The Role of Think Tanks in Africa and the need for endogenous knowledge production in Sub-Saharan Africa

1

Shaping African futures: think tanks and the need for endogenous knowledge production in Sub-Saharan Africa

1. Introduction

A quarter of the world’s population and much of global poverty and violence will be located in

Africa in the next few decades. Africa has also, however, recently experienced the longest

sustained period of economic growth since the onset of liberation some 50 years ago. In spite of

prospects that could be either very bad or very good, little systematic attention has been paid to

understanding alternative African futures as an aid to improved decision-making and action by

governments and by other key agents and stakeholders

Although it receives less attention than China, India, Brazil and other emerging economies,

Africa is undergoing tremendous change. For much of the post-colonial phase, a dismal period

of declining prosperity and increased insecurity, scholars characterized the continent as engaged

in a process of ‘delayed state formation’ – a process effectively frozen with the advent and for the

duration of the Cold War. Today a rapidly increasing population and even higher urbanization

rates characterize a continent traditionally viewed as a development laggard. Despite widespread

poverty, inadequate educational attainment, major health challenges, deepening socio-economic

inequalities, conflicts over limited resources and border disputes, the rise of ‘African Taliban’ in

the Horn, Sahel and Maghreb regions as well as an apparent decline in social cohesion, African

prospects for achieving sustained economic growth are, however, perhaps better than ever. Yet,

within two decades the impact of climate change and food insecurity will begin to impact

severely upon African prospects even as the continent benefits from a global commodities boom

that has seen almost a decade of sustained economic growth prior to the recent food and financial

shocks.

What will drive African futures? In part it will be global and external forces including worldwide

energy supply and demand, trade patterns, and rates of foreign and domestic investment. In even

larger part, of course, it will be domestic and regional forces including patterns of migration,

fertility, ICT adoption, HIV/AIDS, the quality of governance, government spending on

2

education, tends in peace and security, regional and sub-regional integration shape the future of

the continent.

This all creates bewildering complexity and uncertainty with respect to potential local and

continental futures. There are, however, key certainties that frame analysis of those futures.

Firstly, the issues of African development cut across the domains of individual human

development, of social stability and interpersonal security, and of environmental sustainability.

These issues are bound with each other too intensely to allow consideration only in isolation; we

must consider them in interaction.

Secondly, the issues of African development are long-term. Now fifty years beyond

independence for most of the states in Africa, much has been accomplished; yet so much remains

to be done that horizons stretching to mid-century clearly add needed perspective with respect to

required long-term financial and social investments. The horizon of the Millennium

Development Goals is upon us and, while still acting in the immediate future; we must shift our

attention from that horizon to considerably more distant ones.

Thirdly, a wide geographic perspective facilitates understanding. External forces have time and

again reshaped African development patterns. Regional and even continental neighbourhood

effects, including conflicts, migration, and infrastructure connectivity, reinforce attention to

countries and sub-regions in Africa-wide and global context. Multiple geographical perspectives

are needed.

In the face of today’s and tomorrow’s challenges and threats, Africa stands to lose more than any

other region in the world. This is so because it has limited response capacity and a historical lack

of effective agency. That suggests, of course, that it also has more to win than other regions

should it develop the capability to respond via informed and active leadership. Deeper and more

integrated understanding of current and future challenges and opportunities can contribute to

improved leadership and action.

In this regard, responding to the global and continental context and finding appropriate solutions

to Africa’s manifold problems necessitate the generation of context-sensitive and/or nationally

relevant knowledge and capacities to inform long-term innovative and robust policy decisions

around interacting issues. With the limited capacity of the African governments and their

3

economies, solutions to the continent’s challenges will come not only come from the services

and/or expertise of traditional economic sectors like mining, agriculture and manufacturing, but

also from the knowledge economy based on intellectual services and expertise provided by think

tanks. In fact, policy makers in the African legislative and executive branches of government

will, for many years to come, face the common problem of bringing expert knowledge to bear on

government decision-making at a time of a bewildering rise in global and local complexity and

interdependence1.

The intellectual services, expertise and innovative capacities of think-thanks will be much needed

and will, as they are currently doing, shape African futures. This is so because they can be used to

influence and inform public policy in real time and space. These institutions are capable of acting

as a bridge between the academic and policymaking communities, serving in the public interest

as an, arguably, independent voice that translates applied and basic policy research into a

language and form that is understandable, reliable, and accessible for policymakers and the

public’2.

Their capacities contribute to the enrichment of democracy and facilitation of good governance in

the continent. Admittedly, democratization, which brings with it greater pressure on government

officials to make decisions based on empirical facts and thorough research and for the state to

deliver services and redistribute economic benefits more efficiently bodes well for the

development and sustainability of an African think-tank sector. The more open the political space

is and the more room there is for debate on policy issues, the more positive contribution by think

tanks.

In addition, the prospect of African development depends not only on the presence of responsible

and responsive government, effective administration, appropriate skills and investment, but also

on well-informed policy projections, priorities and responses which think tanks are in the

1 McGann James, G. (2008). ‘Global Go to Think tanks 2008’. Think tanks and Civil Society Programs, University of Pennsylvania; Pennsylvania, US.

