Understanding inequality in global knowledge production. Alternative theoretical frameworks, empirical evidence and policy options

Drawing on the theoretical kaleidoscope method, this article aims to develop a pluralistic understanding of global inequality in knowledge production by integrating diverse theoretical frameworks and analysing empirical evidence on inequality in research outcomes and its underlying causes. Economic theory points to the importance of market failures in knowledge production, the key role of public and philanthropic funding of research, and how uncertainty skews investments toward low-risk activities. The theory of epistemic injustice provides insight into how unequal power relations, social structures and prejudice shape inequalities in research. The capability approach provides a unified framework for evaluating and understanding inequalities in global research that encompasses aspects related to both distributive and discriminatory injustice. While the wide gap in knowledge production between the Global North and Global South is explained largely by cross-country differences in public research investment, an expanding body of evidence highlights the influence of reputation, discrimination and systemic biases in driving global inequality in research outcomes. The study identifies policy interventions, including public policies to enhance equitable access to information and education, actions to promote a more just allocation of research funding within academia, and measures to counter prejudice and cultivate epistemic virtue among researchers.