Paper short abstract:

In recent years Finland, Norway and Sweden have developed different ethical strategies for qualitative research methods. In this paper we aim to discuss some of the different effects these standards may have on “good research practice” in these three national contexts in relation to Open Data.

Paper long abstract:

There are currently two juxtaposing principles for researchers in the humanities to observe. One is that science and data should be transparent, reusable and available for the general public. The other one is the protection of personal data, recently sharpened through the law of GDPR. For ethnologists, these contradicting principles are particularly acute in that qualitative methods generate data that often is classified as “sensitive”, hence requiring particular care.

The three countries of Norway, Sweden and Finland have diverging application of ethical principles. The crux of the matter therefore lies in the framework of “good research conduct”, as these ethical principles limit the room of manoeuvre in different ways. In this presentation, our aim is to compare the ethical guidelines in these three countries in direct regard to openness.

We argue that before asking how open science is outlined and realised, one must raise the question of how national standards differ, and how this impact on ethnological research conducted within the different states. Do the more precise principles of Norway or Finland allow more than the more general rules in Sweden? Do qualitative methods of research conducted in these countries lead to different opportunities in contributing to Open Data?