2 Ibid

4

business of providing. 3 Just as the overseas development assistance will help to provide some of

the necessary finance for African governments to respond to their problems, think tanks are

centrally in generating long-term prosperity by attracting the private sector investments.4

Supporting and strengthening the think-tank sector and capitalizing on its expertise is essential to

Africa’s ability to prepare and respond to complex human security threats.

To this end, the role of think-tank capacities and expertise in shaping African futures forms an

immediate motivation for this paper. With a particular focus on broader social sciences think

tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa, this paper looks at how their knowledge generation capacities and

other expertise can help shape better African futures. The following issues are thoroughly

examined; firstly, the history of the industry in the continent and its current form/nature and size;

secondly, the current trends and challenges facing the sector ; thirdly, the contribution the sector

can make to Africa’s development and lastly, the challenges facing the sector. The paper also

maps out the future agenda of African think tanks.

Following this introduction is a brief conceptual overview. The next section looks at the history

and development of the sector in the continent. Subsequent sections look at the capacities

(including its size and scope) of the sector and its impact on policy-making. The paper concludes

by providing some few concluding observations and recommendations.

2. Conceptual Overview

It is not our intention to reconceptualise, redefine and compare numerous and different

definitions of ‘futures’ and think-tank. But since concepts and definitions are by their nature

‘contextual and contingent upon the ideological, epistemological or methodological orientation of

their purveyors’5, our aim here is to only put the two concepts (‘futures’ and think tank) into

context and explain how they are going to be used in this paper.

3 Adrian Johnson, Terence McNamee and Greg Mills. ‘The Think-tank and advisory business in Africa’. Report of the 2009 Tswalu Dialogue. South Africa

4 Ibid

5 David Simon. ‘Development Reconsidered; New Directions in Development Thinking’. In Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 79, No. 4, Current Development Thinking (1997), pp. 183-201. Blackwell Publishing, Stockholm, Sweden

5

When we are referring to Africa’s future we use the plural term ‘futures’ rather than the singular

‘future’. This pluralization creates a space for us not only to envision, analyze the sources,

patterns, and causes of change and stability in the continent but also to postulate possible,

plausible, and preferable futures6. We depart from the premise that there can be as many futures

as possible and through systematic and pattern-based understanding of past and present events,

possible future novelties can be postulated and possible futures can be mapped out. The aim is

not to engage on a prediction exercise about African futures but rather to understand, think about

and explore long-term trends and how they may impact on alternative African Futures.

On a similar note, it is important to also explain what, at least according to this paper, is a think

tank? What do think tanks do? And why are they important?

To provide a concise definition of what a think tank is can be very challenging. There is an

increasing acknowledgement amongst scholars7 that it is more difficult to define a think tank and

to reach a consensus on a conventional definition. According to Stones et al “these

organizations elude simple definition, in large because there is no consensus on what constitutes

a think tank….trying to agree on what think tank is and what is its primary goals are result to

more questions than answers”.8 McGann captures this very well when saying that “ in trying to

define a think tank, “I know one when I see one”9

These difficulties are also attributed to the ambiguity, elasticity and slippery nature of this

concept.10 This concept is seen as being slippery because “it has been applied haphazardly to any

6 See the definition of futures by the World Futures Studies Federation available at http://www.wfsf.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74&Itemid=135 (accessed on 09 November 2010)

7 See McGann James G and Weaver Kent 2002. Think Tanks & Civil Societies: Catalysts for Ideas and Action. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick 2002; Abelson, Donald E. Do Think Tanks Matter? Assessing the Impact of Public Policy Institutes. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002, 246 pp. and Stone Diane, Denham, Andrew and Garnett, Mark. Think tanks across nations: a comparative approach. Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1998

8 Stone et al (1998)

9 Abelson (2002)

10 See Abelson (2002); Stone et al (1998, 2004) and; Smith, J.A. The Idea Brokers: Think Tanks and the Rise of New Policy Elite. New York: Free Press, 1991. 313 pp

6

organization undertaking policy related, technical or scientific research”.11 It is not uncommon to

find non-governmental organizations and interests groups working in the policy field being

referred to or referring to themselves as think tanks. Commercial research firms and advisory

consulting firms are also often confused with think tanks. Due to lack of clarity on what

constitutes a think tank, non-governmental organizations, interests groups, policy advocacy

coalitions and even research networks that populate the policy-making area are all grouped

together under one term, think tanks. Think tanks are non-partisan, not for profit organizations

and are primary interested in research and analysis on policy issues. Although they are interested

in understanding, defining and framing policy issues and influencing policy- making processes,

they operate outside the realm of politics. What set them apart from other organizations is that,

they do not engage in public demonstrations and unlike NGOs and interests groups, their task is

not to aggregate and articulate popular interests.

