What is this about? (Is About)
From The Embassy of Good Science
A short summary providing some details about the theme/resource (max. 75 words)
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
G
There are two complementary approaches through which technology can contribute to sustainability:
• Greening by Tech: using technology to enable sustainable solutions (e.g., climate monitoring, carbon tracking, energy-efficient transportation).
• Greening of Tech: making the technologies themselves — including software, cloud, and hardware — more sustainable and energy-efficient.
Read pages 16 to 18 of the UN Responsible Technology Playbook, linked in the first slide of this course (www.thoughtworks.com/content/dam/thoughtworks/documents/e-book/tw_ebook_responsible_tech_playbook_united_nations.pdf), which explain these two concepts and sustainability design principles. Then complete the two exercises. +
This resource describes 10 scenarios which can be discussed with students. The cases are all about plagiarism, and consider different aspects related to plagiarism, copying ideas, working together and citations. The resource presents the scenarios accompanied with questions students can discuss, and relevant teacher notes.
<br /> +
This article in ''Nature'' covers a series of apparent plagiarism cases in papers co-authored by government ministers and senior officials in Iran. According to the journal, these cases raise questions about whether such incidents are symptomatic of professional conditions also common in other developing countries or whether they are specifically linked to the Iranian regime and its politically-motivated and nepotistic appointments. +
The purpose of the third exercise is for participants to easily gain an overall understanding of the differences between the two types of innovation. +
This factual case discusses various accusations of scientific misconduct, most notably the practices of guest authorship and ghostwriting. The case begins with various letters to the authors of an article on guest authorship and the editors of the journal, following which both the editors and the authors respond to these letters.
'"`UNIQ--references-000000DD-QINU`"' +
This post provides several factual examples of 'purchased author credentials' in published papers. Abalkina argues that ‘bought authorship' has flourished partly due to the increased pressure to Russian academics to publish. However, it has expanded to other European and non-countries. +
This document offers advices on conducting ethical Internet research. It addresses questions such as privacy, vulnerability, potential harm, informed consent, confidentiality, consultation, platform/community knowledge and data acquisition. +
This guidance, developed by the PREPARED project, supports ethics committees and journal editors in conducting fair and rapid assessments of research during public health emergencies. It offers practical recommendations to ensure evaluations remain ethical, transparent, and scientifically sound, even under time and resource pressure. The document emphasizes involving qualified assessors, using standardized checklists, and focusing on key ethical and safety issues. It also encourages minimizing bias, promoting consistency, and improving coordination among journals, ethics boards, and funders. By streamlining reviews without compromising standards, the guidance enables timely, trustworthy research dissemination while protecting participants and upholding public trust. +
The document is the result of participant discussions during the 5th meeting of the ETHICS AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY OFFICER NETWORK (ERION) within the European Association of Research Managers and Administrators (EARMA).
The theme of the meeting was ‘Implementation of training programmes for researchers in Ethics and Research Integrity’. Participants discussed in small groups best practices and key elements for the implementation of training programmes for researchers in Ethics and Research Integrity.
ERION is an open community to discuss the practical and implementation side of Research Ethics and Integrity. The community is for all those that need to ensure compliance, efficiency, functionality, fairness and robustness in the practices and processes in their organisation. Such people may have titles as Ethics/Integrity Officer, Administrator and many others. +
Guidance for all stakeholders involved in clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. This document aims to provide guidance and prevent the disruption of clinical trials during the ongoing crisis. Even when health systems reach their limits, the integrity of trials, the rights, and the safety of the trial participants and staff must be preserved and protected. For this reason, this guideline provides harmonized, simplified and pragmatic measures. +
Guide to Recommendations for Responsible Practices -2013 (2013) is a national framework authored by Brazilian Academy of Sciences, in portuguese, targeting Brazil. Originating from Brazil, it aims to formalise principles of research integrity and open practice. It emphasises honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship of resources, linking these values to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust in research. The text covers responsibilities of researchers, institutions, funders, and journals, spelling out expectations for good practice in planning, conducting, publishing, and reviewing research. Common provisions include clear authorship criteria, proper citation and acknowledgement, management of conflicts of interest, transparency of methods and data, responsible supervision, and fair peer review. It also establishes procedures for handling breaches of integrity, defining misconduct, and setting up investigation mechanisms that ensure due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. By aligning with international standards, it connects local policy to global norms, reinforcing mobility of researchers and comparability of practices across borders. The document integrates the principle of education—training for students and staff on responsible conduct—ensuring that integrity is taught as a core skill rather than assumed knowledge. It also incorporates guidance on emerging issues such as data management, digital tools, open science, and new forms of dissemination, embedding integrity in contemporary workflows. Practical tools often include checklists, codes of behaviour, reporting templates, and FAQs, translating high-level principles into day-to-day actions. The intended audience spans researchers, supervisors, institutions, and policymakers, all of whom need clarity on their roles in safeguarding the credibility of research. Equity and diversity appear as cross-cutting themes, recognising that integrity involves creating inclusive environments free from discrimination, harassment, or exploitation.
