Ten simple rules for Global North researchers to stop perpetuating helicopter research in the Global South

By D. Haelewaters, T. Hofmann, A. Romero‐Olivares. 2021

231 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The practice of Global North (i.e., “richer” globalized countries located in the northern hemisphere, except for Australia and New Zealand) researchers making roundtrips to the Global South (i.e., “poorer” developing countries located around the tropics and in the Southern hemisphere) to collect materials and then process, analyze, and publish results with little to no involvement from local collaborators is referred to as “helicopter research” or “parachute research” [1]. At best, local scientists provide logistical help and knowledge of the local community, such as field site guiding, identification of local organisms, translation from and to local languages, and facilitating resources to foreign scientists. However, often, these necessary actors in the scientific process receive little to no retribution for their work and knowledge. For example, a systematic problem in academia is that local scientists and graduate and undergraduate students are often not offered coauthorship in manuscripts for which their contributions were essential (e.g., project planning, logistics, and knowledge of local biodiversity). Even worse is that research remains unavailable for them and others who contributed substantially, since in most cases, peer-review publications are available behind a paywall (but see [2]), and they are written in English, which is the second or third language for many Global South researchers [3]. Furthermore, local communities where Global North scientists come to conduct helicopter research are usually left out of broader impacts and outreach efforts, as these tend to happen in Global North communities. Helicopter research is a way to perpetuate colonization practices [4], and power imbalances are critical in perpetuating helicopter research. For example, Global North researchers often set the research agenda based on priorities of their funding agencies, which, in many cases, are decided upon by those same researchers sitting in decision-making committees of those very agencies. All too often, proposals are developed without a deep understanding of problems and priorities of Global South countries where the anticipated research will take place. Global South collaborators are rarely invited to brainstorm and set the research agenda for their needs. This opens the door for unequal partnership with research objectives that may be irrelevant for Global South collaborators, who then, are forced to accept an already funded proposal due to lack of research funding within their own countries or institutions [5]. Thus, power and politics behind science are interconnected and are a driving force behind helicopter research. Helicopter research is a problem that also happens within Global North and within Global South countries, where dominating cultures perpetuate abuse on historically marginalized communities, including those of indigenous people, people of color, people from lower

Subfields: Communication, Political Science and International Relations, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Philosophy, Social Sciences & Humanities

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

  1. Yacine Jernite

In Political Science and International Relations

  1. Christopher Akiki
  2. Suzana Ili'c
  3. Giada Pistilli
  4. Yacine Jernite
  5. Matthias Gallé
  6. Margot Mieskes
  7. Thomas Wolf

In Philosophy

  1. Christopher Akiki
  2. Suzana Ili'c
  3. Giada Pistilli
  4. Yacine Jernite
  5. Matthias Gallé
  6. Margot Mieskes
  7. Thomas Wolf

Citations in the corpus