LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE  March 2003

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE March 2003

Subject:

A Gleam of Hope for African Science?

From:

"S. E. Anderson" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:09:45 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (165 lines)

A gleam of hope for African science? (http://www.scidev.net/archives/editorial/comment53.html)

Science policy experts from African countries have proposed a
new 'roadmap' for the future of science on the continent. Their
plan has many strengths, but also faces major challenges. SciDev.Net
readers are invited to comment.

Figures produced last year by UNESCO as part of its regular overview
of the state of world science paint a gloomy picture for Africa.
While support for research and development continues to grow
in many parts of the world  most noticeably within developed
nations  in much of Africa such support has been at best stagnating,
and at worst declining, over the past two decades. Military conflicts,
corrupt or ineffective management, and reductions in public spending
to meet the costs of the 'structural adjustment' required by
external aid donors, have each taken their toll. As a result,
the 'knowledge gap' between rich and poor is widening at precisely
the time it needs to be reduced.

All the more reason, therefore, to welcome an ambitious initiative
to boost support for science and technology across the continent
that was sketched out in Pretoria last week by a group of science
advisers, policy experts and politicians from across the continent
(see 'Roadmap' proposed for science in Africa). The initiative
is being put together by representatives from a group of countries
-most significantly South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt, Senegal and
Nigeria - who are at the heart of planning for the African Union's
New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD). This is a strategy
for promoting the social and economic development of the whole
continent through collaboration on key areas of common interest,
among which science and technology figure prominently on the
agenda.

By describing their initiative as a 'framework' for science and
technology on the continent, the designers of this strategy make
clear that they are  sensibly  drawing lessons from the success
of the European Commission's Framework Programme, a package of
collaborative research programmes that has been put together
every five years since the early 1980s. The money spent through
this programme is used to support a wide range of research that,
directly or indirectly, enhances the objectives of member states
of the European Union at the same time as boosting the competitiveness
of their high-technology industries. Hopefully the African Union
can stimulate its own, embryonic, technological potential in
the same way.

Major obstacles

If it does manage to do so, however, this will be a significant
achievement. For Africa faces several hurdles that are considerably
higher than those in Europe. One is its sheer size, combined
with geographical, cultural and political diversity. Collaboration
is much easier to achieve when such factors are absent. Providing
a unified strategy for a continent that is far from unified itself
would be not far short of miraculous.

Secondly there is the fact that, unlike in Europe, much of the
funding for Africa's own 'framework programme' will need to come
from external sources. In practice, this will mean meeting performance
criteria laid down by potential donor countries (a reflection
of the broader fact that the fate of NEPAD itself rests heavily
on the extent to which African states are seen by the industrialised
world to be dealing effectively with their own recalcitrants,
most notably Zimbabwe).

Related to this  and reflecting the political tensions still
faced on the continent as it comes to terms not only with the
legacies of colonialism but with the dictatorships that so often
followed it  is the need to secure ownership of the science
and technology programme by the people that it is intended to
serve.

Success in the third of these alone will be no mean feat. The
very fact that most of the money will come from the industrialised
north, and on terms approved by such donor nations, means that
there will inevitably be some suspicion, particularly if these
terms are contested as not necessarily in the best interests
of the nations receiving the funding. It was noticeable that
last week's workshop, for example, skirted around sensitive issues
such as intellectual property rights  where the interests of
north and south do not coincide  and stayed well within the
dominant philosophies of globalisation.

A solid agenda

None of this should cast doubt on the value of some of the concrete
measures whose need is now being "acknowledged". It makes sense,
for example, to reinforce what capacity already exists by drawing
individual institutions into 'networks of excellence'. The institutions
linked through such networks can mutually reinforce each other's
activities, ensuring a focusing of scarce resources while at
the same time avoiding unnecessary duplication.

Secondly, the commitment to ensuring that science and technology
are established as a "cross-cutting and multisectoral theme"
within the framework and implementation plans for NEPAD is also
to be applauded. Neither science nor technology can be isolated
drivers of development strategies (a wrong turning that several
countries have taken in the past); both will only be of value
if they can contribute significantly to, and be integrated into,
mainstream development goals.

Thirdly, the new forum of African ministers of science and technology,
and/or presidential sciences advisers, could, at least in principle
(and providing it does not get bogged down in inter-state rivalry)
become a new source of dynamic collaboration, playing a similar
role to the regular meetings of European science ministers that
guide the activities of the European Commission in Brussels.

Forging a democratic technological culture

But if NEPAD's science framework  like NEPAD itself  is going
to succeed, it requires not only the political will of a relatively
small handful of African leaders, or the enthusiasm of their
top advisers, but also broader popular endorsement. This requires
much more than a theoretical demonstration of the benefits of
the framework to the technological programmes of the countries
that participate. It also requires an active commitment to the
framework by those at all levels of society who are intended
to benefit from it.

Europe has certainly learnt this lesson. In its early days, the
European Framework programme came under political fire for being
excessively dominated by the interests of the private sector,
particularly in fields such as information technology and biotechnology.
Over the years, partly in response to such criticism, the programme
has embraced a growing number of social goals, not only in fields
like health and environment research  where the social value
of its results can be easily seen  but also increasingly in
research on controversial areas related to the ethical and environmental
impacts of modern science and technology, as well as efforts
to promote better public understanding of science.

Hopefully NEPAD too will avoid an excessively technocratic agenda,
and accept that one of its goals must be to develop a properly
democratic technological culture within Africa, one that remains
sensitive to the continent's own social and cultural traditions.
The new framework programme will not be the only way of achieving
this; but it certainly needs to be central to such an effort.

Last week's workshop took a step in this direction by proposing
the creation of an 'electronic forum'  in addition to other
meetings and workshops  intended to facilitate dialogue and
"engage all stakeholders to develop a common vision, agenda and
action plan to promote and sustain Africa's scientific and technological
development".

SciDev.Net is keen to play a part in this process. We have launched
a discussion forum in which users of this website are asked to
voice their own opinions about the difficulties facing science
in Africa, and whether NEPAD's proposals are an appropriate response.
You are invited to send us your views, particularly on where
you feel that the main problems lie, and what needs to be done
about them. We have been promised that these will be carefully
considered by the NEPAD secretariat in Pretoria. If you live
in Africa  or care about the state of science on that continent
 now is the time to make your voice heard.

 SciDev.Net 2003

David Dickson
24 February 2003

http://www.scidev.net/archives/editorial/comment53.html

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
May 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager