Model Policy on Scientific Integrity (Updated February 2026)

Table of Contents

  1. Effective date
  2. Context
  3. Authorities
  4. Objectives and expected results
  5. Application
  6. Scientific integrity principles
  7. Requirements
    1. Implementation
    2. Fostering a culture of science integrity
    3. Openness, transparency and timeliness
    4. Public communication of research and scientific information
    5. Dissemination of research and scientific findings
    6. Contributions to the scientific community
    7. Role of employees in science advice and evidence-informed decision-making
    8. Responsible conduct of research
    9. Monitoring and performance evaluation
  8. Responsibilities
  9. Definitions
  10. Enquiries
 
  • This updated model policy builds on the original 2018 version to assist departments and agencies with making good on the commitments made under the 2016 memorandum of agreement between Treasury Board and Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada.
  • In this document, "DDAA" is a placeholder for the name of the department (DD) or agency (AA).

1. Effective date

  • 1.1. This policy takes effect on [insert the date for your department or agency].

top of page

2. Context

  • 2.1. This policy supports the further advancement of a culture of scientific integrity across the Government of Canada, and builds upon the policy issued pursuant to the May 15, 2017 and June 1, 2017 Memoranda of Agreement between the Treasury Board and the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) in Respect of Scientific Integrity.

top of page

3. Authorities

  • 3.1. This policy should be read in consultation with the Values and Ethics Code for the Public SectorFootnote1 as adopted April 2, 2012, the Directive on the Management of CommunicationsFootnote2, and the Policy on Conflict of InterestFootnote3.
  • 3.2. Where there is conflict or incompatibility between this Policy and legislation and/or a provision of any relevant collective agreement, the provisions of the legislation or relevant collective agreement take precedence.
  • 3.3. Where there is conflict or incompatibility between this Policy and a mandatory Policy instrument of the Treasury Board (i.e., policy, directive or standard), the provisions of the Treasury Board mandatory Policy instrument take precedence.
  • 3.4. Where there is conflict or incompatibility between this Policy and a voluntary Policy instrument of the Treasury Board (i.e., guidelines or tools), the provisions of this Policy take precedence.
  • 3.5. Department or agency (DDAA) will maintain a record of all instances of conflict or incompatibility between this Policy and legislation, collective agreements, or Treasury Board policy instruments and/or DDAA policy instruments and submit this record as part of the performance evaluation as per s. 7.9 of this Policy.
  • 3.6. In consultation with representatives of PIPSC, the Deputy Head has authority to support science integrity by establishing relevant and applicable standards for the development or co-developmentFootnote 4, design, conduct, management, review, communication, and use of research, science, and related activities within DDAA.

top of page

4. Objectives and expected results

The objectives of this Policy are to:

  • 4.1. Foster a culture that supports and promotes scientific integrity and excellence in the development or co-development, design, conduct, management, review, communication, and use of research, science, and related activities.
  • 4.2. Increase public, employee, stakeholder, and Indigenous Peoples’ trust in the credibility and reliability of DDAA research and scientific activities.
  • 4.3. Set out expectations regarding the development or co-development, design, conduct, management, review, communication, and use of research, science, and related activities.
  • 4.4. Enhance employee understanding of the contributions of research, science, and Indigenous Knowledge to evidence-informed decision-making, as well as the role of managers, communication specialists, researchers, and scientists in the development of government policy and advice.

The expected results of this Policy are that:

  • 4.5. Employees involved in the development or co-development, design, conduct, management, review, communication or use of research, science, or related activities understand and conduct themselves in manner consistent with the principles of scientific integrity.
  • 4.6. DDAA is recognized by employees, stakeholders, Indigenous Peoples, and the public as a reliable and credible institutional source of research and scientific information.
  • 4.7. Allegations of breach of the principles of scientific integrity as defined in s. 6, and associated employee and management behaviours as outlined in s. 7, are brought forth without fear of reprisal, and, as appropriate and to the extent possible, are addressed through a fair, impartial, efficient, confidential, and respectful process.
  • 4.8. Employees understand and seek to enhance the contributions of research, science, and Indigenous Knowledge to science advice, government policy, and evidence-informed decision-making.

top of page

5. Application

  • 5.1. This Policy applies to DDAA employees who develop or co-develop, design, conduct, communicate, manage, review, or make use of DDAA research, science, or related activities.
  • 5.2. Nothing in this policy supersedes any relevant collective agreements. Neither does the policy extend provisions of relevant collective agreements to employees not subject to those agreements.

top of page

6. Scientific integrity principles

DDAA recognizes that public, employee, Indigenous Peoples, and stakeholder trust in the research and scientific information provided by governments depends upon the integrity of the process by which such information is produced, managed, and communicated. So too does trust in the decision-making process that makes use of such information.

Furthermore, DDAA recognizes that scientists and researchers must uphold and conform to standards of excellence accepted by the wider research and scientific community.

