From leadership research to district action: Scientific diasporas in global biodiversity governance: brain circulation, linkage, and knowledge brokerage in Colombia

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Read source Search paper agent CC BY 4.0

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Abstract The increasing reliance on international scientific collaboration to address biodiversity loss has brought renewed attention to the role of scientific diasporas in global environmental governance. Yet, empirical evidence on how diaspora-mediated practices operate in biodiversity-rich contexts remains limited. This study examines the role of the Colombian scientific diaspora in biodiversity governance by linking empirical patterns to the concepts of brain circulation, brain linkage, and knowledge brokerage. It adopts an exploratory mixed-methods approach that integrates survey (n = 62) and qualitative data generated in the context of COP16. The analysis maps diaspora engagement across multiple dimensions, including where collaboration occurs, through which institutional actors it is mediated, how it is enacted, and under what conditions it unfolds. Findings show that diaspora scientists contribute across all 23 targets of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, with a strong concentration in capacity building, technology transfer, and international collaboration. Engagement is geographically concentrated in major research hubs but extends to peripheral regions, suggesting a pattern of both concentration and reach. Institutionally, collaborations are primarily mediated through higher education institutions and civil society organizations, with limited direct interaction with national government actors. Building on these findings, the study develops an exploratory typology of diaspora collaboration mechanisms, including academic collaboration, capacity building and technology transfer, co-production with society, material exchange, policy advice, and non-institutional collaboration, offering a structured framework for future studies of diaspora engagement in biodiversity governance. Keywords: biodiversity governance, brain circulation and linkage, capacity building, knowledge brokerage, scientific cooperation, scientific diasporas

Study methods

This research adopts an exploratory mixed-methods design (Creswell, 2015) and presents a case study of Colombia aimed at examining the role of scientific diasporas in biodiversity governance by mapping and analyzing the mechanisms and institutional dynamics shaping their collaborations with institutions in Colombia. The empirical material was generated in the context of the Sixteenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP16), held in Cali, Colombia, in 2024, which created a moment of mobilization for the Colombian scientific diaspora. In preparation for the conference, several diaspora organizations, both established and in the process of formalization, launched initiatives aimed at documenting the contributions of Colombian scientists living abroad to biodiversity research, international scientific collaboration, and science–policy processes. Among these, two organizations, Red Colombiana de Científicos en el Exterior and the Red Colombo-Alemana de Ciencia e Innovación BioGeCo (hereafter “the BioGeCo Network”), developed complementary data collection efforts through surveys, focus groups, and public engagement events. Although these initiatives were conducted independently, their thematic convergence enabled the integration of the resulting datasets. We therefore combine survey and qualitative data following an a posteriori comparative approach that integrates independently generated data to enhance analytical insight (Montero and Baiocchi, 2022).

Limitations

No passage was selected automatically. Inspect the complete source before adopting a practice.

A 90-day district inquiry

Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
Days 16–30 · Design. Select one recurring district decision. Publish the decision owner, evidence requirements, consultation process and appeal route; test the process on a bounded low-risk decision. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
Days 61–90 · Decide. Track decision time, unresolved objections, documented reasons, appeals and access differences. Review whether the process changes who can participate and who carries the burden. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Julian Prieto; Natalia Matiz-Rubio; Camila González; Viviana M Posada-Pérez; Laura Catalina Quintero Uribe; Miguel Fernández-Niño; Esteban Charria-Girón; Mónica Medina; Ramón Fernando Colmenares-Quintero; Melina Flórez-Cuadros; Yudy Tibaduiza. Scientific diasporas in global biodiversity governance: brain circulation, linkage, and knowledge brokerage in Colombia. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics (2026-07-03). https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2026.1844103

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.