Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

Sino-African higher educational cooperation has been over a hundred years. The cooperation has entered a fast track after the establishment of FOCAC in 2000, yielding fruitful results. While it also faces multiple challenges such as structural imbalance, imperfect mechanisms, and improper quality.

Paper long abstract:

The journey of Sino-African higher educational cooperation can be traced back to 1922 when Chinese Islamic scholars visited Al-Azhar University in Egypt, and it has now been over a hundred years. Since the establishment of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation in 2000, Sino-African higher educational cooperation has entered the fast track, and a multi-level, multi-field, multi-form and multi-subject pattern of cooperation has been established, yielding fruitful results. Sino-African educational higher cooperation not only meet the practical needs of both sides, but also set an example for South-South cooperation, promoting the construction of a China-Africa community with a shared future and the process of global education. The flourishing development of Sino-African higher educational cooperation has also attracted widespread attention from the international community. While affirming the significance and achievements of Sino-African higher educational cooperation, there are also misinterpretations and criticisms, resulting in a complex international public opinion environment. In addition, Sino-African higher educational cooperation also face multiple challenges such as structural imbalance, imperfect mechanisms, and the need to improve quality, requiring comprehensive measures to be taken. Specifically, this includes focusing on tapping into the educational advantages of African countries and enhancing the two-way nature of cooperation; prioritizing education and gradually improving the mechanisms throughout the process of cooperation; optimizing the management of the entire chain to enhance the quality of cooperation; and adopting cross-cultural adaptation strategies to improve the intercultural communication capabilities between China and Africa.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

Existing "equitable partnership frameworks" sidestep the urgent need for a profound rebalancing of the positioning of Africa and the "Global North" in the worldwide science and research ecosystem. We propose the Africa Charter for transformative research collaborations as a possible antidote.

Paper long abstract:

Debate on the need for more fairness in academic research collaborations between actors in Africa (or the ‘Global South’, broadly) and counterparts in the Global North has intensified in recent years, while practice-oriented frameworks and efforts to foster more equitable partnerships have proliferated. Important approaches to recognise and undo asymmetries in concrete collaboration arrangements – conceptual framing, division of labour, decision making, access to rewards, capacity building – have been identified. In this paper, we draw on African and other postcolonial, decolonial and feminist scholarship, as well as systems thinking and global science data, to argue that such ‘equitable partnerships’ efforts at best, sidestep the urgent need for a much more profound rebalancing of the positioning of Africa and ‘Global North’ in the worldwide science and research ecosystem as a whole. We consider why such wider rebalancing is imperative for both Africa and the global community, propose that research collaborations must be understood as a key entry point for advancing such a systemic shift, and suggest a necessary transformative collaboration mode to this end. We conclude by introducing the Africa Charter for transformative research collaborations, which offers a normative framework of principles for such a mode, and aspirations for policy and regulatory change across higher education sectors to embed it as best and standard practice.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

The paper discusses current efforts by scholars and institutions to promote more equitable discourses and practices in international research collaborations. It argues that Francis Nyamnjoh's notions of incompleteness and conviviality can contribute to address and analyze inequalities in academia.

Paper long abstract:

The global production of scientific knowledge is still characterised by structural inequalities. Researchers from Africa in particular face major challenges like in obtaining research funding and in publishing internationally. In addition, national research collaboration efforts in Africa for are limited due to a lack of government policies. At the same time, there is a growing awareness of the inequalities and power structures of scientific collaboration. Scholars in the Global South and North are rightly calling for a decolonisation of knowledge production. Many funding institutions in the Global North are also looking for new forms of funding to meet this demand. But much remains to be done. This paper explores which discourses and practices hold promise for enabling strategies for more equitable international research collaboration in the social sciences and humanities. Drawing on Francis Nyamnjoh's notions of incompleteness and the ethics of conviviality as a starting point, we argue that the recognition of incompleteness by all actors involved in collaboration can sharpen the focus on the mutual and complex benefits as well as the power relations involved in a particular collaboration and pave the way for more equitable relations. But how far do these notions go beyond the personal level at which any cooperation begins, in order to achieve lasting change at the institutional level? To discuss this, we will draw on our experience with the DFG-funded Point Sud programme, which organises international conferences in Africa together with a network of research institutions in eight countries on the continent.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

The paper critically examines research collaboration trends and patterns between Mozambique, South Africa, Germany, and Sweden.

