Johns Hopkins India, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
School of Public Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Lancet Glob Health. 2023 Sep;11(9):e1464-e1468. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00299-1.
Much of the current global health publishing landscape is restricted in its epistemological diversity, relying heavily on a biomedical lens to examine and report on global health issues. In this Viewpoint, we argue that the space within global health journals needs to be expanded to include diverse forms of research scholarship, thereby shifting the kinds of stories that get told in these spaces. We particularly call for the inclusion of deeper research that values the tacit, experiential knowledge possessed by actors (eg, communities, health-care workers, policy makers, activisits, and researchers) in low-income and middle-income countries, and legitimises the perspectives of local doers and thinkers; research that pays careful attention to context, and does not treat local realities as mere background occurrences; and research that draws on alternative, counter-dominant epistemologies, that allow for the crucial examination of power imbalances, and that challenge hegemonic discourses in global health. To decolonise academic work in the global health field, we should look beyond diversity in research authorship. We need to tackle other unconscious biases such as presumptions about the superiority of particular forms of evidence over others, and thereby expand the plurality of perspectives in global health.
当前，全球健康出版领域在认识论方面存在很大的局限性，过于依赖生物医学视角来审视和报道全球健康问题。在本文观点中，我们认为，全球健康期刊的空间需要扩大，纳入更多元的研究学术成果，从而改变这些领域讲述的故事类型。我们特别呼吁纳入更深入的研究，重视（例如社区、卫生工作者、政策制定者、活动家和研究人员）在中低收入国家拥有的隐性、经验性知识，并使当地实干家和思想家的观点合法化；这种研究需要仔细关注背景，不要将当地现实视为仅仅是背景事件；还需要利用替代的、反主导的认识论，以便对权力失衡进行关键的审查，并挑战全球健康领域的霸权话语。为了使全球健康领域的学术工作非殖民化，我们应该超越研究作者多样性的范畴。我们需要解决其他无意识偏见，例如对某些证据形式优于其他形式的假设，从而在全球健康领域扩大观点的多样性。
