science policies and cooperation ìn afrìcahorizon.documentation.ird.fr › exl-doc ›...

Starting nearly from scratch in ihe early ]%Os, Africa has experienced an academic boom and an impressive increase of scientists, much of ihe gmwih occurring in the 1970s. Valiant efforts have also been made io build up national research sysiems. But the resulis are farfrom saiis- faciory and ihe condirions under which scientific research is carried oui in Africa today are clearly deteriorating. This siiuation has broughi increasing concern among funding agencies and African decision makers who are now looking for new apprwches and strategies for scientijìc cooperaiion. Following a brief overview of scientific research in Africa, the debaie on African research and ihe evolution ofpolicies supporting science and iechnology for development fmm ihe 1960s onward are reviewed. Donors’siraiegies, for the most part, are to argue for a revision of domestic policies on research management ioward a policy of regional integration and of seleciive support io a limiied number of “centers of excellence.” The questions raised by these new sirategies are examined in the conclusion of ihis article.

Science Policies and Cooperation ìn Afrìca

Trends in the Production and Utilization of Knowledge

JACQUES GAILLARD ORSTOM, France, and George Washington University

The early 1960s saw a veritable explosion in higher education in African countries, followed by a record 9 percent increase in the number of research scientists during the 1970s. In several of these countries, institutional structures for scientific research have emerged and human and finan-

-

Author’s Noie: An earlier version of this article was prepared for $e Forum of Partners, 9-11 September 1991, Pans, and presented under the title “Vers un renouveau des modes de coop6ration scientifique en Afrique.” The article was prepared while the author was a Visiting Scholar at the Center for International Science and Technology Policy, Elliott School of Intemational Affairs, George WashingtonUniversity, and is based on workperformed at L‘Institut Français de Recherche Scientifique pour le D6veloppement en Coop6ration (ORSTOM).

Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, Vol. 14 No. 2, December 1992 212-233 Q 1992 Sage Publications, Inc.

.. .

Gaillard / SCIENCE POLICIES IN AFRICA 213

cia1 resources-although still insufficient by most Western standards-are nevertheless quite substantial. The accumulation of these resources (human, financial, and organizational) has not, however, automatically yielded its full potential in terms of productivity. Other factors, ranging from operating conditions, problems arising from the professional and social status of researchers, the training and reproduction of qualified research personnel to the emergence of socially recognized scientific communities are of prime importance for developing science (Gaillard 1991b).

In addressing the problems of deteriorating conditions under which scientific research is carried out in Africa' and of decreasing levels of productivity, national and international policymakers are looking for new ap- proaches and strategies. Some have suggested the creation of centers of excellence, which could offer more stable and equitable salary scales, promote career development, reduce the ratio of researchers to technicians and support staff, and provide operating grants and support for communications. Given the wide disparity of conditions within African countries, others have proposed a solution based on the hierarchical regional organization of se-

networks, and the creation of regional inter-African research centers? The advocates of intemational centers prefer networks with hierarchical integration and specialized apparatus in already existing structures. Others support the promotion of intemational partnerships3 to strengthen and step up North- South and inter-African collaboration, based on a policy of selective aid to outstanding research staffs and multilateral participation aimed at a cohesive integration of regional, national, and international resources. All these mechanisms are not mutually exclusive and can sometimes be mixed in an integrated strategy. Several specific sub-Saharan support programs and initiatives have also been established, especially for agricultural research:

Following a brief summary of scientific research in Africa (including such factors as resources, results, and major concems), this article reviews the debate on African research and the evolution of support policies for development research as they have been discussed in international conferences from the 1960s onward. To conclude (and to encourage further discussion), I look at some of the questions posed by the new strategies and their implications for scientific research in Africa.

l lected national structures, intensive regional cooperation, project sharing, I

An Overview of Research in Africa'

Independent of the indicators used: it is clear that African scientific research occupies only ii marginal position in world terms. Representing

t-

214 KNOWLELX3E CREATION, DIFFUSION, UTILIZATION

approximately 0.4 percent of the world human’ and financial* resources devoted to scientific and technological (S&n activities, Africa produces approximately 0.3 percent of mainstream scientific production? Although this figure is low, it has risen significantly since the early 1960s.

The potential for research is unevenly distributed among the countries themselves. There is one giant, Nigeria, which has access to approximately one-fourth of Africa’s total number of scientists and engineers and which conducts close to one-half of Africa’s mainstream scientific research. It is followed by Kenya, the scientific production of which is close to one-half Nigeria’s production. Fifteen other medium-size51 African nations have significantly less access to resources, and approximately two-thirds of the remaining countries share a mere one-sixth of all S&T potential. The scope of research is also limited. Little research is being carried out in the basic sciences such as mathematics or in engineering sciences (except agricultural engineering), a little more in social sciences. Heavy emphasis has been placed on agricultural and medical research. In French-speaking African countries, agricultural research and to a lesser extent medical research is carried out in governmental research institutions founded in the colonial period (Gaillard and Waast 1988).

The most highly qualified personnel (in terms of academic qualifications) are generally found in the universities, currently the only institutional sector (with few exceptions) practicing the basic sciences. University authors account for the majority (65%) of scientific papers in Africa during the 1970s (Davis 1983) and late 1980s (Eisemon and Davis forthcoming). The African universities underwent a series of radical transformations during the 1970s and 1980s. Student enrollment skyrocketed, and new departments were being created and progressively installed in the provinces, resulting in a “Bakan- ization” of the universities. Although demand for access to higher education is not likely to decrease,” most African governments will be unable to increase the amount of revenues already devoted to the universities to cope with the increased number of students (World Bank 1988). The low salaries of teachers do not keep pace with living costs and, increasingly, teaching staff take up additional appointments outside the university to supplement their incomes while keeping thëi academic appointments. This situation has resulted in the gradual decline of quality of teaching and of the overall research activities. There is a very real danger that the long-term consequences of these changes may ultimately result in the asphyxiation of university-level scientific research.

