This article is part of the Iris Ethics Knowledge Base; you can find a directory of all articles here.
Ethical review is one of those terms that people working in evaluation/research encounter early and often. But what it actually involves, who it applies to, and why it exists in the first place are questions that do not always get a straight answer. This piece explains the basics.
The purpose of ethical review
Ethical review is the process by which proposed human research is assessed to determine whether it has been designed and will be conducted in accordance with accepted ethical principles. It is, at its core, a form of independent oversight. Before a project begins, an ethical review body examines the design, methods, participant protections, and risk management arrangements, and decides whether they meet the required standards.
That oversight serves several practical functions. It gives evaluators and researchers an opportunity to identify and address ethical risks before they begin working with participants. It provides assurance to participants that the project they are being invited to join has been independently scrutinised. And it offers funders, clients, and institutions confidence that the work is being conducted responsibly and in accordance with accepted norms.
The framework: the National Statement
In Australia, ethical review requirements are set out in the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2025 (the "National Statement", or “NS" for short), jointly developed by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Australian Research Council, and Universities Australia. The National Statement is the primary framework governing how human research should be designed, reviewed, and conducted in this country.
The principles at the heart of the National Statement are:
These are not abstract aspirations. They translate into practical requirements that shape how a project should be designed, how participants should be recruited and informed, how data should be handled, and how risk should be identified and managed.
The National Statement makes clear that ethics approval must be obtained before an evaluation/research project begins. As NS 5.1.6 states, retrospective ethical approval of research is not supported by the National Statement. This is not a technicality. Starting a project without approval and then applying afterwards puts participants in a position where they have already been involved in a project that has not been independently scrutinised. That is precisely the situation ethical review is designed to prevent.
Who does ethical review apply to?
The scope of the National Statement is broader than many evaluators and researchers expect. Human research is defined in the National Statement as research conducted with or about people, or their data or biospecimens. That definition extends well beyond academic research conducted in universities.
Activities that involve collecting or analysing information about people can all fall within its scope, including but not limited to:
- Social research
- Community consultations conducted for research or policy purposes
Many other activities can also be considered human research and subject to ethical review. Whether an activity is "research" in the colloquial sense is less relevant than whether it meets the definitional criteria.
Consider a few examples:
- An evaluator commissioned to assess the outcomes of a government employment program, using in-depth interviews with program participants, is conducting human research.
- A market research firm running consumer focus groups to inform product development is conducting human research.
- A policy team running a survey of community attitudes towards a proposed service change is, in most cases, conducting human research.
The requirement for ethical review follows from the nature of the activity, not from the setting in which it is conducted or the title of the person undertaking it.
How Iris Ethics conducts review
Iris Ethics operates a Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) constituted and operating in accordance with the National Statement. The committee reviews applications across market research, social research, program evaluation, and related fields. Review is proportionate to risk: higher-risk projects undergo full committee review, lower-risk projects may be reviewed through a streamlined lower risk pathway, and a specific methodological or ethical question can be addressed through an expert determination without a review of the whole project. Some activities may qualify for a statement of exemption.
Our goal in delivering ethical review is to work with applicants to ensure their project has the best chance to yield benefits while effectively mitigating risks, with a feedback and response process based around collaboration and mutual understanding.
Iris Ethics is committed to making the review process accessible and efficient for practitioners in commercial, government, and non-government settings. See Types of ethical review for a description of each review option, and What needs ethical review? to determine which pathway applies to your project.
Getting started
If you are unsure whether your project requires ethical review, that is a completely reasonable question to have. The answer depends on the specifics of what you are doing, who you are doing it with, and how the data will be collected and used. We are happy to help you think it through.
This page was last updated on 10 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.