𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲

Most of the respected voices in the decolonization of global health movement are either based in the Global North or originally from the Global South but affiliated with Northern institutions.

While the motives of many are genuine, and a true aspiration for change is evident, the reality of elite capture and even neo-colonization within the movement cannot be ignored. There has never been a more critical time to rethink what global health scholarship represents, to assess the genuine gains achieved thus far, and to chart a bolder path toward meaningful change.

In my view, five major shortcomings persist in the current decolonization discourse:

1. Dominance of Global North Leadership:

Global North leadership continues to overshadow the movement. To rebalance this, the active participation and amplification of Global South voices must increase significantly. Courage is essential to counteract gatekeeping in peer-reviewed journals and media outlets. More spaces like Global Health Otherwise are urgently needed to enable free and fearless expression.

2. Lack of Disciplinary Inclusivity:

Decolonization is deeply historical and political, yet historians, political scientists, ethicists, and diplomats are largely absent from leadership roles in this discourse. Global South actors must seize this moment to strategically advance health diplomacy agendas rooted in genuine interdisciplinary engagement.

3. Superficial and Scattered Scholarship:

Current scholarship remains fragmented, with few institutions offering concrete, actionable guidelines. Most of these efforts originate from the Global North. True decolonization demands that Global South–led, transdisciplinary scholarship takes center stage, forging new frameworks that center indigenous and community-based epistemologies.

4. Absence from Curricula:

Decolonization—of global health and knowledge systems—must be enshrined as a core, compulsory course within global public health curricula. Without embedding this at the training level, structural imbalances will persist.

5. Failure to Continuously ask the right Questions:

As I have argued elsewhere: “To decolonize global health effectively, we must continuously interrogate knowledge, expertise, methods, power, and agenda: For whom, by whom, and with whom?”

We must center local institutions and voices—not merely reform existing global structures. We must reject superficial checklists in favor of deep epistemic and structural analyses. Embracing team science that values diverse epistemologies, and capacity-building mechanisms that resist neo-colonial hierarchies. Authentic decolonization must be transformational—not transactional.