We are junior scientists from emerging economies — the world needs more researchers like us solving global problems

Lire en français sur Nature Africa
Hollywood has a knack for painting captivating stories of scientists from around the world coming together to achieve the extraordinary — defeating a deadly virus or finding a new home for humanity — demonstrating the idea that the best science transcends borders. International collaborations have gifted us a COVID-19-quelling vaccine, a climate-tracking space station and evidence of the elusive Higgs boson particle.
But as researchers from lower-income countries now working in a wealthier one, we can see that scientific collaborations are not as glamorous or equitable as Hollywood portrays them.
Our personal ties to Africa make the scientific privilege in rich countries crystal clear. M.S., who grew up in Egypt, found that his ambitions in structural biology were hindered by the limited availability of advanced instruments in the country. In 2016, there was not a single cryogenic electron microscope — which can be used to reveal biological structures at the molecular level — in all of Africa. This stark reality was a reason he pursued graduate studies abroad. Using equipment in the United States and the United Kingdom, he helped to reveal structures of proteins involved in nucleation of the molecular motor actin and regulation of ubiquitin ligase, which can help target proteins for degradation1,2 — accomplishments that would have remained out of reach had he stayed in Egypt.
A.D. and N.M. were both born in Ghana but took distinct paths in their scientific careers. For A.D., Ghana was home until his undergraduate mentors encouraged him to seek opportunities in Europe. With their help, he secured funding to work as a computational scientist, first in Germany and later in the United Kingdom. This enabled him to support his family financially while gaining invaluable experience at world-class institutions. By contrast, N.M. immigrated to the United Kingdom with his family at a young age, eventually becoming a naturalized citizen. This was a ticket to a career in genetics that would not have been possible in Ghana. He studied at Lancaster University, UK, for a fraction of the fees charged to international students, and later joined the UK National Health Service just as the agency began to expand its global expertise in genomics.
How might our stories differ if we had not pursued academic careers abroad? The three of us have heard countless tales of frustration echoed by colleagues from around the world: a chemist in Delhi missing a revision deadline because of a catastrophic flood; a microbiologist in Kenya whose frozen malaria-parasite samples were ruined by frequent power cuts; and a geneticist in West Africa whose laboratory sees students join and leave before reagents for their experiments can clear the months-long import delays. These infrastructural, financial and technical challenges hinder lower-income countries from accessing the technologies that drive high-impact science.
This disparity is backed up not just by anecdotes, but also by data. The G20 nations, a group of countries with some of the world’s largest economies, together account for 93% of global research papers, a proxy for scientific output (see ‘Global scientific output dominated by richer countries’).
But the nations hardest-hit by global crises — such as rising sea levels, climate change and outbreaks of Ebola and Zika viruses — that need research-led solutions aren’t in that lofty list. The contrast is stark, with an unseen line separating the scientific ‘haves’ from the ‘have-nots’. Between 2012 and 2019, richer countries saw a steady decline in research output on topics related to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, a United Nations initiative aimed at achieving “a better and more sustainable future for all”. This decline is concerning because it undermines efforts to find solutions to pressing global issues — from ending poverty and hunger to improving education and equality — particularly in the countries most affected by them.
Efforts to bridge the scientific divide have been spearheaded by universities, funding agencies and governments. Inspiration can be traced back to 1990, when the Dutch government improved partnerships with health researchers in Ghana. Whereas earlier programmes failed to meet local needs, the Ghanaian–Dutch Health Research for Development Programme funded 79 studies led by Ghanaian scientists who chose their collaborators and project directions. This structure gave scientists on the ground the agency that they needed to do high-impact research. The programme succeeded despite focusing on themes that some Dutch researchers were less likely to pursue on their own3, including designing district immunization programmes, reducing maternal mortality, optimizing tuberculosis-treatment hubs and designing a national health-insurance scheme.
Yet, three decades after the Ghanaian–Dutch collaboration, African researchers continue to be excluded from international funding schemes and capacity-building programmes4.
