What difference does language make?

Abstract

The dominance of English-language scholarship in global research has led to a significant knowledge divide, often marginalising research from non-English-speaking regions, particularly in the Global South. This paper presents a comparative analysis of two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) on the health impacts of climate change on outdoor workers in urban Asia, focusing on English- and Vietnamese-language literature. By comparing these two bodies of scholarship, the study uncovers key thematic convergences and divergences, reflecting broader disparities in knowledge production, research norms and priorities. The English-language literature emphasises macro-level analyses, theoretical frameworks, and long-term policy interventions, while the Vietnamese-language literature offers more localised, context-specific insights, highlighting immediate coping strategies and health risks faced by outdoor workers. We argue that the systematic exclusion of non-English sources risks reinforcing existing epistemic hierarchies, narrowing debate on global health and climate change research. By integrating Southern-language perspectives, research can better and more equitably address the diverse vulnerabilities of outdoor workers and develop more effective and locally attuned interventions. The study emphasises the need to cast our linguistic net more widely to enrich global understanding and help achieve epistemic justice.

> Access the paper here: https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/area.70080