När forskningsetik blir till juridik - En studie av Överklagandenämnden för etikprövning och deras tillsyn

Sammanfattning: In recent years it has been a clear conflict in Sweden between scientists and the agency “Önep” which is responsible for the regulatory enforcement of research ethics. This conflict has shown how the academy and the state can have conflicting interests and that power struggle has made this master thesis relevant. Therefore, this thesis aim, and purpose has been to examine how Önep conduct their regulatory enforcement and the possible reasons behind that. With the help of a theoretical framework created by Johanesson et al. and a theoretical framework created with the help of William T. Gormley and Robert A. Kagan this has been possible. It should also be mentioned that the research design was a qualitative case study. The conclusions show that the regulatory enforcement conducted by Önep both have signs of a strict and a soft enforcement style, although the signs of a strict enforcement style are a bit more present. The reasons behind that enforcement style are the risk of catastrophe and human injuries in science which create a need for a strict enforcement style. It can also be explained by the design of the legal framework which contains the possibility of using sanctions against rule breakers.