Towards meaningful institutional change

Responsive bureaucracy and the governance of anthropological ethics

Bibliographic Data

ID2248204
AuthorsTimothy W Elfenbein (0000-0003-0487-2183, Leiden University), Andrew S Hoffman (0000-0001-6137-4047, Leiden University, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume40
Issue2
Pages4-7
Publication date2024-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAnthropology Today (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0268-540X • E-ISSN: 1467-8322
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/1467-8322.12871
OpenAlexW4393386673
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited23

This article advocates for a deeper engagement with the organizational structures that shape the governance of research ethics in anthropology. The authors argue that anthropological critiques of bureaucracy often sidestep the kinds of knowledge needed to pursue meaningful institutional change. They show how different regulatory dynamics and organizational arrangements across jurisdictions produce more or less responsive bureaucracies, comparing Institutional Review Boards in the United States with a case study of a European university's Ethics Review Committee. The authors suggest that such organizational understandings of bureaucratic processes can more meaningfully inform their redesign and contribute to developing more appropriately scaled ethics governance. In so doing, ethics review promises greater responsiveness to the particular demands of ethnographic research while remaining legible to regulatory stakeholders

Bureaucracy · Corporate governance · Economics · Environmental ethics · Institutional change · Management · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · Anthropological Studies and Insights · Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture · Law · Philosophy · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access