IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ccasxx/v44y2025i1p132-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Why should we have theirs if we have our own?’ On decolonizing social science research ethics in Central Asia

Author

Listed:
  • Gulzhanat Gafu
  • Lynne Parmenter

Abstract

Many Central Asian institutions and researchers are under increasing pressure to research and publish internationally, to meet knowledge production goals set by governments. In many cases, however, support systems for research, such as research ethics courses and approval, are not in place. In this research note, we explore research ethics issues in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, and reflect on what it means to conduct ethical research from the decolonial and cultural perspectives within the region and beyond. Findings from one hundred qualitative interviews with social science researchers in these three countries indicate significant variation in attitudes within and between nations to developing social science research ethics guidelines in the region. While researchers in Kazakhstan endorse an internationalized approach, their counterparts in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan were strongly inclined towards culturally nuanced research ethics policies and regulations. Despite the strong call from the participants to have ‘our way’ of doing research, the foundations for it are still to evolve. We recommend rethinking research ethics in Central Asia should start from professional development for researchers and quality discussions to inform policy-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Gulzhanat Gafu & Lynne Parmenter, 2025. "‘Why should we have theirs if we have our own?’ On decolonizing social science research ethics in Central Asia," Central Asian Survey, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 132-140, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ccasxx:v:44:y:2025:i:1:p:132-140
    DOI: 10.1080/02634937.2025.2453696
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02634937.2025.2453696
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/02634937.2025.2453696?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ccasxx:v:44:y:2025:i:1:p:132-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ccas .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.