The number of Africah scientific publications indexed in the international data banks has increased proportionally to the number of research personnel. One also could argue that there has been more of a tradition to publish in

I ‘

I

. Gaillard I SCIENCE POLICIES IN AFRICA 215

anglophone countries as compared to francophone countries. Yet significant contributions come from the Ivory Coast, Senegal, and Cameroon. In the 1980s, however, productivity started to fall off significantly in a number of countries such as Ghana, Sudan, Uganda, and Ethiopia. Again, the majority of mainstream research can be attributed to Africa's earliest and largest scientific communities: Nigeria and Kenya. African research is also charac- terized by a strong tendency for intra-African and more particularly intrana- tional citation behavior. The trend is particularly strong in Nigeria, where it reflects the inward-looking attitude of the scientific community and its extreme: scientific isolation. It can also be interpreted in a positive way as an important mechanism for the strengthening of linkages among national and regional scientists and the legitimation of work done locally.

There is very little research being carried out in the private sector, but there are important private-sector-funded commodity research institutes that continue to be active research institutes. Qpical examples are the Tea and Coffee Research Institute in Kenya and the Tobacco Research Institute in Zimbabwe. Paradoxically, when it does exist, private research is carried out in countries having the weakest research infrastructures and is almost invari- ably oriented toward engineering (particularly mining engineering in English- speaking Africa) or, to a lesser extent, agricultural research programs linked to large-scale rural development projects. Private research work is also often confidential, unrecorded, and intermittent.

The efforts to increase African research capabilities were accelerated during the 1960s and 1970s. In general, the number of scientists has increased more rapidly than has funding, and levels of grant and growth rates now vary in accordance with the country's size, wealth, and strategies. Independent of the amount of resources available, a number of practical considerations merit consideration. These include the following:

There is a lack of technicians and qualified managers and an excessive number of underqualified workers both at universities and public research institutions. There has been a trend of diminishing funds perresearcher since the late 1970s.

0 The imbalance between human and financial resources has led to another major problem: expenditure on operating existing research infrastructures (e.g., equipment, laboratories, and physical plant) has risen at a slower rate than the cost of upgrading them, resulting in their quasi stagnation or degradation. Research funding is heavily dependent on foreign aid. Domestic funding is mainly used for staff salaries.

0 Research and technical personnel are usually underpaid and obliged to take on supplementary positions to complement their income. In the early 1980s, a Ghanaianxcientist showed me the hens he raises in his backyard. The eggs sold at the local market permitted him to double the income he makes as a university professor (Gaillard 1991b, 43). Even in Kenya, which is better off

216 KNOWLEDGE CREATION, DIFFUSION, UTILIZATION

than many other African countries, "President Moi remarked in 1986 that a primary school-leaver with only one cow can obtain from the sale of its milk a monthly income equivalent to that of a university lecturer!" (Eisemon and Nyamete 1989,Sa). Promotion policies and salary structures reward administrative and managerial functions rather than s_cienWic functions and achievements. As a consequence and paradoxically, administrators are generally selected am0ng thebest-trained scientists, often shortly after obtaining their Ph.D.s abroad (Gaillard 1991b, 57). This situation often makes poor administrators out of good researchers because they have not been trained in management (World Bank 1987). Furthermore, researcher and university salaries are increasingly less competi- tive with managerial positions in the private sector. In many African countries, the difference has been further increased while extemal agencies such as the World Bank required African governments to reduce public expenditures. This has also resulted in an increased intemal "brain drain" toward the private sector as well as external brain drain toward foreign countries.

0 High rates of turnover in research staff undermine attempts to develop a cadre of experienced and highly trained researchers. Tumover rates among researchers are more likely to increase when donor projects are completed (Wessen 1988).

1 Budgeting requirements and procedures, modeled on those of the civil service, are unadapted for research activities." Inadequate classification,'* excessive centralization, and administrative red tape are common. There is very little provision for the relatively low but directly productive costs (such as laboratory chemicals, experimentation, access to field sites). Scientific communications (such as subscriptions to scientific reviews, publication costs, conferences) are no longer guaranteed, are paid for in a manner totally incompatible with serious scientific research, or depend on the allocation of often unpredictable intemational grants.

Research still has very little impact on development. In the field of agriculture, the slight production increase in Africa is not considered to be the result of yield improvement: 80% of the increase in agricultural output between 1961 and 1980 came from the use of more lands, whereas for world production during that period, 75% of the production increase came from yield improvement. The very few studies available show that positive results can be obtained when political leaders, research scientists and well-organized producers cooperate closely (Idachaba 1980; Sene 1985). For example, in Nigeria, significant success has been related to the selection of high-yielding varieties of rice, cotton, and cocoa (Idachaba 1980). The role of the economic environment and social structures have also proven to be decisive. Because of the price of inputs and the difficulty of obtaining credit, for instance, recommendations made, too aloof from the socioeconomic realities, have not been very practical. The amounts of manure that are applied, for instance, are often so far below what research recommends that they skim the "thresh-


old of usefulness.” Furthermore, because data fiom applied research become obsolete very quickly, discontinuity of work can lead to gross inefficiency.

Medical research and health programs can be partly credited with the spectacular 12-year gain in life expectancy (from 36 to 48 years) that Africa registered between 1955 and 1985. Yet, despite the considerable effort made by medical research, the results, reflected in public health, are often disap pointing. The national health capability is concentrated in the main hospitals located in the capital city, leaving little room for clinical research, therapeutic tests, or application work except in difficult, rare cases that are investigated in the university hospitals. Public health derives little benefit. The international pharmaceutical industry has met with considerable success outside of Africa in developing new drugs. But the discontinuity in time and the dispersal in space of national health care facilities result in the use of the same molecules everywhere, which may have side effects or create resistance. Thus discoveries are not keeping up with new challenges. The most significant results come from epidemiological work carried out on diseases fiat may seem commonplace and are etiologically well studied, through local control measures that are organized to combine care and pre~ention.’~ Unfortunately national funds are devoted to running the hospitals and are not available for such programs. Success can be credited essentially to the bi- and qultilateral aid agencies, especially the World Health Organization (WHO).

Research results quickly become obsolete, and prove to be totally ineffec- tive if they do not fit in with a dissemination scheme and a world of innovation that should be sîructurally connected to the world of re~earch.’~ In addition to the lack of resources for scientific research, there is a major obstacle to making African research more relevant to development needs: a lack of clearly defined demand from potential users. Consequently, “African science and technology policies focus more attention on the supply of scientific and technical inputs than on the demand for them” (Eisemon and Davis forthcoming).

The overall situation is far from satisfactory. Ín most countries, the implementation of structural adjustment programs over the last few years has so far failed to improve either resource levels or the state of research infrastructures. Lack of resources, however, does not in itself explain the cyrent problems encountered by scientific research in Africa. Other political, social, cultural, and intellectual factors are essential prerequisites to a sustainable African scientific community (Abiola 199 1; Eisemon 1979; Eisemon and Davis 1991). There are a number‘of other essential conditions that must be met to ensure the viability of research investment. It is not

C ’

218 KNOWLEDGE CREATION, DIFPUSION. UTILIZATION

enough to create new organizations and to train competent scientists and provide them with the necessary resources; they must also be inserted into an intense, dynamic, and socially recognized scientific community (Gaillard 1990,1991b).

The increasing awareness of the importance of social, cultural, and organizational factors affecting the development of scientific activities has been voiced in numerous conferences on science and technology in Africa. As a way of illustration, I summarize in the next section the main issues covered by fourteen of these conferences (Appendix A).

Thirty Years of Scienti@ and Technological Conferences

Since the start of the 1960s, many international con fer en ce^'^ on science and technology have been organized, frequently on the initiative of the United Nations organizations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in particular. Some of these conferences (such as CASTAFRICA I and II) drew members of the scientific and technological community from almost every African country. Many resulted in the formal adoption of ambitious resolutions’6and initiatives, often bearing the name of the host country of the conference (the Lagos Plan, the Dakar Declaration, the Vienna Plan; the Kilimanjaro Declaration, etc.). A certain number of S&T conferences were specifically organized for French-speaking Africa (the Yamoussoukro conference in 1983, Lomé in 1988), whereas others dealt with research organization and management (Paris in 1986, Nairobi in 1988), north-south cooperation (Paris in 1991), and special scientific themes (agricultural research, Dakar in 1990). Others brought “men of science” from all over Africa (Brazzaville in 1987) or a few eminent special- ists (Washington in 1991).

Even though these conferences had a wide range of goals and participants, all echoed similarly predominant concerns. With the passing years, it is possible to identify two major periods during which there was a gradual realization that the creation of effective research structures does not depend only on human and financial resources.

The initial phase, starting in the early 1960s and going through to the end of the 1970s (with the Vienna Conference representing the ideological turning point), was a period marked by optimism verging on euphoria, based on the expectation that S&T development would rapidly and almost automatically lead to corresponding economic and social progress in the developing countries (Des). The first conference o r g a ~ m d in Geneva by the United

Gaillard / SCIENCE POLIClEs IN AFRICA 219

Nations in 1963 was a perfect illustration of the spirit of the times. It was thought that developing countries needed only to import existing technola- gies from industrialized nations to close the technology gap. Discussions were dominated by purely technical considerations, with little attention paid to the realities of acquisition and transfer, social impact and cost, and endogenous development. Even though other themes were discussed, this first wave of conferences was mainly concerned with goals pertaining to human and financial resources (CASTAFEUCA I in 1974, Lagos in 1%4, Yaounde in 1%7). Each country was advised to (1) immediately channel 0.5 percent of its GNP (increasing to 1 percent by 1980) into research and development, and (2) aim for a goal of 200 scientists for every million inhabitants by 1980.'' Despite substantial efforts by the countries to attain the objectives, few African countries ever succeeded in doing so."

In the second phase, optimism gave way to disillusionment and even suspicion as far as Western models were concerned. This feeling was inten- sified by the arrival of the economic crisis and large-scale unemployment, and marked the beginning of a period of more sober realism. At the same time, the growth in environmental awareness led to the conviction that scientific development should be considered in terms of its long-term impact. The implementation of monitoring structures was also envisaged (CASTAFRICA II 1987a, 1987b; Nairobi in 1988). Discussions increasingly centered around the question of research management (Nairobi in 1988, Paris in 1986), the social status and recognition of research scientists, the emergence of regional, national, and intra-African scientific communities, intra- African scientific cooperation, the regionalization of scientific research and the necessity for scientific initiatives of specifically African origin and nature (CASTAFRICA II 1987b)." Means by which the private sector could pull resources into S&T activities were also discussed and methods to create new funding mechanisms proposed (Nkwi 1992):'

A number of organizational initiatives witnessing these trends were also undertaken in the years before and after the CASTAFRICA II conference. The African Academy of Science was created in 1985. The academy launched the multidisciplinary scientific review, Discovery and Innovation in 1989, with an international selection committee. The Pan-African Association for Science and Technology was founded during the ftrst Congress of African Scientists, held in Brazzaville in 1987. Today, the publishing company, Academy Science Publishers (cosponsored by the African Academy of Sciences and the Third World Academy of Sciences) already has an impressive list of published titles. The African Academy of Sciences is alsocurrently studying the possibility to create an African Foundation for Research and

i

2'20 KNOWLEDGE CREATION, DIFFUSION, UTILIZATION

Deyelopment that would raise funds from banks, industries, entrepreneurs, and governments. The African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF) was created in 1991 by African governments and donors to build and strengthen indigenous c,apacities in economic policy analysis and development management in sub-Saharan Africa (ACBF 1992).

Changing research assistance policies were naturally influenced by these discussions and by the participation of the decision makers themselves. Decisive innovations began to appear in the early 1970s but these policies were also sometimes marked by the impact of long-standing attitudes.

.

Science and Technology Policies for Development

The major industrialized nations possessed a widely varying range of mechanisms and organizations promoting international S&T cooperation. They were largely influenced by their respective historical and domestic traditions?' Countries such as France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, and, to a lesser extent, Belgium and Portugal shared a common tradition of scientific and technological aid to developing countries. Countries without a history of colonialism, such as Canada, Sweden, and Australia, set up specialized, centralized structures to facilitate scientific and technological cooperation with the developing countries.u Other countries, such as the United States and West Germany, inspired by their respective political and administrative organizations, implemented centralized institutions operabng through relatively decentralized mechanisms.

Thus, on a country-to-country basis, there existed a series of structures and mechanisms (at varying levels of centralization or decentralization) to aid in the development of scientific research, including the creation of organizations specialized in tropical research, a widening participation of the national scientific community, and the strengthening of bilateral and/or multilateral activity.

