Against Permitted Exploitation in Developing World Research Agreements

This paper examines the moral force of exploitation in developing world research agreements. Taking for granted that some clinical research which is conducted in the developing world but funded by developed world sponsors is exploitative, it asks whether a third party would be morally justified in e...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Developing world bioethics 2016-04, Vol.16 (1), p.36-44
Main Author: Wenner, Danielle M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agreements
Attorneys
Bioethics
Biomedical Research - ethics
clinical trials
Developing Countries
developing world bioethics
Ethics
Exploitation
Health care industry
Humans
Interference
Law firms
Moral Obligations
Morals
R&D
Regulation
Research & development
research ethics
Social Justice - ethics
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper examines the moral force of exploitation in developing world research agreements. Taking for granted that some clinical research which is conducted in the developing world but funded by developed world sponsors is exploitative, it asks whether a third party would be morally justified in enforcing limits on research agreements in order to ensure more fair and less exploitative outcomes. This question is particularly relevant when such exploitative transactions are entered into voluntarily by all relevant parties, and both research sponsors and host communities benefit from the resulting agreements. I show that defenders of the claim that exploitation ought to be permitted rely on a mischaracterization of certain forms of interference as unjustly paternalistic and two dubious empirical assumptions about the results of regulation. The view I put forward is that by evaluating a system of constraints on international research agreements, rather than individual transaction‐level interference, we can better assess the alternatives to permitting exploitative research agreements.
ISSN:1471-8731
1471-8847
DOI:10.1111/dewb.12081