To this end, in developing or co-developing, designing, conducting, managing, reviewing, communicating, or using research, science, or related activities, DDAA employees shall:

  • 6.1. Ensure that all such activities are carried out in a manner that is consistent with all relevant and applicable standards of scientific excellence, research ethics, and responsible research conduct, including respect for treaty and/or inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples and relevant principles for research involving Indigenous partners, or use of Indigenous data or information.
  • 6.2. Ensure that the conduct of DDAA research and science and any research or scientific products, as well as any associated communications, are free from politicalFootnote 5, commercial, client and stakeholder interference.
  • 6.3. In the absence of clear and compelling reasons for limiting disclosure, ensure that research and scientific information, and data, produced by DDAA is made available to the public in a timely manner and in keeping with the Government of Canada’s Directive on Open GovernmentFootnote 6, Framework for Implementing Open-by-Default with Federal Government ScienceFootnote 7, and the Data Strategy for the Federal Public ServiceFootnote 8.
  • 6.4. Accurately represent and appropriately acknowledge the contributions of both themselves and others to their research or scientific work.
  • 6.5. Avoid conflicts of interest and conflicts of dutiesFootnote 9, and ensure that any real, potential or apparent conflict is explicitly recognized, reported, and appropriately managed.
  • 6.6. Encourage discussion based on differing interpretations of evidence from research and science, and Indigenous Knowledge systems as a legitimate and necessary part of the research and scientific processes and the approach to deeper understanding. Where appropriate, ensure that any such differences are made explicit and accurately represented.
  • 6.7. Ensure that the significant and meaningful contribution of researchers and scientists to government programs, policies, regulations, and decision-making is acknowledged in official publications or communications, including the names and roles of those who made significant contributions to these products and activities.
  • 6.8. Report any breach of these principles (i.e., a breach of scientific integrity) to their supervisor, manager, or designated official.

top of page

7. Requirements

Furthermore:

  • 7.1. Implementation

    • 7.1.1. This Policy will be regularly communicated to all employees by the Deputy Head, or their designate, with special attention to its implications to DDAA communications policies.
    • 7.1.2. DDAA will continue to develop and implement the additional procedures, policies, guidelines, tools, training, and professional development opportunities necessary to support this Policy.
    • 7.1.3. DDAA will ensure that contractors and/or collaborators involved in, or providing services in support of, research, science, or related activities are informed of this policy and encouraged to comply with its provisions and intent.

  • 7.2. Fostering a culture of science integrity

    DDAA recognizes two complementary approaches to fostering a culture of scientific integrity. The first focuses on promoting scientific integrity by instilling the virtues that underlie responsible conduct in research, science, and related activities (s. 7.2.1). The second focuses on the procedure for bringing allegations of breaches of scientific integrity forward, the review of these allegations, including investigations where necessary, and the consequences of a finding that a breach has occurred (s. 7.2.2).

    The Deputy Head will appoint a DDAA Science Integrity Lead who is responsible for fostering a culture of scientific integrity (a) through actions and initiatives that promote scientific integrity and which demonstrate the high value placed on scientific integrity by DDAA; and (b) by addressing allegations of breaches of this Policy. One Lead may be appointed to perform both functions (a) and (b), or each function can have a designated Lead.

    • 7.2.1. Science virtues

      In accordance with relevant collective agreements, the TBS Directive on Mandatory TrainingFootnote 10 and the TBS Policy on People ManagementFootnote 11:

      • 7.2.1.1. DDAA recognizes the importance of research networking with national and international peers and active participation in the business and organization of relevant scientific and professional societies, which form an important part of ensuring scientists and researchers understand and are held to the standards of their professional communities.
      • 7.2.1.2. DDAA recognizes the importance of the virtues underlying scientific excellence; these include intellectual curiosity and honesty, constructive skepticism, meticulousness, avoidance of bias, humility in the discovery and use of scientific evidence given the limitations of scientific inquiry, recognition of the importance of the open communication of science, and respect for the contribution of diverse knowledge systems to scientific understanding. To this end, it will ensure that learning policies support training, education, and professional development opportunities that allow employees to further their understanding of, and appreciation for, these virtues.
      • 7.2.1.3. DDAA will ensure its learning policies support training, education, and professional development opportunities to inform and educate employees about responsible research conduct, including research securityFootnote 12; research ethics; open science; and the annotation, management, and archiving of research and scientific data. DDAA learning policies will also support education on responsible research conduct and ethics involving Indigenous Peoples and their territories, and the appropriate engagement or collaboration required for solicitation, access, collection, management, communication, and use of Indigenous Knowledge, data or information.
      • 7.2.1.4. DDAA will encourage the development and implementation of a science integrity mentorship program for researchers and scientists, whereby mentors exhibiting exemplary science virtues in their conduct and work are paired with more junior employees.

