Barriers to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in Canadian Research Ethics Board membership
Challenges and opportunities for reform
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21787574 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Miranda Miller (0009-0009-5537-0408, Queen's University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 382-394 |
| Publication date | 2026-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Research Ethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1747-0161 • E-ISSN: 2047-6094 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/17470161251392249 |
| OpenAlex | W4415762304 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 43 |
This article reflects upon the current state of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) on Research Ethics Board (REB) membership in Canada. As post-secondary education institutions strive to increase EDI initiatives across all areas, diversity among the REB membership becomes increasingly critical. Increasing EDI on the REB is complex in the context of colonialism and a discipline that has historically mistreated those from equity-deserving groups. Many barriers to achieving diversity in academia exist that are also reflected in the REB membership. REBs lacking in diversity may struggle to conduct robust ethical reviews, and without full institutional support, increasing diversity in the membership remain a challenge. Diversity amongst community members adds another layer to this complexity with additional barriers such as lack of inclusive recruitment strategies and equitable compensation. Despite community members being central the mandate of the REB, they can be perceived as secondary to affiliated subject matter expert members. This perception de-values the work of the non-affiliated community member, creating conditions of tokenism and power imbalances. Given the unique standing of the REB within the research enterprise, it is well positioned to be a leader in the EDI space. Barriers identified are surmountable and with genuine effort, the REB can champion EDI. It will take full institutional support to enact change and disrupt barriers to EDI for the REB to reach an ideal state of authentic EDI in its membership and processes. Such endeavors can only act to strengthen the ethics review of research and increase research excellence throughout Canada
Champion · Excellence · Mandate · Tokenism · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Ethics in Business and Education · Ethics in Clinical Research
Patterns of Technology Use Among Older Adults With and Without Disabilities
How Diversity Fails
Systemic disruptions
What guidance exists to support patient partner compensation practices? A scoping review of available policies and guidelines
Patient partner perspectives on compensation
Ethical Issues in Research
Are We Asking the Right Questions? A Review of Canadian REB Practices in Relation to Community-Based Participatory Research
Shifting practise
Sustaining Engagement and Partnership
Epistemic Strategies in Ethical Review
What Can IRBs Learn From CABs? A Qualitative Analysis of the Experiences of Recruitment and Training of Nonscientist Members on Research Review Boards
Strange faces’ in the academy
Same old story, just a different policy’
Conducting Research with Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations
Why do EDI policies fail? An inhabited institutions perspective
Upholding "Colonial Unknowing" Through the IRB
Why Doesn't Diversity Training Work? The Challenge for Industry and Academia
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |