Case Study:
Lesotho is a small developing country contained within South Africa. You and your team of academic researchers (10 in all) are spending the next two weeks travelling to different communities throughout Lesotho to test water sources for disease-causing pathogens. The testing you need to do is simple but requires significant assistance from the community – showing your team all the different locations where individuals get their water from, and places/methods for storing the water. You do not see the need to pay the community members, considering if someone asked you about your water source, you would not mind driving them up to the lake! The ultimate goal of the project is to understand the life cycle and characteristics of a specific pathogen, which is found only in this region of Lesotho. Several publications are expected from this research study. A comprehensive profile of this pathogen can help in many ways including development of chemical additives to make the water safe to drink.
Is it ethical to conduct this research study? What will you do next?
Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible. Clearly state the ethical issue.
-
- The researcher does not want to pay community members for their assistance as they themselves feel that they would help others if asked.
- The team only has two weeks to complete the entire project
- Results from this study can help make water safe for consumption which will be beneficial to the community
- Received all necessary institutional review board approvals as well as in country support from the country’s government/ethics board.
- Ethical Issue: Research team wants time and knowledge from community members without compensation.
Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome and Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders
- Researchers
- Praise from academic community for identifying/understanding this pathogen
- Scientific publications
- Possible promotions in job/career due to discovery
- Motivations to help others have safe drinking water
- Universities
- Praise and recognition from other
- More funding in the future as they build their research base
- Potential awards
- Recognition leading to higher ranking and more students applying
- Build up their brand/reputation for pathogen research
- Funding Sources
- Return on their investment → successful project, lead to future work in the area, improved reputation
- Community Members
- A need to have clean drinking water which could be an outcome from the research
- As little interference in their daily life as possible; maximum benefit from research
- Having clean water could attract more tourists to their country
- They export water, so having a good reputation for having clean water can help boost exports
Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using basic ethical core values as guide
Approaches
- Potential solution 1: Give a financial incentive to community members
- Ethical Principle or code
- Beneficence – our actions would result in benefits to the research community (larger understanding of the pathogen), the communities in Lesotho (knowledge of pathogen, eventually hopefully a solution to cleaner water).
- Justice – Community members would receive compensation according to their contribution to the project.
- Pros
- Covers their time if they took off work to help you
- Gives them a larger incentive to donate extra time
- Locals feel they’re contributing to something meaningful and are being appropriately compensated for their effort
- Cons
- Need additional funds to provide the incentive
- May not be sustainable in the long-term if the team were to need to return to gather additional samples
- Moving funding to pay for incentive may cause the team to cut corners that might undermine the research results
- Ethical Principle or code
- Potential solution 2: Continue as planned
- Ethical Principle or code
- Justice – community members are not receiving equal compensation for the effort they are putting in.
- Pros
- No additional planning, time, or funds are required
- Research team is giving back to the community in the long term through information on the pathogen and is incentive enough
- Research team saves money
- Cons
- Community members might not be willing to provide us with the information we need
- There is no immediate incentive or benefit to community members
- Ethical Principle or code
- Potential solution 3: Provide education about the pathogen and how to clean the water they use
- Ethical Principle or code
- Justice – Community members would receive compensation according to their contribution to the project.
- Pros
- Community members gain an understanding of the pathogens that may be affecting their health and the need for clean water.
- Involvement of community members in the research may lead to them being more willing to participate and let you return in the future
- May be more sustainable than a financial incentive
- Cons
- Time consuming to train or educate people
- Community members may not see education as an incentive, it may take up too much of their time or they may not care to learn about it
- May create panic as community members feel that they have no sources of safe drinking water and cause unrest
- Ethical Principle or code
Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection
Personally, I thought this case study was a little difficult because I was trying to decide if there really was a problem with ethics. It was also kind of challenging coming up with potential solutions to the problem at hand. I believe more people would be open to offering their assistance if there is a compensation involved. However, there may be more people (not always better) coming to assist depending on the type of compensation they would receive. It would be helpful to find a set of reliable community members that have an understanding of the bodies of water in Lesotho. Education on water safety and pathogens would be extremely beneficial to communities such as these. I think my team was able to collaborate and decide on options for alternative solutions for this case. I did find some additional information that could be helpful with this case study in the future.
Momba, M., Makala, N., Zani, B. and Brouckaert, B. (2005). Key Causes of Drinking Water Quality Failure in a Rural Small Water Supply of South Africa. In Water Encyclopedia (eds J.H. Lehr and J. Keeley). doi:10.1002/047147844X.mw1843
Olaniran, A.O., Naidoo, S. and Pillay, B. (2012), Surveillance of Invasive Bacterial Pathogens and Human Enteric Viruses in Wastewater Final Effluents and Receiving Water Bodies – a Case Study from Durban, South Africa. Clean Soil Air Water, 40: 681-691. doi:10.1002/clen.201100023
Sadik, N. J., Uprety, S., Nalweyiso, A., Kiggundu, N., Banadda, N. E., Shisler, J. L., and Nguyen, T. H. (2017), Quantification of multiple waterborne pathogens in drinking water, drainage channels, and surface water in Kampala, Uganda, during seasonal variation, GeoHealth, 1, 258– 269, doi:10.1002/2017GH000081.
Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values. Explain reasoning and justify. Discuss your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class.
In my opinion, the best course of action would be to include education to the community about clean water as a compensation for their assistance with the project. This compensation would encourage more people to assist with the project. The education could be on pathogens, the causes, and what the effects may be of ingesting pathogens. Many developing countries are unaware of the causes of diseases and disabilities. Many members of these communities believe the causes of these diseases and disabilities are from worshiping the devil, witchcraft, and from sinning. With correct education on pathogens and its influence on diseases it could decrease the amount of people that are ostracized from the community. Education is also a way to save money. If education is given as a compensation, the investors do not need to provide more money to give as compensation to the community members for assisting in the project. Others may disagree that providing education as a form of compensation is not a good idea. Perhaps, people will not want any education on the topic, and therefore will not be eager to volunteer their time to help the project. Other people in my group and class suggested moving forth without including any compensation at all as well as offering money as compensation. However, there could be negative implications with providing monetary compensation for community members that assist with the project.
Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture. Explain the impact of your proposed solution on the venture’s technology, economic, social and environmental aspects.
I feel that my solution impacts the ventures technology, economic, social and environmental aspects of the project in a positive way. Socially, the community members will be provided with a way to help their community with solving the problem of the pathogens in the water. The community members will also be receiving education on water, pathogens, and water safety for their assistance with the project. Environmentally, the project will be a success because there will be research and hopefully a cure for the pathogen in the water. This will save many lives of the community members. Economically, there will be no additional funds needed from the investors for compensation because we are using education as a way to compensate the community members for assisting with the venture.