Ten Rules to End Helicopter Research: A New Ethical Standard for Global Scientific Collaboration

Redacción HC
13/06/2023

Scientific research in the Global South is often conducted under conditions that perpetuate inequality. “Helicopter research,” also known as “parachute science,” refers to the extractive practice in which researchers from the Global North collect data or samples from the Global South, return to their home institutions, and publish findings without meaningful involvement of local collaborators. A recent editorial published in PLOS Computational Biology sets out to challenge this harmful status quo.

Led by Danny Haelewaters, Tina A. Hofmann, and Adriana L. Romero‑Olivares, the article proposes ten clear, actionable rules to help researchers avoid these neocolonial dynamics. Rather than merely critiquing the system, it offers a framework for equitable collaboration, grounded in respect, transparency, and shared scientific ownership.

Recognizing the Problem: When Science Becomes Extraction

Despite decades of international collaboration, systemic power imbalances persist in global science. Researchers from the Global South often serve as logistical assistants or data providers, rarely receiving authorship, leadership opportunities, or access to final publications. In many cases, the benefits of research are not shared equitably with the local communities who enable it.

This editorial asks a critical question: How can Global North scientists ensure that their research in the Global South is ethical, reciprocal, and inclusive?

The answer is not only a matter of ethics—it is one of scientific integrity, sustainability, and social justice.

From Guidelines to Action: Ten Rules for Ethical Research Partnerships

The article compiles insights from personal experience, institutional best practices, and global policy instruments (such as the Nagoya Protocol and the Bonn Guidelines) into ten rules:

1. Create Win-Win Relationships
   Start by co-designing projects with local partners. Ensure mutual benefit from the outset—not after data collection.
2. Actively Seek Local Collaborators
   Value the pre-existing knowledge and research capacity of local scientists. Avoid duplicating efforts or disregarding local literature.
3. Foster Synergies, Not Tokenism
   Align with legal and ethical frameworks to share benefits transparently, whether monetary or educational.
4. Ensure Fair Coauthorship
   Authorship should reflect substantive contributions, including obtaining permits or local field expertise.
5. Empower Local Leadership
   Prioritize capacity-building, shared decision-making, and even student exchanges or joint training programs.
6. Guarantee Access to Knowledge
   Publish in open-access venues, provide translations, and communicate results back to local communities.
7. Respect Local Ethical and Cultural Norms
   Adhere to community protocols and indigenous codes, such as the San Code of Research Ethics.
8. Push for Institutional Change
   Support journals and funding bodies that require local collaboration and coauthorship.
9. Acknowledge Historical and Structural Power Dynamics
   Understand the colonial legacies embedded in science and strive to dismantle them, including linguistic and cultural dominance.
10. Lead by Example
    Train students and peers in inclusive, horizontal research practices, modeling the future of ethical science.

Why These Rules Matter: Scientific and Social Impacts

Although this is not an empirical study, it builds on documented cases and institutional shifts that support its claims:

• Journals like Global Health Action now require local coauthors for work conducted in the Global South.
• The Dutch Research Council (NWO) mandates co-designed workshops as part of funding requirements.
• Data shows that internationally coauthored papers receive up to 34% more citations, indicating higher visibility and impact.

Beyond metrics, these rules promote a culture of reciprocity and trust—essential for conducting meaningful research that benefits both science and society.

Turning Theory Into Practice: What Can Be Done Today?

The editorial outlines practical applications for researchers, institutions, and publishers:

• Design budgets that include funding for co-creation meetings, translations, and community benefits.
• Require memoranda of understanding (MOUs) that outline expectations of authorship, data access, and dissemination.
• Educate students and early-career researchers in decolonial and inclusive research methodologies.
• Push for publishing policies that reject work lacking equitable collaboration.

As Haelewaters and colleagues argue, ethical collaboration is not an add-on—it’s a scientific responsibility.

“Science must not only advance knowledge but also do so in a way that is just and inclusive,” they write.

Conclusion: A Decolonial Shift in Global Science

The ten rules proposed in this editorial are not merely aspirational—they are actionable steps that Global North researchers can take to dismantle extractive research practices. Implementing these rules fosters scientific excellence while also correcting long-standing power imbalances.

As global challenges like climate change and biodiversity loss demand cooperation across borders, ethical collaboration becomes non-negotiable. The future of global science must be more horizontal, inclusive, and just—and it starts with changing how research is designed, conducted, and published.

Topics of interest

Open Access Academia