Descriptions of mollusks in the Global South are still, for the most part, the result of ‘parachute science’

Between the 16th and 19th centuries, when colonialism was the prevailing order, it is not surprising that scientific expeditions, specimen deposits in natural history museums, and descriptions of species from European colonies in Africa, Asia, and Latin America were carried out only by naturalists from the Old World.

However, a study published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B by Brazilian researchers supported by FAPESP shows that this practice continues, even though the former colonies are now independent countries, many of which have the structure and qualified personnel to study their own biodiversity.

Using more than 3,200 descriptions of terrestrial mollusk species from around the world between 2003 and 2022 as a model, researchers from the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), the Federal University of Paraíba (UFPB), and the Federal Institute of Education, Science, and Technology of Piauí (IFPI) demonstrated that local scientists were not listed as authors in nearly half of the descriptions. This exclusion was concentrated in species from the Global South.

This neocolonial practice is known as “helicopter science” or “parachute science.” In this practice, foreigners travel to the research site, collect what they need, and return to their country of origin to complete the work, without involving local researchers or crediting the residents who helped them.

Not surprisingly, when the authors analyzed the scope of published scientific works using objective criteria, they observed that descriptions were more robust when at least one researcher from the country where the described species occurred was involved.

“’Helicopter’ or ‘parachute’ science is a practice that harms not only local researchers, but also science in general. Less robust studies may have their results invalidated in the future. This may delay conservation efforts, which require accurate and stable information,” says Mario Moura, coordinator of the study and a current professor at UFPB.

Part of the work was carried out during Moura’s time as a Young Investigator Grant recipient at the Institute of Biology at UNICAMP in a project supported by FAPESP. 

The other authors of the study are Evandro Abreu from UFPB and Edson Lourenço da Silva from IFPI.

Neocolonial science

To arrive at their results, the researchers compiled a database of 3,272 descriptions of terrestrial mollusks (snails and slugs) published in scientific articles, book chapters, or books between 2003 and 2022. Of these, 2,216 (68%) were discovered in 78 countries in the Global South, while 1,056 (32%) were found in 26 countries in the Global North.

The definitions of Global South and Global North are adapted from the United Nations’ (UN) nomenclature and are given in geopolitical terms, differing in part from the purely geographical definition.

For example, countries in the Southern Hemisphere, such as Australia and New Zealand, are considered part of the Global North. Conversely, nations in the Northern Hemisphere, such as Mexico, China, India, and countries in North Africa and Southeast Asia, are traditionally considered part of the Global South.

Although most species have been discovered in the Global South, researchers from this region have only contributed 33.3% of the descriptions. This figure contrasts with researchers affiliated with research institutions in the Global North, who contributed 79.3% of descriptions.

Comparing descriptions between the two geopolitical macroregions reveals that 51.4% of descriptions of species from the Global South excluded researchers from that region, whereas only 0.6% of descriptions of Global North species did not involve local scientists.

Publications relying solely on researchers from the species’ location accounted for 40.4% of the total, while publications involving both local and foreign scientists accounted for 14%. The remaining 1,493 species in the database (45.6%) were the result of “parachute science” and were described only by researchers from outside the species’ country of origin. In this modality, 88.6% of the descriptions occurred in the Global South.

“One of the expectations when including researchers from the Global North in research on species from the Global South would be to facilitate access to both collections in European and North American museums and to technologies that are costly for us, such as molecular biology and internal anatomy analysis. In theory, these tools would make the study more robust and comprehensive. However, what our analyses show is that this doesn’t occur. In fact, the inclusion of local researchers has led to more robust work,” says Moura.

Moura points out that the neocolonial practices and geopolitical influence observed in the descriptions of terrestrial mollusks can also be seen in other animal groups, according to his team’s ongoing research.

The authors argue that to advance biodiversity science, inclusion strategies must consider not only authorship parity but also access to analytical tools and resources that ensure quality studies. These strategies should also value local knowledge and promote long-term data sharing. In turn, institutions must prioritize sustainable partnerships, transparent funding, and technology transfer.

“The benefits of pluralistic and inclusive science can go beyond equitable collaborations, contributing to the quicker filling of knowledge gaps about global biodiversity, especially in tropical regions,” they conclude.

About São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP)
The São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) is a public institution with the mission of supporting scientific research in all fields of knowledge by awarding scholarships, fellowships and grants to investigators linked with higher education and research institutions in the State of São Paulo, Brazil. FAPESP is aware that the very best research can only be done by working with the best researchers internationally. Therefore, it has established partnerships with funding agencies, higher education, private companies, and research organizations in other countries known for the quality of their research and has been encouraging scientists funded by its grants to further develop their international collaboration. You can learn more about FAPESP at www.fapesp.br/en and visit FAPESP news agency at www.agencia.fapesp.br/en to keep updated with the latest scientific breakthroughs FAPESP helps achieve through its many programs, awards and research centers. You may also subscribe to FAPESP news agency at http://agencia.fapesp.br/subscribe.