1 / 11

Ensuring Science Integrity and Preventing Misconduct - Japan ’ s Challenge -

Ensuring Science Integrity and Preventing Misconduct - Japan ’ s Challenge -. S&T Policy Bureau Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) JAPAN Feb 22, 2007 Tokyo, Japan. Summary.

talor
Download Presentation

Ensuring Science Integrity and Preventing Misconduct - Japan ’ s Challenge -

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ensuring Science Integrity and Preventing Misconduct- Japan’s Challenge - S&T Policy Bureau Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) JAPAN Feb 22, 2007 Tokyo, Japan

  2. Summary • Research misconducts including fabrication has been pointed out one after the other recent years in Japan. • Research misconduct is an act of violating the moral and ethical principles of research to distort the essence or original intent of research activities. • Research misconduct undermines public trust in science, obstructs the development of science and desecrates science. • There is a greater need to ensure fairness in research for the effective utilization of government funds. • The Special Committee was established under the Council of S&T in February 2006. • The Guideline was established in August 2006.

  3. Guideline from Council of S&T (2) Scope of Guideline Research Misconduct (*) Scope of Guideline R&D Activities funded through the competitive research funding scheme by MEXT and MEXT-related funding agencies. (Out of scope) • R&D Activities funded through the • block funding scheme • - R&D Activities self-funded etc. (*) Definition of research misconduct: Fabrication, falsification and plagiarism of data or research results appearing in published research results.

  4. Guideline from Council of S&T (3) • Table of Contents of Guideline • Section 1: Basic Principles Concerning Research Misconduct • Section 2: Guidelines for Responses to Research Misconduct Pertaining to Research Supported by Competitive Funding • 1. Purpose of the Guidelines • 2. Definition of research misconduct • Receiving of Allegations and Other Information • Investigation of Allegations and Other Information • 5. Measures Applicable to Informants and Subjects of Allegations • 6. Actions by Funding Institutions Against Persons Culpable of Misconduct

  5. Guideline from Council of S&T (4) Receiving of Allegations # Research institutions and funding institutions shall individually establish offices for receiving allegations and other information concerning research misconduct. - Following this Guideline, for example, MEXT established the office in S&T Policy Bureau in November, 2006. JSPS established the office in General Affairs Division in December, 2006. JST established the office in Department of General Affairs in December, 2006.

  6. Guideline from Council of S&T (4) Actions by Funding Institutions Against Persons Culpable of Misconduct # Description of actions - Termination of competitive funding - Rejection of applications for competitive funds - Return of competitive funds related to misconduct - Restrictions on applications for competitive funds

  7. Japan’s Action: Beyond Guideline (1) Research Misconduct Scope of MEXT’s Guideline (R&D Activities funded nationally…) Other R&D Activities? Actions by scientific community themselves should be taken, because the over-regulation should be avoided to maintain the autonomy of academia.

  8. Japan’s Action: Beyond Guideline (2) Autonomous action by Japan’s Academia Important as an action complement to the Government’s one. Science Council of Japan (SCJ): “Statement: Code of Conduct for Scientists” (October, 2006) President of Science Council of Japan (SCJ): “Comment on the ‘scientific’ experiment on the TV program etc.” (January 26, 2007) - Quick response to the social problem, so-called “Aru-aru incident” took place on January 7, 2007.

  9. For Discussion From our experience, the following discussion points would be left for us. # What actions should be taken by Government? And, what should be left for the autonomous action by the academia? # What kind of ‘punishment’ would be appropriate for what kind of misconduct? # Prevention of misconduct itself would be more important than the dealing with misconduct. What kind of science system is effective to prevent misconducts?

  10. Reference “Aru-aru” incident (January, 2007) In the Japanese popular TV ‘science’ program “Aru-aru Encyclopedia II” (audience rating: about 15%), the fabrication of experimental data was founded. In the program, the data was used to justify a new ‘scientific’ theorem that Natto (bean-based Japanese traditional food) is effective for diet (weight loss). After the program was on air on January 7, 2007, the huge reaction was seen all over Japan, for example, Natto was almost sold out and its price was raised. Natto: Bean-based Japanese traditional food

  11. Reference MEXT: “Guidelines for Responses to Research Misconduct”(August, 2006) http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/gijyutu/gijyutu12/houkoku/06082316.htm * only in Japanese (English version will be uploaded soon) Science Council of Japan (SCJ): “Statement: Code of Conduct for Scientists”(October, 2006) http://www.scj.go.jp/ja/info/kohyo/pdf/kohyo-20-s3e-1.pdf * in English

More Related