Beyond the apparent diversity of these structures and mechanisms, there are a number of convergent trends toward increased domestic and intemational and a progressive internationalization of policie^?^ Similarly, there is increasing consensus on the overall objectives of S&T aid to developing countries. Until the end of the 1960s, the industrialized nations of the north-had been drawing mainly on their own human and financial resources to solve a number of specific problems in the developing countries. There was often a lack of unanimity about which countries should be assisted, which population segments should be targeted, and what type of research to promote. Since then, prevailing ideology has stressed the backing of "endog-


enous scientific and technological skills” in harmony with “social and cultural traditions” and the “conditions relative to each developing country” as top-level priorities, while emphasizing the need to meet “basic and essential needs.”25 The 1970s were the decade of the “integrated rural development project” particularly in low-income developing countries.

Yet it was also during the 1970s that a debate took place between the partisans of policies concentrating on “poverty reduction and equity” on one side and the partisans of “efficiency” on the other side. From 1980 on, the World Bank, stridently defending the latter position, developed new program loans-the so-called Structural Adjustment Prograhx-which were condi- tional on the implementation of policy measures involving privatization and reduction of state budgets. One of the direct consequences has been the dramatic reduction of S&T budgets in many African countries.

Even more recently, partly due to the globalization of world economic interdependencez6 and the internalization of S&T issues, the main donors seem to converge on the way that research collaboration should be organized. Their support is now expected to generate a new collaborative relationship that benefits both sides.” Many industrialized nations also recognize that aiding research in collaboration and in partnership with developing countries is now one of the principal means of enabling these countries-and especially the African countries-to contribute to the emergence of national scientific communities as well as their partial integration to the international scientific community. Thus the long-standing concept of scientific w d technological assistance, often limited (and still limited in certain cases) to substitution research, is progressively giving way to genuine S&T cooperation in partnership with domestic scientific communities. The increased emphasis on training is also another indicator of more genuine scientific cooperation. Several concise examples Óf the institutional‘ mechanisms implemented to encourage and support north-south partnerships are presented in Appendix B. Most of these mechanisms were created or strengthened following the UN Conference on Science and Technology (UN 1979), during which the concept of S&T cooperation between developed and developing countries was strongly supported by the developing countries representatives. It would be useful to assess the impact of the different forms of partnership: Which criteria should govern the choice of potential partners? What are the respective advantages and drawbacks of bipartite (north-south) partnership-based research, and the tripartite partnership configurations (north-north-south and south-south-north)?

Finally, the recent rapidly shifting political environment has radically transformed the East-West balance of power, putting an unexpected end to the cold war. In the United States, for example, aid was clearly justified on

.

222 KNOWLEDGE CREATION, DIFWSION, UTILIZATION

the grounds that Third World countries were under the constant threat of subversion and communism (Berg and Gordon 1989). Will the end of the Cold War signal a decline in interest among the main donors-and particularly the United States and Europe-for the Third World in general and Africa in particular? Although it might be too early to give a definite answer to this question, one can already observe signs of shift of interest toward Eastem Europe and the new emerging Commonwealth of Independent States. Even if Africa enjoys a certain protection through specific earmarked programs, the overall aid resources are not likely to increase.

Many industrialized nations possess a wide range of structures for directly financing domestic research in the developing countries. In France,% genuine partnership activity with researchers in developing countries emerged only through the geographic reorientation of its program of scientific cooperation with Latin America and Asia. Heavily committed to supporting existing research structures that are established outside its own territory (and particularly in Africa), France does not currently make a substantial contribution to the direct funding of either research staffs or research structures in the developing countries. Partnerships can become really effective only when African researchers have access to adequate resources (salaries, equipment, operating conditions). In response to this problem, France’s Ministry of Cooperation proposed a program and offered funds to help African researchers collaborate with French scientists while also promoting the setup of a more ambitious intemational mechanism.29 According to Pujolle (1991),

France is seeking donors to collectively finance the creation of an intemational foundation to seek funding for sustainable research in Africa. Directed by a body of reputable members of the intemational scientific community, the foundation will actively support common themes and Pan-African projects chosen and negotiated by a non-African scientific community. This implies that the various African governments accept that a certain portion of the financial aid granted for this program will be administrated by non-govemment sources. In addition, governments must also agree to African researchers freely circulating, producing and publishing their results subject to stringent assess- ment and selection procedures. This of course implies a revision of existing domestic policies on research management towards a policy of regional integration. (p. 21)

Other donors, such as the International Development Research Center (IDRC), recognize that most African countries lack sufficient resources to support long-term national research programs and have advocated the concentration of financial aid to selected “target establishments,” on the condi- tion that “all parts of the country and its organizations reap some of the benefit” (“2 1989). The IDRC funding policy entails granting long-term financial assistance (ten to fifteen years) to these “target groups,)’ together

Gaillard I SCIENCE POLICIES IN AFRICA 223

with various grants aimed at supplementing salaries, equipment purchase, professional training, sabbaticals, and so forth (IDRC 1989). These revised strategies are also dictated by reduced budget resources. Thus “doing fewer things in fewer countries on a more long term basis, but doing them better” has become a leitmotif in most aid organizations?’

These new donor strategies presuppose changes in domestic and international policies, and entail special conditions to ensure overall advantages for each African country participating in the program. By way of conclusion and to encourage further discussion, I will briefly examine some of the questions raised by these new strategies.

Conclusion

The aid granted by the majority of donor organizations for the promotion of research and development in Africa is currently concentrated in just a few countries and a small number of scientific institutions?l Althoughthirty-eight African countries (out of forty-five potential beneficiaries) receive financial support from the IDRC, ten of these countries accounted for a full 7 1 percent of the total grants provided?’ Aid granted by the IDRC was also concentrated in a relatively limited number of scientific organizations. Approximately one-quarter went to only 8 of the 190 domestic organizations receiving such grants.33 Regular comparisons reveal that concentrations of this type are common to the majority of donor organizations. This concentration is not deliberately planned but rather the result of the blind process that depends mainly on the selection of tenders submitted to these same agencies, more often than not reflecting the policies and preferences of the donors themselves rather than those of the beneficiaries. It is nevertheless possible to advance the hypothesis (which remains to be verified) that the structures receiving the lion’s share of available funding are also the most dynamic, and probably generate the best output in terms of quality.