    • 7.2.2. Breaches of scientific integrity

      • 7.2.2.1. In cases of alleged breaches of scientific integrity, employees at all levels shall seek to resolve the issue in a fair and respectful manner and consider informal processes such as dialogue or mediation. In such cases, employees are encouraged to discuss and resolve these matters with their immediate supervisor. They can also seek advice and support from other appropriate sources within DDAA.
      • 7.2.2.2. The Science Integrity Lead will address alleged breaches of this Policy and shall ensure they are promptly and thoroughly reviewed and, where deemed warranted, investigated by the DDAA.
      • 7.2.2.3. DDAA will endeavor to protect personal information and otherwise provide safeguards to ensure that employees may bring forward, in good faith, allegations of breach of scientific integrity or participate in an investigation procedure without prejudice or fear of reprisal.
      • 7.2.2.4. When public servants have information that could indicate a serious breach of the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector, they can avail themselves of the procedures laid out in the Public Servants Disclosure Protection ActFootnote 13.

  • 7.3. Openness, transparency and timeliness

    DDAA recognizes and understands the importance of openness and transparency about all elements of the research and scientific process, as well as the timely release of scientific and research information. It nonetheless also recognizes that there may be legitimate and compelling reasons for limiting the disclosure or availability of research or scientific information to employees, stakeholders, or the public.

    • 7.3.1. This policy, as well as any associated policies, directives, or guidelines, shall be posted on the DDAA’s public website in permission-less downloadable form.
    • 7.3.2. As the current policy and any associated policies, guidelines, or tools are amended and revised, DDAA will maintain an annotated electronic archive of all such changes, with all archive elements available in permission-less downloadable form.
    • 7.3.3. No DDAA employee shall suppress, alter, or otherwise impede the timely release of research or scientific information in the absence of clear and compelling reasons for doing so.
    • 7.3.4. DDAA employees shall ensure that research and scientific data or information (including that produced by contractors, grantees, or other partners who participate in, or assist with, the development or co-development, design, conduct, management, or use of research, science, or related activities) is produced and disseminated in a timely and transparent manner, in the absence of clear and compelling reasons for not doing so. DDAA will appropriately resource the open dissemination of research and scientific data or information, respecting the principles of open science and open by default and in keeping with the Directive on Open Government.
    • 7.3.5. In the case where Indigenous partners have contributed data or information to DDAA research or science, DDAA employees will provide them or their appropriate designates the opportunity to collaborate in the interpretation of these data or information and the review of research or scientific findings prior to publication, in keeping with an established agreement based on free, prior, and informed consent. Managers will work with employees to identify these requirements when designing scientific and research activities, and ensure that employees are appropriately resourced to fulfill these obligations.

  • 7.4. Public communication of research and scientific information

    DDAA recognizes the right to freedom of expression by researchers and scientists on matters of research or science. It also recognizes the important role of researchers and scientists in communicating research and scientific information to the public.

    Moreover, DDAA recognizes that as public servants, scientists, researchers, and indeed all employees are subject to the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector as adopted April 2, 2012. It further recognizes the need for caution and prudence in the public communication of classified or sensitive scientific or research information, as well as existing legal constraints on information disclosure. Finally, DDAA recognizes that effective public communication requires certain skills, and that researchers and scientists may have different degrees of comfort with public forums.

    • 7.4.1. Researchers and scientistsFootnote 14 shall have the right, and are encouraged, to speak about or otherwise express themselves on science and their research without approval or pre-approval and without being designated as an official spokesperson. In doing so, they must respect the information disclosure provisions of the Access to Information ActFootnote 15 and the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector as adopted April 2, 2012.
    • 7.4.2. In any public communications, employees must be familiar with and respect any legal restrictions on information disclosure such as privacy rights, matters before the courts, and cabinet confidences. They must also respect the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector as adopted April 2, 2012, the Access to Information Act, the Public Servants Inventions ActFootnote 16, and any restrictions related to confidentiality and intellectual property. Unless explicit approval to do so has been given by supervisors or managers, classified or sensitive research or scientific information shall not be discussed in any public communication.
    • 7.4.3. In the case of planned formal public communication events with sufficiently long lead times (e.g., public talks or lectures), employees should notify their supervisor/manager of the upcoming event and provide a copy of their communication material for information purposes only and without prejudice.
    • 7.4.4. In the case of formal public communication events with short lead times (e.g., media interviews) that effectively preclude prior notification, employees should notify their supervisor/manager as soon as possible after the event for information purposes only and without prejudice.
    • 7.4.5. Pursuant to s. 7.4.2 and s. 7.4.3, DDAA will ensure that employees are provided with guidelines consistent with relevant collective agreements and the Directive on the Management of Communications and Federal Identity, to assist them in determining the types of public communications for which supervisor/manager notification is desirable or required, and the appropriate timing and form of any such notifications.
    • 7.4.6. Researchers and scientists are under no obligation to act as public DDAA subject matter experts or appear in public forums and may decline any such invitation or request without prejudice, unless explicitly given this task by management.
    • 7.4.7. Any public communication which describes work conducted by researchers or scientists must be reviewed and approved by them or their designates before publication or dissemination, and must acknowledge their contribution(s). If the work described includes Indigenous data or information, the communication must be reviewed and approved by the Indigenous partners who contributed the data or information, or by appropriate representatives, or in accordance with the terms of an established agreement, and must acknowledge their contribution(s). In cases where a researcher, scientist, or Indigenous partner does not wish authorship and/or their contribution to be acknowledged, they should be consulted as to whether, in their view, the work is accurately described and findings interpreted appropriately.
    • 7.4.8. Researchers and scientists are encouraged to participate in media training provided by the DDAA, but this is not a requirement for them to express themselves about science or their research.
    • 7.4.9. Where a researcher or scientist is speaking in the role of an official spokesperson, they must identify themselves by name and position and speak on the record for public attribution.