Global partnerships should benefit both sides — offering training and access to equipment and data for all involved. But they often end up one-sided, with richer countries ‘rescuing’ poorer ones, perpetuating inequality. Programmes should elevate scientific talent in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and treat all partners equally. Two-way exchanges are crucial, allowing researchers from LMICs to gain experience in high-income countries (HICs), and vice versa. The Ghanaian–Dutch collaboration is a great model: let LMIC researchers set priorities and lead projects. We feel that international research funding should be determined by the quality of both the research and the collaboration. Creating scientific academies in LMICs, akin to the US National Academy of Sciences, could enhance global recognition of research from these regions. Recognizing laureates and scientific prizewinners in LMICs would signal that their research is worthy of the highest accolades.
Being closely involved in day-to-day scientific work, junior scientists are often the first to notice when disparities and inequalities manifest. For example, while in Egypt, M.S. secured a competitive spot at a 2016 workshop at Stanford University in California for hands-on training in advanced neuroscience and bio-imaging methods. But he couldn’t attend, because he lacked funding for travel and accommodation, highlighting how the gap between well-resourced and under-resourced researchers becomes entrenched. This experience led M.S. to advocate for less-privileged researchers to have dedicated, fully funded slots in international workshops. He reached out to people involved in professional society committees, wrote to workshop organizers and contacted an international funding agency to secure travel grants for students from LMICs to attend the Stanford workshop.
We encourage early-career researchers around the world to use their own experiences and platforms to foster meaningful international collaborations. Together, the voices of early-career scientists carry more weight when advocating for inclusive and equitable scientific practices than any individual effort could achieve. Early-career scientists have the agency to form international partnerships that focus on mutual benefits rather than aid; to advocate for policies that support equitable access to resources, grants and publications; to encourage skills-sharing and knowledge-transfer activities at our institutions; and to engage with colleagues from every background to understand the challenges faced by researchers in less-privileged circumstances. Here are some steps that younger scientists can take to change the status quo:
• Support globally inclusive research by seeking out collaborations between institutions in countries with different levels of economic development. Champion programmes that view partnerships as equitable collaborations, not one-sided efforts. For example, during his PhD programme, N.M. joined the international PanProstate Cancer Group consortium, to help analyse whole-genome sequence data from more than 1,000 men with prostate cancer. He observed how smaller working groups fostered equitable collaboration. The organization had a flat management structure that allowed researchers at all levels of experience to help set priorities, and he met senior researchers from HICs who advocate for the inclusion of African populations and scientists in genomics research.
• Advocate for a seat at the table of committees, panels and steering groups that shape the nature of international partnerships. Ensure that these efforts are meaningful and reciprocal, and that they address the experiences and needs of researchers in LMICs. By doing so, you can expand your network while bringing to the discussions first-hand knowledge of challenges and privileges.
• Identify and pursue research projects that inherently require a two-way exchange of data, fieldwork, equipment or expertise with global partners. This will not only enhance the scope of the research, but also foster a symbiotic relationship in which all parties benefit. For example, A.D. frequently returns as an alumnus to the University of Ghana in Accra to conduct workshops in computational neuroscience and machine learning, sponsored by the charity TReND in Africa. Sharing his expertise with students in Ghana has increased their awareness and inspired interest in the field, and some have gone on to pursue higher degrees in these disciplines.
• Organize with other scientists to encourage institutions and funders to change their policies so that researchers in LMICs are not marginalized or, in the worst instances, exploited through the export of their samples or data to international labs without receiving equitable opportunities in return.
• Proactively form relationships with people at partner institutions, on funding-body committees and in local governments. Early-career researchers in both LMICs and HICs need to see their network as both local and global from the outset of their careers.
The world is more connected than ever — and to solve global challenges, the success of scientists in lower-income nations is as important as that of those in HICs. Working to build bridges between these nations should be an essential feature of every scientist’s career, as well as acting for the common good.