An increasingly important component of think tank activity - that is building of regional and

international policy research networks, also tends to compound these conceptual difficulties. The

distinction is often blurred between loose and voluntary networks of policy research institutions

(good examples in Sub-Saharan Africa are the Organization for Social Science Research in

Eastern and Southern Africa (OSSREA) and Council for the Development of Social Science

Research in Africa (CODESRIA) and think tanks. Think tanks are not research networks, but

networking is part of their activity. As pointed out by Stone, “research networks are composed

of research institutes and policy centers that are organizationally similar in structure and general

objectives and they exclude other non-state actors such as NGOs, private firms, and professional

associations”.12 As evidenced by the South-South Research Networks in the global South,

networks are mainly found at the regional level and are a reflection of shared historical

conditions, ties of language and ethnicity, and of encountering similar or trans-border policy

problems. 13

11 Stone et al (1998)

12Stone, D. (2000a). 'Think tanks across nations: the new networks of knowledge', NIRA Review,. Winter, 34–9. 13 Ibid

7

As indicated above and as Abelson rightfully observes, at times lack of conceptual clarity

coupled with the degree of overlap between think tank activity and that of other organizations in

the society prevents a clear-cut boundary between think tanks and other entities.14 To respond to

this overlap, some analysts and scholars have come up with a number of tags such as ‘universities

without students’, ‘epistemic communities’, ‘ideas brokers’, ‘thinking class’, ‘discursive

communities’ etc.

But the question still remains, what is a think tank? It might seem that the lack of consensus on

definitional issues discussed above has not prevented formulation of definitions. According to the

2009 The Global Go to Think tanks Report, think tanks are “public policy research, analysis and

engagement institutions that generate policy-oriented research, analysis and advice on domestic

and international issues that in turn, enable both policymakers and the public at large to make

informed decisions about public policy Issues”15. To the United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP) “think tanks are “[the] bridge between knowledge and power"16. McGann

agrees with the UNDP and posits, “at their best, think tanks are the filters and synthesizers that

facilitate the identification of policy issues, the design of policy solutions, and the

implementation of and feedback on policy decisions”17.

This paper defines think tanks as apolitical independent and not for profit public policy research

institutes that solely work alone or in partnership with others (networks) on rigorous research and

analysis to inform and influence policy processes in different space and time. This concept is also

used here to refer to policy research institutes that work independently, are affiliated to

universities, are state or private sponsored, with highly qualified staff component and provide, on

limited basis, policy advisory services to different stakeholders in the ‘market of ideas’. Focus in

14 Abelson (2002)

15 James G. McGann. The Global Go-To Think tanks:The Leading Public Policy Research Organizations In The World. Think tanks and Civil Societies Program International Relations Program University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA USA. 21 January 2010

16SeeStone, Diana. "Think tanks and Policy Advice in Countries in Transition." How to Strengthen Policy-Oriented Research and Training in Viet Nam, Asian Development Bank Institute Symposium. Hanoi, 31 Aug. 2005. P. 2.

17 James G. McGann, 2010

8

this paper is not on independent policy pressure groups or advocacy coalitions within policy ‘sub-

systems’. We focus on those organizations that try to identify, frame and define issues and

influence policy making process through their intellectual ideas and analysis rather than

lobbying. We pay a particular attention on the organizations that are engaged in rigorous policy

analysis and are concerned with ideas and concepts that underline policies.

3. The History and Development of Think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Overview

Though ‘epistemic communities’ in Africa started to take shape and to be popularized in the 19th

century, the continent has long been the centre of knowledge generation as early as in the 8th

century. The 2010 Thomson Reuters’ Global Research Report-Africa18 posits, “the continent is

home to a rich history of higher education and knowledge creation….the University of Al

Karaoulne at Fez in Morocco was founded in CE 859 as a madrasa and is identified by many as

the oldest degree awarding institution in the world”. The Al Karaoulne University was followed

by another North Africa based University, an Egyptian Al-Azhar University established in 97019.

The Timbuktu region in Mali is also known for its ancient ‘intellectual discursive communities’

and epistemic communities. Writing in the 1960s, Cheikh Anta Diop, the well known Senegalese

historian, wrote that centuries before Europe colonized the continent and questioned the primitive

character of African ‘mentality’, Aristotelian logic was being discussed by local African scholars

in places like Timbuktu20. According to Diop, “Four centuries before Levy-Bruhl wrote his

primitive mentality (also known by the title How Natives Think) Black Muslim Africa was

commenting on Aristotle’s ‘formal logic’ and was devoted to dialectics”21.

However, the critique of these ancient centres of knowledge is that they were mainly focused on

religious issues. The epistemological and methodological orientation of the medieval African

Scholars like Ahmad Baba al-Massufi al-Tinbukti (October 26, 1556 – 1627) were, to a larger

18 Adams et al, 2010

19 Ibid pg 1

20 Souleymane Bachir Diagne. “Toward an intellectual history of West Africa: the meaning of Timbuktu”. In Shamil Jeppie and Souleymane Bachir Diagne (eds). The Meanings of Timbuktu. The Human Sciences Research Council Press, Pretoria, South Africa 21 See Diop C.A.1960. L’Afrique noire precoloniale. Paris: Presence Africaine

9

extent, informed and shaped by their religious beliefs. Their currents of thoughts and thematics

were only grounded on their subjective experience and religious narratives. Thus, some scholars

do not consider these medieval centres of knowledge and intellectual discursive communities to

be akin to the 19th century think-tank. In fact, to these scholars the ancient African Universities

and centres of excellence cannot be compared to and are not equivalents of the 19th century think-

tank.

