Indigenous excellence: confronting racism and complicity in peer review.

Racism in peer review is a common, structurally embedded, and systemic problem. However, it is often framed as isolated acts of individual-level bias. Racism in peer review manifests across interconnected societal, system, and process levels, shaping who participates in knowledge production, what is deemed credible evidence, and whose work is published. This Indigenous-led Perspective examines racism in peer review through a three-layer framework: (1) societal, (2) system, and (3) process (decision-making and interpersonal), situating peer review as one domain within the broader problem of anti-Indigenous publication bias. Grounded in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), Indigenous Data Sovereignty, and lived experience, we integrate conceptual analysis with illustrative examples to identify intervention points. At the societal level, colonial structures and socio-political forces determine whose knowledges count. At the system level, editorial governance, publishing models, and reward structures reproduce inequities. At the process (decision-making and interpersonal) level, racism cuts across reviewer selection and feedback, editorial decision-making, and dissemination through racialized assumptions, assessment and evaluative practices. We propose concrete, systemic reforms to dismantle racism in peer review, including structural policy reform, diversification of reviewer and editorial pools, anti-racism and cultural safety training, and explicit guidelines. We also outline (co)author responsibilities to act in solidarity when racism occurs. Equity, justice, and fairness in peer review demand more than goodwill. They require enforceable structural change, accountability, and culturally safe practice. Confronting racism is both an ethical imperative and a prerequisite for research excellence, integrity, and health promotion that serves all communities.