IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v57y2003i10p1957-1967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research relationships between the South and the North: Cinderella and the ugly sisters?

Author

Listed:
  • Jentsch, Birgit
  • Pilley, Catherine

Abstract

There has been an increase in the size and range of North-South health research partnerships since the 1990s. Current literature tends to stress the need for partnership and associated principles, but recognises the difficult context of structural inequality and historical legacies. Critics point to continuing neo-colonialist attitudes to research, which are unhelpful for the development of mutually beneficial collaborations. Such dynamics have parallels with the European folktale of Cinderella and the Ugly Sisters, the latter using their advantage of wealth and position to exploit their step-sister. Little literature is available on how to address this situation for the principles of partnership to be integrated into project design, implementation and dissemination. This article examines processes and dynamics within North-South collaborations in health research through two different case studies presented from Northern perspectives. Each case study focuses on distinct aspects of research collaborations. The first, a North-South partnership project in Bangladesh, highlights issues of capacity building, use of data and publications. The second case, a Doctoral study in Thailand, examines the reliance on contributions by Southern partners, responsibility to the local setting and the practice of reciprocity. The article then turns to Southern researchers' reflections, explored in semi-structured interviews, on themes identified by Northern researchers as important concerns in research collaborations. The authors conclude that advantage should be taken of the fact that Southern and Northern colleagues often share similar values regarding research collaborations, but difficulties exist in implementation partly due to historically rooted and current inequalities. Practical arrangements are suggested which may help to address the commonly assumed roles of the North as 'provider' of funding and ideas, and of the South as 'receiver' in an environment with little scope for action.

Suggested Citation

  • Jentsch, Birgit & Pilley, Catherine, 2003. "Research relationships between the South and the North: Cinderella and the ugly sisters?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(10), pages 1957-1967, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:57:y:2003:i:10:p:1957-1967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(03)00060-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nelius Boshoff, 2009. "Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in Central Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 413-434, November.
    2. Molyneux, Sassy & Geissler, P. Wenzel, 2008. "Ethics and the ethnography of medical research in Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 685-695, September.
    3. Nelius Boshoff, 2010. "South–South research collaboration of countries in the Southern African Development Community (SADC)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 481-503, August.
    4. Shelley Kotze & Mirek Dymitrow, 2022. "North–South research collaborations: An empirical evaluation against principles of transboundary research," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 40(2), March.
    5. Wight, Daniel, 2008. "Most of our social scientists are not institution based... they are there for hire--Research consultancies and social science capacity for health research in East Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 110-116, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:57:y:2003:i:10:p:1957-1967. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.