Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Eyob Balcha Gebremariam
(University of Bristol)
Puleng Segalo (University of South Africa)
Send message to Convenors
- Chairs:
-
Divine Fuh
(HUMA-Humanities in Africa Institute)
Isabella Aboderin (University of Bristol)
- Format:
- Roundtable
- Streams:
- Politics and International Relations (x) Decoloniality & Knowledge Production (y)
- Location:
- Hörsaalgebäude, Hörsaal B
- Start time:
- 1 June, 2023 at
Time zone: Europe/Berlin
- Session slots:
- 1
Short Abstract:
How do we envision a future global research and science ecosystem in which African constituencies and terms take their rightful place in knowledge production? The discussions critically examine past and present modes of knowledge production in, on and about Africa to envisage a transformed future.
Long Abstract:
This roundtable aims to reflect on three interrelated questions: 1. "How do we envision a future global research and science ecosystem in which African constituencies and terms take their rightful place in knowledge production?" 2. "Can efforts to redress structural power imbalances in "Global North-Africa" research collaborations help foster such a transformed ecosystem?" And, if so, 3. "What directions do such efforts need to take, and what social policy responses are required to underpin them?"
Efforts to decolonise the African research ecosystem in general and higher education, in particular, have been primary objectives of post-independence leaders and scholars from the continent. Africanising universities, highlighting the drawbacks of extraversion, and the neoliberal onslaught on African universities were some of the key issues over the past decades. More recently, emphasis is being placed on epistemological and linguistic orientations, iconographies, and institutional policy practices. Key foci have also been a valorisation of African knowledge systems and a disruption of Eurocentric frames and interests in the generation, dissemination and use of knowledge products to engage policy and political processes.
This roundtable examines the multiple layers of inequities in knowledge production concerning Africa and their influence on shaping "African futures". Discussions will highlight epistemic injustices, the unidirectional developmental gaze, extraversion, unequal power relations in research collaborations and the dominance of non-African actors and finance in the African research and science ecosystem. Possible areas of change required in institutional arrangements and policy spaces, as well as individual actions, will also be examined in the discussions.
Accepted contributions:
Session 1Mareike Schomerus (Busara Center)
Contribution short abstract:
This roundtable contribution takes a decade of experience of Busara—based in Kenya—in advancing behavioural science in beneficial and appropriate ways for diverse people in different African contexts, while navigating a funding environment that is largely skewed against such local ownership.
Contribution long abstract:
The challenges of integrating Africa in a global knowledge production system are well established. The Covid-19 pandemic has made some of the inequities even more visible: a tiny fraction of global funding for social science research on Covid 19 went to Africa. Global funding for strengthening of Africa’s research capacities in public health is already extremely limited—where it is dispersed, it is most commonly administered by a research institute in the Global North or allocated to a handful of African universities. Certain disciplinary approaches are entirely in their infancy, such as behavioural science.
This is a crucial challenge: behavioural science is increasingly important in policy making; methods are advancing rapidly. However, for an equitable future, the advancement and application of behavioural science needs to be Africa-owned, both methodologically and through changed funding mechanisms.
This roundtable contribution draws on a decade of experience of Busara—based in Kenya—in seeking to advance behavioural science in ways that are beneficial and appropriate to Africa while navigating a funding environment that is still largely skewed against such local ownership. The advance of behavioural science provides many opportunities, but also comes with pitfalls of continued transplanting of non-contextualised research methods. The paper concludes with recommendations of how such opportunities need to be shaped by the experience of seeking to change the research ecosystem.
Zuzana Uhde (Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Sociology)
Contribution short abstract:
The paper outlines dialogical border thinking, namely between sub-Saharan Africa and Central and Eastern Europe, which both symbolise a non-Western difference, albeit in a different scale and form, and proposes it as a method to challenge western-centric political economy of knowledge production.
Contribution long abstract:
Critical inquiries into the coloniality of geopolitics of knowledge production has regained a strong presence in academic debates and beyond. Decolonial thinkers have highlighted a need to developed horizontal, pluriversal or transversal dialogue bridging different epistemic locations in order to envision an inclusive cosmopolitan arrangement. Nevertheless, the main body of research structures the debate along the lines between the West and its different Others, given a western-centric bias of an institutionalized notion of academic excellence, publishing practices and research funding. In contrast, a dialogue between contexts and macro-regions outside of the West as a hegemonic place of knowledge production brings in different insights and can contribute to opening up a space for decolonial imaginaries as a process of creating inclusive cosmopolitan future as a new universal project.
The paper argues for border thinking as a method for transforming knowledge production. It focuses on two geopolitical contexts, namely sub-Saharan Africa and Central and Eastern Europe, which both symbolise a non-Western difference, yet in a different scale and form. It outlines dialogical border thinking between these two geopolitical contexts in order to explore how these two lines of criticism can inform each other in an effort to envision a future global research ecosystem. In particular, it focuses on feminist critique embedded in these two geopolitical contexts and on how a mutual intellectual exchange can contribute to challenging western-centric political economy of knowledge production and opening a broader space for alliances beyond a binary thinking of West-and-the-rest or white–non-white.
Liisa Laakso (Nordic Africa Institute) Esther Kariuki
Contribution short abstract:
This paper will examine African knowledge production and decolonization of political science with regard to its potential to contribute to democratic developments in Ghana, Kenya and Zimbabwe.
Contribution long abstract:
This paper will examine African knowledge production and its limitations in the discipline of political science. We will look at the profile of the African research output in the Web of Science and Sabinet databases. What is researched in Africa within the political science discipline? Where is it published? How much is it cited? After an overview of the trends over the last two decades in the whole continent, we will look at the developments in the leading national universities in Ghana, Kenya and Zimbabwe, countries representing different political trajectories but similar academic traditions including the use of the English language in university education. Our bibliometric analysis is complemented by interviews of scholars from these universities of their experiences in knowledge production. With regard to the potential of political science knowledge to contribute to local democratic developments, we will discuss decolonization of African political science, the pressure to publish in order to succeed in a university career vis-à-vis local policy relevance of the research work, resources to conduct research and the freedom to publish expert opinions on politics.
Jessica Pourraz (Sciences Po Bordeaux) Allison Felix Hughes (University of Ghana)
Contribution short abstract:
By exploring Global North-Africa research collaborations in Ghana around air pollution, this paper highlights how Ghanaian scientists, by using low cost sensors which they have to adapt through calibration work, participate toward shifting Africa’s position in the global science.
Contribution long abstract:
In research on air pollution, the international scientific community and academic journals see highly technical and expensive measurements instruments – not affordable to most scientists in the Global South – as the “gold standard”. Not only does this practically create a Global North monopoly over publication but also wrongly positions research made by these means as “novel”. It is as if the new research brings an unknown problem to light, even though studies of air pollution in countries like Ghana or Kenya goes back several decades, and includes a lot of labour by locally-based researchers (deSouza, 2019). By exploring “Global North-Africa” research collaborations on going in Ghana around air pollution for more than a decade, this paper aims to highlight how Ghanaian scientists are instrumental in knowledge production around air quality. By using low cost sensors, which they have to adapt to the local settings through calibration work, Ghanaian scientists and academics participate toward shifting Africa’s position in the global science. By using the devices, they make them work properly in the local setting and compete with highly technical and expensive measurements instruments from Global North. Through the analysis of the assemblages to produce scientific knowledge between North-South academics, experts, international donors and private actors, this paper explore how Ghanaian scientists are contesting inequities in knowledge production by appropriating and creating new ways of making air science, make it visible to international scientific community and transform the research ecosystem.