What is this document?

This document is a Code of Conduct, intended to help groups of researchers coming from a wide range of institutions to have a common framework for ethics and conduct while working together in the field; it also includes instructions for use (this document), and a short synopsis to make it easier to understand. Many fieldwork experiences are organized across institutions, may include members that are not affiliated with any particular institution, and are funded from multiple sources. All of this can lead to ambiguity in, or outright lack of, any unifying code of conduct for such groups of researchers. This document seeks to provide an open-access solution to this problem.

This document exists because the authors experienced a situation where a group of researchers working together in a remote field location had need of such a document, and did not have one. We believe it is with the best of intentions that inter-disciplinary and inter-institutional researchers plan field work, expecting friendship, respect, and logic to be sufficient for inter-personal conflict resolution. While admirable in sentiment, this often-unconscious reliance on expectations of reasonable behavior puts the entire group at risk — at risk of misconduct from even just a single group member, and at risk of extreme legal and research consequences in the aftermath of such misconduct when there is not a clear path forward towards resolution. The authors of this document have experienced an example of such a situation and have prepared this document in the hopes that it can help to prevent such situations from arising in the future.

We provide here a Code of Conduct, which:

1. Outlines key principles, commitments, and challenges to unify researchers from multiple institutions;
2. Details prohibited conduct;
3. Provides specific definitions;
4. Outlines specific policies for research ethics, diversity concerns, sexual and other forms of harassment and misconduct, and conflicts of interest; and
5. Provides a structure for such groups to address concerns effectively.

Providing such clear guiding principles and instructions helps to ensure that breaches of conduct do not happen in the first place. We provide this Code not as a prescriptive document, but as a tool, to be shaped and crafted by each group of researchers to fit the individual needs of their particular project and group.

How is this document used?

We have endeavored to write this document in a way that is as broadly applicable as possible: you may be able to simply download it and use it without modification. However, that is not the core intent. We hope that this document will serve as a framework, to be modified and built upon.

During the planning stages of any inter-institutional fieldwork, the leadership of the project should carefully consider conduct and ethical issues. What problems might arise? How will they be dealt with, if they do? How can we prevent them from happening in the first place?

It has been demonstrated that the provision of clear rules of conduct, as well as the training of group members in those rules, is an effective means of preventing conduct issues from arising (Nelson et al 2017). When a code is adapted, all group members should be trained in its contents, and it should be consistently and visibly enforced by the project leadership. We recommend having each group member physically sign that they agree to the terms of whatever code is adopted, ideally after someone has discussed the contents with them in full, to ensure that they are aware of and understand the particular policies and guidelines laid out in the code.

We provide a detailed Code of Conduct, as well as a Short Synopsis that can be printed on a single page and used as a handout to ensure that every team member has the necessary information.

Any group interested in using this document should carefully consider the entire document, and modify it to fit the needs of the particular research project, field context, and group. There are, however, certain key points that must be carefully considered, and to which we would advise research groups to pay careful attention:

1. It may be useful to explicitly define the start and end dates of the project or fieldwork experience to be governed by this code.

2. Key Principles, Commitments, and Challenges: These introductory sections provide the ethical basis for everything that is to follow, and should be considered carefully when any project is adapting this Code to their needs. We recommend caution in modifying these sections, because it is easy for unconscious biases and unexamined assumptions to creep into broad statements of purpose and principles. A statement of principles that is inadvertently exclusionary will leave group members feeling demoralized and excluded from the beginning, and may destabilize your research group, rather than bringing them together, as intended.

3. In the Prohibited Conduct section, we have made the decision to explicitly ban alcohol consumption. Even when permitted by law, alcohol generally does not add to the productivity of fieldwork activities. Fieldwork activities are generally of a short enough duration that it should not be a burden for any group member to abstain (and if it is, perhaps they should seek treatment). The regulation of alcohol consumption adds unnecessary complications to project planning and leadership, and unnecessary additional risk of conduct violations due to inebriation, and unnecessary risks to health and safety in remote research sites, where hazards are common and medical evacuation may be difficult and costly.

   Some may find this to be overly strict, and desire to change it to something more permissive (e.g., alcohol prohibited during work hours, or work tasks, etc.). If that is so, we would urge caution, and consider the way that altering this policy to be more permissive impacts the rest of the Code of Conduct. In particular, you may want to add some Definitions, to explicitly define the times, places, and situations when alcohol consumption is allowable. You may also want to add clarity to other policies, such as Sexual Harassment and Misconduct, about the role that inebriation will play in judging misconduct. (Remember, no one can consent if they are drunk.)

4. In the Conflicts of Interest and Abuses of Power section, we have made the decision to explicitly forbid the formation of new intimate relationships between members of the group, regardless of hierarchical relationships and other power dynamics between them. During fieldwork settings, emotional and physical stresses are exaggerated, group members are often isolated for some length of time, social dynamics may be altered from typical academic settings. In the field, there is often both a relaxing of hierarchical relationships (e.g., students and supervisors may relate more as equals) concurrent with a narrowing of hierarchical structures (e.g., a student may have no other administrative authority than the mentor with whom they are in the field). Given these complicating factors, we have judged that field relationships are inadvisable, because consent may be difficult to assess and formal and informal hierarchical dynamics may be difficult to untangle, leading to conflicts of interest and potential abuses of power.

   As with the prohibition on alcohol, some may feel that this provision is overly strict, and desire to change it. If you do, we recommend also amending the Definitions section, or adding an additional section, which clearly delineates the hierarchical relationships in the group before the start of fieldwork. Who counts as a student, versus a volunteer? Who is in charge of overseeing whom? It may also be advisable to expand the Conflicts of Interest and Abuses of Power section to explicitly provide provisions for such newly formed relationships, and guidelines for professional conduct.

Who wrote this document?

This document was prepared by a group researchers engaged in inter-institutional fieldwork in a remote setting, who had need of such a document, but did not have one. We are (alphabetically):

Paulette Goyes, Jessica Grant, Araya Jensen, Patty Kaishian, Elisa Levy, Tobias Policha, and Roo Vandegrift

We have released this document as open-access, under the GNU General Public License Version 3.0, which means that you can download it and use it as you see fit. If you want to republish an changed or improved version, please do, but remember to cite the original release, so that others who may find it useful are able to access it, and please release your new version under the same terms.

Please cite this Code of Conduct as:

Paulette Goyes, Jessica Grant, Araya Jensen, Patty Kaishian, Elisa Levy, Tobias Policha, & Roo Vandegrift (2020). Code of Conduct for Inter-Institutional Fieldwork (Version v1.0.0). Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.XXXX/zenodo.XXXXXXX