  • 7.5. Dissemination of research and scientific findings

    DDAA recognizes that communication among researchers and scientists is critical to the development of scientific and scholarly knowledge. Moreover, DDAA recognizes that its researchers and scientists are part of a global community of scientific and scholarly expertise, their contribution to which is critical to maintaining and enhancing the credibility and reputation of DDAA experts, the reputation and credibility of DDAA, and the contribution of DDAA to the knowledge economy.

    As with public communications, researchers or scientists disseminating or communicating information through research or scientific media are subject to, and bound by, the Access to Information Act, the Public Servants Inventions Act, and the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector adopted April 2, 2012, and must abide by Treasury Board of Canada’s Directive on the Management of Communications and Federal Identity where it does not conflict with the relevant collective agreements. To this end, DDAA must have publication approval processes that are compatible with the relevant collective agreements. Approval to publish will not be unreasonably withheld.

    Data or information provided by Indigenous partners shall only be disseminated, shared, or published with the free, prior and informed consent from those who provided the data or information, or their representatives, and/or in accordance with an established agreement. Researchers and scientists will work with Indigenous partners to ensure transparency and seek consent and guidance related to the potential impacts of sharing or publishing research results and/or Indigenous data or information.

    DDAA publication policies shall be examined to ensure that they are consistent with the following principles and procedures:

    • 7.5.1. Drafts of DDAA research or scientific publications authored by DDAA researchers or scientists shall be submitted for review to their manager, supervisor, or other relevant personnel prior to formal submission to a publisher or other third party and discussed in a timely fashion.
      • 7.5.1.1. If the draft research or scientific publication does not contain explicit comments about or recommendations on federal statutory, regulatory, or policy matters, approval of publication content by supervisors, managers, or other relevant personnel is not required before submission for publication, communication, or dissemination.
      • 7.5.1.2. If the draft research or scientific publication does contain explicit comments about or recommendations on federal statutory, regulatory, or policy matters, approval of publication content by supervisors, managers, or other relevant personnel is required before submission for publication, communication, or dissemination. In such cases, approval may be (i) withheld on the basis of publication content, or (ii) may be contingent upon content changes.
    • 7.5.2. In the event that approval is contingent upon content changes per 7.5.1.2, and the author(s) are not in agreement with the suggested changes, the work will not be attributed to the employee if the employee so requests. In the event that approval is withheld, the author(s) shall be so informed in writing of the reasons.
    • 7.5.3. In support of Articles 7.5.1 - 7.5.2 and in consultation with PIPSC representatives, DDAA shall provide guidelines to assist researchers, scientists, managers, and supervisors in identifying and distinguishing publications that require approval of content by managers, supervisors, or other relevant personnel.
    • 7.5.4. The responsible author(s) of any research or scientific communication must ensure that:
      • (i) Approval of all listed authors and contributors is obtained;
      • (ii) The work in question is not a republication of original work except when the republication involves translation or dissemination to diverse audiences and is consistent with existing standards on republication;
      • (iii) All contributions to the work are appropriately acknowledged in a manner conforming to accepted standards of the relevant discipline(s) and publication(s);
      • (iv) DDAA authors’ federal affiliations are listed;
      • (v) The communication has been subjected to appropriate independent peer review and that technical and/or editorial changes that may result from this review have been addressed;
      • (vi) Matters related to acknowledgements and official languages have been appropriately managed and administered;
      • (vii) The possibility of publishing scientific and technical papers in Open Access journals and/or depositing in open repositories has been prioritizedFootnote 17;
      • (viii) All applicable restrictions associated with privacy, confidentiality, research security, and relevant information and data sharing agreements are respected;
      • (ix) They have exercised due diligence in ensuring that all issues related to intellectual property and related matters have been resolved;
      • (x) They understand relevant terms and conditions for publication, including copyright and level of authority required for approvals.

      Moreover, researchers and scientists should seek credible and reputable outlets for academic publication that conform to established practices and standards of academic publishing, including particularly rigorous peer review practices.

    • 7.5.5. In cases where DDAA scientists or researchers have provided data or information to be used in a government document (e.g., a report, briefing note, etc.), management and those responsible for preparing the documents should consult with the scientist or researcher concerned to ensure that the data or information is used and interpreted appropriately.

  • 7.6. Contributions to the scientific community

    DDAA recognizes that the participation of DDAA researchers and scientists in the global scholarly community depends upon domestic and international collaboration and partnerships. Such collaborations and partnerships provide important opportunities for DDAA researchers and scientists to leverage their expertise, knowledge, and infrastructure in developing research, scientific, and technological knowledge to the benefit of Canadians.