Many critical African Scholars have been arguing that Africa does not have its own think tanks,

as outsiders set their agendas . Some people see as extensions or purveyors of Northern interests.

They are often accused of not being independent enough or of advancing their own political

agendas and contradictory agendas of the key actors in a globalizing world. The Dakar School of

Thought and the Dar Es Salaam School of Thought22, over the last decades, have been vocal in

critiquing modes of knowledge generation in Africa, the work of epistemic communities in

Africa, the paradigms and languages that are used in narrativizing African realities and of late,

the work of think tanks. To some, radical/Marxist African Scholars, the think-tank sector

represents an institutionalized paradigmatic domination of the continent by Europeans and

Westerners23. In fact, these scholars view the ‘ideas business’ in Africa as extroverted and

reinforcing the “subordination of African traditional knowledge to the world system of

knowledge”24.

Their claims are tempting in that, the recent history of and the latest developments in the think-

tank sector have all been attributed to the advanced industrialised countries and Western

democracies. Think tanks are western constructs and were once found almost exclusively in the

capitals of the developed West25. Perhaps, this is why they have been criticized by critical

22 The prominent scholars associated with these schools of thought include but are not limited to Archie Mafeje, Kwesi Prah Appiah, Paulin Hountondji, Cheikh Anta Diop, Claude Ake, Thandika Mkandawire, Jimi Adesina, Issa Shivji and others

23 Please see Jeremiah Arowosegbe. “decolonising the social sciences in the global South: Claude Ake and the praxis of knowledge production in Africa”. ASC Working Paper 29/2008. University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.

24 See Paulin Hountondji. Producing Knowledge in Africa Today: the second Bashorun M.K.O Abiola Distinguished Lecture. African Studies Review, Vol.38, No.3 (December, 1995) pp1-10

25 In his critique of the social sciences in Africa, Paulin Hountondji even question the discipline of African Studies, asking a question as to “How African are the so-called African Studies? I’m sure he would also extend the question to African think tanks and ask How African are they because to him they form part of an overall project of knowledge accumulation initiated and controlled by the West ( See Paulin Hountondji. “Knowledge of Africa,

10

African scholars and some African governments. However, contrary to the generalization that

think tanks are new in the continent , Sub-Saharan Africa has relatively old think tanks that,

during different and difficult political periods in the continent, managed to resist pressure.

The sector has a very profound history harking back to the late 1920s. As shown by figure 1

below, although the great expansion of ‘ideas brokers’ (think tanks) in Africa didn’t not begin

until the late 1980s and early 1990s, these formations have been in existence throughout the

decolonization period and ever since the times of liberation struggles. The first of its kind in Sub-

Saharan Africa was the South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), established in 1929

during the challenging times of great depression. This was to be followed by the South African

Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) in 1934. Though in Ghana, the Institute of Statistical,

Social and Economic Research (ISSER) and Centre for Development Studies were established in

1962 and 1969 respectively, in comparative terms, South Africa remains one of the countries

with the oldest think tanks.

Knowledge by Africans: Two perspectives on African Studies”. RCCS Annual Review 1, September 2009. African Centre for Advanced Studies, Benin

11

Figure1: Extracted from the 2007 Survey of Global Think tanks by James McGann

Observably, whereas the first think tanks in Africa were founded in the 1920's, these institutes

remained uncommon in Sub-Saharan Africa until the 1960's.26 According to the 2007 Global

Think-Tank Survey, this increase in the 1960’s is attributable to the period of decolonization

during which the majority of African countries received their independence. This is correct, after

a period of stagnancy in the 1940s up until late 1950s, a minimal growth of think thanks was

recorded during the 1960s and early 1970s. For instance, the Centre for Conflict Resolution

(CCR) and the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) in South Africa were both established

in 1968, the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) and Centre for

Development Studies in Ghana were established in 1962 and 1969 respectively and

CODESERIA in Senegal, Freedom Market foundation in South Africa and the Nigerian Institute

of International Affairs were all established in early 1970s.

26Peter Ronald de Souza. ‘The Role of Research Institutes and Think tanks in Democratic Governance Reform’. Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla Presentation at the “UNDP OGC roundtable on Evidence into Policy: The Role of Research Institutes and Think tanks”, Cairo, 18 -19, January 2009.

12

As mentioned earlier on, throughout the world, with Africa included, the establishment of think

tanks and their growth appears to be at least partially tied to a series of major political, social and

economic events.27 In Ghana for instance, shortly after its independence Dr. Kwame Nkrumah set

up various state-supported think tanks such as the Cocoa Research Institute and the Council for

Scientific and Industrial Research.28 An interesting question then is, what was the role of these

think tanks in policy-making and what influence and impact did they have? On closer inspection,

it seems that they had no impact at all on policy processes. This is so because during the post-

independence period policy priorities were not driven by empirical research and evidence, but

rather by political ideologies and preoccupations with state formation.