The renewal of the donors’ strategies, as discussed in this article, will only reinforce (in a more coherent form) the concentration of aid to a chosen number of beneficiaries. Clearly, there is a need for improved discussion between donors and recipient institutions and govemments, to avoid a number of problems, including the capacity to absorb this aid in an efficient way, the excessive number of task forces and individual visits for an excessive variety of aid programs and small prdjects, and the quasi impossibility of integrating aid programs into national S&T policies and financial administration structures. The particular situation of the universities and the risk of their progressive isolation from the rest of the research community should

t

224 KNOWLEDGE CREATION, DIFFUSION, UTILJZATION

also be seriously considered. According to Donald Ekong, secretary general of the Association of African Universities (MU), “Of all the aspects of university functions it is the research and graduate education that have been most damaged” by the ongoing economic crisis (Holden 1992,1628). Con- fronted by the problem of the gradual strangling of university-based research, a number of African countries have opted for the founding of many more specialized research institutions outside the pivershies. Accordingly, there is an increasing breach between the academic world, isolating itself from ongoing scientific activities, and the public research centers, which do not undertake research training. The creation of transnational centers would serve only to accentuate this trend. The most highly qualified and experienced researchers are to be found in the universities. Moreover, it is the universities that enjby the greatest amount of freedom to undertake basic and strategic research in areas such as health, environmental studies, the social sciences, and agriculture (Okigbo 1991). The choice and reinforcement of transnational centers should therefore include recognition of the potentially vital role to be played by universities, particularly in the reproduction of highly needed competent researchers.

African policymakers and donors could get inspiration from the Asian experience, where a selected number of postgraduate studies departments have been identified to become centers of advanced studies. A number of centers of advanced studies such as a “center of excellence” for economic and social research in the Ivory Coast already exist in Africa, but there are too few. Keeping these centers within universities would make it possible to improve the quality of research and, at the same time, keep a link with teaching activities through postgraduate training. Partnership-based research could also help “to reconcile” research and higher education by reviving the tradition of university research and bringing course content more into line with current needs. It should also be possible to compensate partially for the lack of researchers and to contribute to the training needs of African researchers by having undergraduates participate in the research work.34

These centers could also have a regional mandate. A few have been established recently such as the African Regional Postgraduate Program in Insect Science in Nairobi. But without the necessary back-up mechanisms, the creation of such transnational centers could fragment African research, dividing it into two subsystems: one of which would be supported because it would accommodate “transnational centers” and “target organizations,” the other of which would become totally isolated from mainstream research. Such a fast subsystem would probably include Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Senegal, the Ivory Coast, Cameroon, and Zimbabwe. Tanzania, Ghana, and the Sudan could also be added to the list if this new policy would give them


a second chance. It is essential to develop mechanisms of scientific cooperation that transcend national boundaries, but in doing so, we must not lose sight of the legitimate desire and of the necessity for each country to frame its own S&T policies. No global or regional strategy can become truly productive unless it leans on capable national structures and clearly defined S&T policy at the national level. However, if most governments in sub- Saharan Africa are “fully aware of the important role that S&T must play in their countries’ development” (mvESCO 1987), very few governments have developed policies clearly defining that role. Based on UNESCO’s model, central institutions for S&T policies have been established in many countries, but “they tend to have responsibility without authority: their statutes give them a broad mandate without conferring upon them the power or resources they need to act” (Vitta 1990, 1478). Clearly, these institutions would need to be given more authority and resources. , In defining the support mechanisms for partnership-based research, it should also be kept in mind that scientific collaboration tends to encourage the mobility of researchers and increases the potential risks of brain drain. The experience of the International Foundation for Science (IFS) showed that these risks can be significantly reduced by targeting research funds toward researchers who are at least minimally integrated within national research struct~res?~ Providing complementary salaries to African researchers within the context of a defined program is preferable to providing the overall salaries of researchers not attached to national systems. Similarly, appreciable but directly productive costs (laboratory chemicals, experimentation, or access to field sites) and scientific socialization (subscriptions, publications, or conferences) are not necessarily high, providing that suitable and flexible support mechanisms that directly benefit the researchers themselves are implemented.

More discussion between the “donor” countries and the African countries could perhaps lead to the work‘s being shared in such a way as to simulta- neously influence both systems (national and regional). By way of illustration, the “small” grants such as those awarded by the IFS could be more appropriately targeted for domestic research, whereas the transnational centers requiring much greater amounts are more likely to have donors such as European donors, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), IDRC, and the Swedish Agency for Research Cooperation with Developing Countries (SAREC). Similarly, partnership-based research and research network establishment could be financed in such a way as to encourage improved integration of national and regional activities. Already existing and well-managed regional programs such as the Institut du Sahel (INSAH) and the Southern African Center for Cooperation in Agricultural Research

226 KNOWLEDGE CREATION, DIFFUSION. UTILIZATION

(SACCAR) should also bg strengthened. Although the suggested ingredients could partly compensate for weak national institutional setup, they could never replace the African governments themselves assessing the importance of S&T activities in their national priorities and taking the necessary steps to support them.

Despite a sometimes impressive development of their research capacities since the early 196Os, most African countries have yet to develop dynamic and socially recognized national scientific communities and to strengthen their national research systems for addressing their development problems. Developing and sustaining these scientific communities would require greater commitments from national governments. Given the prevalent economic situation, however, few African govemments will be able to raise significant and sustainable funding for S&T activities in the near future, and the private sector is not likely to bring the necessary complementary support. Thus it will be necessary, for many years to come, to continue to call on the international donor community with the inherent risk that the development of S&T activities in Africa will continue to be too closely determined by donor policies. New dialogue and cooperative mechanisms should therefore be established to avoid this risk In the domain of partnership research, a charter of responsibilities could be defined between the researchers in the north and in the south to ensure that each partner is associated in the different phases of the cooperation from project design and definition to the publication and implementation of the results. With the end of the Cold War and the newly emerging political climate, the donor community could also accept to entrust an international fund, independent from donors’ governments, that would gather their contributions and channel them in a better-coordinated way to more autonomous national and regional institutions in concert with national S&T policy bodies. The governance of such an international fund or foundation could be entrusted to the African Academy of Sciences or a similar legitimate African institution.

