Global health photography behind the façade of empowerment and decolonisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global health photography has historically been commissioned and, therefore, dominated by the gaze of Western photographers on assignments in the Global South. This is changing as part of international calls to decolonise global health and stimulate 'empowerment', spawning a growing initiative to hire local photographers. This article, based on interviews with global health photographers, reflects on this paradigm shift. It highlights how behind the laudable aim of 'empowerment' of local global health photography there is a simultaneous exploitation of precarious photographer labour and the emergence of 'glocal' photography elites. The paper argues that empowerment of local photographers can become a euphemism for reducing image production costs and maintaining control over the image content, while extending the scope of mainstream global health visual culture without challenging it. Finally, the article amplifies the growing concern that uncritical engagement with institutionalised empowerment becomes a warrant for the reproduction of local inequalities behind the fashionable façade of cooperation and care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".