researchers from possible retribution. The governance
of research and innovation must be viewed at local,
national and global level so as to be able to competently
assess risks if any and avoid systemic injustice and
promote equitable benefit sharing. (COMEST 2015).
Armin (2011) argues that the issue of responsibility in science, technology and innovation should be
viewed in the context of the individual, situation in
which responsibility is required, the existing governance structure, and quality of knowledge available
with respect to consequences of actions under which
scientific and technological knowledge is generated
(Armin 2011). Whereas institutions provide a platform
from which research and innovations are developed, it
is important that they respect the intellectual property
rights (IPR) of individual researchers.
IPR comprises the entire landscape of protection
of intellect including inventions arising from research
and innovations in scientific, artistic, product development domains (Granstrand 2006). The debate of
IPR in the context of developing countries is beyond
the scope of this article. Ethical issues are inevitable
when commercial interests curtail the societal benefits. Tradeoffs and sustainable solutions revolve
around the entire governance ecosystem. Like in the
case of research and innovation, IPR requires utmost
responsibility (Schuijff & Dijkstra 2020). This responsibility should be reflected at all levels of knowledge
advancement.
7 CONCLUSION
Ethical issues are inevitable in research and innovation.
Nathan (2015) and Lubberink, Blok, van Ophem, and
Omta (2017) assert that unless innovation decisionmaking is based on ethical decision-making framework, its likely to be tainted by undesired impacts and
concerns. One of the mitigative approach is the ethical review of every step of research and innovation
process. Advances in emerging sciences and technologies that pose serious ethical issues and concerns, on
the individual, community and even international level
require collective responsibility. Responsible research
and innovation is a transparent, interactive process by
which societal actors and innovators become mutually
responsive to each other with a view to the (ethical)
acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability
of the innovation process and its marketable products. This will allow proper embedding of scientific
and technological advances in our society. Secondly,
research sponsors and investigators have the right to
study whatever they want, however, ethical reflections
suggested that they ought to be morally obligated to
routinely include innovative works that may be a matter of life and death in LICs. They should also not
withhold any available basic resources that can better
the lives of their study participants, and any resources
that they distribute should not be used to manipulate vulnerable communities to consent to research
participation.
8 RECOMMENDATIONS
Research ethics is currently in its nascent stage in many
LICs, therefore many innovative research projects are
likely to miss out the microscopic scan on how well
autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice
are addressed by the research teams. As such, research
participants and their local communities may be getting very little for contributions made. This then stands
out as one research-related injustice and amounts to
exploitation of communities, who generally have limited frameworks for defense. Better governance is
needed to increase the ethical and social robustness
of new and emerging sciences and technologies. This
is needed within the individual institutional establishments as well as at national level. There should be
overarching and institutionalized framework of regulations, standards, policies, codes, principles to ensure
that quality research and innovations are part and parcel of knowledge advancement for industrial growth
and sustainable development.
DISCLAIMER
The views, interpretations, and conclusions expressed
in this report are entirely those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily express the views of the institutions in
which the authors are affiliated.
REFERENCES
ADB.2017. Industrialize Africa. Strategies, Policies, Institutions, and Financing. African Development Bank Group.
ALLEA. 2017. The European Code of Conduct for Research
Integrity. All European Academies, Berlin Germany.
Armin, G. 2011. Responsible Innovation: Bringing together
Technology Assessment, Applied Ethics, and STS
research, Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies, 7, IET,
pp. 9–31.
Bastos de Morais J-C., & Stückelberger C. (eds.), 2014.
Innovation Ethics. African and Global Perspectives. Globethics.net and African Innovation Foundation, Geneva.
Beisiegel, U. 2010. Research integrity and publication ethics.
Atherosclerosis, 212 (2) https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.athero
sclerosis.2010.01.050
CIOMS. 2016. Council for International Organizations of
Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans.
Retrieved July 13, 2020 from https://cioms.ch/wpcontent/uploads/2017/01/WEB-CIOMS-Ethical Guidelines.pdf
COMEST. 2015. Ethical Perspective on Science, Technology
and Society: A Contribution to the Post-2015 Agenda.
Report of COMEST, SHS/YES/COMEST-8EXTR/14/3,
UNESCO, Paris.
Council of Europe. 2012. Guide for Research Ethics Committee Members. Steering Committee on Bioethics. https://
www.coe.int/en/web/bioethics/guide-for-research-ethicscommittees-members.
Eckstein, S. (Ed.). 1992. Manual for Research ethics committees. 6
th Edition, Centre of Medical Law, Kings College,
London, Cambridge University Press.
