Racism in Academia and Research Publishing: Unveiling the Hidden Struggles of African Researchers

Abstract

This paper examines the longstanding and underreported systemic and, in fact, pervasive forms of racism in academia and intellectual literature with specific attention to African scholars and African institutions and epistemological norms. By applying Critical Race Theory, Postcolonial Theory, and the concept of Epistemic Injustice, we demonstrate how seemingly neutral processes still reinforce exclusion. The study design comprises a systematic narrative review from 2010 to 2025, a theory-based qualitative synthesis and key-informant interviews (KIIs). We included n:70 studies in the qualitative synthesis and conducted n:20 key informant interviews (KIIs). We operationalise Critical Race Theory, Post-Colonial Theory, and Epistemic Injustice using various mechanisms and align each of them with editorial and funding reforms that can be implemented. The findings are that (i) editorial gatekeeping is often supported by coded decisions, which marginalise African expertise and subject matter, including claims of insufficient international relevance; (ii) linguistic policing and waiver opacity have varying impacts on unfunded Africa-based authors; (iii) the structure of authorship in international collaborations and the article-processing-charge (APC) regime, often constrain conceptualisation and senior authorship, by keeping Africa-based scholars as data-collectors. We recommend: (a) a conceptual framework based on linking colonial legacy to modern metric bureaucracy and editorial power; (b) introductions of strictly operationalised theoretical views to the analysis of particular publishing mechanisms; and (c) a theory-consistent reform agenda, comprising redistributive editorial authority, multilingual review, imposition of an authorship equity, and metric pluralism, and challenges confronting the implementation of suggested solutions. We conclude that decolonising scholarly publishing requires changes not only among stakeholders but also in the meaning and administration of validity, relevance, and rigour.