Research ethics: Assuring anonymity at the individual level may not be sufficient to protect research participants from harm

Randomised Response Techniques are used to investigate rule breaking in conservation such as hunting of protected species

Abstract

The recent special edition of Biological Conservation on Conservation Crime provided an opportunity to reflect on the growing use of specialised methods for asking sensitive questions in conservation. Such tools, including the Randomised Response Technique (RRT), are increasingly used to investigate rule breaking in conservation for example, hunting of protected species, use of illegal fishing gear, or other wildlife crimes.

Citation

John, F.A.V.St., Brockington, D., Bunnefeld, N., Duffy, R., Homewood, K., Jones, J.P.G., Keane, A., Milner-Gulland, E.J., Nuno, A., Razafimanahaka, J.H., Research ethics: Assuring anonymity at the individual level may not be sufficient to protect research participants from harm, Biological Conservation, 2015

Research ethics: Assuring anonymity at the individual level may not be sufficient to protect research participants from harm

Updates to this page

Published 1 January 2015