Abstract
The maturity of health research cultures can not only be identified through the breadth, quantity, and quality of engagement in empirical enquiry but also through the extent to which internal strategy and planning consider future growth and sustainability. As this collection attests there is undeniable talent and promise among the ranks of those engaged in naturopathy research and all, including those who seek to critique this form of health care, should be encouraged by the rise of scientifically rigorous investigation around this topic. Yet, it is also true that research on naturopathy remains in its early stages especially when compared with the volume of research resource and output dedicated to and produced across conventional medicine and health care. In this light, the goal of growing the ranks and talent of naturopathy-focused researchers remains a priority for the field. Although there exist pockets of excellence in naturopathy research across the world, the field remains ripe for further growth in terms of mentorship, leadership development, expanding networks, and building critical mass.
Unfortunately, addressing this need has not been at the forefront of much naturopathic research activity to date, and this is not too surprising given that the profession and field have, in many instances, been required to dedicate much energy and resource to defending and/or maintaining its position or at worst its existence. Furthermore, the landscape in which naturopathic researchers find themselves poses challenges to facilitating a strong mature research culture. Many are not located in naturopathy-dedicated faculty/organizations (but can be working within other health research areas such as gerontology or rural health) and such researchers can find themselves isolated within their own institutions. Competing or incommensurate institutional priorities and goals may often resign naturopathic-focused research into the margins and restrict its development. Equally, such a competing environment can also lead to challenges around mentorship and capacity building—identifying others who are keen to commit to mentoring naturopathic research talent and potential can also play second fiddle to developing researchers and future leaders for what may be considered more deserving professional or academic fields.
In direct response to these circumstances, in 2015 a group of senior health researchers at the Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), University of Technology Sydney explored a number of leadership, mentorship, and capacity building opportunities. After extensive consultation with others across and beyond academia (clinicians, associations, and relevant industry partners), the ARCCIM directorship established the International Naturopathy Research Leadership Program with a view to help facilitate and grow a rich sustainable research culture around naturopathy.
The Naturopathy Research Leadership Program—loosely based upon key features employed on the earlier-established Oxford International Primary Care Research Leadership Program of which Distinguished Professor Jon Adams is an appointed senior fellow—competitively appointed a range of early to mid-career naturopathic researchers (Ryan Bradley, Kieran Cooley, Joshua Goldenberg, Joanna Harnett, Jason Hawrelak, Erica McIntyre, Rebecca Reid, Janet Schloss, Claudine Van de Venter, and Naveen Visweswaraiah) from a large pool of eligible applicants. The program is kindly supported through partnerships with the Jacka Foundation of Natural Therapies, the Blackmores Institute, and Blackmore Foundation. An annual residential held at ARCCIM, University of Technology Sydney, provides 4 days of activities to stimulate collaboration and discussion, promote partnership across international naturopathy-focused research activities, and provide advice and share insights around career and field development.
Since its establishment in 2016, the Leadership Program has to date produced more than 30 coauthored peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and research books as well as facilitated the establishment of 10 new national and international research projects (some of which have already attracted external funding). Although the tangible products of the program such as these outlined here are certainly important to help build the broad evidence base for naturopathy, the main goal of the program—to foster a collegial, well-coordinated, and rigorous international research culture around naturopathy—is perhaps more significant.
Academia is an increasingly competitive environment across all disciplines and the opportunity for potential research leaders in naturopathy to be working together and sharing their insights, experiences, and skills through the Leadership Program is itself essential to ensuring a rich and sustainable research culture for naturopaths and naturopathy is possible. As many of the articles in this special issue show, the networks and collaborations between Fellows on the ARCCIM International Naturopathic Research Leadership Program are already bearing fruit. Our vision at ARCCIM is to both maintain and extend the leadership program with the current cohort of fellows acting as senior mentors for a future cohort of early- to mid-career appointees, which will help develop cross-generational networks and trust as well as provide further skill development and experience in mentorship to those within the field.
There is undoubtedly much further to go with regard to leadership training, mentorship, and capacity building in naturopathic research, but the ARCCIM International Naturopathic Research Leadership Program has already identified that rich research talent in and around naturopathy exists, that an enthusiasm and drive for collaboration among naturopathic researchers is strong and that industry and professional partners share the program vision and are prepared to support such an initiative. As this special issue illustrates in featuring a number of project developments from the program as well as providing a platform for other quality naturopathic research from the international field, there is much to be optimistic about on these fronts.
Ultimately, as for all health research fields, the success in establishing and growing a rigorous, rich, and critical research culture around naturopathy will be dependent upon both internal and external partners. Although acknowledging the core need for naturopathic research to closely interact with and relate to daily routine care and other features of the naturopathic landscape, it is important the naturopathic research enterprise also be aided by and coproduced with important others (e.g., clinicians and methodologists) who may be located beyond the profession or field. For now, the shared task for those seeking to develop research around this important area of health care is to coordinate our efforts (rather than compete) and to build upon the early but significant infrastructure and success of the ARCCIM International Naturopathy Research Leadership Program.