Brazil's scientific leadership varies according to type of international partnership

Brazil plays a significant role in international scientific collaborations in health and life sciences. However, how these patterns vary among North-South, South-South, and triangular partnerships is still poorly explored. A recent study analyzed Brazil's international collaborations from 2010 to 2019, using Scopus data with 362,860 publications ¹.

Types of partnerships and scientific leadership

The research identified three collaboration models: Brazil with high-income countries (BR–HIC), Brazil with low- and middle-income countries (BR–LMIC), and Brazil with both (BR–HIC–LMIC). International collaborations nearly doubled, with triangular cooperation growing the fastest, although this was not accompanied by a proportional increase in Brazilian authorship leadership. Scientific leadership, measured by the position of first and last author, varied significantly among the models: 75% in BR–LMIC, 67% in BR–HIC, and only 31% in triangular partnerships ¹.

The citation impact also followed a clear hierarchy: 49% of triangular collaborations were among the 10% most cited, compared to 34% for BR–HIC and 22% for BR–LMIC. This suggests that Brazil occupies contextual-dependent positions in global research networks, influencing how bibliometric frameworks assess leadership and equity in international collaborations ¹.

Thematic specialization also diverges among the models. BR–HIC partnerships cover various areas, while triangular collaborations focus on clinical trials. BR–LMIC partnerships, on the other hand, align with Brazil's fields of highest specialization index: Agricultural and Biological Sciences and Veterinary Sciences ¹.

The evaluation of a country's performance in global science often uses indicators such as the proportion of articles in international collaboration and the frequency of these collaborations. However, these indicators do not answer important questions about leadership, impact, and scientific agendas. International collaboration is not homogeneous, and different partnership models may involve varied forms of funding and agenda setting ².

The study highlights the importance of considering different indicators to evaluate Brazil's role in international research networks. Leadership and citation impact vary according to the collaboration model, revealing a distinct portrait of the country's scientific performance ².