    To this end, DDAA will:

    • 7.6.1. Encourage and facilitate domestic and international research or scientific collaborations and partnerships between DDAA researchers and scientists and the external research and development communities in universities, colleges and research, or scientific institutions; provincial, territorial and Indigenous governments or representative organizations; industry and business; and civil society.
    • 7.6.2. Make a reasonable effort to appropriately resource participation in relevant scientific and professional societies, working committees, conferences, workshops, and symposia identified by both researchers and scientists as well as management.
    • 7.6.3. Make a reasonable effort to ensure appropriate engagement or participation of researchers and scientists in international science and research-based forums of which Canada is a formal member.

    Furthermore:

    • 7.6.4. DDAA encourages activities related to collaboration with the extramural research and development communities, including the appointment of DDAA researchers and scientists to adjunct professorships.

    Their importance notwithstanding, it is possible that research or scientific partnerships and collaborations may expose the Government of Canada to research security risks. In seeking to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of these activities:

    • 7.6.5. For any proposed research, scientific, or technological collaboration with extramural researchers, scientists, academic or scientific institutions, or private partners, DDAA employees shall exercise due diligence in assessing and identifying any potential research security risksFootnote 18 and submitting these risks, if any, for review as part of the proposal.
    • 7.6.6. Supervisors, managers, or other relevant authorities shall review proposals for extramural collaboration to determine any associated research security risks in a transparent and efficient manner. If identified, a risk assessment will be performed to inform the decision to participate or not, and if pursued appropriate risk management measures shall be implemented in accordance with relevant Government of Canada and DDAA policies to ensure that the mitigated risks are acceptable.
    • 7.6.7. DDAA employees engaging or participating in remunerated or unremunerated science and research related activities, including activities outside of their formal DDAA functions, involving extramural institutions, organizations, or groups, whether public or private, shall ensure that these activities are pursued in accordance with DDAA policy, and that (a) all relevant research security restrictions are respected; and (b) unless explicit approval to do so has been given by the appropriate authorities, classified or sensitive research, scientific, or technological information shall not be shared, disclosed, or otherwise communicated to any extramural institution, organization, group, or individuals.

  • 7.7. Role of employees in science advice and evidence-informed decision-making

    DDAA recognizes that researchers and scientists have important roles to play in providing advice that informs federal programs, policy, regulations, and law. Research and scientific findings are an important source of evidence that must be appropriately considered in evidence-informed decision-making.

    Moreover, researchers and scientists have an important role to play in providing advice not only on the research required to resolve today’s issues, but also to identify emerging scientific and technical issues, research directions, and opportunities.

    To this end and in consultation with PIPSC representatives, DDAA will develop and deploy transparent and systematic mechanisms and procedures for:

    • 7.7.1. Gathering, evaluating, and incorporating scientific and/or research advice and, where relevant and applicable, Indigenous Knowledge, into the DDAA policy and regulatory decision-making process.
    • 7.7.2. Engaging employees in the design, development or co-development, and evaluation of robust and resilient research or scientific programs and initiatives that will be able to meet the research or scientific needs of the future.
    • 7.7.3. Identifying and prioritizing areas of federal authority for which the current federal science or research capacity is inadequate or where federal investment in research or scientific undertakings is likely to provide substantial benefits to Canadians.

    In addition, DDAA will:

    • 7.7.4. Support the development of training and professional development opportunities devoted to the roles of science, research and Indigenous Knowledge in developing evidence to support evidence-informed decision-making. Such opportunities may be made available to all employees who engage in, supervise, manage, support, review, report on, or use research and scientific activities; analyze, curate or communicate data or information generated by these activities; and/or seek to use information derived from these activities in decision-making.

  • 7.8. Responsible conduct of research

    DDAA is committed to ensuring that DDAA research and science conforms to the highest standards of responsible research conduct and shall strive to follow the relevant and applicable research practices honestly, accountably, openly, and fairly in the development and dissemination of research and scientific knowledge.

