Skip to Content

Co-design

OverviewCo-design activities that do not require ethics reviewWhen co-design outputs become research dataIris Ethics' positionRelated resources

This article is part of the Iris Ethics Knowledge Base; you can find a directory of all articles here.

Overview

Co-design is a participatory approach in which researchers, evaluators, and stakeholders work collaboratively to shape research questions, methodology, data collection approaches, and analysis frameworks. Co-design activities are explicitly recognised by the National Statement as playing a valuable role in research planning, and specific provisions address when such activities require ethics review.

Co-design activities that do not require ethics review

The National Statement is explicit that pre-research engagement does not itself constitute human research. The Purpose, Scope and Limits of this Document states:

"...consultation and engagement with potential participants, co-researchers and community representatives that precedes the development, design or conduct of the research is not itself human research and typically does not require ethics review" (see also NS Chapter 4.1, Introduction).

This means that workshops, deliberative sessions, collaborative planning meetings, and iterative feedback processes conducted during the planning phase, before formal data collection begins, do not typically require ethics review.

When co-design outputs become research data

The situation becomes more complex when co-design outputs are subsequently used as research or evaluation data. If materials generated during co-design activities, such as workshop recordings, participant contributions, or design artefacts, are later analysed to generate new knowledge, that analysis constitutes research and requires ethics review.

This includes scenarios such as:

  • process evaluations that use co-design documentation as evidence;
  • reflective practice research analysing the co-design process itself; and
  • synthesis of stakeholder perspectives from co-design activities.

The National Statement is clear at NS 5.1.6 that retrospective ethical approval is not permitted. Researchers who plan to use co-design materials as research data should include this in their initial ethics application or submit an amendment before such analysis begins.

Iris Ethics' position

Iris Ethics treats the review and analysis of co-design outputs as research requiring ethics review, typically at the lower risk level. This reflects the position that while the co-design activities themselves may not require review, their subsequent use as research or evaluation data does.

Best practice recommendations for researchers undertaking co-design include:

  • Seeking consent from co-design participants for potential research or evaluative use of outputs at the outset
  • Being transparent about how materials generated may be used, including in publications and reports
  • Recognising co-design participants as peer practitioners where their contributions become research data
  • Planning prospectively for any research use of co-design materials by including this in the ethics application

Where the boundary between co-design and data collection is unclear, Iris Ethics recommends erring on the side of inclusion and using a conditional approval process if details are not yet finalised. This involves submitting an application for ethical review, making clear in the application that:

  • elements of the activities are yet to be designed;
  • there is a process by which those elements will be designed; and
  • once those elements are designed, they will be provided for review and approved prior to use in the project.

In almost all cases, this approach is treated as a minor amendment to the initial application at no extra cost to the applicant.

A final consideration: for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, data sovereignty considerations require that any use of co-design outputs be explicitly negotiated with and agreed to by relevant stakeholders, consistent with the AIATSIS Code of Ethics.

Related resources

This page was last updated on 16 September 2026.

Was this helpful? We'd appreciate your feedback!

This article makes reference to the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2025. It is intended as practical guidance and does not constitute legal advice.

AI Disclosure: Resources in this library were prepared using Large Language Models with input from Iris Ethics staff who guided the scope and design. Subsequent revisions and final versions were developed and approved by Iris Ethics staff.