What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
Developing countries can strengthen scientific research by building partnerships with one another—often called South-South cooperation—alongside collaborations with wealthier nations. Joint research, training, researcher exchanges, institutional links and technology transfer can widen access to expertise and help build local capacity. The outcome depends on who sets priorities, controls funding and gains skills and infrastructure.
What scientific cooperation between developing countries means
South-South scientific cooperation is collaboration among developing countries. It can take the form of joint research projects, researcher mobility, shared training, links between institutions and technology transfer. It does not have to replace partnerships with wealthier countries: South-South work can sit alongside North-South partnerships or broader North-South-South arrangements.
A 2010 review of health biotechnology partnerships describes these models and their potential effects. Its examples concern health biotechnology, so they illustrate possible mechanisms rather than establish that every field or country will see the same results. Read the review.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteWhat cooperation can contribute
Broader knowledge networks
Working across borders can connect researchers to expertise, collaborators and institutional networks they might not reach through domestic research alone. Partnerships can also make research more visible and support joint outputs.
#1 Best Overall
Skills and stronger institutions
Training, researcher exchanges and sustained links between universities or research institutes can help develop local expertise. The important measure is not simply whether people participate in a project, but whether knowledge, skills and institutional capability remain with local partners.
Research on shared or locally relevant needs
Partners may be well placed to identify common problems or priorities that are overlooked when research agendas are set elsewhere. In health biotechnology, the 2010 review’s underlying programme interviewed 471 experts across its studies, most of them in developing countries. That figure describes the review’s research programme, not the number of participants in one partnership or a current global total.
How partnerships are organized
Historical examples in the 2010 review include China-Africa, Africa-India and Brazil-Africa initiatives, as well as support from TWAS and the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) for training and research links. A Chinese government document also reports China-Africa joint scientific and technical research demonstration projects. These are descriptions from dated sources, not confirmation that particular programmes remain open or operate in the same way today. See the review and the Chinese government document.
The review reports that the Chinese Scholarship Council awarded 2,733 scholarships to African students in 2007, or 27% of China’s international scholarships worldwide that year. These are historical figures attributed to the council as reported by the review; they should not be read as current scholarship numbers.
Who sets the agenda and controls resources?
Cooperation is not automatically equitable. The health-biotechnology review identifies limited funding for South-South work and cautions that dependence on external funding can influence research priorities or leave local partners with limited control. A partnership may involve several countries and still concentrate decisions, expertise or long-term benefits in the hands of a funder or lead institution.
When assessing a proposed collaboration, examine:
- Funding and expertise: Which partners provide money, facilities and specialist knowledge?
- Agenda-setting: Do local partners help choose the questions and methods, or mainly carry out decisions made elsewhere?
- Capacity building: Does the work build skills and institutions that can continue after the project ends?
- Benefits: How are outputs, data, recognition and practical gains shared?
- Relevance: Does the research address shared or locally identified needs?
Why cooperation can matter for costly research
Partnerships can also help with practical barriers to doing research. A 2014 SciDev.Net report on Antarctic research described collaboration with Chile as a possible way for distant countries to reduce the cost and difficulty of access. This is an example tied to Antarctic fieldwork; it does not establish that partnerships reduce costs in every scientific discipline. Read the SciDev.Net report.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to judge whether cooperation is working
Count more than projects, exchanges or publications. A stronger assessment asks whether partners share decisions and benefits, whether local research capacity grows, and whether the work addresses priorities identified by the communities and institutions involved. Those questions distinguish a durable research relationship from a temporary arrangement that depends on external resources without expanding local control.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
