There is a substantial body of literature on ethics in translation and interpreting. Universities teach translation ethics. Professional associations publish codes of conduct. Researchers examine translators’ ethical dilemmas, impartiality, confidentiality, accuracy, and professional behaviour. Entire books, training programmes, and workshops are devoted to helping translators and interpreters navigate ethical challenges in their daily work.

This emphasis is undoubtedly important. Translators and interpreters exercise significant professional judgement and often work in situations where ethical decision-making has profound consequences for individuals and society. Yet I increasingly find myself asking a different question:

Why is there so little discussion about the ethical responsibilities of the other actors within the translation “ecosystem”?

Language service providers (LSPs) make decisions about pricing, procurement, deadlines, technology, and working conditions. Professional associations lobby governments, influence professional standards, promote certification systems, and claim to represent the profession. Universities determine which stakeholders help shape research agendas, who is invited to conferences, and which voices are granted academic legitimacy. Public authorities design procurement systems that influence remuneration, quality, and labour conditions. And technology companies increasingly shape translators’ working environments through platforms, algorithms, and artificial intelligence.

Each of these actors exercises considerable power and influence over translators’ and interpreters’ pay, working conditions, and professional opportunities. Yet ethical discussion remains disproportionately focused on the conduct of individual translators rather than on the institutional decisions that shape the profession itself.

For example, translators are expected to comply with detailed ethical codes governing confidentiality, impartiality, competence, and professional behaviour. But where are the equivalent discussions about the ethical responsibilities of language service providers towards the workforce upon which their businesses depend?

Where are the discussions about the ethical responsibilities of universities when they collaborate with commercial organisations whose business models may contribute to and benefit from existing inequalities? Where are the discussions about the ethical responsibilities of professional associations when lobbying for policies that may affect labour markets and increase barriers to entry? Where are the discussions about the ethical responsibilities of public procurement bodies when contract design contributes to declining rates and deteriorating working conditions?

These questions become particularly important because ethics cannot simply concern individual behaviour. Ethical responsibility also concerns institutions. We must acknowledge that other actors in the “ecosystem” shape incentives, control access to work, and determine whose voices are heard. These reflections become essential as Translation Studies increasingly invites commercial actors to shape research agendas. Ethical questions must accompany those collaborations. Collaboration without adequate scrutiny of power, representation, attribution bias, and conflicts of interest risks becoming an ethical issue in its own right.

I use the term “ecosystem” in quotation marks deliberately. As I have argued previously, describing the translation industry as an ecosystem is itself a political choice. The term evokes the image of a naturally occurring system in which different actors coexist, adapt, and contribute to a larger whole that should not be disturbed. However, industries are not natural ecosystems. They are contested social and economic systems shaped by unequal power, competing interests, and conflicting incentives. Therefore, when Translation Studies scholars use the term “ecosystem”, they may, however unintentionally, be depoliticising labour rights issues and amplifying the language of powerful actors.

Translation ethics should not begin and end with translators and interpreters. If we genuinely believe in ethical practice across the translation “ecosystem”, then every stakeholder—including universities, professional associations, commercial intermediaries, technology companies, and public authorities—must be prepared to examine its own ethical responsibilities, not merely the ethical responsibilities of translators and interpreters. Academia has a particular responsibility to investigate these actors independently, critically, and with integrity.

About the author
Fardous Bahbouh is a researcher and broadcast interpreter specialising in labour rights and the political economy of the translation and interpreting industry. Alongside her academic research, she continues to work with agencies and production companies that value interpreters and translators and provide fair working conditions. She also runs a small translation company and does not generalise critiques of unfair intermediaries to all translation companies or agencies.

Blog Image

Laura Sofia Martinez Agudelo / https://betterimagesofai.org / https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/