However, as shown by Figure 1 above, there was no great expansion of think tanks in the late 70s

until late 80s and early 90s. There are many reasons for this. After some few years in office, the

new ruling elites started to change the rules of the game. This led to a deficit of democratic space

and low appreciation for objective policy work done by think tanks.29 During this period, media

space and opportunities to express thoughts that are not in line with those of the ruling elites

ranged from limited to naught and the space for think tanks to contribute to policy debates was

shrinking by the hour.30

The ruling elite saw policy-making as purely a government concern that should be only limited to

the selected few and to be out of reach for public policy researchers In many African countries,

this mode of thinking discouraged the growth of the sector and successfully kept them out of the

policy formulation processes throughout late 70s and early 80s.

Although the think-tank sector in other parts of the world has been well established ever since

1960s as shown by figure 2 below, in the African context, it took time for the sector to be well

established and to flourish. As mentioned earlier on, this was due to the growing suspicion and

27Goran Buldioski. ‘Think instead of Tanks’. Turkish Policy Quarterly, October 1, 2007 28 Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_tank (accessed on 5 September 2009)

29 Also see Goran Buldioski. Think Tanks in Central and Eastern Europe in Urgent Need of a Code of Ethics The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law Volume 11, Issue 3, May 2009 30 Ibid

13

marginalisation of the sector and the fear that its growth will agitate for regime change and thus

pose threat to the power of the ruling elite.

Figure 1 above shows that the growth of the industry in Africa only started to be recorded in

1980s and peaked up during the late 80s and early 90s. During this period there was a great

expansion of the think-tank industry. The mushrooming of think tanks in Africa in 1990s

occurred in tandem with the developments in Eastern Europe and other parts of the world (see

figure 2 below). As McGann rightfully points out in the 2007 Global Think tanks Survey, there

are a number of trends that influenced the market of ideas in the continent and they include, but

are not limited to the following;

a) The fall of the Berlin Wall and the Third Wave of Democratization

b) Information revolution

c) End of government monopoly on information

d) Complexity and technical nature of policy problems

e) Size of government and crisis in confidence in government officials

f) Globalization and the growth of state and non-state actors

g) Need for timely and concise information and analysis “in the right form at the right time”

These trends transformed the economic, social and political debates in most countries of the

world, which in turn, created a greater demand for policy research and advice.31 For instance,

during and after the Cold War, the continent witnessed an intense competition for advancement

of certain strategic interests. Western countries dug deep into their pockets, supporting some

think tanks affiliated to governments with the aim of influencing the political and ultimate policy

directions.

As McGann and Weaver rightfully observes, countries “such as the United States were extremely

generous in their donations to African states that supported free elections and democratic 31 McGann James G and Weaver Kent 2002.

14

transitions and throughout the Cold War. Much aid during this period was provided both by the

Soviet Union and the United States in an attempt to gain client states that supported their

particular ideologies”.32 Apart from these two countries, with transition in countries like Namibia

and negotiations in South Africa there was also an increase in foreign investment to Africa from

Western businesses.

Figure 2: Extracted from the Global Go to Think tanks Survey 2008 by McGann

In addition, this proliferation of ideas brokers in Africa in early 1990s can also be attributed to

the changes in the understanding of this concept of security. Before, the African ruling elite

understood security as it relates to their political survival rather than the protection of citizens and

sovereignty. Unexpectedly, the fall of the Berlin Wall brought changes in the political and socio-

economic situation of the world. Some of these changes offered opportunities for increased

cooperation and action between state and non-state actors to advance the cause of human

freedom.

On the positive side, the post-Cold war period witnessed a paradigmatic shift in the discourse on

and practice of security. This shift involved the broadening of the unit of analysis of security

from the state to individuals and groups of people within states. These shifts from state to human

security also contributed to the proliferation of think tanks. With the emergence and growing

32 Ibid

15

prominence of human security threats like poverty, desertification, unemployment and HIV/Aids,

there was a growing demand for policy research advice on these issues. Huge amounts of funding

from Western countries and government agencies were channelled to think tanks to conduct

cutting edge research on these emerging security threats.

However, as shown in figures 1 & 2, ever since the year 2000 there has been a slow decrease in

the number of think tanks being established. Currently, “a mere 3.3 think tanks are established in

Sub-Saharan Africa per year and this is a remarkable decrease from the 9.9 institutions founded

per year in the 1990's”.33 The reported decrease in establishment of think tanks does not mean

that there are no think tanks being established and this trend is not unique to the African region

only. The same decline was noted all over the world, particularly in the United States and

Western Europe as shown in figure 2. As pointed out in the Global Go to Think tanks Survey,

there are many reasons for the decline in establishment of the new think tanks in the world and

they include the following;

a) Political and regulatory environment hostile to think tanks and NGOs

b) Changes in funding priorities by major public and private donors

c) Underdeveloped institutional capacity

d) Advocacy organizations, for profit consulting firms and electronic media are replacing

some think tanks

e) Donors funded short term projects and programs instead of strengthening capacity and

building institutions

f) Institutions have served their purpose and have discontinued their operations

4. Surveying the current think-tank landscape in Sub-Saharan Africa

4.1 Size of the Sector

The figures below are adapted from the Global Think-Tank Survey 2008 graphical estimations.

