Is academic research and publishing still leaving developing countries behind?

Is Academic Research and Publishing Still Leaving Developing Countries Behind? Brady D. Lund January 2022 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 Abstract In this short commentary, the author reflects on his experience working with researchers from developing nations and argues that it is the professional responsibility of those researchers privileged by conducting research in a developed, English-speaking nation to pursue collaboration with researchers in more disadvantageous positions. As noted in a recent article from Matthews et al., researchers from developing countries experience tremendous barriers to identifying collaborators and publishing in top research journals. This commentary notes that researchers from developed countries have both humanitarian and symbiotic rationales for seeking international collaborations with researchers from developing countries. These relationships support the growth of research fields and help deconstruct a western hemispheric hegemony present in much of existing research approaches and thought and publishing practices. Keywords: International; Developing Countries; Research; Publishing; Collaboration Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 As noted in a recent article by Matthews et al. (2020), researchers in developing countries experience significant difficulties in publishing their work in high quality scholarly journals or participating in international collaboration. Authors in developed countries, and particularly those in which English is a common primary or secondary language, have a tremendous benefit, owing to the long history of high research standards and prestigious journals that publish in these countries (Salager-Meyer, 2008). Those from developing countries are left playing catch-up, seeking to publish their works in a foreign country and language, or developing their own journals that must slowly gain credibility and prestige within the disciplines. While this reality is understood well by these researchers, it is often overlooked by researchers in developed countries, who, by the privilege earned through birthplace have tremendous advantage in the production of top publications. This commentary offers the argument that it is imperative for researchers in developed countries to provide meaningful support to their colleagues in developing countries as they work to establish equitable footing in the global research arena. As of October 1, 2020, 3519 journals were included in the Social Science Citation Index. Of these, 2172 journals were published in a developed country (62%), 3175 were published in English (90%), and only 258 were published open access (7%). These percentages hold true for many major disciplines, such as psychology. Among 502 psychology journals in the SSCI, 73% are published in developed countries, 90% are published in English, and only 5% are published open access. Developed countries and those in which English is either a primary language or taught in schools, have a significant advantage in terms of top journals compared to developing countries and countries in which English is not a common language. Developed countries represent only 13.5% of the world’s population as of October 2020 (Worldometer, 2020), while Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 English is only spoken by about 17% of the world’s population and is only the primary language of about 5%. What impact does this skew in favor of developed nations and the English language have on researchers from developing countries? For one thing, it sets goals and aspirations that are insurmountable not because of talent but rather because of language or cultural barriers. I have worked with several researchers in countries like Nigeria and India – which both have English as an official language, but it is not a common first language and the grammar of those who do write in it often varies significantly from the European nations, Canada, Australia, and the United States – who produce quality work and aspire to publish in top journals of their discipline but are unable to get their work accepted due largely to language barriers. Certainly, there are services that while edit papers for language and grammar, but these services are not free and, again, we are talking about developing nations. It is not uncommon for professors in these countries to make less than a living wage. There is certainly no budget for proofreading services. The flawed argument of proofreading services is not novel one among attitudes towards researchers from developing countries. The same attitudes underpin much of the approach towards international students. These students are expected to travel to an institution in a developed nation to receive an education, taking them thousands of miles from home, thrusting them into a new culture and new political situation (often, one that is not particularly hospitable to foreigners). Some students are certainly happy with the international experience, but many never get the opportunity or come to experience depression and isolation. If the purpose of this education was really only to spread quality western education to developing countries, why not bring the education to them? Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 Consider this a bare minimum goodwill doctrine for researchers: that we use our privilege as researchers in developed countries to support the work of researchers in developing countries and make all of world of scholarly research richer for it. Rather than work within geographic or acquaintanceship-based silos, it is imperative that researchers fluent in English and familiar with the “politics” of publishing in developed countries support the work of researchers in developing countries, whether by simply offering free proofreading services, being more flexible and helpful as reviewers and editors of manuscripts written by authors for whom English is not a primary language, or by teaming up for research project on an area of shared interest (which can often be enriched through diverse perspectives or developed/developing countrybased comparative approaches). We should do these things not to seek some sort of credit, or feel like a hero, but because it is the right thing to do: for those who are disadvantaged; for the promise of new forms of thought and paradigm shifts; and for the future of our disciplines, which must maintain legitimacy and relevance in times of increasing competition and globalization of society. Ethical Considerations in Supporting Research from Developing Nations Ethically, the argument offered in this paper aligns with Singer’s (1999; 2011) “Obligation to Assist”: That you have a moral obligation to help others and not helping is morally equivalent to harming. This moral belief runs in opposition to that to which many people in developed countries adhere, the “do no harm” philosophy, where individuals are considered to be morally “right” so long as they are not actively harming others. But “Obligation to Assist” thinkers would argue that neglecting others in need, when we have the means to ameliorate those needs, is morally equivalent to actively harming others. This viewpoint can be applied to our obligations as researchers as follows: • If it is possible to prevent or stop something “bad” from happening without us sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to do so. