Forum: Rethinking Ethics Review for International Relations Research

Abstract In this forum, scholars contribute to a critical reevaluation of ethics review processes arguing that the existing frameworks are inadequate for the dynamic and politically charged environments in which international relations as a discipline operates. We observe the institutionalized nature of ethics reviews and their inadequacy to address the methodological and epistemological approaches typical of IR. Drawing on experiences from diverse contexts and bringing together expertise from diverse institutions, the forum’s objective is to raise awareness of the limitations of the one-size-fits-all approach of current ethics review protocols. Such approaches overlook the power dynamics and the contextual sensitivities in which IR scholarship operates and instead of addressing these, they risk amplifying their negative consequences. Although there is no easy fix for this, we hope to inspire readers and stimulate critical engagement by reporting on alternative practices that prioritize reflexivity, inclusion, context-specific adjustments, and continuous ethical dialogue among all stakeholders involved. We call for an ethics that is not only procedurally compliant but is also substantively consistent with the nuances of IR research landscapes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Studies Perspectives
Published
2025-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekaf004
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Korean Peninsula Historical and Political Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Forum: Rethinking Ethics Review for International Relations Research

Marnie Howlett, Natalia Otrishchenko, Grace Akello, Filippo Dionigi et al.
1 citations
International Studies Perspectives
Korean Peninsula Historical and Political Studies
4.20
article

Forum: Rethinking Ethics Review for International Relations Research

Marnie Howlett, Natalia Otrishchenko, Grace Akello, Filippo Dionigi, Anastasia Shesterinina, Mousumi Mukherjee, Rebecca Tapscott
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract In this forum, scholars contribute to a critical reevaluation of ethics review processes arguing that the existing frameworks are inadequate for the dynamic and politically charged environments in which international relations as a discipline operates. We observe the institutionalized nature of ethics reviews and their inadequacy to address the methodological and epistemological approaches typical of IR. Drawing on experiences from diverse contexts and bringing together expertise from diverse institutions, the forum’s objective is to raise awareness of the limitations of the one-size-fits-all approach of current ethics review protocols. Such approaches overlook the power dynamics and the contextual sensitivities in which IR scholarship operates and instead of addressing these, they risk amplifying their negative consequences. Although there is no easy fix for this, we hope to inspire readers and stimulate critical engagement by reporting on alternative practices that prioritize reflexivity, inclusion, context-specific adjustments, and continuous ethical dialogue among all stakeholders involved. We call for an ethics that is not only procedurally compliant but is also substantively consistent with the nuances of IR research landscapes.

International Studies Perspectives
Gulu University (UG), University of Bristol (GB), University of Oxford (GB), O. P. Jindal Global University (IN), Center for Urban History of East Central Europe (UA), University of York (GB), University of Glasgow (GB), Global University (LB)
National Science Foundation, Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Korean Peninsula Historical and Political Studies
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.