Levelling the playing field for North-South research collaborations

Issue 14 of Southern Lens on Development by Prof. Jane Mariara 

The PEP - Partnership for Economic Policy was founded in 2002 with the conviction that in-country challenges require locally devised solutions. Over the past two decades, PEP—a Southern-led global organization—has supported locally-led development in the Global South through nearly 400 projects in 66 countries. Together, these projects have built the research and policy advising capacity of over 1300 researchers, half of whom are women. To provide rigorous empirical evidence on the benefits of localization, PEP commissioned some of its Research Fellows to conduct a series of studies over the past five years. It subsequently launched a call-to-action, which has to date been signed by more than 95 leading economists, to enhance the participation of Southern researchers in development debates concerning their countries.

This edition of my newsletter focuses on highlights from two of these studies that analyse the success of research collaborations between Northern and Southern researchers.

Importance of collaborative research

Research partnerships between the North and the South can improve the understanding of complex development issues with each side complementing the other. Southern researchers benefit from exposure to new research techniques, meeting top authors, participating in reputable conferences, publishing in high- ranking journals and overall capacity building. Northern researchers gain valuable insights into context-driven policy and social nuances of the regions in the South where the research issues are most prevalent.

However, the manner in which such research collaborations work in practice is much more complex and do not always involve full and equitable participation from Southern researchers.  Two PEP commissioned research papers on this subject—Leading the Way: Fostering Fair North-South Research Collaborations (Interviews paper hereafter) and Research Collaboration in Development Economics: Understanding Disparities in Publication Patterns (Citations paper hereafter)—highlight entrenched structural disparities driven primarily by funding and access to research resources. These papers also informed a discussion on the subject organized by PEP in November, 2024—Enhancing North-South Collaboration in Global Development Research and Policy. A compelling set of recommendations for successful North-South collaborations emerged from this extensive research and subsequent conversations.

Why North-South research collaborations continue to be unfair

In the Interviews paper the authors conducted extensive qualitative interviews with researchers from Africa and Asia to draw on their lived experiences. A key issue that emerged was the deep influence of Northern institutions in shaping the research agenda primarily due to the funding imbalance, which leads to skewed power dynamics. Some researchers even called it ‘scientific colonialism’ since the research benefitted the careers of Northern researchers but often deprived those from the South from adequate recognition and access to data.

On this latter point of recognition, the Citations paper which studied the pattern of research collaborations between Northern and Southern researchers through analysing publications in top economic development journals (a total of 18951 articles between 2000-2019) found that over 70% of articles are authored solely by researchers based in developed countries. Researchers from the Global South continue to be under-represented, authoring only 15% of articles with no clear sign of improvement over time. The remaining 13% were produced through North-South collaboration, which is a growing phenomenon. Most of these collaborations were concentrated around a few key institutions—both in the North (e.g., the World Bank, IFPRI) and South (e.g., Addis Ababa University, University of Cape Town).

When it came to data analysis and interpretation of findings, African researchers shared that they were left out and the process of including them appeared more like ‘window dressing’ or an ‘afterthought’ to fulfil requirements (Paper 1). In comparison, the Asian researchers found the process much more equitable and representative. Southern researchers also highlighted that, since the funding went to Northern institutions, researchers from the North were allocated higher budgets for travel and other activities. In the same vein, junior Northern researchers were assigned more important and senior roles than their Southern counterparts.

Further, some Southern researchers also reported the research management institution’s approach as disrespectful towards them with demands for uncompensated additional work. The Interviews paper also highlighted a clear gender imbalance with female lead researchers not given their due as team leaders and expected to play a ‘mother’ role. Lastly and importantly, as the funding institutions were only focused on outputs, the structural disparities in the process remain unaddressed despite an increase in research collaborations in recent years. This skewed influence of Northern institutions could expand given recent global events, including ongoing economic shifts, violent conflicts and AI advancements.

The next section details the recommendations that this research has identified as critical to shifting the balance based on extensive and thorough consultation.

Shifting the balance – the way forward

Funding and equitable research budgets – The findings from the papers highlight the need for a clear shift towards direct and transparent funding allocation processes for Southern institutions. This would ensure greater autonomy for organizations from the South and promote trust among all collaborators. Equally, it is important to allocate research budgets equitably so that Southern researchers receive fair compensation and adequate resources for core research activities.

Process related changes – There is a need to establish clear guidelines and agreements on authorship and contributions at the start of collaborations, as well as have Southern researchers participate in all stages of the research process to ensure their perspectives are taken into account. Moreover, promoting long-term sustained partnerships will allow for the gradual building of trust, capacity, and equal partnerships over time.

Changes in design and decision-making – Collaboration frameworks must be designed with long-term goals and support mechanisms to ensure continuity and impact. Importantly, Southern researchers must play an important role in setting research agendas so that their lived understanding informs the design. This would mean fostering interdisciplinary research agendas that accommodate diverse perspectives and methodologies to address complex local and global challenges effectively. Such an approach would ensure all contributions are recognized and valued, balancing power asymmetries.

Ensuring gender equitability – It is necessary to ensure that female researchers are respected as team leaders and not burdened with non-research-related duties.

Strengthening monitoring and evaluation – There is a need to develop standardized fairness guidelines to govern North-South collaborations, mandate reporting on these, incorporate feedback mechanisms, as well as monitor and evaluate both the outputs and processes of such partnerships. Further, how "excellence" and "impact" are defined and measured in global research needs to be revisited to move beyond traditional Northern-centric metrics (like high-impact journal publications) to genuinely value diverse forms of knowledge, local relevance, policy influence and capacity building.   Equally, conducting comprehensive cultural sensitivity and ethics training at the onset of collaborations to reconcile cultural differences and promote mutual respect will go a long way in establishing fairer North-South research collaborations.

I hope you enjoyed reading this edition of my newsletter and how organizations like PEP are striving to address the intrinsic power imbalance and ensure that the playing field for researchers from the South is levelled. Do watch out for more pieces on localization in the coming months. As always, I welcome your comments and feedback.

Comment on LinkedIn