Sharing the benefits of research fairly: two approaches

• Published in: Journal of medical ethics Vol. 38; no. 4; pp. 219 - 223
• Main Author: Millum, Joseph
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Institute of Medical Ethics 01.04.2012; BMJ Publishing Group; BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; BMJ Publishing Group LTD
• Subjects: benefit sharing; Biomedical research; Biomedical Research - economics; Biomedical Research - ethics; Clinical research; Company systems management; Conflict of Interest - economics; Developed countries; Developing countries; Developing Countries - economics; distributive justice; Ethics; Exploitation; Fairness; Health care industry; health policy; Health Services Accessibility - economics; Health Services Accessibility - ethics; Human Experimentation - ethics; Humans; Influenza; Information management; informed consent; International Cooperation; LDCs; Medical research; Medicine, Experimental; Moral judgment; philosophical ethics; political philosophy; Research ethics; Research studies; Research Subjects; Research Support as Topic - ethics; responsiveness; Socioeconomic Factors; Vaccines; Vulnerable Populations
• ISSN: 0306-6800; 1473-4257; 1473-4257
• DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100118

Research projects sponsored by rich countries or companies and carried out in developing countries are often described as exploitative. One important debate about the prevention of exploitation in research centres on whether and how clinical research in developing countries should be responsive to local health problems. This paper analyses the responsiveness debate and draws out more general lessons for how policy makers can prevent exploitation in various research contexts. There are two independent ways to do this in the face of entrenched power differences: to impose restrictions on the content of benefit-sharing arrangements, and to institute independent effective oversight. Which method should be chosen is highly dependent on context.