New Delhi: Research on climate and health in South Asia by foreign authors is 4.2 times more likely to receive funding, according to a new paper published in The Lancet journal. The study looked at 308 research papers published across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka, and found that there was an imbalance in funding for authors affiliated with domestic institutions versus foreign institutions, even if the topics and forms of research were similar.
Around 52 per cent of the research papers led by domestic first authors did not have any funding, while for papers with foreign first authors, that number dropped to 20.6 per cent.
“The findings suggest the presence of systemic biases favouring funding for foreign-affiliated researchers,” the study said. “This is likely due to…(foreign) institutes having greater access to resources, allowing them to set research agendas with a ‘foreign gaze’.”
The study was conducted by researchers from The George Institute for Global Health India, who wanted to understand whether the knowledge ecosystem around climate change and health is ‘fair and just’. By looking at research about climate and health in low- and middle-income countries in South Asia, the authors wanted to understand the role that domestic scholars play in producing this work.
As first authors or corresponding authors, scientists from low- and middle-income countries can participate not just in producing original research, but also in agenda-setting and knowledge legitimisation. When it comes to research on the health impacts of climate change in South Asia, domestic scholars are more accountable and connected to the local context, and research funders should take that into account, the study said.
Additionally, the study explained that high-income countries already have a history of contributing more to climate change. Their participation in research on climate change in low-income countries could seem ‘hypocritical’.
“Global discussions on climate change and health require a pro-justice platform for those most vulnerable,” said the study.
Also read: Health vs. Heat—New study shows how India really wants its climate change messages delivered
Colonialism and research funding
The study referred to the power imbalance in academia created by colonialism, explaining how the colonisers were often the ‘producers’ of knowledge while the colonised were the receivers. This imbalance, according to the study, has carried forward into present-day academia through the distribution of resources and funds for producing academic research.
It also cited previous research showing that in papers about low- and middle-income countries, scholars from high-income countries are predominantly listed as first or corresponding authors. This, too, the paper said, creates a knowledge imbalance and geographical disconnect between the site of research and its producers.
“The leading of research by domestic institutes is not only a moral imperative but also an epistemic advantage, which can facilitate a more nuanced understanding,” the paper said.
According to the paper, funders need to critically analyse such “extractive” research practices by scholars from high-income countries who conduct research and produce knowledge in low-income countries. It also said that in the case of international collaborations, the research should still be led by institutions based in the country where the research is being conducted.
The paper called for a pro-justice approach to funding scholarly work on climate change research. It urged funders to enact affirmative action policies for scholars from low- and middle-income countries and also asked ethics review committees to act to protect the rights and interests of communities being studied — to prevent “epistemic” injustice by scholars from high-income countries in low-income settings.
(Edited by Prashant)