Key recommendations.

Despite a burgeoning discourse within the humanitarian health community regarding decolonisation, there remains lack of practical guidance for researchers seeking to decolonise their work. We conducted a qualitative study which aimed to explore the perceptions of research and teaching staff at the Health in Humanitarian Crisis Centre (HHCC) and their external partners —including humanitarian health researchers, practitioners, and donors— regarding how to decolonise research, teaching and partnerships at a leading global health Higher Education institution in the UK. We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews and 3 focus group discussions with HHCC members and external partners, including donors, academic institutions in conflict-affected and humanitarian settings, and practitioners from local and international humanitarian organisations. The first theme explored the concept of decolonisation itself, examining the disparate definitions and understandings held by HHCC members and partners, along with examining the institutional appetite and the role of leadership in driving decolonisation efforts. The second theme focused on sectoral and structural barriers to decolonising HHCC’s work, including the dominance of Western-defined knowledge models, inequitable funding policies and practices, and epistemic injustice. Finally, the third theme explored HHCC’s experiences in decolonising teaching and curriculum. The study identifies good practices within the HHCC community including knowledge co-production, equitable authorship arrangements, co-dissemination of findings, assigning co-principal investigators from conflict-affected countries, and centring and building on the experiences of researchers with relevant lived experience. However, these individual efforts contrast with a lack of appetite at the institutional level to address the underlying structural barriers. Our study provides the foundations for humanitarian health researchers and educators based in the Global North to begin to practically decolonise their work in the sphere of global/humanitarian health.

尽管人道主义健康领域的学术话语中，去殖民化（decolonisation）相关讨论日益兴起，但仍缺乏针对研究者开展去殖民化工作的实操指引。本研究采用质性研究方法，旨在探究英国某顶尖全球卫生高等教育机构——人道主义危机健康中心（Health in Humanitarian Crisis Centre, HHCC）的教研人员及其外部合作方（包括人道主义健康研究者、从业者与资助方），对该机构如何在研究、教学与合作中推进去殖民化的看法。本研究共开展20场半结构化访谈与3场焦点小组讨论，受访对象涵盖HHCC成员与外部合作方，其中包括资助方、受冲突影响及人道主义场景下的学术机构人员，以及来自本地与国际人道主义组织的从业者。首个主题围绕去殖民化概念本身展开，梳理了HHCC成员与合作方对该概念的多元定义与认知，并考察了机构意愿与领导力在推动去殖民化工作中的作用。第二个主题聚焦HHCC推进去殖民化工作所面临的行业与结构性障碍，包括西方主导的知识范式、不公平的资助政策与实践，以及认知不公（epistemic injustice）。第三个主题则探讨了HHCC在去殖民化教学与课程建设方面的实践经验。本研究识别出HHCC社群内的良好实践，包括知识共创、公平的作者署名安排、共同传播研究成果、任命来自受冲突影响国家的共同首席研究员，以及聚焦并依托具备相关亲身经历的研究者的经验开展工作。然而，这些个体层面的努力，与机构层面缺乏解决深层结构性障碍的意愿形成鲜明对比。本研究为来自全球北方（Global North）的人道主义健康研究者与教育工作者，提供了在全球/人道主义卫生领域切实推进自身工作去殖民化的基础框架。