16
of research and innovation must be viewed at local,
national and global level so as to be able to competently
assess risks if any and avoid systemic injustice and
promote equitable benefit sharing. (COMEST 2015).
Armin (2011) argues that the issue of responsibility in science, technology and innovation should be
viewed in the context of the individual, situation in
which responsibility is required, the existing governance structure, and quality of knowledge available
with respect to consequences of actions under which
scientific and technological knowledge is generated
(Armin 2011). Whereas institutions provide a platform
from which research and innovations are developed, it
is important that they respect the intellectual property
rights (IPR) of individual researchers.
IPR comprises the entire landscape of protection
of intellect including inventions arising from research
and innovations in scientific, artistic, product development domains (Granstrand 2006). The debate of
IPR in the context of developing countries is beyond
the scope of this article. Ethical issues are inevitable
when commercial interests curtail the societal benefits. Tradeoffs and sustainable solutions revolve
around the entire governance ecosystem. Like in the
case of research and innovation, IPR requires utmost
responsibility (Schuijff & Dijkstra 2020). This responsibility should be reflected at all levels of knowledge
advancement.
7 CONCLUSION
Ethical issues are inevitable in research and innovation.
Nathan (2015) and Lubberink, Blok, van Ophem, and
Omta (2017) assert that unless innovation decisionmaking is based on ethical decision-making framework, its likely to be tainted by undesired impacts and
concerns. One of the mitigative approach is the ethical review of every step of research and innovation
process. Advances in emerging sciences and technologies that pose serious ethical issues and concerns, on
the individual, community and even international level
require collective responsibility. Responsible research
and innovation is a transparent, interactive process by
which societal actors and innovators become mutually
responsive to each other with a view to the (ethical)
acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability
of the innovation process and its marketable products. This will allow proper embedding of scientific
and technological advances in our society. Secondly,
research sponsors and investigators have the right to
study whatever they want, however, ethical reflections
suggested that they ought to be morally obligated to
routinely include innovative works that may be a matter of life and death in LICs. They should also not
withhold any available basic resources that can better
the lives of their study participants, and any resources
that they distribute should not be used to manipulate vulnerable communities to consent to research
participation.
8 RECOMMENDATIONS
Research ethics is currently in its nascent stage in many
LICs, therefore many innovative research projects are
likely to miss out the microscopic scan on how well
autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice
are addressed by the research teams. As such, research
participants and their local communities may be getting very little for contributions made. This then stands
out as one research-related injustice and amounts to
exploitation of communities, who generally have limited frameworks for defense. Better governance is
needed to increase the ethical and social robustness
of new and emerging sciences and technologies. This
is needed within the individual institutional establishments as well as at national level. There should be
overarching and institutionalized framework of regulations, standards, policies, codes, principles to ensure
that quality research and innovations are part and parcel of knowledge advancement for industrial growth
and sustainable development.
DISCLAIMER
The views, interpretations, and conclusions expressed
in this report are entirely those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily express the views of the institutions in
which the authors are affiliated.
REFERENCES
ADB.2017. Industrialize Africa. Strategies, Policies, Institutions, and Financing. African Development Bank Group.
ALLEA. 2017. The European Code of Conduct for Research
Integrity. All European Academies, Berlin Germany.
Armin, G. 2011. Responsible Innovation: Bringing together
Technology Assessment, Applied Ethics, and STS
research, Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies, 7, IET,
pp. 9–31.
Bastos de Morais J-C., & Stückelberger C. (eds.), 2014.
Innovation Ethics. African and Global Perspectives. Globethics.net and African Innovation Foundation, Geneva.
Beisiegel, U. 2010. Research integrity and publication ethics.
Atherosclerosis, 212 (2) https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.athero
sclerosis.2010.01.050
CIOMS. 2016. Council for International Organizations of
Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans.
Retrieved July 13, 2020 from https://cioms.ch/wpcontent/uploads/2017/01/WEB-CIOMS-Ethical Guidelines.pdf
COMEST. 2015. Ethical Perspective on Science, Technology
and Society: A Contribution to the Post-2015 Agenda.
Report of COMEST, SHS/YES/COMEST-8EXTR/14/3,
UNESCO, Paris.
Council of Europe. 2012. Guide for Research Ethics Committee Members. Steering Committee on Bioethics. https://
www.coe.int/en/web/bioethics/guide-for-research-ethicscommittees-members.
Eckstein, S. (Ed.). 1992. Manual for Research ethics committees. 6
th Edition, Centre of Medical Law, Kings College,
London, Cambridge University Press.
16