Decolonisation initiatives at the Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium: ready for change?

In a global context, the pernicious effects of colonialism and coloniality are increasingly being recognised in many sectors. As a result, calls to reverse colonial aphasia and amnesia, and decolonise, are getting stronger. This raises a number of questions, particularly for entities that acted as agents of (previous) colonising countries and worked to further the progress of the colonial project: What does decolonisation mean for such historically colonial entities? How can they confront their (forgotten) arsonist past while addressing their current role in maintaining coloniality, at home and abroad? Given the embeddedness of many such entities in current global (power) structures of coloniality, do these entities really want change, and if so, how can such entities redefine their future to ensure that they are and remain 'decolonised'? We attempt to answer these questions, by reflecting on our efforts to think through and start the process of decolonisation at the Institute of Tropical Medicine (ITM) in Antwerp, Belgium. The overarching aim is to contribute to closing the gap in the literature when it comes to documenting practical efforts at decolonisation, particularly in contexts similar to ITM and to share our experience and engage with others who are undertaking or planning to undertake similar initiatives.

Review of health research and data on/with racially minoritised groups: Implications for addressing racism and racial disparities in public health practice and policies in Europe: a study protocol.

Historically, across Europe, data and research on/with racially minoritised groups have not been collected or carried out in a sufficient, adequate, or appropriate manner. Yet, to understand emerging and existing health disparities among such groups, researchers and policymakers must obtain and use data to build evidence that informs decision-making and action on key structural and social determinants of health. This systematic search and review aims to contribute to closing this gap and promote a race-conscious approach to health research, strengthening the utilisation and deployment of data and research on/with racially minoritised groups in Europe. Its ultimate goal is to improve equality and equity in health*. Concretely, the study will do so by reviewing and critically analysing the usage of the concepts of race, ethnicity, and their related euphemisms and proxies in health-related research. It will examine the collection, use, and deployment of data and research on/with racially minoritised groups in this area. The study will focus on Belgium, France, and the Netherlands, three countries with graphical proximity and several similarities, one of which is the limited attention that is given to racism and racial inequalities in health in research and policy. This choice is also justified by practical knowledge of the context and languages. The results of the review will be used to develop guidance on how to use and deploy data and research on/with racially minoritised groups. The review is part of a larger project which aims to promote race-conscious research and data. The project does this by a three-pronged approach which: 1) highlights the need for a race-conscious approach when collecting and using data, carrying out research on/with racially minoritised groups; 2) builds expertise for their effective use and deployment, and; 3) creates a knowledge network and community of practice for public health researchers working in Europe.

Realist evaluation in times of decolonising global health.

Realist evaluation (RE) is a theory-driven evaluation approach inspired by scientific realism. It has become increasingly popular in the field of global health where it is often applied in low- and middle-income countries. This makes it timely to discuss RE's relationship to the emerging decolonisation of global health movement. In this short perspective, we argue that the principles and practices that underpin RE have great potential to contribute to the decolonisation endeavour. Both the focus on the inclusion of local stakeholders and the openness to the rival theories these stakeholders bring to the fore, are promising. However, in practice, we see that a lack of acknowledgement of power imbalances and different ontologies and an overreliance on Western-based theories thwart this potential. We therefore suggest that realist evaluations performed by external researchers, especially in the field of global health, should actively engage with issues of (power) inequities. This is not only the just thing to do, but will also contribute to a better understanding of the intervention and may facilitate the emancipation of the disenfranchised. One way of doing this is through the adoption of participatory (action) research methods, currently underused in realist evaluations. We finally give a short example of an evaluation that combines emancipatory and participatory practice development with a realist approach. The Afya-Tek project in Tanzania has an innovative bottom-up approach throughout the full evaluation cycle and shows the possible strength of the proposed combination to create better interventions, more empowered stakeholders, and more illuminating programme theories.