Paper short abstract:

Using in-depth and key informant interviews, the paper examines dimensions of asymmetries relating to discipline, language, gender and funding of research in African Studies. Initials findings show that programmes are often cut down drastically for explicitly political reasons, not financial ones.

Paper long abstract:

In recent times, African higher education has had to contend with reduced levels of public funding for a hugely expanded sector which has resulted in many African university teachers having to grapple with low salaries and large classes, leaving them with little time to do much else. Scholars in the Humanities including African Studies, face unique challenges because of the pressure on university administrators to focus funding on the Sciences hence the efforts by foreign donors from the Global North to fund scholarship in Africa in order to increase the capacity to engage in more productive collaborations (Tripp, 2014). Though laudable, oftentimes many of the grants tie research too closely to interests of funders. Even though research programmes like Africa Cluster Centres (ACC) under the Africa Multiple Cluster of Excellence at the University of Bayreuth (Germany) are less restrictive and benefit African researchers more, there is still a demand that they reflect practical or theoretical implications for the Centre in Bayreuth. The funding body determines the methodology, topic and result framework, meaning that research findings sometimes differ from what similar independent studies might have produced. Using 10 in-depth interviews and 5 key informant interviews, this paper examines the different dimensions of asymmetries relating to discipline, language, gender and funding of researches in African Studies. Preliminary findings show that proposals or programmes are often turned down or cut down drastically for explicitly political reasons, not financial ones. It also suggests ways that North-South collaborations can be more mutually beneficial and equal.