They indicate the distribution or spread of think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa as of 2008-2009. In

figure 3 below, the countries highlighted in purple had a think-tank (TT) range of 0-10, the 33 Ibid

16

orange ones had a range of 10-20, the blue ones had a range of 20-30, the yellow ones had a

range of 30-40, the orange-red ones had a range of 40-85 and figures are not available for the

grey (uncoloured) ones.

Figure 3: Adapted from the findings of the 2008 -2009 Global Go to Think tanks Survey

In 2008-2009, of the 53 states in Africa, only 42 states had think-tank representation, and of these

42 only 14 African states had 10 or more think tanks, namely, Burkina Faso (16), Cameroon (20),

Cote d’Ivoire (12), Ethiopia (20), Ghana (36), Kenya (56), Malawi (13), Namibia (11), Nigeria

(45), Senegal (16), South Africa (84), Tanzania (11), Uganda (23) and Zimbabwe (21). Using

Freedom House’s Freedom in the World Index for 2008 as a measure of the guarantee and

protection of civil rights and civil liberties, the above mentioned were classified as either free or

partly free with the exception of Cameroon and Zimbabwe due to the repressive trends in these

countries. This is a further evidence of the strong link between democratization and the growth of

think tanks.

The think-tank sector in sub-Saharan Africa is thriving in those states considered by most to be

the beacons of Africa across the areas of good governance, rule of law, socioeconomic

17

development and political development, notwithstanding the many domestic challenges that these

states continue to grapple with: Ghana and Nigeria in West Africa, Kenya in East Africa and

South Africa in Southern Africa (all with an HDI measure of between 0.5 and 0.68).

The following list indicate the number of think tanks in Africa per country:

Figure 4: Number of think tanks by country- adapted from the findings of the 2008 -2009 Global

Go to Think tanks Survey

Country

Think tanks Number

Algeria Angola 4 Benin 13 Botswana 10 Burkina Faso 16 Burundi 6 Cameroon 20 Cape Verde 2 Central Africa Republic 2 Chad 3 Comoros 0 Congo 3 Congo D.R 7 Cote D’Ivoire 12 Djibouti 15 Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea 4 Ethiopia 20 Gabon 2 Gambia 6 Ghana 36 Guinea 1 Guinea-Bissau 0 Kenya 56 Lesotho 1 Liberia 3 Libya Madagascar 2 Malawi 13 Mali 9 Mauritania

18

Mauritius 2 Morocco Mozambique 4 Namibia 11 Niger 4 Nigeria 45 Rwanda 4 Sao Tome & Principe 0 Senegal 16 Seychelles 1 Sierra Leone 1 Somalia 4 South Africa 84 Sudan 4 Swaziland 1 Tanzania 11 Togo 4 Tunisia Uganda 23 Zambia 8 Zimbabwe 21 TOTAL 503

According to the Global Think-Tank Survey 2009, out of the 503 think tanks in Africa, the top

and largest think thanks were in Sub-Saharan Africa. The top 25 think tanks in Sub-Saharan

Africa were from South Africa, Senegal, Kenya, Ghana, Uganda, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and

Nigeria.

As shown by figure 6 below, this uneven distribution of think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa also

extends to the research output. According to the 2010 Thomson Reuters’ Global Research

Report-Africa, for the years 1999 to 2008, the central region of Africa (see the table below)

produced the smallest quantity of papers, roughly about 7,100 per year despite being the region

with the greatest number of countries and the south region, although made up of only 14

countries produced more than 10,000 papers.

19

Figures 5 &6: Extracted from the 2010 Thomson Reuters’ Global Research Report-Africa

4.2 Sub-Saharan Africa’s Share of Global Think-tank Industry

As indicated by figure 5 below, of the world’s 6,305 think tanks, about 503 (8 %) are from Sub-

Saharan Africa, compared to Washington DC which alone hosts 393 think tanks. It is interesting

to note that although Latin America and Asia have experienced a steady increase in the number

of new think tanks, Africa has seen a decline in past years. US based and European (mainly UK

based) think tanks dominate the top positions of the Think-tank Index. The Cape Town-based

Centre for Conflict Resolution (CCR) is the only African institute to feature in the index of the

Top 50 Non-US Think tanks.

