In the competitive global knowledge economy, highly qualified individuals are increasingly recognised as being the key to development. In particular, doctorate holders are not only the most qualified in terms of educational attainment, but also those specifically trained to be at the forefront of innovation and in a position to drive advances in science, technology and knowledge of society. In developing countries with relatively weak research structures, not least with regard to PhD graduates, the training of PhDs has been intimately linked to the reproduction of human capacity in national research systems. This study examines the mobility of PhD graduates funded under the Swedish development aid program to build institutional research capacity in Mozambique from 1990 to 2013. Principal areas of investigation are extent and direction of geographic, sectoral and vertical mobility, perception and individual rationales for mobility and career choices and experience of the so-called "sandwich model".
Global and regional goals, such as Agenda 2030 and the African Union's Continental Education Strategy for Africa, foreground higher education as an engine for development and job creation. Yet, many African universities perform weakly in international comparison. This policy note looks at the challenges in strengthening the freedom, relevance and impact of research and higher education in Africa.
Recommendations for policymakers:
This paper analyses faculty experiences tackling global knowledge asymmetries by examining the decolonisation of higher education in Africa in the aftermath of the 2015 ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ student uprising. An overview of the literature reveals a rich debate on defining ‘decolonisation’, starting from a critique of Eurocentrism to propositions of alternate epistemologies. These debates are dominated by the Global North and South Africa and their experiences of curriculum reform. Our focus is on the experiences of political scientists in Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, and Zimbabwe. These countries share the same Anglophone political science traditions but represent different political trajectories that constitute a significant condition for the discipline. The 26 political scientists we interviewed acted toward increasing local content and perspectives in their teaching, as promoted in the official strategies of the universities. They noted that what was happening in lecture halls was most important. The academic decolonisation debate appeared overambitious or even as patronising to them in their own political context. National politics affected the thematic focus of the discipline both as far as research topics and students’ employment opportunities were concerned. Although university bureaucracies were slow to respond to proposed curricula changes, new programmes were approved if there was a market-based demand for them. International programs tended to be approved fastest. Political economy of higher education plays a role: dependency on foreign funding, limited national resources to conduct research and produce publications vis-à-vis international competition, and national quality assurance standards appeared to be most critical constraints for decolonising the curriculum.