{"id":10442,"date":"2025-11-20T05:25:55","date_gmt":"2025-11-20T04:25:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/?p=10442"},"modified":"2025-11-20T06:34:31","modified_gmt":"2025-11-20T05:34:31","slug":"challenging-old-power-dynamics-how-regional-collaboration-strengthens-the-global-south","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/challenging-old-power-dynamics-how-regional-collaboration-strengthens-the-global-south\/","title":{"rendered":"Challenging Old Power Dynamics: How Regional Collaboration Strengthens the Global South"},"content":{"rendered":"

Academic mobility carries varied meanings across different contexts. <\/strong>For Global North academics, it is often about getting closer to the research context and <\/strong>broadening empirical scope<\/strong>. Conversely, for researchers in the Global South, mobility is frequently understood as access to opportunities\u2014such as postdoctoral appointments, fellowships, or short-term visits to Global North institutions. These opportunities are perceived to help the pursuit of<\/strong> resources, recognition, and legitimacy, along with <\/strong>network expansion and intellectual exchange.<\/strong><\/p>\n

This asymmetrical nature of academic mobility is a recurring theme in my fieldwork findings. The patterns highlighted reflect deeper structural inequalities in the global academic system, where the Global North remains the dominant center of knowledge and opportunity.<\/p>\n

Academic mobility can unintentionally reinforce global inequalities in knowledge production. Research across Southeast Asia, Africa and West Asia, shows how certain types of collaborations perpetuate the existing hierarchies and how others can serve to change the equilibrium\u2014and what it might take to reimagine mobility as a more equitable practice.<\/p>\n

Why Some Voices Count More in Global Scholarship<\/strong><\/h5>\n

Scholars from the Global South are often expected to contribute local data or contextual insights, while theoretical framing and agenda-setting remain the domain of Northern institutions. This division of labor reinforces the idea that knowledge from the Global North is inherently more credible, and that mobility is a pathway to validation more so than co-creation. In a collaboration equilibrium where one side has more perceived credibility and, at the same time, scarcity (the Global North is a minority in terms of population numbers), it becomes a socially valued advantage to collaborate and travel to the Global North.<\/p>\n

Mobility schemes, even those designed to foster inclusion, can inadvertently reproduce these hierarchies. The very structure of fellowships, visiting positions, and postdoctoral opportunities often assumes that the Global North is the destination of intellectual advancement. For many scholars, mobility becomes a means of accessing legitimacy and visibility\u2014rather than a space for mutual learning. This does not mean mobility to or collaborations with a Global North location are \u201cbad,\u201d but we need to reimagine more equal and balanced mobility patterns.<\/p>\n

Neocolonial Patterns in Research Collaboration<\/strong><\/h5>\n

In line with the hierarchies of knowledge highlighted above, I have also investigated an African context, together with a colleague from there, to understand the dynamics of collaborative knowledge production. Our recent collaborative fieldwork in an elite Ghanaian university revealed how institutional prestige and funding from the Global North shape research priorities. Collaborations were often framed as opportunities, yet they came with implicit expectations: the Northern partner defined the research agenda, provided the budget, and determined the publication strategy. Scholars in the Global South, while essential to the project\u2019s success, were frequently relegated to supporting roles, such as data collectors and local network brokers.<\/p>\n

These dynamics mirror broader neocolonial patterns in knowledge production, which were especially visible in Ghana, and possibly the broader African context. The Global North continues to dominate not only the flow of resources but also the architecture of academic recognition\u2014journals, conferences, citation metrics, and rankings. Mobility and research collaborations, in this context, become a mechanism of dependency, where scholars must align with Global North norms to be visible and heard in the global knowledge system. Otherwise, the publications that build from data from Ghana, or any Global South location, with no international collaborations, become \u201ctoo local\u201d with not much insight for the rest of the world.<\/p>\n

Regional Collaboration in the Global South as Empowerment<\/strong><\/h5>\n

Yet, perhaps we can work towards a more equal and collaborative knowledge production space. In its broad calling, South-South collaborations can make a difference towards a more plural knowledge production space. In our ongoing Hong Kong RGC-funded research project (GRF#13601523) on scientific research collaborations in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), we focus on intra-regional research collaborations.<\/p>\n

