The approval of Resolution CNS no. 510/2016 is a progress for Brazilian science
Keywords:Research Ethics Board, Conep, Qualitative Research, Epistemology, Collective Health, Social Sciences and Humanities
The Brazilian National Health Council’s Resolution no. 510/2016 states the specific ethical procedures for social science and humanities (SSH) research. It is the result of many people’s work who, for a long time, have been arguing the inadequacy of one single strictly biomedical set of guidelines supposed to be applied in all areas. The main differences between SSH research and biomedical research are discussed in this article. The fight for the power to state what science is characterizes the scientific field, in which the interference of the Research Ethics Board/Brazilian Commission on Research Ethics system is not adequate, because the mission of this system is to protect research participants. We discuss six changes brought by Resolution no. 510/2016. Brazilian guidelines on research ethics are prominently narrow. At the international level, many research codes are broader. Norway has specific guidelines for research in Social Science, Humanities, Law and Theology, which include the discussion on research’s social value and function; society’s interests; the need for academic freedom to conduct research considering ethical procedures; the role and interests of academic managers; principles and interests within academic communities, including their relationship with students; funding agents’ responsibility; researches’ results consequences; and science popularization.