Paper long abstract:

Our Paper critically examines research collaboration trends and patterns between Mozambique, South Africa, Germany, and Sweden. We review the historical power imbalances and geopolitical and ideological differences that have been addressed and overcome, or whether they continue to shape relations and interests in higher education. Our Paper relies on the Scopus data for bibliometric analysis of research collaboration trends. Through bibliometric analysis of international research collaboration trends over the past decade and the literature review on historical collaboration trends and patterns between the countries in our sample, we highlight contemporary complexities and asymmetric dependencies between European and African countries in our sample between South Africa and Mozambique. The national complexities and asymmetries are primarily informed by historical and contemporary ideological and geopolitical priorities, aims, and interests. The last point mainly refers to the case of South Africa and Germany, where research collaboration trends continue to follow the pre-1990s collaboration patterns between historically white universities in South Africa and the former West German universities. Our analysis shows that the talk about equity in North-South collaboration remains largely rhetorical and that higher education and research collaboration in Europe and Africa - and collaboration between them - continue to be shaped by past and current systemic and structural power imbalances and ideological, geopolitical and economic divisions, differences, interests and norms. We conclude by reflecting on the implications for future international research collaborations in higher education and the role academics, researchers, universities, higher education ministries, research councils, and funders of research can play in challenging the status quo.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

Eight universities in Ethiopia were differentiated as research universities. The government allocates 0.27% of its GDP to research. This forces universities to depend on research funds from other sources, often from the Global North which is a major challenge for achieving their missions.

Paper long abstract:

Ethiopian public universities under the Ministry of Education were categorized into four generations based on their year of establishment. In 2020, the universities were differentiated as Research University (8), Comprehensive University (21), University of Applied Sciences (15), and Science and Technology University (2) based on their mission and focus. Although they fell short of fully meeting the requirements and international practices of research universities, eight universities, which are also first-generation universities, were categorized under research universities. The differentiation aimed at addressing, among others, the homogenization of universities and promoting institutional quality and competitiveness by considering national priorities. Although research universities bring direct and indirect economic benefits to society in addition to their contribution to knowledge, innovation, and creativity, it is important to note that they may require more resources than other types of universities. Ethiopia allocates about 0.27% of its GDP to research and research funds is one of the major challenges of public universities. This forces universities to look for and depend on research funds from other sources, often from the Global North. The paper argues that differentiating universities based on their mission and focus is important. This helps universities to advance in their research activities which helps them to actively engage in research collaboration much more than what they used to do. However, the lack of government commitment to raising its GDP to research and development could leave universities to heavily depend on funds from the Global North which is a major challenge for achieving their missions.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

Although concepts of socio-cultural diversity vary in local contexts, diversity strategies by universities worldwide often seem to align with specific (Western) models. The presentation will show findings from a PhD project on diversity strategies in Ghanaian universities.

Paper long abstract:

Universities worldwide are increasingly faced with the challenge of doing justice to a socio-culturally heterogeneous group of people on their campuses. The rationale behind the adoption of diversity strategies is often articulated in terms of resolving extant social and cultural conflicts, as well as proactively mitigating instances of discrimination. However, economic considerations, such as enhanced prospects for securing international grants, wield significant influence and emerge as primary motivators for the institutionalization of these strategies.

Diversity as a concept is though interpreted differently across regions influenced by local realities and settings. And universities in Ghana as those in other parts of the world deal with socio-cultural diversity in various forms and at different institutional levels (or not at all). Despite these divergences, diversity strategies employed often exhibit formulations and frameworks that reflect, and at times overtly align with, Western strategy documents.

The presentation will highlight insights of an ongoing PhD project and statements from conducted expert interviews. The project investigates the implementation of diversity strategies at Ghanaian universities from an organizational-sociological angle and asks whether isomorphic processes in the adaptation to international standards can be identified and demonstrated by measures similar to diversity management, which has been analyzed and described in many ways in the Western higher education context. The whole investigation is based on the theoretical and historical consideration of the understanding of diversity in Ghana and globally.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

The paper examines the theoretical, rhetorical, and practical implications of the recent trend to include emerging and developing countries in international Higher Education Policies by way of the case study of Germany and Southeast Asia.

Paper long abstract:

The paper considers the notion of (higher) education research cooperation from a mutually beneficial perspective. It examines the theoretical, rhetorical, and practical implications of the recent trend to include emerging and developing countries in international Higher Education Policies by way of the case study of Germany and Southeast Asia. Germany international higher education cooperation policy infrastructure tends to challenge the traditional distinction between international research cooperation and development cooperation and embrace of more egalitarian discourse with consequences on standards and evaluation criteria. Our paper examines the underlying assumptions of the policy for research collaboration and the practice engagement with selected Southeast Asian countries (eg., Malaysia, Vietnam, Laos) as to whether they perpetuate traditional asymmetries in the global political economy of international research collaboration. The paper offers a review of policy assumptions more broadly, through the lenses of practical experience of engaging in cooperation programs as a way to search for more egalitarian approaches to global north- Global South cooperation.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

This paper proposes a reorientation of debates on equitable research partnerships towards a focus on how power-aware collaborations can drive systemic change for sustainable development. It outlines avenues for knowledge ecosystem change and potential practical actions within and across partnerships

Paper long abstract:

