Abstrak

Kembali

To achieve a global brain circulation, many Latin American countries have incentivized training abroad and publishing in high impact factor journals. Such internationalization strategies are valuable, but we argue that a knowledge dialogue is a better model for global science to overcome North–South disparities and to achieve both excellence and relevance. Circulation implies transmitting into a system, but dialogue highlights the individuals involved in the exchange. Although extant policies are theoretically adequate means of achieving brain circulation, broader impact criteria (e.g., integrating research and education, enhancing underrepresented groups’ participation, linking science with national goals) would help attain genuine knowledge dialogue. Using the Argentine and Chilean science systems as case studies, particularly regarding environmental inquiry, we found that these principles are not systematically used but that nascent efforts exist. Lessons from home and experiences elsewhere offer guidance to promote and evaluate science in a manner that reconciles the need for global excellence and local socioecological relevance.