AO: Western researchers (with funding) assume they know the best “problem space” so design the survey whereas non-Western local researchers feel that the research design and
AO: Unsurprisingly given that the authors are publishing in ICTD, the techno level of analysis is very strong. They focus on collaboration in a part of the
AO: not discussed at all. It is unclear how the interlocutors are interested in the collaboration.Read more
AO: The issue of authorship begins even before the actual writing of the paper as the analysts note: “Who is given the opportunity to contribute, and thus potentially qualify as an
AO: The authors are thinking about how they can address ICT design problems through engagement with their users.Read more
AO: The authors point to bad practices with data sharing and “intellectual ownership” in “collaborations” that have created a barrier towards collaborations: “Northern researchers
AO: The paper is co-authored and authors note the first author’s “insider” status and second and third authors’ “outsider” status (although they all reside in Switzerland?). Here,
AO: Like Matsutake group, they explicitly note they are not interested in a division of labor (86)
AO: They give an example of collaboration with “Bert”
AO: The two authors appear to work in the field of global health (based at UK university) and focus on economic inequalities of research funding (“Research and devel- opment
AO: They do not talk about this explicitly but they note the collaborative milieu that is now the normative environment of research (which is supported by research grants and “