I

Appendi A Some Main Conferences on Science

in Developing Countries and in Africa

1963-United Nations Conference on the Application of Science and Technology to the Development of Less Developed Countries, Geneva

19644ntemational Conference on the Organization of Research and Training in Africa in Relation to the Study, Conservation and Utilization of National Re- sources, 28 July to 6 August, Lagos, Nigeria


19674ymposium on Science Policy and Research Administration in Africa, 10-21 July, Yaounde, Cameroon

1974-(CASTAFRICA I) Conference of Ministers of African Member States Re- sponsible for the Application of Science and Technology to Development, 21-30 January, Dakar, Senegal

1979-United Nations Conference on Science and Technology for Development, 20-31 August, Vienna, Austria

1983-Conf6rence des ministres de la recherche scientifique et de l’enseigenement su@rieur, 17-22 October, Yamoussoukro, Côte d’Ivoire (organized by ACCT) (ACCT 1983% 1983b)

1986S6minaire sur les choix strat6giques d’une politique de recherche pour le d6veloppement, 22-26 September, Paris (organized by IIAPMRT/MINICOOP with support from UNESCO)

1987-Premier congrhs des hommes de science en Afrique, 25-30 June, Brazzaville 1987-(CASTAFRICA II) Second Conference of Ministers of African Member States

Responsible for the Application of Science and Technology to Development, 6-15 July, Arusha, Tanzania

1988-Colloque des directeurs nationaux de la recherche scientifique, 17-20 Febru- ary, Lo” Benin (organized by CBRST with support from IDRC)

1988-Consultation on the Management of Science for Development in Africa, 2 1-24 November, Nairobi, Kenya (organized by the African Academy of Sciences)

1990-JournQs de rbflexion de Dakar: Le point sur la recherche agricole en Afrique, 28-30 June, Dakar, Senegal (organized by ISRA) (ISRA 1990)

1991-Symposium on Science in Africa (Achievements and Prospects), 15 February, Washington, DC (organized by the American Association for the Advancement of Science)

1991-Forum des Partenaires: Les Conditions d’une recherche durable en Afrique au sud du Sahara, 9-11 September, Paris, France (organized by ORSTOM) (OR- STOM 1991)

Appendix B Some Institutional Mechanisms to Support

South-North Scientific Partnership

In Cunada, scientific partnerships with scientists in the south is one of the main objectives behind the creation of the Intemational Development Research Center (IDRC) in 1970. Canadian academics have also considerably increased their scientific collaborations with developing countries scientists during the last twenty years. To coordinate these activities better, an International Development Secre- tariat was established in 1978 as part of the Canadian Association of Universities and Colleges. Cooperative (Canada-South) programs of research have been em- phasized at IDRC since 1980, following the UNCSTD conference (UN 1979).

0 This is also very much the case in Sweden, with the creation of the Swedish Agency for Research Cuoperation with Developing Countries (SAREC) in 1975. One of the four main programs of SAREC is aimed at strengthening research collaborations between Swedish scientists and institutions and counterparts in the developing world. SAREC is also promoting south-south partnerships through a special


collaborative program. Regional research programs in Latin America and in Africa have also received SAREC’s support.

0 In the United States, there was an institutionalization of partnership research at the end of the 1970s with the inception of the Collaborative Research Support Programs (CRSPs), the aim of which is to promote interdisciplinary research programs in collaboration with Thi i World countries. The Office of the Science Advisor of USAID created in 1981 is also managing a granting program (Program in Science and Technology Cooperation) for the benefit of Third World and U.S. scientists working in collaboration on innovative research programs. The Association des Universit6s partiellement ou entihrement de langue française (AUPELF), established in Montreul in 1%1, is aiming at mobilizing scientists in French-speaking universities to “promote a scientific co-development in a partnership spirit.” The Science and Technology for Development (STD) program of the European Community, established in 1982 is promoting scientific collaboration between European and Third World scientists in the areas of agriculture and health. In Frunce, a number of mechanisms to promote research partnership between French and Third World scientists have been implemented during the 1980s. They include researeh training fellowships, training-insertion agreements, collaborative grants, and visiting fellowships. The DANIDA program for Enhancement of Research Capacity in Developing Countries (ENRECA) was established in Delwtark in 1990. It aims at promoting collaborative work between Danish and Third World scientists as well as contrib- uting to the strengthening of national research institutions in the Thiid World.

Notes

1. For the purpose ofthis article, Africa denotes all countries south of the Sahara, excluding the Republic of South Africa.

2. Regional cooperation is not a new phenomenon in the African region. In colonial times, several regional centers were established in the main ecological zones by the French. Anumber of regional institutions were also established by the British in the East African Community in the 1940s and 1950s, as well as in West Africa. Shortly after independence, most of these regional institutions were dissolved but the establishment of the Organization of African Unity also led to the reemergence of cooperative activities in science and technology (S&T).

3. On the achievements, problems, and prospects of international partnership see Gaillard, Schlemmer, and Waast (1992).

4. For example, the Special Programme for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR), the African Capacity Building Initiative (ACBI) and the Global Coalition for Africa ( N A ) incorporating ACBI and SPAAR and directing “attention to the need for a new partnership amongst African leaders, international donors, the private sector and NGOs in addressing the fundamental challenges facing Africabeyond the medium term” (SPAAR 1991).

5. This section leans heavily on Gaillard and Waast (1992). 6. National statistics are often unverified, fquently outdated, or in incomplete or nonuni-

form series. The sources, nevertheless, provided coherent aggregates, corresponding orders of magnitude, and clear trends. Principal sources are United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), bilateral and multilateral donor organizations (by sector or

b


target country, and in the field of agricultural research ISNAR [Intemational Service for National Agricultural Research] and the FAO [Food and Agricultural Research]), and various papers from scientometric and sociological science soutces (generally more reliable).

7. Human resources are defined hexe as number of full-time equivalent scientists and engineers active in S&T activities.

8. Financial wsoumes are defined as total S&T budget including national and foreign sources.

9. Measuring scientific production in developing countries, and in Africa in particular, is problematic. Mainstram scientific production is defined as the most widely visible, consulted, used, and cited publications. Several data.bases record articles appearing in the wealth of scientific publications they scan. For measuring mainstream science, the most widely used data base is the Science Citation Index (SCI) developed by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). It is not my intention to enter into the debate on the relative merits of these data bases here. I have done that elsewhere (Gaillard 1992). It is nevertheless important to realize that they store “major” and “mainstream” scientific information that, for the main part, has appearedin joumals published in the Northem Hemisphere. Almost 50 percent of all African research reports are publishedinlocal scientific joumals that are not listedin international data bases. Althoughthese data bases tend to present a biased view of African research, indicators appear to confirm the levels of general scientific activity. For further information on the relevance of these data bases and scientific indicators in general for developing countries see Moravcsik (1988) and Arvanitis and Gaillard (1992).

