Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38404521›Full record

ReviewSustainability science2024

An organizing framework to break down Western-centric views of knowledge in North-South research.

Hannah Turner, Briony Rogers, Sarah Kneebone, Diego Ramirez, Matthew French, Mere Jane Sawailau, Filise Volavola, Sholyn Baran, Kelera Matavesi, Orlando Newton and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sustainability science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Hannah TurnerMonash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0009-0007-4771-2768
Briony RogersMonash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Sarah KneeboneMonash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Diego RamirezFaculty of Art, Design and Architecture, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Matthew FrenchFaculty of Art, Design and Architecture, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Mere Jane SawailauRevitalising Informal Settlements and Their Environments (RISE), Suva, Fiji.
Filise VolavolaRevitalising Informal Settlements and Their Environments (RISE), Suva, Fiji.
Sholyn BaranLive and Learn, Suva, Fiji.
Kelera MatavesiUniversity of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.
Orlando NewtonUniversity of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.
Maraia Batiota LuveniyaliUniversity of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.
Autiko TelaFiji National University, Suva, Fiji.
Isoa VakarewaRevitalising Informal Settlements and Their Environments (RISE), Suva, Fiji.
Monash University · AUHouse of Representatives · NLUniversity of the South Pacific · FJFiji National University · FJ

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Global challenges, such as climate change, persistent poverty, and food insecurity are complex problems. These societal, environmental, and economic challenges cross scientific disciplines, communities, and geographies, requiring interdisciplinary, North-South solutions. Nevertheless, prevailing sustainability science responses are Western-centric. Some seminal studies have attempted to understand and engage with diverse knowledge systems. These include decolonial and Indigenous methodologies, such as "Two-Eyed Seeing", which emphasizes the importance of using both Western and Indigenous knowledge to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the world, and participatory action research, which highlights the importance of involving participants in the research process and promoting social change through collaborative effort. However, apart from in-country research collaborations with traditional Indigenous knowledge, most North-South studies overlook the role or influence of Western-centric views and therefore fail to recognize and incorporate diverse worldviews and knowledge systems. This may, in part, reflect the tendency to categorize research into disciplinary silos, but more likely is the unintentional, yet prevalent, view that Western science is "objective and neutral." As more scholars from multiple disciplines and geographies focus on interdisciplinary North-South research, it is critical that researchers reflect on dominant research approaches and knowledge production. Studies can co-construct, reproduce, or control the forms of knowledge generated-whether intentional or unintentional. This paper presents an organizing framework to help researchers navigate, understand, and engage with diverse forms of knowledge in undertaking North-South research. The framework draws on empirical observations from the authors' interdisciplinary research and from empirical cross-cultural literature. It comprises three contextual levels of influence, featuring guiding principles and subsequent practical actions researchers can use to navigate the complexities of knowledge co-construction in North-South research. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-024-01478-6.

Indexed as

Diverse ways of knowingInterdisciplinaryKnowledge co-constructionNorth–SouthResearch framework

Identifiers

PMID38404521
PMCPMC10891260
OpenAlexW4391895871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.