Read on Twitter
Oversimplification of nuanced phenomena in scientific literature by tourist scientists does a great disservice on science policy in Africa. @GlobalYAcademy #scicomm #scienceandtechnology #AcademicTwitter
A thread 1/n
A thread 1/n
African governments often listen to researchers from Europe & North America on environmental issues. However, these researchers lack a nuanced understanding of the situation on the ground 2/n
As a result, policies and regulations that are myopic, irrelevant, and sometimes dangerous to the African nations are quickly enforced. And the @UNEP_Africa leads the chorus praising the policies 3/n
When African researchers speak out they are ostracized not only by their government but by the "scientific consensus" 4/n
Academic journals are the major culprit. European researchers writing about atmospheric pollution in Africa are celebrated - global impact e.g. @EnvSciTech 
African researchers writing about the same issue - desk rejection -> regional issue 5/n https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c03575
African researchers writing about the same issue - desk rejection -> regional issue 5/n https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c03575
This leaves one wondering - what makes a study of global importance? Is it the researcher or the content of the research? But to many so-called high quality journals it is the author that makes the difference 6/n
Besides affecting the lives of billions of people in Africa through useless environmental solutions, science imperialism hinders scientific progress due to failure to ask right questions 7/n
Consider this discussion on PBDEs in Africa from the @EnvSciTech paper 
. The sources PBDEs vary greatly from Angola 
to Zimbabwe 
but the authors reduced 50+ countries to just one monolithic region called Africa 8/n
. The sources PBDEs vary greatly from Angola to Zimbabwe but the authors reduced 50+ countries to just one monolithic region called Africa 8/n
Almost forgot the funders! European PROJECT2020 researchers make Africa their sampling site & ignore local experts. And funders don't see this as unethical but rather the expansion of their "scientific empire" 9/n https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/12/1/305/
More participation by Africans in the peer review process can help curb scientific imperialism, to a minute degree. I have had comments ignored or rebuffed citing other "tourist science" studies. Many Africans have similar experiences 10/n