10. According to King (1989, as cited in Eisemon and Davis 1991), certain African countries appear to be on the verge of huge expansion of their universities. Kenya, for example, may face a tenfold increase in university admissions between 1985 and 2000.

11. This is all too often characteristic of the budgetary procedures used by foreign donors. 12. One of the continent’s leading hematologists said that his main problem was importing

certain vital reagents that are very rarely used. They are difficult to identify in the customs’ nomenclature, and are valued 100 times higher than common laboratory products. The institute accountants and the public authorities, who issue the import licenses. do not accept or understand this situation.

13. A study on Algeria (Waast 1981) reports a drop in infant mortality h m 12.5 percent to 4.5 percent in five years following the sustained implementation of a vaccination-vitaminization- water control program backed by a care and prevention network

14. From this point of view, medical research is in the best position because its research scientists are often also practitioners or service directors. Epidemiological research is not caught in a relay role because care and prevention are not separate activities. Agricultural research is less fortunate, mainly because the producers are less organized and the system designed to provide supervision for the areas is not all it should be. In other fields, research is expected to produce turnkey consumer products rather than to respond to local, social needs.

15. A number of national conferences were also organized but space does not permit me to present the complete list. One of the most recent, organized by theAcad6mie Malgache was held in Antananarivo, Madagascar (2-12 April 1991) on the theme “Research, a Determining Factor for Development.”

16. CASTAFRICA I adopted 31 recommendations in such areas as necessary financial and human resources, the status of researchers, an inventory of research potential, regional cooperation, the mobility of African scientific personnel, and so on.

17. It should be remembered that even higher levels were set for Latin America (400) and Asia (380).


18. Most African countries currently allot just over 0.2 percent of their GNP to research and development.

19. This imperative is predominant in a n t publications from African authors: see Odhiamb (1991), Chetsanga (1991), and Abiola (1991).

20. The Lagos Plan of Action called in 1980 for the establishment of National Science and Technology Development Funds (NSTDn and the provision of fiscal and financial incentives to private industries for investing in S&T.

21. See Organization for Economic Development (OECD) (1985). 22. Canada created the International Development Research Center (TDRC) in 1970. The

Swedish Agency for Scientific Cooperation with Developing Countries (SAREC) was founded in 1975, and the Australian Centre for Intemational Agricultural Research (ACIAR) was created in 1981.

23. This situation is illustrated by the recent creation of a number of special programs for scientific activities, particularly in the field of agricultural research. This is the case for SPAAR, created in 1985.

24. The late 1960s through the 1970s was a period of substantial increase (in relative and absolute terms) of multilateral programs. Yet, with regard to funding, it appears that the notion of promoting the “coalition” of existing resources hasgainedground over the proposal to create a single fund for S&T formulated during the 1979 Vienna Conference (United Nations 1991).

25. These principles were reaffmed during the 1979 Vienna Conference on Science and Technology.

26. It may also be due to the necessity to find new justifications to counteract the “aid fatigue” as experienced in a number of countries.

27. Aid as a means of promoting “mutual interests” is, however, not a new concept. Thus close to seventy years ago, Lord Milner, the British Colonial Secretary from 1919 to 1921, developed this argument in an article published in the Observer in 1923 (quoted in Drummond 1974,40).

28. For additional information on the French system, see Gaillard ( I s l a ) . 29. Since the early 1980s. MRT’s (MinisBre de la Recherche et de la Technologie)

Department ofhvelopment Research alsoputout tendersinviting French scientists tocooperate more fully with their partners in the Southern Hemisphere, with the goal of encouraging the overall participation of the French scientific community rather than just specialized institutions such as the ORSTOM, CIRAD (Centre de Coophtion Intemationale en Recherche Agrono- mique pour le Mveloppement), or IPOM (Institut Pasteur Outre Mer).

30. See, for example, the Management Action Plan of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID 1990) and the Strategic Plan of the IDRC (1991).

3 1. This situation also exists in other continents. There is also a concentration in certain large areas of research (pincipally agriculture and health) as defined by the donor nations of the Northern Hemisphere.

32. In descending order of the amount g r a n e Kenya, Tanzania, Senegal.Ethiopia, Nigeria, SierraLeone, Mali, Zimbabwe, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon (Cameroon shares tenth place with the Ivory Coast in terms of support for national research centers). The repartition of IDRC support in Africa may, however, be partly biased given the location of its regional centers in Kenya and Senegal.

33. In descending order of the amount granted. Nairobi University, the University of Dar es Salaam, Sierra Leone University, the National University of the Ivory Coast, Lesotho National University,theUniversity of Addis Ababa,theEthiopianInstituteofAgriculture, mdthe Sokoine University of Tanzania.


34. This approach was successfully tried out by the MRSTD (Minist2re de la Recherche et de la Science et de la Technologie pour le D&eIoppement)/ORSTOM combined research team based at Tulkar University, Madagascar, which set up a partnership experiment (including research training, personnel training, and joint publishing).

35. In 1985,95 percent of beneficiaries were still active within their respective domestic scientific communities, sixteen years after the fust grants were distributed.

References

Abiola, I. 1991. The African scholar: Is black Africa entering the dark ages of scholarship? Transition 2126-69.

African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF). 1992. Strategy and indicative work program, 192-1995. Harare, Zimbabwe: ACBF.

Agence de Coophtion Culturelle et Technique ( A O . 1983a. Confkrence des ministres de la recherche scientifique et de l'enseignement sup6rieur: Rapport de la confkrence, 17-22 November.

, 1983b. Conf6rence des ministres de la recherche scientifique et de l'enseignement supkrieur: Suivi de la conf6rence, 17-22 November.

Arvanitis, R., and J. Gaillard, eds. 1992. Scienfijic indicators for developing countries. Proceed- ings of the International Conference on Scientific Indicators for Developing Countries, UNESCO, Paris, 15-19 October 1990. Paris: Editions de I'ORSTOM.

Berg, R. J., and D. F. Gordon. 1989. Introduction and overview. In Coopemtion for intentational development: The United States and the Third World in the 1990s, edited by R. J. Berg and D. F. Gordon, 1-17, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

CASTAFRICA II. 1987a Coop6ration scientifique et technologique intra-africaine et inter- figionale. SG87KASTAFRICA IVREF.8. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.

Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. Chetsanga, C. J. 1991. Science and technology in Africa: Strategies for continued success. In

Science in Africa, 147-55. Washington, Dc: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Davis, C. H. 1983. Institutional sectors of "mainstream" science production in subsaharan Africa, 1970-1979 A quantitative analysis. Scientometrics 5163-75.

Drummond, I. M. 1974. British economic policy and the empire, 1919-39. London: Allen & Unwin.

Eisemon, T. O. 1979. The implantation of science in Nigeria and Kenya Minerva 12 (4): 504-26. Eisemon, T. O., and C. H. Davis. 1991. Can the quality of scientific training and research in

Africa be improved? Minerva 29:21-26. .1992. Universities and scientific research capacity in Africa and Asia. Journal ofAfrican

and Asian Studies 27 (1/2): 69-94. Eisemon, T. O., and A. Nyamete. 1989. Schooling and agricultural productivity in Kenya.

Journal of East African Research and Development 18 winter): 52. Gaillard, J. 1990. La science du Tiers-Monde entre deux mondes: Science nationale ou science

internationale? Quelques r6flexions et implications politiques. Social Sciences Information

- .1987b. Pour une renaissance scientifique de l'Afrique. SC-B7/CASTAFfUCA II/REF.7.

29 (3): 655-75.

i_ I

1.

232 KNOWLEDGE: CREATION, DIFFUSION, UTILIZATION

.1991a. Les politiques d'aide B la recherche pour le d6veloppement: De l'assistance B la coop6ration scientifique et technique? (Le cas de la France). Cahiers des sciences humaines de I'ORSTOM 26 (3): 405-25.

.1991b. Scientists in the third world. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. -. 1992. Use of publication lists to study scientific production and strategies of scientists

in developing countries. Scientometrics 23 (1): 57-73. Gaillard, J., B. Schlemmer, and R. Waast. 1992. De l'assistance technique B un partenariat

nord-sud en Afrique: I'exp6rience &ente d'organismes et de programmes europ%ns. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Canadian Association for African Studies, Mon- treal, May.

Gaillard, J.. and R. Waast. 1988. La recherche scientifique en Afrique. Afrique Contemporaine

-. 1992. The uphill emergence of scientific communities in Africa. Journal of Asian and

Holden, C. 1992. Higher education starving in Africa. Science 256:1628. Idachaba, E S. 1980. Agricultural researchpolicy in Nigeria. IFPRI (Intemational Food Policy

Research Institute) research report No. 17. Washington, Dc: IFPRI. Institut Stnbgalais de Recherche Agronomique (ISRA). 1990. Lepoint sur la recherche agricole

en Afrique. Actes des journees de dflexions de Dakar, 28-30 June. Dakar: ISM. International Development Research Center (IDRC). 1989. Stmtegic choices for sub-sahuran

Africa. Ottawa: IDRC. -. 1991. Empowerment through knowledge: The strategy of the International Develop-

ment Research Center. Ottawa: IDRC. LOME. 1988. Rapports nationaux, colloque des directeurs M~~OMUX de la recherche scientifique,

17-20 February. Moravcsik, M. J. 1988. The coverage of science in the Third World The"Philade1phiaprogram."

In Infometries 87B8, edited by L. Egghe and R. Rousseau, 147-55. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Nkwi, P. N. 1992. Funding of research in Africa. Paper presented at the 1992 annual meeting of

the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Chicago, February. Odhiambo. T. R. 1991. Three decades of science: Quantum achievements and the context of

future advancement. In Science in Africa, 1-11. Washington, Dc. American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1985. Scientific and technotogical coopemtion with developing countries. Paris: OECD

Okigbo, B. N. 1991. Agricultural research for sustainable development in Africa: Building institutional capabilities. In Science in Africa. 77-101. Washington, Dc: American Associ- ation for the Advancement of Science.

ORSTOM. 1991. Fonun des Pufienaires: Les conditions d'une recherche durable en Afrique au sud du Sahara. Papis: ORSTOM.

Pujolle, T. 1991. Recherche: l'espoir au fond de la crise. Echanges 6:21, Sene, D. 1985. fitude de l'impact de la recherche agronomique sur le dheloppement agricole

au Sbntgal. Paris: Centre de Coo@ration Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le DBveloppemnt.

Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR). 1991. Nelfth SPAAR plenary session, 4-5 December, Washington, De.

UnitedNations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 1974. Ldl science et Ia technologie au service du développement en Afrique. Report No. 35. Paris: UNESCO.

.1987. Comparative study on the national science and technology pol icy-d ing bodies in the countries of Eustem and Southern Africa. Paris: UNESCO.

148:3-30.

African Studies 27 (ID): 41-68.

Gaillard /SCIENCE POLICIES IN AFXICA 233

United Nations (UN). 1979. The Kenna programme of action. New York UN. .1991. Report to intergovernmental committee on science and technology for develop-

ment. UN Advisory Committee on Science and Technology for Development. New York UN.

U.S. Agency for Intemational Development ( U S A D ) . 1990. Manugemnt action plan. Wash- ington, Dc: USAID.

Vitta, F! B. 1990. Technology policy in sub-saharan Africa: Why the dream remains unfulfìlled? Wdrld Development 18 (11): 1471-80.

Waast, R. 1981. Port& et limite d’une action integr& de soin-fivention dans la lutte contre la morbidi&mortalitr? infantiles. Cahiers de l’Aménagement du territoire (Alger) 748-76.

Wessen, R D. 1988. Causes and impacts of tumover of research scientists within the Senegalese Agricultural Research Institute: 198 1-1987. MSc diss., Department of Agricultural Econom- ics, Michigan State University, East Lansing.

World Bank. 1987. Special program for Ajìican agricultural research: Guidelines for strengthening national agricultural research systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, Dc: World Bank.

. 1988. Education in sub-saharan Africa: Policies for djustment, revitalization, and expansion. Washington, Dc: World Bank.

JACQUES GAlLL4RD is Senior Researcher at the Institut Français de Recherche Scientifique pour le Développement en Coopération (ORSTOM), 213 rue Lufqette, 75480 Paris céda 10, France. Fmm 1975 to 1985, he worked as scientific secretary of the Intemational Foumixtion for Science. During the 1992-1993 academic year; he is Visiting Fellow at the Center for Intemational Science and Technology Policy, George Wmhington University. His most recent book is Scientists in the Third World (Lexington: University Press of Kentu&, 1991).

science policies and cooperation ìn afrìcahorizon.documentation.ird.fr › exl-doc ›...

Documents