The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ten simple rules for Global North researchers to stop perpetuating helicopter research in the Global South
Open accessAbstract
ntroductionThe practice of Global North (i.e., "richer" globalized countries located in the northern hemisphere, except for Australia and New Zealand) researchers making roundtrips to the Global South (i.e., "poorer" developing countries located around the tropics and in the Southern hemisphere) to collect materials and then process, analyze, and publish results with little to no involvement from local collaborators is referred to as "helicopter research" or "parachute research" [1].At best, local scientists provide logistical help and knowledge of the local community, such as field site guiding, identification of local organisms, translation from and to local languages, and facilitating resources to foreign scientists.However, often, these necessary actors in the scientific process receive little to no retribution for their work and knowledge.For example, a systematic problem in academia is that local scientists and graduate and undergraduate students are often not offered coauthorship in manuscripts for which their contributions were essential (e.g., project planning, logistics, and knowledge of local biodiversity).Even worse is that research remains unavailable for them and others who contributed substantially, since in most cases, peer-review publications are available behind a paywall (but see [2]), and they are written in English, which is the second or third language for many Global South researchers [3].Furthermore, local communities where Global North scientists come to conduct helicopter research are usually left out of broader impacts and outreach efforts, as these tend to happen in Global North communities.Helicopter research is a way to perpetuate colonization practices [4], and power imbalances are critical in perpetuating helicopter research.For example, Global North researchers often set the research agenda based on priorities of their funding agencies, which, in many cases, are decided upon by those same researchers sitting in decision-making committees of those very agencies.All too often, proposals are developed without a deep understanding of problems and priorities of Global South countries where the anticipated research will take place.Global South collaborators are rarely invited to brainstorm and set the research agenda for their needs.This opens the door for unequal partnership with research objectives that may be irrelevant for Global South collaborators, who then, are forced to accept an already funded proposal due to lack of research funding within their own countries or institutions [5].Thus, power and politics behind science are interconnected and are a driving force behind helicopter research.Helicopter research is a problem that also happens within Global North and within Global South countries, where dominating cultures perpetuate abuse on historically marginalized communities, including those of indigenous people, people of color, people from lower
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Microbiome members of individuals from non-westernized populations are particularly underrepresented by current cultivation-based genomic catalogs causing metagenomic profiling approaches to miss large fractions of the microbial diversity in the samples.”
From Maternal and food microbial sources shape the infant microbiome of a rural Ethiopian population (2023) · cites this paper as [35]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cultural Shock: Adjustment to New Cultural Environments
Oberg, K. (1960) · Practical Anthropology · doi:10.1177/009182966000700405 · Cited by 2,706
Convention on Biological Diversity
Cropper, A. (1993) · Environmental Conservation · doi:10.1017/s0376892900023614 · Cited by 2,485
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity
(2007) · Biodiversity · doi:10.1080/14888386.2007.9712830 · Cited by 1,106
Culture shock : Adjustment to new cultural environments
Oberg, K. (1960) · Cited by 997
Turning the tide of parachute science
Stefanoudis, P. V., Licuanan, W. Y., Morrison, T. H., Talma, S., Veitayaki, J., & Woodall, L. C. (2021) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2021.01.029 · Cited by 309
Assessing Cross-Cultural Competence
Matsumoto, D., & Hwang, H. C. (2013) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022113492891 · Cited by 301
Scientific Collaboration Results in Higher Citation Rates of Published Articles
Figg, W. D., Dunn, L. A., Liewehr, D. J., Steinberg, S. M., Thurman, P. W., Barrett, J. C., & Birkinshaw, J. (2006) · Pharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy · doi:10.1592/phco.26.6.759 · Cited by 242
Adams, M. S., Carpenter, J., Housty, J. A., Neasloss, D., Paquet, P. C., Service, C., Walkus, J., & Darimont, C. T. (2014) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-06569-190305 · Cited by 160
Fostering Responsible Research on Ancient DNA
Wagner, J. K., Colwell, C., Claw, K. G., Stone, A. C., Bolnick, D. A., Hawks, J. D., Brothers, K. B., & Garrison, N. A. (2020) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.06.017 · Cited by 148
Global soil science research collaboration in the 21st century: Time to end helicopter research
Minasny, B., Fiantis, D., Mulyanto, B., Sulaeman, Y., & Widyatmanti, W. (2020) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114299 · Cited by 137
Monolingual searches can limit and bias results in global literature reviews
Nuñez, M. A., & Amano, T. (2021) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-020-01369-w · Cited by 115
Dismantling Brazil's science threatens global biodiversity heritage
Fernandes, G. W., Vale, M. M., Overbeck, G. E., Bustamante, M., Grelle, C. E. V., Bergallo, H. G., Magnusson, W. E., Akama, A., Saccol, S. D. S. A., Amorim, A. M., et al. (2017) · Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.pecon.2017.07.004 · Cited by 99