    • 7.8.1. Scientific integrity involves the application of concepts of transparency, openness, high quality work, avoidance of conflicts of interest and conflicts of duties, and ensuring high standards of impartiality and research ethics. Employees involved in science or research shall conform to the standards of responsible research conduct. Such standards include, but are not limited to ensuring that:
      • (i) All research and scientific activities (including study design and implementation; recording, analyzing, and interpreting data; and in reporting and publishing data and findings) are conducted with the highest scientific rigour;
      • (ii) Complete and accurate records of data, methodologies and findings, including graphs and images, are maintained in a manner consistent with policies, laws, regulations, and professional or disciplinary standards. This curation is essential to the verification and/or replication of the work by others;
      • (iii) Referencing and, where applicable, obtaining permission for use of all published and unpublished work, including theories, concepts, data, source material, methodologies, findings, and images as appropriate;
      • (iv) Generative artificial intelligence tools are used only with human oversightFootnote 19, control, careful review, and respect for information security, privacy, intellectual property, and transparent disclosure, and in accordance with existing guidelinesFootnote 20;
      • (v) Authorship consent is obtained, and that all those and only those who have made a substantial (conceptual and/or material) contribution to, and who accept responsibility for, the contents of the publication or document are listed as authors;
      • (vi) Individuals, organizations, or institutions who have supported the research or scientific activity, including through financial, logistical, administrative, or in-kind support, are appropriately described and acknowledged;
      • (vii) All and only those individuals who have participated in the research or scientific activity are appropriately recognized and acknowledged;
      • (viii) The contribution of those and only those who have contributed substantially to the research or scientific activity is appropriately described and acknowledged;
      • (ix) Any real, perceived, or potential conflict of interest or conflict of duties is reported and appropriately managed;
      • (x) Information included in grant or award applications is accurate and complete, including information on partners, collaborators, and co-applicants, and that their permission to be listed has been obtained;
      • (xii) Research involving humans or animals conforms with the Tri-Council principles and procedures as specified in the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans – TCPS 2 (2022)Footnote 21, and the Canadian Council on Animal Care Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental AnimalsFootnote 22, respectively;
      • (xii) Research involving or conducted with Indigenous partners conforms with the principles specified in Chapter 9 of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans – TCPS 2 (2022) as well as all relevant and applicable principles developed and implemented by Indigenous governments, organizations or communitiesFootnote 23 including, but not restricted to, Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, and Ethics (CARE) Principles for Indigenous Data GovernanceFootnote 24, First Nations Principles of Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession (OCAP)Footnote 25, Principles of Ethical Métis ResearchFootnote 26, and the National Inuit Strategy on ResearchFootnote 27;
      • (xiii) Research security risks associated with research or scientific undertakings, including ongoing, proposed, or potential collaborations or partnerships, are assessed, and if necessary, mitigated in accordance with existing guidelines and policiesFootnote 28 Footnote 29, and processes developed by DDAA.
    • 7.8.2. Employees involved in science or research shall avoid breaches of responsible research conduct. Such breaches include, but are not limited to:
      • (i) Fabrication: Making up data, source material, methodologies, or findings, including graphs and images;
      • (ii) Falsification: Manipulating, changing, or omitting data, source material, methodologies, or findings, including graphs and images, without acknowledgement, such that the research record is not accurately represented;
      • (iii) Destruction of research records: The destruction of one’s own or another’s research data or records to specifically avoid the detection of wrongdoing or in contravention of this or any other applicable policies and/or laws, regulations, and professional or disciplinary standards;
      • (iv) Plagiarism: Presenting and using another’s published or unpublished work, including theories, concepts, data, source material, methodologies, or findings, including graphs and images, as one’s own, without appropriate referencing and without permission where requiredFootnote 30;
      • (v) Misrepresenting generative artificial intelligence: Representing (either explicitly or implicitly) text, images, or software from prompts to generative artificial intelligence as the work of authors or co-authors without transparent disclosure;
      • (vi) Redundant publication or self-plagiarism: The re-publication of one’s own previously published work or part thereof, including data, in any language, without adequate acknowledgment of the source or adequate justification;
      • (vii) Invalid authorship or contributions: Inaccurate attribution of authorship, including attribution of authorship to persons other than those who have made a substantial contribution to, and who accept responsibility for, the contents of a publication or document. Invalid authorship also includes the failure to acknowledge those who have made substantial contributions to the work in question;
      • (viii) Mismanagement of conflict of interest: Failure to appropriately identify and address any real, potential, or apparent conflict of interest or conflict of duties, contrary to the Directive on Conflict of Interest;
      • (ix) Inaccurate grant and awards application: Providing incomplete, inaccurate, or false information in a grant or award application or related document, such as a letter of support or a progress report;
      • (x) Inaccurate statement of collaborations: Listing of co-applicants, collaborators, or partners without their agreement;
      • (xi) Failure to respect the principles specified in Chapter 9 of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans – TCPS 2 (2022), as well as other relevant and applicable principles, in research involving or conducted with Indigenous partners;
      • (xii) Failure to meet DDAA requirements for minimizing research security risks and safeguarding research, science, or technology processes, protocols, products, or activities.

  • 7.9. Monitoring and performance evaluation

    DDAA should review this and associated policies, guidelines, or tools to ensure they remain relevant and seek employee and applicable bargaining agent input and feedback on the implementation of this Policy.