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 • Inequities in research access and publication opportunities on the basis of non-material aspects of the research (language differences, lack of research funding and support, lack of research collaborators/mentors), which are attributable only to unfortunate birthplace circumstances, are bad. • Researchers in developed countries can stop these inequities by sacrificing only time and energy, which are not morally comparable to the opportunity to contribute meaningful and, potentially, paradigm-altering ideas to the scholarly literature of our disciplines. Certainly, there are some counterarguments that could be levied against these moral propositions, for example: • “Why is it our job to help? After all we are busy professionals. Couldn’t we just provide grant and proofreading support for researchers in developing countries?” • “Research is not a life-or-death proposition like the poverty and disease that Singer’s works emphasize. How can we really measure the significance of the problem?” In response to the first counterargument, it seems evident that we cannot morally assume that others will do the right thing. History shows that any support provided by organizations on our behalf will be insufficient to make any real change. Conversely, our direct intervention, while maybe not helping a large number of people, will have a much stronger impact for those few who do receive it. We then hope that others follow our lead in engaging in these collaborations. We must do what WE can. No one said that moral obligations would not require sacrifice. Regarding the second counterargument, no one said that the problem had to be “life-or-death” to constitute “harm.” The fact that the overwhelming majority of aspiring researchers worldwide face substantial barriers that are not related to the quality or the research or the motivation of the Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 researcher, causes tremendous harm to individuals’ ability to gain acclaim and share important, potentially paradigm-altering (and even life-saving) ideas and findings. Any argument to the contrary functions on a sectarian (racist) belief that those producing research now (largely white, European and American) are the best able and that researchers from developing nations, with similar resources, would still produce inferior ideas and research. It also functions with the acceptance that it is just that researchers from developing countries should have to work harder in order to reach the same position of prominence in their work as those from developed countries. Framed in this way, it should be evident that, while perhaps not directly “life-or-death,” this problem is not one that can be ignored by anyone claiming to support the social justice efforts within academia. Further, it is evident that this problem harms not only the researcher from the developing country, but all of academia, by limiting the true participation and exchange of ideas. Some arguments do not invalidate the philosophy but propose (often valid) exceptions to the rule. There are certain types of research that do not make sense for international collaboration For example, research involving a certain plant or animal species that is endemic to a specific area within one country, or research that examines a problem that exists in businesses or schools in one country, would not make sense for international collaboration. However, there may still be opportunities to extend this research into an international collaboration, in the form of a comparative study (e.g., “what evolutionary differences exist between this bird that is endemic to New York State and this one that is endemic to Punjab State, India?”). Another consideration is ethical standards. Standards for research ethics can vary widely across countries, along with specific research procedures and compliance. In highly-developed countries like the United States, it is expected that all researchers complete research ethics training and submit a detailed report of all research activities to be performed, which must be reviewed and approved by an institutional review board (which is held to its own specific standards by the nation’s government). This Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 might not always be the case with other nations. While most countries have standards for medical research, other research involving human subjects may be less controlled. Compliance may also be more mixed. Researchers participating in an international collaboration are still ethically responsible for ensuring that all data collection adheres to appropriate ethical standards. Studies that involve existing datasets only – secondary data analysis, content analysis, literature reviews, bibliometrics – are perhaps most straightforward and least ethically problematic for international collaboration. Researchers seeking international collaboration for human subjects research are not completely left in the dark, however. Benator and Singer (2000) published a set of ethical guidelines for international research collaborations, while the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (2016) and the World Conferences on Research Integrity (2013) issued guidelines and “responsibilities” for researchers involved in international collaborations. The Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations (World Conference on Research Integrity, 2013) lists 20 responsibilities for those individuals involved in international research collaboration, including intentions for pursuing such collaborations, responsibilities in managing the collaborations, responsibilities in negotiating research practices, and responsibilities for research outcomes. How to Embody This Philosophy There are several ways to “embody” this philosophy toward international collaboration in your own work. Here are some examples of what I would consider the “minimal effort” one could exert in adopting the philosophy: • I am a researcher who wants to perform a systematic review of literature on the topic of older adults’ susceptibility to medical misinformation. I visit ResearchGate and search for “misinformation” and “older adults.” I discover a researcher from the University of Nairobi (Kenya) who has published several recent articles on medical misinformation in some less journals in the discipline, but whose research (independent of language, Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883 grammar, etc.) is very strong. I invite this researcher to join the research team for this review project, even though I understand this will likely mean greater writing/proofreading responsibilities for me compared to if I just found collaborators in my own university/country. I actively seek out researchers like this, rather than using only those contacts within my university or whom I have met at (expensive and elite) conferences. • I am the editor of a top-tier academic journal. In order to do my part in encouraging these collaborations, I create a special issue dedicated to international research collaborations, where all articles must be co-authored by researchers from developed and developing nations. This special issue opportunity provides incentive for all researchers on the team – the researchers from the developed countries are rewarded for their time and energy by getting their research published in a top journal – so no one is really even “sacrificing” anything. In my few years as an academic researcher, I have approached this doctrine in several ways. First, by making close friendships with international students on campus, welcoming them into what must be an unfamiliar and intimidating situation and providing whatever social support I can in addition to working on research topics relevant to their interests. Through these students, I often am introduced to fellow researchers in their home nations, with whom I also establish relationships; I have found every one of these individuals in my experience to be extraordinarily generous and gratuitous, in a way that frankly seems much more rare among academics in developed countries. I have also used researcher networking sites like ResearchGate to identify individuals who are interested in my work and from there reach out and establish relationships. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4344883