A better measure of research from the global south
Lebel, J., & McLean, R. K. D. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-018-05581-4 · Cited by 89
Indigenous Genomic Databases: Pragmatic Considerations and Cultural Contexts
Caron, N. R., Chongo, M., Hudson, M. L., Arbour, L. T., Wasserman, W. W., Robertson, S. P., Correard, S., & Wilcox, P. (2020) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.00111 · Cited by 88
Multinational teams and diseconomies of scale in collaborative research
Hsiehchen, D., Espinoza, M., & Hsieh, A. (2015) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1500211 · Cited by 79
Parasitic and parachute research in global health
Smith, J. (2018) · The Lancet Global Health · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30315-2 · Cited by 75
Guidelines for healthy global scientific collaborations
Armenteras, D. (2021) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-021-01496-y · Cited by 70
Ethics and Community-Based Participatory Research: Perspectives From the Field
Bastida, E., Tseng, T., McKeever, C., & Jack, L. (2009) · Health Promotion Practice · doi:10.1177/1524839909352841 · Cited by 68
Tindana, P. O., Campbell, M., Marshall, P. A., Littler, K., Vincent, R., Seeley, J., de Vries, J., Kamuya, D., & the H3Africa Community Engagement Working Group (2017) · Global Health · doi:10.1017/gheg.2017.9 · Cited by 57
Culture shock: negotiating feelings in the field
Irwin, R. (1970) · Anthropology Matters · doi:10.22582/am.v9i1.64 · Cited by 53
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity, 29 January 2000
Sands, P., & Galizzi, P. (2004) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139171380.038 · Cited by 34
Giller, K. E. (2020) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114302 · Cited by 30
A values‐based process for cross‐cultural dialogue between scientists and Māori
Wilcox, P. L., Charity, J. A., Roberts, M. R., Tauwhare, S. E. K., Tipene-Matua, B., Kereama‐Royal, I., Hunter, R., Kani, H. M., & Moke‐Delaney, P. (2008) · Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · doi:10.1080/03014220809510555 · Cited by 25
Ger, G., Suarez, M. C., & do Nascimento, T. C. (2019) · BAR - Brazilian Administration Review · doi:10.1590/1807-7692bar2019180069 · Cited by 17
Biopolitics, Pseudoscience, and Bioethics in the Global South
Aramesh, K. (2017) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2017.1365187 · Cited by 6
‘Helicopter research’: who benefits from international studies in Indonesia?
Minasny, B., & Fiantis, D. (2018) · doi:10.64628/aan.x6hgjuqyw · Cited by 5
Cuts and dismissive remarks unnerve Mexican scientists
Wade, L. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.365.6451.305 · Cited by 2
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- SX Ou, 2019, Decolonizing ecology for socially just science, Science Connected Magazine [Internet]
- M Amaya, 2004, Bridging the Cultural Divide in Health Care Settings: The Essential Role of Cultural Broker Programs, National Center for Cultural Competence
- A de Vos, 2020, The problem of “Colonial Science, Scientific American [Internet]
- M Gatta, 2020, Scientists are producing data without sharing it with people who actually need it, Massive Science [Internet].
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Public human microbiome data are dominated by highly developed countries
Abdill, R. J., Adamowicz, E. M., & Blekhman, R. (2022) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001536 · Cited by 221
Draper, C. E., Barnett, L. M., Cook, C. J., Cuartas, J. A., Howard, S. J., McCoy, D. C., Merkley, R., Molano, A., Maldonado‐Carreño, C., Obradović, J., et al. (2022) · Infant and Child Development · doi:10.1002/icd.2375 · Cited by 203
Steigerwald, E., Ramírez‐Castañeda, V., Brandt, D. Y. C., Báldí, A., Shapiro, J. T., Bowker, L., & Tarvin, R. D. (2022) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/biac062 · Cited by 155
Building consensus around the assessment and interpretation of Symbiodiniaceae diversity
Davies, S. W., Gamache, M. H., Howe‐Kerr, L. I., Kriefall, N. G., Baker, A. C., Banaszak, A. T., Bay, L. K., Bellantuono, A. J., Bhattacharya, D., Chan, C. X., et al. (2023) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.15023 · Cited by 111
When and how can we predict adaptive responses to climate change?
Urban, M. C., Swaegers, J., Stoks, R., Snook, R. R., Otto, S. P., Noble, D. W. A., Moirón, M., Hällfors, M., Gómez‐Llano, M., Fior, S., et al. (2023) · Evolution Letters · doi:10.1093/evlett/qrad038 · Cited by 95
Metadata
- Authors
- Haelewaters, D., Hofmann, T. A., & Romero-Olivares, A. L.
- Affiliations
- Universidad Autónoma de Chiriquí (PA)
- Venue
- PLoS Computational Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2021-08-19
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e1009277
- ISSN
- 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7358
- PMC
- PMC8376010
- OpenAlex
- W3193474197
- Semantic Scholar
- 39fe8db1b6a4b4926c4c3ea2082f388e45f683b8
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 48 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 4
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University of Minnesota
- University of Otago
- Wageningen University and Research
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Decolonial Thought and Epistemologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Health and Surgery
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Keywords
- helicopter research, Global South, research ethics, co-authorship, research collaboration, research funding, paywalls, language barriers, indigenous peoples, marginalized communities
- MeSH terms
- Aircraft, Humans, Research Personnel, Internationality
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
