services, Vulnerable populations, thema EDItEUR::Q Philosophy and Religion::QD Philosophy::QDT Topics in philosophy::QDTQ Ethics and moral philosophy, Low and middle-income countries, Global research ethics, thema EDItEUR::P Mathematics and Science::PD Science: general issues::PDA Philosophy of science, Non-clinical health research, thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBD Medical profession::MBDC Medical ethics and professional conduct
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
