Bridging the Knowledge Divide: Why Do Global Research Disparities Exist?
Advancing Research for a Fairer Future
Article 4 - Why Do Global Research Disparities Exist?
Despite
the ideal of science as a borderless pursuit, the reality is that vast
inequalities shape who produces research, where it happens, and whose knowledge
is amplified on the world stage. Grasping the origins of these disparities is
crucial for anyone invested in restructuring the global research ecosystem for
greater equity and impact. This article unpacks the multifaceted reasons behind
persistent global research gaps.
Economic Inequality and Resource Disparity
The
most significant and persistent driver of research inequality is national
wealth. Scientific discovery depends on sustained investment in
infrastructure, personnel, and training. According to the latest UNESCO data,
high-income nations consistently spend over 2% of their GDP on research and
development (R&D), while the majority of developing countries invest less
than 1% (UNESCO, 2025). As a direct result:
- High-income and upper-middle-income economies produced over 85% of global science and engineering articles in 2022 (NSB, 2023).
- Low-income countries—home to a substantial portion of the world’s population—contributed less than 1% (University World News, 2025).
A
lack of financial investment means fewer research centers, less equipment,
lower salaries for researchers, and reduced opportunities for graduate and
postdoctoral training—feeding a cycle of limited innovation.
 |
Infrastructure and Institutional Capacity
Quality
research ecosystems depend on state-of-the-art infrastructure and robust
institutions. Universities in North America, Europe, and East Asia often have
access to:
- Cutting-edge laboratories and technology.
- Extensive libraries and digital databases.
- Reliable grant systems and administrative structures.
- Internationally networked faculties.
In
contrast, researchers in low-resource settings may work without steady
electricity, internet, or access to current journals. This puts a ceiling on
the quality and volume of research produced and limits the ability of these
regions to attract and retain talent—a phenomenon known as “brain drain”.
Inequitable Access to Funding and Networks
Access
to competitive international funding and global research networks is heavily
skewed in favor of established, wealthy institutions. Major funding agencies,
journal editorial boards, and conference organizers are clustered in the Global
North. For researchers in Africa, Latin America, and much of Asia, this
presents multiple hurdles:
- Less access to high-profile grants or technology transfer.
- Difficulties forging global collaborations on equal footing.
- Hosting and attending international conferences or workshops is often prohibitively expensive (Lancet, 2023; Scinapse, 2024).
Even
when funding exists for “North-South” collaborations, leading roles frequently
go to institutions from high-income countries, with partners in developing
regions relegated to supporting or data-gathering roles.
 |
Table-1
- Globalresearch leading organizations based on Nature Index data from 1
January 2024 to 31 December 2024 (
Language Barriers and Editorial Bias
The
dominance of the English language in scientific publishing presents a barrier
for non-native speakers. Many scholars in Latin America, Francophone Africa,
the Middle East, and Asia face:
- Additional hurdles preparing manuscripts for top-tier journals.
- Higher rejection rates for linguistically “nonstandard” English.
- Fewer opportunities to participate in global discussions or serve on editorial boards (Phys.org, 2025).
Moreover,
major journal editorial boards and peer reviewers tend to be concentrated in
North America and Europe. This can unintentionally create a gatekeeping effect,
where research about—and by—underrepresented regions is overlooked or held to
different standards.
Structural and Historic Inequities
Today’s
disparities are rooted in longer histories of colonialism, uneven economic
development, and the legacies of global power imbalances. High-resource
institutions, often with centuries of accumulated capital and prestige,
continue to set agendas and standards for what counts as valuable or rigorous
science. As a result:
- Topics critical to developing countries, such as neglected diseases or region-specific agriculture, are less likely to receive international attention or funding.
- Scholars from traditionally marginalized regions may lack the social capital—mentor networks, alumni connections, or institutional endorsements—to break into the upper echelons of global science (Phys.org, 2025).
Policy Instability and Government Priorities
Research
output reflects not just raw resources, but policy choices. Some mid-income
countries, like China and South Korea, have made research central to their
national strategies—leading to explosive growth. Elsewhere, policy instability,
lack of protected research funding, or low prioritization in government agendas
mean that research ecosystems remain fragile and underdeveloped (UNESCO, 2025;
Scinapse, 2024).
Role Assignment in International Collaboration
Studies
consistently show that researchers from the Global South are less likely to be
first authors or principal investigators in international projects, even when
the research concerns their own region (Phys.org, 2025; Nature Index, 2023).
This “supporting role” status perpetuates cycles of unequal recognition and
advancement.
Global
research disparities emerge from the intersection of economic, linguistic,
institutional, and historic factors. While the barriers are formidable, they
are neither natural nor fixed. By unmasking the root causes of inequality, we
can begin to redesign systems—funding, publishing, mentoring, and policy—to
ensure broader participation, richer knowledge, and a science truly global in
talent and ambition.
References
- Lancet Regional Health Southeast Asia. (2023). Regional and international collaboration: key to quality research in south Asia. Lancet Regional Health – Southeast Asia, 9, 100160. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10305997/
- Nature Index. (2023). 2023 Research Leaders: Leading countries/territories. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/research-leaders/2023/country/all/global
- NSB [National Science Board]. (2023). Publication Output by Region, Country, or Economy and by Scientific Field. National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb202333/publication-output-by-region-country-or-economy-and-by-scientific-field
- Phys.org. (2025, April 30). Study reveals significant underrepresentation of Global South in climate science. https://phys.org/news/2025-04-reveals-significant-underrepresentation-global-south.html
- Scinapse. (2024, December 23). Global Research Inflection: Research in 2025. https://insights.pluto.im/global-research-in-2025/
- UNESCO Institute for Statistics [UIS]. (2025, March 7). Explore the latest progress on SDG 9.5 Research and Development. https://uis.unesco.org/en/news/Explore-latest-progress-on-SDG9.5-Research-Development-through-key-indicators-February2025
- University World News. (2025, May 9). Study exposes inequity in global research on medical errors. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20250509141827343