Overall, the resource situates research integrity as both a personal commitment and an institutional responsibility, embedding it into the full research cycle from design to dissemination. Annexes may provide case studies, historical context, and references to international declarations such as Singapore or Montreal statements. Definitions and glossaries support consistent interpretation, and contact points or ombudsperson systems are described to lower barriers to reporting. These features help the resource serve not only as a policy but also as a practical handbook.
Set of questions to guide the conversation about about work-related stress and about stress influencing work.
The guide addresses the following themes:
# Work-related stress
# Work-life balance
# Atmosphere at work
# Evaluation & agreements +
Guidelines 03/2020 on the processing of data concerning health for the purpose of scientific research in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak +
This guidance is intended for the processing of health data for the purpose of scientific research. It provides information on legal basis for the processing of data, data protection principles, exercise of the rights of data subjects, and international data transfers for scientific research purposes. +
These Guidelines were presented by the Lithuanian Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures in 2020 (revised 2022), and were developed to ensure the compliance of the Lithuanian academic community with european and global research ethics standards. The principles of academic integrity established here aim to protect the interests of research participants and animals used for research. The guidelines establish complaince with ethical procedures as a marker of research quality, and offer guidance for coping with the challenges and problems of research reliability, integrity, and comprehensiveness, as well as with management of collected data. +
These guidelines aim to help departments and faculty members implement evaluation procedures in hiring, tenure and promotion. They are intended for scholars dealing with digital media as their subject as well as for those who use digital methods in their work. +
The FNRS (Funds for Scientific Research) is a research funding organization that has focused on encouraging fundamental research in Belgium for more than 90 years. In order to enable universities to perform research within a clear framework of scientific integrity, this guideline was developed. It also aims to lay out procedures for addressing scientific misconduct, and to create awareness or research integrity among individual researchers. +
The Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT) is a member organization of the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. As an independent advisory body, it provides important guidelines that lay down the standards of good scientific practice. +
Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology (NESH, Norway) +
The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) is one of the constituents of the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. As such, it forms an impartial advisory body on research ethics and integrity. In this document, the NESH sets out the good research practices that are especially relevant to researchers within the social sciences and humanities, but also to the research community at large. +
This is an educational course intended for new researchers. The aim of the course is to educate them on conducting responsible data management. It contains best practice guidelines, various learning features and resources. +
Guidelines for Safeguarding Good Research Practice (2022) is a national framework authored by German Research Foundation, in german and english, targeting Germany. Originating from Germany, it aims to formalise principles of research integrity and open practice. It emphasises honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship of resources, linking these values to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust in research. The text covers responsibilities of researchers, institutions, funders, and journals, spelling out expectations for good practice in planning, conducting, publishing, and reviewing research. Common provisions include clear authorship criteria, proper citation and acknowledgement, management of conflicts of interest, transparency of methods and data, responsible supervision, and fair peer review. It also establishes procedures for handling breaches of integrity, defining misconduct, and setting up investigation mechanisms that ensure due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. By aligning with international standards, it connects local policy to global norms, reinforcing mobility of researchers and comparability of practices across borders. The document integrates the principle of education—training for students and staff on responsible conduct—ensuring that integrity is taught as a core skill rather than assumed knowledge. It also incorporates guidance on emerging issues such as data management, digital tools, open science, and new forms of dissemination, embedding integrity in contemporary workflows. Practical tools often include checklists, codes of behaviour, reporting templates, and FAQs, translating high-level principles into day-to-day actions. The intended audience spans researchers, supervisors, institutions, and policymakers, all of whom need clarity on their roles in safeguarding the credibility of research. Equity and diversity appear as cross-cutting themes, recognising that integrity involves creating inclusive environments free from discrimination, harassment, or exploitation. Overall, the resource situates research integrity as both a personal commitment and an institutional responsibility, embedding it into the full research cycle from design to dissemination. Annexes may provide case studies, historical context, and references to international declarations such as Singapore or Montreal statements. Definitions and glossaries support consistent interpretation, and contact points or ombudsperson systems are described to lower barriers to reporting. These features help the resource serve not only as a policy but also as a practical handbook.
