Engaged research is increasingly becoming a crucial aspect of higher education institutions (HEIs) in South Africa. In doing engaged research, various complex ethical considerations emerge, particularly as researchers interact with communities in collaborative and participatory ways. The panel discussion, ‘Engaged Research Ethics in South African Higher Education Institutions, at the Community Engagement Conference sought to delve deeply into these concerns with a diverse and nuanced approach.

The panel was facilitated by Rhodes University’s coordinator of Engaged Research, Dr Rene Oosthuizen and featured Rhodes University’s Emeritus Professor Peter Clayton; the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) Chair, Dr Janet Hayward and Community Partner and HREC member, Ms Monica Canca. The panel also featured Dr Martina Jordaan, the Head of Community Engagement Research and Postgraduate Students from the Mamelodi Campus of University of Pretoria;  Prof Vhonani Netshandama, Director of Community Engagement at University of Venda and Jacqui Scheepers-Searle from Cape Peninsula University of Technology. 

Community Engagement as the Third Pillar

The discussion began with the positioning of CE as the third pillar of Higher Education Institutions and how this developed. "The creation, dissemination, and application of knowledge are the three pillars of universities, with teaching, research, and community engagement forming the backbone of these institutions,” acknowledged Prof Clayton. “However, these pillars have not always been equally emphasised.” 

In the early days, universities primarily focused on teaching. Research began to gain prominence in the 1960s and 70s, and it wasn't until the 21st century that community engagement started being recognized as a fundamental pillar. At Rhodes University, it was only in 2008 that a subcommittee on community engagement was established.

Jaqui Scheepers-Searle noted that although we have these three pillars, Community Engagement struggles to stay in one lane.  “I think we've always dabbled across the three pillars,” she says. “I don't think we ever stayed in our lane. That's not the nature of community engagement.” 

Because of the complexity of Community Engagement activity in Universities, robust ethical committees are important for the impact and sustainability of research projects. 

Impact of Engaged Research on Traditional Ethical Committees and Processes

Dr. Janet Haywood emphasised that engaged research requires reversing the traditional top-down approach. "The huge importance of engaged research is allowing the community to shape the research, to shape the question, to work out who the participants should be," she stated. This shift has significant implications for research ethics. 

The traditional ethics approval processes, designed primarily for researcher-driven projects, often clash with the principles of engaged research. For example, the requirement for researchers to know their research questions and methodologies before commencing their projects contradicts the iterative, collaborative nature of engaged research. Dr. Haywood's introduction of a scoping approval process at Rhodes University addresses this by allowing preliminary engagement and planning with communities before formal ethics approval.

These processes must be reiterative which requires researchers to be continuously invested in keeping up with changing dynamics. Through reflecting on her experience at the University of Pretoria, Prof Jordaan noted that being trained in ethics of research when making applications is an important process. “We actually had to go through courses, online CITI (Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative) courses, before we could even apply for the ethics, ” she recalls.  “After I went through this course, I realised, oh my goodness, there's things that I don't know. So that is really one of the things that [University of Pretoria] are implementing now.”

The complexities of engaged research ethics extend to transdisciplinary projects as well. These projects, which involve multiple academic disciplines and community perspectives, often face bureaucratic and formalistic hurdles. Prof. Clayton noted the discomfort many researchers feel towards these processes, viewing them as unnecessary bureaucratic burdens. However, he also acknowledged their importance in ensuring ethical rigour.

University Ethics vs Community Values 

Despite these advancements in the research ethics processes, challenges remain. The integration of community values and ethical standards with academic research protocols is not straightforward. Monica Cranca pointed out,  "What might be ethical according to university processes might not be considered ethical by the community," emphasising the need for continuous dialogue and negotiation.