    • 7.9.1. In consultation with the Office of the Chief Science Advisor (OCSA) and PIPSC representatives, the DDAA shall design, develop, and implement monitoring and performance evaluation plans for this Policy that provide information on (a) the extent to which DDAA has complied with the provisions of the policy; (b) policy performance; and (c) future policy and associated instrument (e.g. guidelines, directives, etc.) adjustments, modifications, or changes likely to improve policy performance. Any such plan must have regard for other government initiatives or circumstances that may affect performance independent of, or in concert with, the Policy.
    • 7.9.2. Any plan developed under article 7.9.1 must explicitly identify (a) the performance indicators that will be monitored; (b) how the data on these indicators will be collected, annotated, and curated; (c) how performance baselines will be characterized; and (d) how changes from baseline will be estimated and evaluated.
    • 7.9.3. A copy of all data or information collected as part of the monitoring and performance evaluations plans will be forwarded annually to the appropriate National Union-Management Consultation Committee, and to the Office of the Chief Science Advisor as requested.

top of page

8. Responsibilities

Deputy Head

The Deputy Head and its delegates are responsible for fostering an environment that encourages integrity and excellence in research, science, and related activities, and for promoting a culture of open communication where employees may disclose, in good faith, information concerning breaches of scientific integrity. The Deputy Head is also responsible for:

  • ensuring that this Policy is regularly communicated to all employees;
  • monitoring compliance with this Policy within DDAA and taking corrective action as needed;
  • performance evaluation of this Policy;
  • providing an annual confirmation of the compliance and reporting with this Policy as required by the relevant collective agreements.

Directors, managers and supervisors

Directors, managers, and supervisors are responsible for implementation of this Policy. Such responsibilities include:

  • informing employees about this Policy and ensuring that they are aware of their rights, responsibilities, and obligations under the Policy;
  • ensuring compliance with this Policy, providing to employees information about the processes available to them if they wish to make an allegation under this Policy, and reporting all allegations of breach of scientific integrity that are brought to their attention or of which they are aware to the Science Integrity Lead;
  • ensuring that employees are aware of professional development and training opportunities that may be available in support of this Policy.

Specific responsibilities will be articulated in procedures and guidelines that will be developed to support this Policy.

DDAA employees

All DDAA employees involved in the development or co-development, design, conduct, management, review, communication, or use of research, science, or related activities, and all persons conducting research, science, or related activities under the auspices of DDAA will have primary responsibility for:

  • ensuring their behaviour and conduct conforms to the principles of scientific integrity;
  • ensuring their research activities conform with the principles and procedures laid out in the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans – TCPS 2 (2022) and the Canadian Council on Animal Care Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental Animals, where applicable;
  • ensuring that they develop or co-develop, design, conduct, manage, review, communicate, or use research or science in a manner fully consistent with this Policy;
  • reporting a suspected breach of scientific integrity as soon as possible; and
  • participating in good faith in any inquiry or investigation conducted pursuant to this Policy.

