Effects of parachute science on local research capacity

Strengthening research capacity is essential to address the global biodiversity crisis. Yet, parachute science often undermines this goal, and its prevalence, costs, and benefits are unclear. We analyzed 13,502 publications on primate research that we extracted from Scopus (1960-2022) to evaluate the effects of parachute science on local research capacity across primate-range countries. We categorized these publications as local (LRP), collaborative (CRP), or parachute science (PSRP) research publications and categorized countries where the research took place as low- to middle-income countries or high- to upper-middle-income countries. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models to assess how parachute science influenced local research capacity. For 69% of PSRPs, the research was conducted in 59 low- to middle-income countries. For 20% of LRPs, research was led by people from these 59 countries. The disparity in LRPs among country groups was large. Local research publications in high- to upper-middle-income countries were at least 3.6 times higher than those in low- to middle-income countries. Before 2013, parachute science contributed to an increase in LRPs; this trend reversed after 2013, mainly resulting in a decline in LRPs across all countries and both income categories. Strengthening the capacity to share research in low- to middle-income countries is urgent if international conservation commitments are to be met. We recommend establishing true collaborative and interdisciplinary research teams, expanding local research opportunities, and supporting long-term research projects as key strategies for sustainable research capacity strengthening in low-income countries.