The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity is a framework for self-regulation, published by ALLEA (All European Academies), that sets out four principles — reliability, honesty, respect, and accountability — and translates them into good research practices for every scientific and scholarly discipline.
The Code is not a law. It is a reference document: the European Commission recognises it as the standard for research integrity across Horizon Europe-funded projects, and it increasingly functions as the template that national bodies, universities, funders, and publishers draw on when they write their own rules.
- What Does the European Code of Conduct Say?
- The Four Principles: Reliability, Honesty, Respect, Accountability
- Who Should Follow the Code?
- How the Code Relates to the Netherlands Code and the UK Concordat
- Answer-First Q&A
- Implications for Research Administrators
What Does the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity Say?
The Code was first issued in 2011 by the European Science Foundation and ALLEA, revised in 2017, and substantially updated in the 2023 Revised Edition, published on 23 June 2023. Each revision has widened its scope: the 2023 text adds provisions on open science, data management under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), equity and inclusion, and — for the first time — the responsible use of generative AI in research.
Structurally, the Code separates good research practices from research misconduct. It sets out expectations for the research environment, training and supervision, research procedures, data management, collaborative working, publication and dissemination, and reviewing, evaluating, and editing. It then defines violations — fabrication, falsification, plagiarism — and distinguishes these from lesser questionable research practices.
Two Horizon Europe-funded initiatives illustrate how the Code operates in practice rather than as an abstract statement: the ROSiE project built its guidelines for responsible Open Science directly on the Code’s principles, and the European Research Area Forum’s living guidelines on generative AI use the same four-principle structure as their foundation.
The Four Principles: Reliability, Honesty, Respect, Accountability
The Code is organised around four principles, commonly abbreviated RHRA:
- Reliability — ensuring the quality of research through sound design, methodology, analysis, and use of resources.
- Honesty — developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting, and communicating research transparently, fairly, and without bias.
- Respect — for colleagues, research participants, society, ecosystems, cultural heritage, and the environment.
- Accountability — taking responsibility for the research process, from idea to publication, its management and organisation, training, supervision, and mentoring, and its wider societal impact.
These four principles are the load-bearing structure of the entire document: every good practice and every misconduct definition traces back to one or more of them. Institutions building their own research integrity policy typically map local commitments against RHRA rather than inventing a parallel taxonomy.
Who Should Follow the European Code of Conduct?
ALLEA addresses the Code to the entire research community, not to any single actor. In practice this means:
| Stakeholder | Expected role under the Code |
|---|---|
| Researchers (all career stages) | Apply RHRA principles in daily research conduct, data handling, and authorship decisions |
| Universities and research institutions | Provide training, embed the Code in institutional policy, and investigate alleged misconduct |
| Funding agencies | Require compliance as a grant condition (as the European Commission does for Horizon Europe) |
| Publishers and editors | Apply the Code’s publication-ethics provisions during peer review and post-publication correction |
| Academies and learned societies | Promote the Code within discipline-specific guidance and national adaptations |
Compliance is not enforced by ALLEA itself. Enforcement sits with the institution, funder, or publisher that has adopted the Code as a condition of employment, funding, or publication — which is why national and institutional codes exist alongside it rather than instead of it.
How the Code Relates to the Netherlands Code and the UK Concordat
The European Code positions itself explicitly as a model, not a substitute, for national frameworks. Two of the most-cited national instruments illustrate how that works in practice.
The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (Nederlandse gedragscode wetenschappelijke integriteit) was developed by the Dutch universities’ association (now Universities of the Netherlands), the Federation of Dutch University Medical Centres, KNAW, NWO, and the TO2 federation, and took effect on 1 October 2018. It uses five principles — honesty, scrupulousness, transparency, independence, and responsibility — that map closely onto RHRA but split “reliability” into scrupulousness and independence.
The UK Concordat to Support Research Integrity, first published by Universities UK in 2012 and revised in 2019, is organised around five commitments covering rigour, transparent governance, supportive research environments, addressing misconduct, and openness. The UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) treats the European Code as a reference document that informs, rather than replaces, UK sector guidance.
| Framework | Publisher / steward | Current edition | Structure | Binding status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity | ALLEA | 2023 Revised Edition | 4 principles (RHRA) | Non-binding; mandatory for Horizon Europe grants |
| Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity | Universities of the Netherlands, NFU, KNAW, NWO, TO2 | 2018, in force since 1 October 2018 | 5 principles | Binding on signatory institutions |
| UK Concordat to Support Research Integrity | Universities UK | 2019 revision | 5 commitments | Non-binding; signed by most UK universities |
The pattern is consistent: national codes narrow and operationalise the European Code’s four principles into locally enforceable commitments, while keeping the underlying definitions of misconduct — fabrication, falsification, plagiarism — aligned with the European text. This is also why institutions outside the EU, including in North America, Australia, and Asia, increasingly cite the European Code as a baseline reference when no comparable domestic framework exists: it offers a discipline-neutral, internationally vetted starting point rather than a jurisdiction-specific rulebook.
Answer-First Q&A
What Is the European Code of Research Integrity?
The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity is a self-regulatory framework published by ALLEA that defines good research practice across all scientific and scholarly disciplines. First issued in 2011 and most recently revised in 2023, it is recognised by the European Commission as the reference standard for Horizon Europe-funded research.
What Are the 5 Principles of Research Integrity?
This is a common mix-up: ALLEA’s European Code itself sets out four principles — reliability, honesty, respect, accountability — not five. The “five principles” phrasing usually refers to a national adaptation, such as the Netherlands Code of Conduct‘s five principles (honesty, scrupulousness, transparency, independence, responsibility), which subdivides the European Code’s reliability principle.
What Are the 4 Principles of Integrity?
Under the European Code, the four principles of integrity are reliability (sound methodology), honesty (transparent, unbiased reporting), respect (for participants, colleagues, and the environment), and accountability (responsibility across the research lifecycle). Together they form the basis for every good practice and misconduct definition in the document.
What Are the 7 Ethical Standards in Research?
The “seven ethical standards” typically refers to a separate human-subjects research ethics framework (associated with Emanuel et al.), covering value, scientific validity, fair subject selection, favourable risk-benefit ratio, independent review, informed consent, and respect for participants. It is distinct from — though compatible with — the European Code’s integrity-focused RHRA structure, which governs conduct rather than human-subjects protection specifically.
Implications for Research Administrators
For research administrators, the practical takeaway is that the European Code functions as a compliance anchor even outside its formal EU jurisdiction. Institutional research integrity policies that cite the Code’s four principles by name are easier to defend during Horizon Europe audits, easier to cross-reference against national codes, and easier to explain to international collaborators who may not recognise a purely domestic framework.
Grant offices, integrity officers, and research administration teams reviewing or drafting institutional policy should treat the 2023 revision — not the superseded 2017 edition — as the current baseline, since the generative AI and open science provisions did not exist before 2023.
Looking ahead, the trend toward citing the European Code as a default reference is likely to continue as more funders outside Europe adopt open science and research-integrity conditions modelled on Horizon Europe’s approach, reinforcing the Code’s role as a de facto international baseline rather than a purely regional instrument.