This presentation introduces the short history of REC, presents the most interesting and challenging cases, and aims to explore how the operation of the REC and conducting research have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also allows insight into the impact of pandemic on ongoing research and highlights the most serious problems the researchers faced because of the pandemic. The presentation also covers the pandemic’s effects on the research activity in general.

Abstract: This presentation aims to summarize the main findings of a survey that a team from the University of Zurich, including myself, conducted in 2019 with 98 scholars teaching research integrity in 19 European countries. The survey, which took place within the framework of the EU Horizon2020 INTEGRITY Project, intended to explore two central questions: How is research integrity being taught in academic institutions in Europe? How can the quality and efficacy of this teaching be improved? The survey results offer a good picture of the state of the art in the teaching of research integrity and show important areas of agreement among respondents about the challenges and possible ways to improve the quality and efficacy of the current teaching.

Research involving people with disabilities is specific in that way that people with disabilities typically play and inferior role in everyday social situations, it is usually the researcher who occupies a position of power, therefore individuals with disability are presumed to show vulnerability and limited competence for self-defence. Thus, decisions by the research ethics committee require serious consideration of research ethics principles, which means that we need to take specific aspects into account to provide competent treatment that does not take advantage of these individuals’ disadvantaged positions, but offers increased protection and the minimization of the risks arising from research. It is quite challenging to ensure that we receive informed consent from participants who are often incapacitated or have limited capacity to act and have limited access to information.

Abstract: French national committee for consideration of ethics in animal experimentation considers this guide to be in accordance with the principles adopted in the National Charter on the ethics of using animals in experiments, and is regarded as the reference document for anyone involved in animal experiments. This guide, which is not a definite or fixed document, has been acknowledged by the two overseeing Ministries (the Ministry of Higher Education and Research on the one hand and the Ministry of Agriculture on the other hand) as well as by French national committee for consideration of ethics in animal experimentation. This marks advancement in the promotion of ethical evaluation of research projects. In addition, sharing of experience and harmonization of methods on which it is based contribute to ensure the implementation of principles and good practices shared by all.

Abstract: Animal research is contested in society. In spite of evidence of results in terms of understanding and treating human diseases, there is still debate concerning the moral justification and trustworthiness of animal research, and on the validity of the used experiments including animal models. This resulted in a longstanding ethical debate in society and within the academic community. However, this ethical debate on animal research is not yet research ethics. This also holds for the ethical or legal guidelines that are in place in all European countries. Compliance to these guidelines is an important aspect of research ethics, but there is a need to broaden the scope. It includes a culture of integrity that starts in critical reflection on aspects such as study design, reporting and dealing with negative data. The presentation elaborates on the claim on broadening the scope by focusing on translational research.

Abstract: Widely accepted ethics standards which function in an appropriate institutional context are key components of the process of ethics review of research proposals. In order to follow the standards, the researchers need clarity with regard to what is expected from them and a clear institutional structure within which the ethics review is conducted. A special role in the process of harmonization of the ethics standards and setting up a wide ranging ethics review policies can be played by international funding institutions, which develop their own systems of ethics review. Since such institution are necessarily staffed by citizens of different countries, they can play this role on two levels. First, by involving sensitivities of experts from different countries, they can develop ethics standards which integrate the ethics aspects of research practices and are sensitive to cultural differences. Secondly, the experts of such institutions can contribute to harmonization of the ethics review policies in different countries by participating in the process in their home countries. This talk will explore the interaction between national and international levels of ethics review as a channel of harmonization of research ethics standards and policies.

The H2020-SwafS TORCH project looks at the interconnections between different elements of RRI. In this paper we will introduce the project, its ambitions and challenges. We ask how we could effectively represent and reflect on this interconnectivity in our institutional structures and systems as well as in collaborations between different institutions.

Abstract: From my background as a judge and as chair of several committees of research integrity I want to deal with a few matters that are often problematic for committees. Committees, struggle with issues as e.g. anonymous allegations, the threshold to less serious cases (what is less serious?), what the principle of hearing parties on both sides implies, given the fact that often the relationship between these parties is completely disturbed. A few examples from Dutch cases will be presented.