15 hours Ago
April 30, 2025 This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlightedthe following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: fact-checked peer-reviewed publication trusted source proofread by Indiana University A new study has exposed significant underrepresentation of researchers and content from the Global South in climate science publications, raising concerns about systemic disparities in academic publishing. The research, recently published in the journal Climactic Change , highlights how scholars from Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia face barriers to visibility and influence in global scientific discourse.
"Since the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report evaluating scientific knowledge about climate in 1990, there has been geographic inequality in authorship and content," the authors write. Using survey data and interviews with IPCC authors from the Global South, the study identifies institutional and structural factors that limit their nomination, selection, and ability to contribute to IPCC reports. The study is co-authored by Diana Rucavado Rojas of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Julio Postigo, Assistant Professor of Geography in the College of Arts and Sciences at Indiana University Bloomington.
The IPCC is a United Nations body responsible for assessing scientific knowledge on climate change, its impacts, and potential policy responses. Rucavado Rojas and Postigo analyzed Global South authors' participation in the IPCC Working Group II, which assesses the scientific literature about the vulnerability of socioeconomic and natural systems to climate change, and found that scientists and content from these regions are often underrepresented in the IPCC report. The findings suggest that structural biases, funding limitations, and institutional inequalities contribute to this disparity.
"These barriers create a cycle of underrepresentation where Global South research is systematically excluded from IPCC reports, reinforcing existing disparities in climate science and policy influence," said Professor Postigo. Barriers to representation in scientific publishing The study examined the mechanisms of the geographic bias in the IPCC report, revealing that researchers from wealthier nations, particularly in North America and Europe, dominate the field. Scientists from the Global South, even when conducting research in their own regions, have to overcome more barriers and limitations than their peers from the Global North.
Reduced research output diminishes the salience of Global South authors and content in global assessments such as the IPCC reports. "Scientific progress should be a global effort, but our findings indicate a stark imbalance in who gets to shape the discourse," said Rucavado Rojas. "Researchers from the Global South contribute invaluable knowledge, yet systemic barriers prevent them from being equally recognized.
" Key challenges for Global South authors include limited access to research funding , language barriers in English-dominated academic world, and biases in editorial and peer-review processes, the authors assert. The study also found that international collaborations often position Global South scientists in supporting roles rather than as lead authors. "Economic inequality among countries is a major driver of this North-South divide in knowledge production," noted Postigo.
"The financial constraints faced by Global South institutions limit opportunities for researchers to participate fully in international scientific efforts, further entrenching disparities in authorship and influence." Discover the latest in science, tech, and space with over 100,000 subscribers who rely on Phys.org for daily insights.
Sign up for our free newsletter and get updates on breakthroughs, innovations, and research that matter— daily or weekly . Why representation matters The study points out that underrepresentation of Global South researchers affects more than just individual careers—it shapes the direction of scientific inquiry. When research is disproportionately led by scientists from wealthier nations, it risks overlooking local expertise, cultural perspectives, and region-specific challenges.
This is particularly risky for reports like the IPCC because their known influence on policymaking for adaptation to impacts of climate change and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Further, geographically biased reports may be less legitimate and salient for underrepresented regions. "Scientific knowledge should be inclusive and representative of diverse viewpoints," said Rucavado Rojas.
"Addressing these disparities isn't just about fairness—it's about improving the quality and relevance of research worldwide." Bridging this gap requires multiple institutional transformations, including increasing investment in research and development (R&D) by Global South countries, and expanding the ways knowledge is produced and assessed within countries and by international organizations such as the IPCC. Undertaking these transformative actions will improve the quality and legitimacy of IPCC products for policymaking.
The authors call for a more inclusive approach to scientific publishing, including prioritizing local expertise in research conducted in Global South regions. They also recommend strategies to bridge the knowledge production gap, such as: The establishment of structured mentorship programs where experienced researchers, particularly from the Global North, work with Global South scholars to help them navigate the publishing process, secure leadership roles, and gain visibility in scientific discourse. Increasing research grants and other international funding initiatives for Global South scholars, to ensure they have the resources to conduct independent studies, attend international conferences, and publish in high-impact journals.
Reforming editorial and peer-review policies and processes to reduce biases against Global South authors, promoting inclusive authorship policies in international collaborations, and ensuring fairer representation of Global South research in major scientific reports like those of the IPCC. Reducing the teaching and service demands of researchers in the Global South while raising their salaries would enable scholars to increase their time dedicated to research. "If implemented, these recommendations are likely to promote the production of local climate science, broadening the knowledge base of the [IPCC] assessment reports with authors and contents from underrepresented regions," the authors write.
Without meaningful action, the authors observe, the cycle of exclusion will persist, limiting not only the careers of Global South scientists but also the depth and accuracy of global scientific knowledge. The authors assert that true progress in climate science and in academic publishing more generally requires dismantling barriers, fostering collaboration, and ensuring that all voices—not just those from wealthier nations—shape the future of research and policy. More information: Diana Rucavado Rojas et al, The cycle of underrepresentation: structural and institutional factors limiting the representation of Global South authors and knowledge in the IPCC, Climatic Change (2025).
DOI: 10.1007/s10584-025-03857-z Journal information: Climatic Change Provided by Indiana University.