The “equitable partnerships” agenda, a current preoccupation amongst many “northern” institutions and actors who participate in a wider knowledge ecosystem, aims to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of research projects, coupled with a moral imperative to decolonize “northern” research practices. Positive actions are being observed in the form of localization, numerous principles and guidelines on equitable partnerships, and an emphasis on open dialogue. Even though momentum is clearly building around this agenda amongst northern actors, it is difficult to see real changes in practices. Many researchers in the global South highlight a lack of accountability amongst key northern research actors towards working intentionally to shift power relations. A project led by Southern Voice, with the Institute of Development Studies (UK), indicates that a focus on equitable partnerships has limited resonance with global South researchers since partnerships often perpetuate, rather than mitigate, the dynamics of the structures in which they operate. This paper shares key findings from the study which has involved extensive engagements with both northern and southern stakeholders, and proposes a reorientation of current debates on equitable partnerships towards a focus on the purpose of research collaborations. Southern-led research that contributes to more equitable, sustainable development outcomes should then be grounded in authentic, power-aware research partnerships. The paper outlines potential avenues for moving beyond north-south binaries by influencing the wider knowledge ecosystem within which development research takes place, and offers opportunities for practical action relating to academic, publishing and funding sub-systems.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

The logic of development cooperation as conceptualized in the SDGs as well as the respective papers of the EU and, for example, Germany, do not allow for partnerships on so-called eye-level. Therefore, hierarchy and dependency remain the dominant mechanisms, also in research funding programs.

Paper long abstract:

To increase the quality of research in the respective higher education landscapes as well as the global community, it is essential that research institutions collaborate internationally. However, in many African research landscapes, the need for institutionalized research funding is not always backed up with the necessary funding lines. That means, international research funding mainly comes from Europe and North America. However, the logic of development cooperation as it is conceptualized in the SDGs and the respective papers of the European Union and, for example, Germany, do not allow for a partnership on the so-called eye-level. Instead, hierarchy and dependency remain the dominant traits of such collaborations.

The European Union as well as diverse German ministries have developed strategic initiatives with different regions in the world, also with Africa. While the terminology with other partner regions, such as North America, speaks of shared values and experiences, the terminology used in an African context is that of “enabling” and “supporting”. That means, while in some collaborations, the partnership strengthened, in other cooperation, the partner needs to be strengthened.

That is the underlying logic of development cooperation since Truman’s inaugural speech in 1949. More than 70 years later, the SDGs as the mother document, the EU and, for example, the German ministries, still use the same language.

This paper aims to make underlying concepts of development cooperation transparent and give examples from the EU as well as from Germany. It also aims to present the AU language on research collaboration.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

Based on our diverse experiences of collaboration, we argue that making sure that those in/from the Global South can actually hold their Global North partners to account and demand explanations is a key way to ensure reciprocity, and recognize the competence and experiences of African researchers.

Paper long abstract:

In this paper we focus on three issues that hinder successful reciprocal research between the so-called Global-North and Global South: the lack of autonomy Africa-based researchers face when they receive funding from Europe; the shifting goal posts they face as their careers progress thus keeping them in precarious situations; and the guilt that impedes critical discussions. Based on our diverse experiences of research collaboration, we argue that these issues are underpinned by a fundamental misunderstanding of reciprocity; in particular, its relational nature and the responsibilities it imposes on the relevant parties. Reciprocal research, like reciprocity, requires that each party´s status and contribution be recognized as equal and thus subject to being held accountable. This means that the hierarchical power structures that characterize Global North-Global South research interactions require negotiation. Failure to do so, and focusing instead on “creating more avenues for global south researchers to conceive and do research in the global north” runs the risk of reinforcing the very unequal structures we wish to dismantle. One key way to ensure reciprocity in research collaborations is by making sure that those in the Global South can actually hold their Global North partners to account and demand explanations. This would recognize the competence and experiences of African researchers. This contribution offers lessons learned for researchers interested in engaging in meaningful and equitable research collaboration across the so-called North-South divide.

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract:

Our paper addresses the global inequality of access to mobility for researchers. It identifies contradictions between political ideals and bureaucratic barriers, and calls for a transformation of policy institutions to accommodate the goals of fruitful academic cooperation.

Paper long abstract:

It is a truism that most of the policy frameworks and institutional infrastructure for promoting international academic exchange between countries in the Global North and their counterparts in the Global South are skewed in favour of the former. The cross-border movement of people in science and higher education has drawn research interest for decades. However, the definition of international academic mobility and exchange exhibits conceptual and practical contradictions. Our paper examines the discrepancy between the progressive policy discourse towards more egalitarian international academic exchange and the underlying bureaucratic and managerial infrastructure that hinders effective international scholarly collaboration. The paper suggests that the current legacy of policy institutions and practices designed to prevent Southern to North academic exodus or to hinder immigration in general needs to be transformed to reflect an increasingly diverse spectrum of international academic collaboration purposes and traditions. It offers a set of assumptions on international scholarly collaboration and, more broadly, proposes a fresh point of entry for the field of academic mobility to contribute to higher education and migration and mobility studies.