Considerations for Collaboration
Reputation and Prestige
The majority of respondents (twenty-four) prioritized features that could be considered somewhat transactional in nature when assessing potential collaborators. The phrases “track record”, “expertise”, “credentials”, “training”, “reputation” and “funding” appeared consistently in these responses.
For these individuals, the prestige of the potential partner and the ability to offer funding and training were key elements for considering new collaborators.
What makes an attractive international partner when you consider joining a research project?
"The expertise and connectedness." - HEI respondent from Ghana
"Career pathways. Track records in the area of expertise. Reputation of the collaborators and partners." - NGO respondent from Tanzania
"The partner's credentials, credibility, policies, and conditions/terms of the partnership." - Arts or Cultural Organisation respondent from Zimbabwe
Relationships
A significant number of respondents (fourteen) identified factors that appeared to prioritize the nature of the relationship with a potential collaborator. The terms “mutual”, “respect”, “mentorship”, “values”, “open”, “flexible” and “local context” all featured heavily in these responses.
For many, a potential partners’ willingness to be open to new ways of doing things, to be flexible in overcoming challenges faced by local partners and to operate with an awareness of the need for equitable decision-making were the main factors that they considered when engaging in international collaborations.
What makes an attractive international partner when you consider joining a research project?
"The one who is flexible on all aspects, willing to listen to what is on the ground at a particular period not the one who seats somewhere in an office and makes rules and regulations governing research with little knowledge of how research is evolving over time." - HEI respondent from Uganda
"Mutual relationship where both parties have equal/similar decision making power." - Government respondent from Malawi
"One who should be able to recognise and support our small initiatives, capacity and potential. One who should also know that we can also bring something to the table, one who will take us as partners and not subjects. One who can support our ideas and help us build capacity to stand on our feet." - HEI respondent from Malawi
Networking Challenges
The most common obstacle to developing international partnerships was the difficulty in identifying appropriate partners, which was noted by seven respondents. Other closely related issues include lack of networking opportunities, lack of knowledge about how to develop partnerships, and lack of resources to develop partnerships.
What obstacles currently impede your ability to develop international partnerships?
"Lack of information on how to develop said partnerships with international institutions."- Government respondent from Malawi
"Knowledge about the available international potential partners."- NGO respondent from Rwanda
Structural Challenges
Structural impediments to international collaboration were raised as an issue by several people. These impediments included funding schemes being skewed in favour of northern partners, little to no inclusion of overheads for southern partners in funding schemes, and unequal agenda-setting processes that exclude LMICs. Layered on top of these structural issues were other issues of power imbalances, including individual attitudes on the part of northern scholars to collaboration with LMIC researchers and difficulties penetrating existing research networks.
Specific recent challenges included the negative impact of COVID-19 on the ability to develop international partnerships and the damage caused by cuts to the UK’s ODA research programmes. Uncertainty in the funding landscape and changing funding priorities were also noted along with general lack of funding for developing collaborations.
What obstacles currently impede your ability to develop international partnerships?
"South Africa's status as middle income rather than low income means we're not a priority for some international funders. Funding arrangements are often skewed in favour of the Northern partners - e.g. Newton Fund. Some Northern scholars have arrogant attitudes to collaboration." - HEI respondent from South Africa
"Requirement of the huge budget to always remains in northern institutions and with small or without overhead cover." - Research Institute respondent from Tanzania
Summary
The relationship between the likelihood of securing funding and the expertise of the team ensure that reputation and track record will remain significant factors when exploring new research collaborations. That being said, the relational elements noted by a significant portion of our respondents highlight the broader considerations that may impact how successful and resilient a partnership becomes in the long term.
The responses to the question about collaboration highlight a potential area of exploitation. For institutions and individuals that prioritize the possibility of working with a prestigious collaborator, there is a risk that well-established and well-known researchers or institutions will leverage this element of the relationship to create an inequitable partnership where the benefits are not mutual.
In terms of obstacles, the responses highlight that opportunities to meet, form relationships with, and identify areas of collaboration with potential partners are limited for research teams in the Global South. For researchers without extensive international networks developed through education or early career research positions abroad, it can be difficult to access existing informal networks. Even for researchers with international connections, lack of funding makes it difficult to maintain collaborations. The structural challenges embedded within funding schemes and agenda setting processes furthermore make it more difficult for researchers from the Global South to build the diverse international networks necessary to address shifting funder priorities.