Why Are African Researchers Left Behind in Global Scientific Publications? – A Viewpoint

The paper addresses the question of why African researchers lag in global scientific publications despite years of training and capacity-building efforts. It highlights persistently low publication outputs from Africa—only modestly improving from 1.5% of world output in 2005 to 3.2% in 2016—and minimal representation in COVID-19 literature (3% of 36,326 indexed publications 10 months into the pandemic). The authors question whether low African productivity contributes to limited attention to Africa’s health challenges in the literature and situate this issue within the Sustainable Development Goals agenda of reducing inequalities and leaving no one behind. The viewpoint aims to discuss challenges faced by African scientists in producing and publishing high-quality work and proposes recommendations for comprehensive research capacity-building on the continent.

The viewpoint references multiple analyses showing Africa’s marginal presence in global research: (1) Africa’s share of world publication output increased only from 1.5% (2005) to 3.2% (2016). (2) Only 3.0% of 36,326 indexed SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 publications had African contributions 10 months into the pandemic; the top 10 African countries combined published fewer COVID-19 papers than China alone. (3) A review of COVID-19 articles in 10 journals (Jan–Sep 2020) found only 3.9% with content relevant to Africa, 3.2% with African primary affiliation authors, and 66.1% of authors on African papers were from outside Africa. Further literature documents weak health research governance, limited budgets, inequitable funding distribution, concentration of grants in a few African countries and diseases (HIV, TB, malaria), and low researcher density. These sources collectively frame systemic, financial, and structural barriers limiting African researchers’ outputs and visibility.

This is a viewpoint/commentary drawing on secondary data, policy analyses, and illustrative statistics. The authors synthesize: (a) macro indicators of research investment (eg, World Bank and UNESCO GERD/GDP and GERD per capita figures); (b) WHO African Region surveys on national health research systems (eg, presence of budget lines, legislation, governance structures); (c) WHO Global Observatory data on researcher density; (d) funding distribution analyses across African countries and disease areas; (e) journal APC pricing examples; and (f) a brief online survey conducted by the authors among researchers in African countries, with 25 responses. Reported survey metrics include proportions publishing in impact factor journals, paying APCs, receiving waivers and satisfaction with waivers, and considering lesser-known journals due to cost. The article also presents two descriptive tables: (1) government expenditure on R&D (GERD) across selected regions/countries; (2) average salaries of medical specialists in selected African countries, contrasted qualitatively with APC ranges.

• Publication output and representation: Africa’s share of world publication output rose modestly from 1.5% (2005) to 3.2% (2016). Only 3.0% of 36,326 indexed COVID-19 publications (10 months into the pandemic) had African contributions; the top 10 African countries published fewer papers than China alone. In 10 journals (Jan 1–Sep 30, 2020), only 3.9% of articles had content relevant to Africa; only 3.2% of authors had African primary affiliations; 66.1% of authors on African papers were not from Africa.
• Research investment and systems: Among 39 WHO African Region countries (2018), 61.5% had a budget line for health research; only 2 invested 2% of the national health budget in research, and 1 invested at least 5% of health sector development assistance in research. Many countries lacked legislation regulating health research (17/39) and lacked a health research-promoting unit in the Ministry of Health (16/39). Africa had about 20 health researchers (FTE) per million inhabitants versus 239 in Europe (2021).
• Funding inequities: In 2018, Africa received 0.8% (583/76,435) of grants from 11 funders. Distribution was skewed: South Africa (32%), Kenya (17%), Uganda (11%); some countries received only one grant (eg, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea, Gabon, Eswatini, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Benin). About 43% of grants addressed only HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria.
• Capacity-building efforts: Continental strategies (WHO AFRO Research for Health 2016–2025, AU Africa Health Strategy 2016–2030, HRISA 2018–2030) led to some gains (ethics review strengthening, training programs, expenditure tracking), but overall gaps in governance, coordination, and system-wide capacity persist. Program evaluations show limited policy influence and low publication outputs from trained researchers.
• Barriers from ethics review costs: Non-student early-career researchers sometimes pay up to 40% of small research grants on ethics review fees, impeding research execution and publication.
• APC barriers and affordability: APC ranges cited: BMJ Journals £1500–£4800; Springer Nature US$860–$4480; Wiley US$1000–$5200. Given medical specialist salaries in selected African countries (median monthly ~US$2439; lowest monthly ~US$449), APCs are often unaffordable even for highly paid professionals. Waivers for low-income countries partially mitigate but are insufficient.
• Survey of African researchers (n=25): 71% had published in journals with impact factors; 88% had paid APCs; 47% received full or partial waivers, of whom 57% were dissatisfied; 82% considered publishing in lesser-known journals due to unaffordable APCs.
• Open access cost concerns: High OA fees (eg, Nature’s €9500 option) exacerbate exclusion; publisher profits (Elsevier US$2.58B in 2019; Taylor & Francis US$330.4M in 2019; Wiley US$1.7B in 2017) are highlighted as disheartening relative to African researchers’ means.

The findings point to interconnected systemic, financial, and structural barriers that collectively leave African researchers behind in global publishing. Low and inequitable investments in health research produce fragile research systems with insufficient governance, infrastructure, and human resources, leading to low research output and limited policy impact. Funding disparities disadvantage many African countries and concentrate grants in a few nations and disease areas, narrowing research breadth and opportunities for many researchers. High ethics review fees further constrain early-career investigators’ ability to conduct and publish studies. On the dissemination side, high APCs and limited, inconsistent waiver policies create prohibitive financial barriers, forcing researchers to opt for lesser-known journals or forego publication, which limits visibility and career progression. These constraints undermine the SDG commitment to reduce inequalities and leave no one behind and impede the development of locally generated evidence to inform local solutions. The viewpoint underscores the need for comprehensive, system-wide capacity strengthening and equitable publishing models to improve African researchers’ participation and influence in global science.

African research and publication outputs remain low due to intrinsic and extrinsic factors, including weak and underfunded research systems, inequitable grant distribution, and unaffordable publishing charges. To align with the SDG agenda and avoid leaving African researchers behind, the authors recommend: (1) Advocacy for increased, sustained government funding and enabling environments to strengthen health research systems, ensuring robust governance, resources, and productive research careers; (2) Encouraging established publishers to create sister or special-interest journals focused on context-relevant evidence with affordable APCs for African authors; (3) Establishing sustainable, collaborative funding mechanisms by donors, African governments, and institutions to support promising researchers’ career progression and retention in Africa, coupled with awareness-raising to increase uptake; (4) Developing pre-service and in-service capacity-building programs in scientific writing through collaborations among African academic institutions, Ministries of Health, and international organizations. These actions aim to build comprehensive research capacity and enhance African scientists’ contributions to global scholarship.