The development of an ASEAN higher education space, which has recently seen momentum with the declaration of a higher education space in 2024 by its authorities, can contribute to a vibrant ecosystem of regional collaboration. Our recent research indicates that researchers in the region publish increasingly collaboratively with each other, even after accounting for the global increase in publications.<\/p>\n

Although the trajectory is promising, there is, of course, still a lot to be done. For example, the implementation of region-wide intra-mobility schemes for researchers and students alike and research collaboration schemes funded by the region can make a further difference. Compared to North-South collaborations, South-South collaborations help build capacity within the region, so it is a more sustainable form of partnership. Scholars across Southeast Asia can engage more in joint research that addresses locally and regionally relevant issues without the involvement of Northern institutions. These collaborations are not only productive but also empowering\u2014they can allow researchers to set their own agendas, define their own metrics of success, and build networks rooted in shared experience.<\/p>\n

Regional initiatives like these are not easy to achieve, but with proactive steps by policy-makers and also bottom-up grassroots involvement, they can lead to empowerment. They challenge the gravitational pull of Northern validation and create space for flourishing. South-South collaboration, when supported by equitable funding and institutional commitment, can foster mutual capacity building and intellectual autonomy.<\/p>\n

Towards Equitable Futures<\/strong><\/h5>\n

Hierarchies of knowledge and neocolonial patterns lead to unequal dynamics and purposes for academic mobility and collaborative knowledge production, and strengthening collaborations within the Global South can help create more equal global mobility patterns. The latter is not an easy task as it requires a purposeful policymaking within the Global South, which includes designing mobility programs that center sustainable capacity building in the Global South, supporting regional networks, and recognizing the value of diverse publication venues.<\/p>\n

Supporting collaborations within the Global South may also benefit from constructive actions from Global North policymakers and scholars. For example, this could mean moving beyond the logic of access\u2014who gets to go where\u2014and towards the logic of agency\u2014who gets to shape what is known\u2014 and how that process can be done in a more reciprocal manner. Also, supporting the regional networks and recognizing the value of diverse publication venues would be crucial. Recognition plays a key role in mobility decisions from the Global South.<\/p>\n

Mobility within academia could be a space of equal co-creation. It should enable scholars to engage across contexts without reproducing hierarchies. And it should be grounded in a commitment to plurality and equity.<\/p>\n

Dr Yusuf Oldac<\/a> is an Assistant Professor at The Education University of Hong Kong, specializing in international and comparative higher education with a current focus on global knowledge production and epistemic equity.<\/em><\/p>\n

References:<\/p>\n

\u2013Nkansah, J. O., Oldac, Y. I., & Yang, L. (2024). Dependency and neocolonialism in international research collaboration: Evidence from a Ghanaian elite university<\/a>. Higher Education<\/em>.
\n\u2013Oldac, Y. I., & Yang, L. (2023). Regionalisation and agency in science space: A historical bibliometric analysis of ASEAN science<\/a>. International Journal of Educational Development<\/em>, 97<\/em>.
\n\u2013Oldac, Y. I., Nkansah, J. O., & Yang, L. (2024). \u2018West is must, the rest is optional\u2019: Epistemic injustice and positional good in international research collaboration<\/a>. Higher Education<\/em>, 88<\/em>(2), 505\u2013522.
\n\u2013Oldac, Y. I., Lim, M., Mok, K. H., Tran, L., Yang, L., & Nkansah, J. O. (2025). Southeast Asia\u2019s cross-regional research collaborations in the multiplex world: Current trends and future paths<\/a>. International Journal of Educational Research<\/em>, 133<\/em>, 102726.<\/p>\n

To go back to our blog series on International Academic Mobility<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Academic mobility carries varied meanings across different contexts. For Global North academics, it is often about getting closer to the research context and broadening empirical scope. Conversely, for researchers in the Global South, mobility is frequently understood as access to opportunities\u2014such as postdoctoral appointments, fellowships, or short-term visits to Global<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":368,"featured_media":10428,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1354],"tags":[1391,1392,1394,1393,514],"coauthors":[1390],"class_list":["post-10442","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-international-academic-mobility","tag-collaboration","tag-equity","tag-globalsouth","tag-knowledge","tag-mobility"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10442","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/368"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10442"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10442\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10453,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10442\/revisions\/10453"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10428"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10442"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10442"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10442"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nccr-onthemove.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=10442"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}