20

Figure 7: Extracted from the Global Go to Think tanks 2009 Survey

It is clear that Sub-Saharan Africa think tanks are grossly underrepresented in this burgeoning

industry. In an attempt to analyse the state of think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa it is important to

make some concessions. The think-tank industry is not without its discrepancies and does not

epitomise a level playing field. Think tanks on the continent are comparably underfunded and not

very well resourced as compared to their Western counterparts. Furthermore, they do not possess

the necessary skill sets as they struggle to retain ‘quality staff’ that are lured away by the promise

of better opportunities and working conditions in larger institutions, mostly in developed

countries. The decrease in number of graduates produced by African Universities, and brain drain

are also the key contributing factors. For instance, it was recently reported that SouthAfricawas

unable“toproduceenoughdoctoralgraduatestobuildthe'knowledgeeconomy'itaspires

21

to,orsimplytoreplacetheexistingcohortofacademicsinthehighereducationsystem”34

AccordingtotheUNEconomicCommissionforAfrica,althoughdata on brain drain in Africa

is scarce and inconsistent; however, statistics show a continent losing the very people it needs

most for economic, social, scientific, and technological progress.35

Despite encountering some difficult operating environments, Sub-Saharan Africa think tanks

have significantly increased in number (from 274 in 2007 to 503 in 2008). However, what

remains a challenge is the limited number of research outputs coming from Africa. The continent

remains a large consumer of knowledge and not a producer. According to Pauw, “there is a low

global presence of African research outputs and Sub-Saharan Africa contributes 0.7% to world

science output”.36

5. Challenges facing Think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa

The key challenges that face Sub-Saharan African think tanks evolve around the following

issues: funding, interests and agenda concerns and strained relations with host country

authorities/governments.

5.1 Funding

Money remains a challenge for well functioning of think tanks in Africa. The production and

marketing of ideas also need some financial injections. Unfortunately, there are no philanthropic

traditions in the continent to support the work of independent public policy research institutions.

More so, there is no reliable pool of domestic public funding of think tanks to ensure the

34 Dell, Sharon. South Africa: Decline in PhD numbers a major problem. World University News, 22 August 2010 (also available at http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php? story=20100820150736361

35 See (http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-71249-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html) “ The ECA estimates that between 1960 and 1989, some 127,000 highly qualified African professionals left the continent and according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), Africa has been losing 20,000 professionals each year since 1990 “ (ibid).

36 See a presentation by Christoff Pauw titled South-South Research Collaboration: The case of Stellenbosch University. Presented during a Workshop held at University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, May 2010. Also see (French Academies des Sciences 2006; Worldmapper). “Today, 20% of [African] researchers who are still active carry out most of their research outside the walls of academia and traditional research bodies, usually for international organizations, foreign intergovernmental bodies and NGOs.” ( Schmaus, W. ‘A New Way of Thinking about Social Location in Science’, Science & Education (2008) 17:1127–1137.

22

sustainability of these value-adding institutions. As a result, dependence on donor funding is

inevitable.37As shown in figure 6 below, of the 63 think tanks in Africa responding to the budget

question on the 2007 survey, the vast majority have annual budgets of less than $500,000 and,

unlike in the U.S., none have a budget of more than $50 million.38 The large chunk of their

budget and core funding came from foreign support. The 2007/2008 annual reports of all the 25

largest think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa that participated in the 2008 Global Go to Think tanks

Survey reveal that they are still falling short of that $50 million. In 2008, the Human Sciences

Research Council in South Africa was the only think-tank in Sub-Saharan Africa with the budget

close to that amount (R264.3 million). The financial reports of the largest think tanks in the

region also indicate that they are supported by larger international organizations, such as the

United Nations or the World Bank and Western government agencies such as USAID, GTZ and

DFID.

Figure 8: Extracted from 2007 Survey of Think tanks

In May 2009, during the annual meetings of the African Development Bank, Canada’s

International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 37 McGann 2008

38 McGann 2008

23

and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced that they would each commit at total

amount of US$90 million in grants to 24 think tanks in East and West Africa in their Think-tank

Initiative. These join other Western based donor such as the Ford Foundation, the Oslo

Foundation and Trust Africa.

Quite often than not, new funding opportunities influence the growth of other think tanks and

non-governmental organizations (and whether or not they compete for funding). The sad reality is

that legitimate and reputable think tanks have to compete for this limited funding with fly by

nights Mongos (My own NGOs), Pongos (Politicians' NGOs), Mangos (Mafia NGOs), and

Congos (Commercial NGOs), each marketing itself as a credible voice of "the people", while

harbouring some unspoken interest, not least the chasing of funds.39

Indeedanendogenousmodeloffinancing&resourcingforthinkstanksinAfricais

desirability.TheinitiativesthathavebeentakenbysuchAfricaninstitutionslikethe New

Partnership for Africa's Development(NEPAD)andtheAfricanCapacityBuildingFoundation