top of page

9. Definitions

  • Alteration (of a scientific or research work): any change in the form or content of a research or scientific work that may affect the interpretation of the work and/or its implications.
  • Breach (of scientific integrity): failure to abide by any of the provisions described in s. 6 or s. 7 of this Policy.
  • Classified or sensitive research or scientific information: research or scientific information that would normally be considered exempt from disclosure under the Access to Information Act.
  • Clear and compelling reasons (for withholding publication of scientific or research information): legitimate reasons include but are not limited to: (a) disclosure of such information is exempt under the Access to Information Act or the Foreign Interference and Security of Information ActFootnote 31; (b) technical or technological constraints, contractual obligations, copyright, and/or intellectual property protections limit or prevent making the information available; and (c) respect for Indigenous data and information sovereignty rights as defined in agreements such as non-disclosure agreements, contribution agreements, data sharing agreements, collaborative research agreements, or memoranda of agreement.
  • Client: any person, institution, or organization, whether internal or external to government, who is the recipient and/or user of research or scientific data, products, services, or information, and who is involved with establishing the question or topic of the research or scientific work in question.
  • Co-development: a collaborative and participatory research approach that supports the concept of "nothing about us without us", acknowledging the distinct nature and lived experience of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis, in support of Canada’s constitutional relationship with Indigenous Peoples, recognized and affirmed under s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982Footnote 32. In the context of this policy, the principle of co-development applies only to scientific or research activities that involve Indigenous partners.
  • Collaborator: any person, organization, or institution with whom/which a DDAA employee undertakes the design, conduct, management, review, or communication of research, science, or related activities and who/which does not receive direct or indirect remunerationFootnote 33.
  • Communication (of science): science communication involves any exchange of scientific or research information (including research results and interpretations thereof, methods, protocols, data, and products) in any form, between or among researchers or scientists (science and research producers) and the consumers or users of this information, including the public, other scientists or researchers, other government employees, and clients.
  • Compelling evidence: evidence of sufficient strength to convince the decision-maker that it is likely that the claim for which the evidence adduced is true.
  • Conflict of duties: a conflict that arises, not because of the employee’s private interests, but as a result of one or more concurrent or competing official responsibilities. For example, these roles could include their primary public service employment and their responsibilities in an outside role that forms part of their official duties, such as appointment to a board of directors, or other outside function.
  • Conflict of interest: a situation in which the employee has private interests that could improperly influence the performance of their official duties and responsibilities or in which the employee uses their office for personal gain. A real conflict of interest exists at the present time, an apparent conflict of interest could be perceived by a reasonable observer to exist, whether or not it is the case, and a potential conflict of interest could reasonably be foreseen to exist in the future.
  • Deputy Head: as defined in section 11(1) of the Financial Administration ActFootnote 34.
  • Employee: this is in most cases to be interpreted broadly to cover all employees within a department or agencsy, all of whom have a greater or lesser role to play in the scientific integrity procedures described in this Policy.
  • Generative artificial intelligence (AI): a type of AI capable of producing content, such as text or images, based on instructional text that the user inputs (i.e. “prompts”). Examples of generative AI tools include ChatGPT or Dall-e. These do not include basic assistive AI tools, such as spelling or grammar checking tools, that are used to make suggestions to correct or improve content authored by employees.
  • Indigenous data or information: facts, knowledge, or information provided by, originating from, and/or jointly held with Indigenous Peoples including, but not limited to, individuals, communities, governments, languages, cultures, lands, resources, and ecological knowledge.
  • Indigenous partners: an Indigenous Knowledge Holder or Indigenous institution, community, group, or person who engage(s) in research or scientific activities with intramural organizations or personnel, or contribute(s) significantly to such activities.
  • Indigenous Peoples: a collective name for the original peoples of North America and their descendants, including First Nations, Inuit and Métis.
  • Indigenous Knowledge: a set of complex knowledge systems embedded in the unique cultures, languages, values, and worldviews of Indigenous Peoples, that is community specific and place-based, arising from Indigenous Peoples’ intimate relationship with their environment and territory over thousands of years. It is generally understood to be collective knowledge that encompasses community values, teachings, relationships, ceremony, and oral storiesFootnote 35.
  • Interference: any action that alters or suppresses the work or the impartiality of a scientist or researcher, as understood within the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector, including the expectation that they provide decision makers with all the information, analysis, and advice they need, while striving to be open, candid, and impartial. Interference also includes inappropriate alteration or suppression of research methodology and results or dissuasion of reporting of results by any party, including clients, stakeholders, or domestic and foreign state or non-state actors.
  • Related activity: any activity that (a) supports science or research (e.g. laboratory operations and management; infrastructure, including information and communication infrastructure); (b) uses research or scientific information as an input (e.g. solicitation or preparation of science advice; evaluation of research or scientific evidence); or (c) involves the curation, communication, or archiving of scientific or research data or information.
  • Research: any undertaking intended to extend knowledge through a disciplined inquiry and/or systematic investigationFootnote 36.
  • Research or scientific publication: a technical publication that conveys research or scientific information to a knowledgeable, often technical, audience that is usually in a position to judge the research or scientific merits of the information. This includes primary research or scientific publications that present original work conducted by DDAA researchers or scientists, as well as secondary research or scientific publications that provide technical or plain language summaries, syntheses, or reviews of existing research or scientific work.
  • Researcher: employees primarily involved in the application of comprehensive scientific and professional knowledge to the planning, conduct, evaluation, and management of fundamental or applied research, knowledge enhancement, technology development, and innovation relevant to defence science, historical research and archival science, mathematics, and the natural sciences. (N.B. These definitions follow the RE occupational group definition for the public serviceFootnote 37.)
  • Research security risk: the loss of intellectual property, unwanted transfer of knowledge in ways that individuals and teams do not intend, and activities that threaten Canada’s national or economic security, and/or the integrity of its research ecosystemFootnote 38.
  • Science: the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural world through application of one or more elements of the scientific method. In the context of the current policy, it is understood to include both fundamental and applied natural, physical, biomedical, and social science, as well as engineering and mathematicsFootnote 39.
  • Scientific integrity: the condition resulting from adherence to concepts of transparency, openness, high quality work, avoidance of conflict of interest, and ensuring high standards of impartiality and research ethics.
  • Scientist: employees primarily involved in the application of comprehensive scientific and professional knowledge to one of the applied science programs involving actuarial science, agriculture, biology, chemistry, forestry, meteorology, or physical sciences, which include physics, planetary and earth sciences, scientific regulation, and patents. (N.B. These definitions follow the definition of the SP professional group for the public serviceFootnote 40).
  • Stakeholder: individuals, or domestic or international institutions engaged in collaborative research or scientific activities, as well as individuals or institutions providing financial, logistical, administrative, or in-kind support for these activities. Stakeholders may also include those who make use of the products resulting from DDAA research, science, or related activities.
  • Suppression (of a scientific or research work): the deliberate withholding of a scientific or research work, or any portion thereof, from publication or dissemination, in the absence of clear and compelling reasons for doing so.
  • Timely manner: within a time frame that is consistent with usual review and approval processes, and consistent with logistical and resource constraints. The DDAA or external collaborators may impose reasonable embargo periods to respect the right of a principal investigator to first publication.
  • Treaty and/or inherent rights (of Indigenous Peoples): Aboriginal and treaty rights under s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and the inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples as affirmed in Canada’s United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ActFootnote 41.

top of page

10. Enquiries

For further information on this policy, contact [insert the contact information for your department or agency].

top of page

Date modified: