This essay discusses the interplay of epistemological-methodological approaches and research practices developed within a global health study that aims to understand and strengthen community actions and organizing by – and preserve the memories of – made-marginalized places and people during the COVID-19 pandemic. The project has brought together community actors and social justice scholar-advocates in two Global South countries (Brazil and Peru) and two Global North countries (Canada and Germany) to explore and dialogue around how community mobilization efforts during the pandemic sought to influence policymaking toward health equity and social justice. Rather than emphasizing our research results per se, we relay our experiences of countering dominant, asymmetrical approaches to global health research, both in theory and practice, based on a shared belief that community engagement is central to societal transformation. We provide an in-depth account of how we have carried out our project – through what we aspirationally name Dialogical and Non-extractivist Approaches (DNA) – using an analytic narration of the possibilities of global health research anchored in an ethical dialogic praxis, guided by principles of non-extractivism and Freirean action research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Romero et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: