Integrity committee

Anthropology, “the most humanistic of sciences and scientific of humanities”, is a social enterprise. We function in research teams, departments, and collaborations with our interlocutors. Research that lacks integrity can cause direct damage and can affect public trust in science and trust between scientists. It is essential that scholarly research be conducted in accordance with the guiding principles of scientific integrity: honesty, diligence, transparency, independence and responsibility. The standards for good research practices set out what researchers must take into consideration in their work, individually and as a team, during each phase of the research process: design, conduct, reporting, assessment and peer review and communication. The EASA Integrity Committee fosters scholarly integrity in the European Anthropology community and aims to facilitate discussion on, and protection of such standards. EASA is a supra-national association and is thus bound by national and institutional legal frameworks. While it has no legal leverage beyond these frameworks, it holds its members to integrity standards and may undertake action that may affect membership status if breeches in research integrity by EASA members are brought to its attention.

National and institutional integrity protocols exist in different degrees across our universities. Ideally, they provide a working environment that promotes and safeguards good research practices. They ensure that researchers can work in a safe, inclusive and open environment where they feel responsible and accountable, can share concerns about dilemmas and can discuss errors made without fearing the consequences (‘blame-free reporting’).

While research ethics are closely related to research integrity, the Integrity Committee focuses on matters of integrity, that is, the practice of being honest, caring and acting responsibly towards colleagues, interlocutors and other actors.

EASA is committed to providing a welcoming professional environment in which all its members are treated with dignity and respect, regardless of sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion or belief, age or disability. EASA recognises a shared responsibility of all members and attendees to establish and uphold that environment for the benefit of all. Harassment and discrimination undermine EASA’s principles of equality, diversity and freedom of expression and constitute professional misconduct. EASA members can contact the Integrity Committee for advice and can report a violation of the Code of Conduct, in person or to integrity_contact(at)easaonline.org.. The EASA Integrity Committee has developed a specific EASA code of conduct and complaints policy.

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