What makes working together work? A scoping review of the guidance on North–South research partnerships

Abstract

At their best, research partnerships provide a mechanism to optimise each partner’s strengths, make scientific discoveries and achieve development goals. Each partner stands to gain from the relationship and perceives it to be fair. However, partnerships between institutions in the global North and the global South have been beleaguered by structural inequalities and power imbalances and Northern stakeholders have been criticised for perpetuating paternalistic or neo-colonial behaviours. As part of efforts to redress imbalances and achieve equity and mutual benefit, various principles, guidelines, frameworks and models for partnership have been developed. This scoping review maps the literature and summarises key features of the guidelines for North-South research partnerships. The review was conducted between October 2020 and January 2021. Three academic journal databases and Google were searched and additional resources were identified through a hand search of reference lists and expert recommendation. Twenty-two guidelines were identified published between 1994 and 2021 and originating predominantly in the fields of international development and global health. The themes addressed within the guidelines were aggregated using NVivo qualitative analysis software to code the content of each guideline. Topics featuring most prominently in the guidelines were: partner roles, responsibilities and ways of working; capacity strengthening; motivation and goals; resource contributions; agenda setting and study design; governance structures and institutional agreements; dissemination; respect for affected populations; data handling and ownership; funding; and long term commitments. The current study reinforces many of the themes from two recent scoping reviews specific to the field of global health, but gaps remain which need to be addressed: Southern stakeholders continue to be under-represented in guideline development and there is limited evidence of how guidelines are used in practice. Further exploration is needed of Southern stakeholder priorities and whether and how guidelines are operationalised.

“We should be at the table together from the beginning”: perspectives on partnership from stakeholders at four research institutions in sub-Saharan Africa

“…Interviews with early to mid-career and senior researchers and research managers at four institutions in anglophone eastern and southern Africa revealed wide-ranging experiences of partnership with HIC collaborators, both positive and negative. Existing principles for partnership [28][29][30] provide good coverage of the issues that participants described as being the key determinants of a healthy partnership, for example: mutual respect, involvement of all partners from concept design stage throughout the research lifecycle, clear governance and open communication. A small number of participants referred to published partnership guidelines, but none mentioned having used them.…”

“…This was a qualitative study informed by a scoping review of the literature on principles and guidelines for ‘North–South’ research partnerships [ 28 ]. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants from a sample of research institutions in anglophone eastern and southern Africa.…”

“…Two interview topic guides were developed: The first was informed by a scoping review of principles and guidelines for research partnerships [ 28 ]. The second topic guide was less detailed and contained broad questions to prompt participants to describe their experiences of partnership.…”

“…The data were then reviewed again and organised using a small number of broad categories. Transcripts were also coded deductively using the framework of the key themes arising from a scoping review of principles and guidelines for partnership [ 28 ].…”

“…A recent scoping review of guidelines for ‘North–South’ research partnerships [ 28 ] identified 22 sources of guidance. The most prevalent topics were: partner roles, responsibilities and ways of working—which encompassed communication, transparency, and mechanisms for conflict resolution and decision-making, capacity strengthening, motivation and goals, resource contributions, agenda setting and study design, governance structures and institutional agreements, dissemination, national relevance, data handling and ownership, and funding.…”