Research Ethics Committees (RECs) play a critical role in ensuring ethical oversight and accountability for research, including in complex and rapidly evolving humanitarian settings.
Types of RECs Involved in Humanitarian Research
Humanitarian research protocols are often reviewed by one or more of the following types of RECs:
- 🏥 Local RECs
Often affiliated with governments or local universities, based in the region where the crisis has occurred. - 🌍 International & NGO-Affiliated RECs
Linked to international organizations or non-governmental organizations conducting research in crisis settings. - 🎓 Academic RECs in Other Countries
Based in universities where the principal investigators are affiliated, often providing institutional oversight.
➡️ In some cases, multiple RECs (local, NGO, and academic) collaborate on a single protocol.
➡️ In others, especially when local researchers lead the project, only a local REC may be involved.
⚠️ In rare situations where a local REC is not operational during a crisis, alternative forms of ethical oversight must be arranged.
Some considerations for REC review of humanitarian research are the following:
- Review of urgent protocols:
- Some humanitarian research, especially in sudden-onset emergencies, needs to be implemented quickly. This can be challenging to align with the standard operating procedures of many RECs. In consequence, many RECs that review urgent protocols have established procedures to facilitate their timely review. For example, RECs have instituted policies to review generic protocols prior to a crisis event, to be followed by a focused review after the crisis occurs and the research site has been identified.
- More about policies for urgent protocols are included in section 4 of this repository.
- Accessing information:
- It may also be challenging for RECs to access relevant information about a research setting if a humanitarian crisis is ongoing, including background conditions where the research would take place. Challenges to access relevant and current information are especially likely for international RECs, but may also occur for national RECs.
- A REC and its members may be directly affected if an emergency occurs in their city or region
- During some crises, RECs receive an increased volume of protocol submissions. Both of these situations will have consequences for the functioning of the REC. Different strategies have been proposed in such situations, including establishing a central REC responsible for the review of protocols linked to a specific crisis, or partnering between RECs.
- In a crisis setting, research and research ethics review may be politicized; In some settings, RECs may need to protect their independence and resist attempts to influence their deliberations.
Case Studies & Further Reading
Médecins Sans Frontières’ Ethics Review Board
MSF has published several papers (1& 2) on their experience with humanitarian protocol review. These insights illustrate how an international NGO REC manages ethical challenges.
Experiences of REC Members During Disasters
A study and accompanying video explore how REC members perceive and navigate disaster research review—emphasizing the need for timely, responsive, and rigorous ethics oversight.
HUMANITARIAN HEALTH ETHICS 