Global problems, partial perspectives

The communications and research industry often describes itself as global in outlook. Yet much of the insight that informs strategy, policy and storytelling is still produced through a distinctly Western lens. Countries outside Europe and North America are frequently underrepresented in datasets, under-sampled in studies, or grouped together under broad classifications that obscure important differences. 

This imbalance is not simply theoretical. Research exclusions have tangible consequences for how issues are understood and addressed worldwide. Recent analysis of climate research, for example, shows that rapidly growing cities in parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America appear far less frequently in academic and policy literature than cities in Europe or North America, despite facing some of the most severe climate risks. Urban centres experiencing rapid population growth, infrastructure strain and environmental vulnerability are often missing from the research that shapes global climate responses. 

A similar pattern is emerging in technology and data-driven fields. As artificial intelligence becomes embedded in areas such as healthcare, concerns are growing that systems trained primarily on Western datasets risk excluding billions of people. Without representative data from low- and middle-income countries, AI tools may perform poorly or unevenly across different populations, reinforcing existing inequalities rather than reducing them. In both cases, the absence of diverse research inputs leads to outcomes that privilege certain regions while marginalising others. 

Part of the challenge lies in how research is produced. Established research markets, data availability and methodological familiarity often make Western contexts easier to study. However, convenience can quietly shape what is considered “standard” or “universal”. When insight repeatedly flows from the same regions, it reinforces the idea that certain experiences are central while others are secondary. 

Language also plays a role. Terms such as “third world countries”, though still widely used, stem from outdated geopolitical frameworks and fail to reflect the complexity and diversity of today’s global landscape. More importantly, they often overlook the historical forces that shaped modern inequalities. Colonial extraction, resource exploitation and unequal trade relationships have had lasting effects on economic development, yet this context is frequently absent from contemporary research narratives. 

For communications, digital and research professionals, this matters. Research does not just describe the world; it helps define which stories are told and whose perspectives are prioritised. As audiences become more globally connected, there is a growing need for insight that reflects that reality. 

A more genuinely global approach to research will require broader inclusion, more precise language and greater awareness of historical context. The result will not only be fairer representation, but stronger, more accurate insight in an increasingly interconnected world.