EASA people

Integrity committee

In 2020, EASA created an Integrity Committee to provide an independent voice and offer guidance on issues of academic integrity brought to it by one or more members of EASA. The committee can make recommendations to the EASA Executive Committee. Membership includes the EASA President (or their nominee) and another member of the EASA Exec committee, a member nominated by the Exec and two EASA members nominated (and elected, as needed) by the membership for four years. The terms of reference are set out below.

In its first two years, it responded to a number of queries, commissioned a report on the role of academic ombudsman in the context of sexual harassment, and hosted a workshop on harassment at EASA2022.

We thank previous members of the committee: Dr. Aliche Tilche, Dr. Insa Koch, Dr. Matan Kaminer, Kathleen Openshaw and Dr. Fiona Murphy (Chair)

To contact the ICO please email .

Michele Filippo Fontefrancesco

University of Gastronomic Sciences and a fellow at Durham University’s Department of Anthropology

Kathleen Openshaw

School of Social Sciences at Western Sydney University

Rachel Spronk

Department of Anthropology at the University of Amsterdam

David Mills

University of Oxford

Matan Kaminer

School of Business and Management, Queen Mary University London

Alexandra Oancă

PrecAnthro/KU Leuven

Terms and references of the Integrity Committee

  1. To offer an independent body for EASA members to which they can bring complaints and concerns about integrity and ethical issues that occur in the context of their work as anthropologists, in two circumstances: (i) where no institutional complaints procedure or other recourse to solve the issue is safely available to the members; or (ii) where a member feels that the issue concerns a wider question of ethics or integrity that the IC should be aware of.
  2. To offer members an opportunity to be heard and supported when they are confronted with problems involving integrity and ethical issues in the course of their professional practice as anthropologists, responding to requests for advice by listening, consulting and offering guidance, either from individual members of the committee as a whole.
  3. To write reports based on material submitted to the IC, on the understanding that the IC is not a legal entity and is unable to provide more than advice based on the IC’s expertise where appropriate. It may be appropriate for the IC to agree that a matter goes beyond its remit and can be more safely dealt with by other institutional bodies.
  4. To develop a ‘living’ and accessible web-based repository of published information [M1] relating to integrity and ethical issues for members, including IC reports on anonymised analysis of ‘cases.’
  5. To provide members with information on other possible sources of institutional support (e.g. within universities, unions, and arbitration and mediation services), particularly where the IC concludes that the case might merit something more than advice or review. The committee’s aim should be to highlight relevant support and refer complainants to support elsewhere when possible.
  6. To be a point of reference for good conduct: to prepare briefings and guidelines for good practice professional standards that we hope will be of use to other researchers and institutions.
  7. To ensure full anonymity and confidentiality for members who come to the IC.
  8. To anticipate emerging issues and future challenges in relation to