CENTRES OF EXCELLENCE AND AFRICAN RESEARCH

1. CENTRES OF EXCELLENCE AND AFRICAN RESEARCH Anshu Padayachee, David Woods and Paulos Chanie SANTRUST, Durban, South Africa and OSSREA , Ethiopia

2. The rationale for COE’s • To compete globally and to contribute to the knowledge economy • Enhance and improve research • Build capacity • Attract and retain excellent researchers • Develop national and international collaborative research networks • Overcome disciplinary and institutional barriers which hinder interdisciplinary collaborative research • Enhance scientific, economic and social development • Produce policy relevant outputs

3. AFRICAN INITIATIVES • Since the 1960s – several efforts by African States to Building national R & D institutions and Develop into CoE’s • Not been successful.– no relevance or impact on economic development, poor choice of short term projects, insufficient funding • 2006 AU/NEPAD Africa’s Science & Technology Consolidated Plan of Action for Knowledge Production, Capacity Building & Technological Innovation - Initiatives • Bioscience Facility for E & C Africa at International Livestock R I, Nairobi • Square Kilometre Array • Planned – African Laser Centre, • Africa institute of Space Science

4. African initiatives continued…… • 2008 – 32 African network for drugs and diagnostic innovation(ANDI) CoE’s in Health Sciences (4 North Africa, 5 West Africa, 6 East Africa, 2 CentralAfr15 Southern Africa) • Problems – Lack of collaboration within Africa and internationally, lack of funding

5. The Pan-African University (PAU) The African Union Council via the establishment of the PAU initiative : Sought to: • Stimulate fundamental & applied research of the highest quality in areas critical to African technical, economic & social development • Promote integration of African scientists, academic staff, students and Diaspora • Position African HE as a driver for social and economic development and attainment of Africa’s collective vision.

6. The 5 research areas selected to achieve these objectives The 5 research areas and institutions that were to be resourced were selected as follows: • Water & energy – University of Algeria • Life & earth science – University of Ibadan, Nigeria • Space science for telecommunication - ? • Basic sciences, technology & innovation – Jomo Kenyatta University, Kenya • Governance, humanities and social sciences – University of Yaounde II, Cameroon NOTE: ONLY ONE IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES It was intended that each PAUI was to be linked to a network of 10 PAU Centres – and in turn each PAUI was to partner with a lead thematic partner(LTP) NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED

7. Lead Thematic Partner (LTP) Each PAUI should be partnered by a LTP LTP expected to: • Contribute financially to the PAUI • Link PAU Centres in the home country and globally • Provide the PAUI with research equipment • Mobilise other funders to support the PAUI • Participate in the governance of the PAUI Sweden via Sida is the LTP for the Cameroon PAUI

8. Governance/Organisation of PAU • PAU Council – academics, community leaders, representatives of regional economic communities, industry • PAU Senate – Rector, 5 PAUI Directors, LTP • PAU Rectorate • LTP establishes Board of Directors – Chair PAU President, PAUI Director, Regional Hub Leaders, Students, LTP • Funding – Host Country, AU (Fellowships), LTPs TOP HEAVY, CUMBERSOME, INEFFICIENT, EXPENSIVE

9. PAUI in Cameroon – Governance, Humanities and Social Science – University of Yaounde II (Assessment report S Hagberg & A Anderson for Sida) • Bids from universities from CA – expert panel but no details of composition or criteria for selection of PAUIs • Total of 193 M students at PAUIs – 80 at Cameroon PAUI • No information on PAU Centres • Library – inadequate & references in theses > 5 years old • Computer facilities - inadequate • Classroom facilities recently renovated • Student housing – inadequate; needs renovating • No long-term financial commitment from government or university

10. Preliminary conclusions • Lack of publications in international peer reviewed journals • Researchers publish in in-house departmental or faculty journals • Underdeveloped research facilities • Cross disciplinary and multidisciplinary research? • Lack of long term financial commitments • Cumbersome governance structures • No details re monitoring, mid term evaluations, reviewing of objectives etc. • What are some of the markers of excellence that this CoE has? • Has this CoE been successful in responding to science, innovation and social challenges in Africa? • Unlikely that the PAU would achieve its strategic objectives Sida’s Research Council decided against recommending funding of the Cameroon PAUI

11. CONCLUSION • COE,s are no doubt a highly effective instrument for enhancing scientific base of a country, provided it is efficiently implemented, its tracking and monitoring systems are in place , mid term reviews are conducted to assist I changing its course, targets, outcomes and course etc. • Centers of Excellence are established on the basis that they exemplify advanced basic science in combination with industry application and are able to count outcomes of substantially tangible nature especially in respect to the development agenda of a region/country. • COE,s especially in the developing world, need to consider the importance of multidisciplinary research and its impact on social innovation for human development. • The major challenge in respect of the PAU CoE’s is to identify the recurrent linkages between these dimensions, and carve out ‘packaged solutions’ that are likely to generate specific effects successfully and sustainably.