Navigating ethical challenges in online wildlife trade research
The surge in internet accessibility has transformed wildlife trade by facilitating the acquisition of wildlife through online platforms. This scenario presents unique ethical challenges for researchers, as traditional ethical frameworks for in-person research cannot be readily applied to the online realm. Currently, there is a lack of clearly defined guidelines for appropriate ethical procedures when conducting online wildlife trade (OWT) research. In response to this, we consulted the scientific literature on ethical considerations in online research and examined existing guidelines established by professional societies and ethical boards. Based on these documents, we present a set of recommendations that can inform the development of ethically responsible OWT research. Key ethical challenges in designing and executing OWT research include the violation of privacy rights, defining subjects and illegality, and the risk of misinterpretation or posing risks to participants when sharing data. Potential solutions include considering participants' expectations of privacy, defining when participants are authors versus subjects, understanding the legal and cultural context, minimizing data collection, ensuring anonymization, and removing metadata. Best practices also involve being culturally sensitive when analyzing and reporting findings. Adhering to these guidelines can help mitigate potential pitfalls and provides valuable insights to editors, researchers, and ethical review boards, enabling them to conduct scientifically rigorous and ethically responsible OWT research to advance this growing field.
Authors
- Sadek Atoussi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8303-6313)
- Jennifer M. Pytka (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6241-4821)
- Thaís Q. Morcatty (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3095-7052)
- Vincent Nijman (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5600-4276)
- Kim Feddema (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8680-4522)
- Anushri Karve
- Penthai Siriwat
- Ruth M. Thompson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3339-9591)
- Jordi Janssen (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7737-5108)
- Joss Wright (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5237-3309)
- David Lindsay Roberts (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6788-2691)
- Shan Su (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5243-1246)
- Sérgio Henriques (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2602-7888)
- Astrid Alex Andersson
Institutions
- Butler University (US)
- Canterbury Christ Church University (GB)
- Edith Cowan University (AU)
- Oxford Brookes University (GB)
- University of Padua (IT)
- University of Kent (GB)
- Wildlife Conservation Society Canada (CA)
- Indianapolis Zoo (US)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- University of Guelma (DZ)
- Science Oxford (GB)
- Wildlife Conservation Society India (IN)
- International Union for Conservation of Nature (CH)
- University College London (GB)
- University of Hong Kong (HK)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Conservation Biology
- Published
- 2024-09-09
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14341
- Citations
- 5
- Primary Topic
- Sex work and related issues
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 5.66
Funders
- Oxford Brookes University
- University of Oxford