(ACBF)aregoodstepsatarightdirectionandarecommendable.Sinceitsinceptionin

1991,ACBFhasbeenissuinggrantsandprovidingfinancialsupportforknowledge

productsandservicestoAfricanpolicyinstitutesandcentres,TheACBFhasadopted

innovativemodelsinitssupportfortertiaryinstitutionsandotherspecializedtraining

institutionsintheareasofeconomicandfinancialmanagementandstrengtheningpublic

management.40

Today,economicpolicyanalysisandmanagementisthelargestACBFcorecompetencyarea

ofintervention.SincetheestablishmentoftheFoundationin1991,thefirstgenerationof

ACBF‐supportedinterventionshaslentsupporttopolicyresearchcentersandeconomic39Availableathttp://www.saiia.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=828:civil-society-

principles-and-per-diems&catid=62:governance-a-aprm-opinion&Itemid=159 (Accessed on 05 March 2010). Also

see Corrigan Terence 2008.Civil Society, principles and per diems. AllAfrica.com 11 August 2008

40 A good example of this innovative partnership model is the African Economic Research Consortium (AERC), which is the executing agency for various economics and agricultural economics programs. These include CEPA, Ghana; Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER), Ghana; Centre for Corporate Governance (CCG), NGO Council, KIPPRA, and

IPAR, Kenya (see African Capacity Building Foundation. Annual Report 2009. Harare, Zimbabwe

24

policymanagementtrainingprograms.AccordingtotheACBF2009AnnualReport,The

foundationcontributedtotherevitalizationofanumberofexistingregionalinstitutions

suchastheBanqueCentraledesEtatsdel'Afriquedel'Ouest/BanquedesEtatsdel'Afrique

Centrale(BCEAO/BEAC),theAfricanTrainingandResearchCentreinAdministrationand

Development(CAFRAD),CESAG,theCouncilfortheDevelopmentofSocialScienceResearch

inAfrica(CODESRIA)andtheAssociationofAfricanUniversities(AAU).41In2009,ACBF‐

supportedpolicyunitsliketheKenyaInstituteforPublicPolicyResearchandAnalysis

(KIPPRA)providerigorousanalysisandinsightfulperspectivesoneconomicpolicyissues

intheircountries.42KIPPRAlaunchedtheKenyaEconomicReportentitled:“Buildinga

GloballyCompetitiveEconomy”.43

Sincethefoundationwasformedwithassistancefromtheinternationaldonorcommunity

undertheauspicesofworldbankandUNDP,thisisagoodillustrationthatmutually

benefitiallyandequalpartnershipsbetweenthecontinentandtheinternationalcommunity

needtobefurtherdeepenedsincetheyarecentrallyinhelpingthecontinenttofind

solutionstoitsproblems.TheACBFexamplealsoshowsthattotheinternationaldonor

communitythatpartnershipscanbesustainableandcanyieldexpecteddividendsisthe

conditionsarenotimposedanddictatedandifthereislocalownershipandthecontinentis

seenasanequalpartner.ForAfricangovernments,theACBFexperiencecanbeusedto

buildotherendogenousfinancemodelsaimedatsupportingknowledgeproductioninthe

continent.

5.2 Strained Relations, Interests and Agendas

Athough there is no empirical evidence of the scope and extent of state-civil relations in Africa,

anecdotal evidence points out that, while over the years there have been some improvements on

these relations, there remains some few challenges.

41 Ibid

42 Ibid

43 Ibid

25

Needless to say, many attempts in recent years have been made to improve state-civil relations

and to involve representatives of think tanks in joint fora with governments. Observably,

“contrary to the situation of the 1970’and 1980s, the new African political leadership recognizes

the role of civil society and wants to work with it in reaching the people and in addressing the

human security challenges”. 44 Since the late 1990s there has been an increasing interaction

between think tanks and the state and at the beginning of this 21st century, this was extended to

both regional and continental governmental bodies.

A good example of this is with the formation of the African Union (AU) in 2002. AU has

adopted a more inclusive stance with regards to the participation of think tanks and other civil

society organizations in the affairs of the organization and that has afforded these groupings with

an unprecedented opportunity to contribute towards the policy making process45. The series of

meetings between AU/civil society that culminated to the drafting of the statutes for the

Economic Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC) further attests to this. Since then, several

think tanks in Africa have been providing capacity building and project implementation

assistance to Regional Economic Communities (RECs) such as Southern Africa Development

Community (SADC), Economic Community of West African States ( ECOWAS) and others.

However, despite these new developments and achievements, not much has changed on the

tensions that exist between government and non-state actors. The antagonistic relationships still

persist in some countries such as Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Gambia and Rwanda to mention just a few.

Think tanks remain closely monitored and do not enjoy the freedom and space to operate freely

and support state actions.46

Although governments do not present alternative funding sources, they consider think tanks with

foreign funding as agents of western countries or neo-colonialists, motivated by the hunger to

access political power, in the process advance foreign interests than those of the society they

44 Fatoumatta M’boge and Sam Gbaydee Doe; African Commitments to civil society Engagement: A review of Eight Countries, Monograph, Human Security Initiative, 2004 45 Tim Murithi. ‘The role of African Think tanks in Influencing Policy on Peace and Security Issues’. Paper presented at University of Bradford, 2005

50 Kapemba C 2005.Can State and Civil Society Become Real Partners in Fighting Poverty in Africa? Presented on

Public Service Day Tele-Conference organized by the South African Department of Public Service, 2005 User � 02/11/10 02:58Deleted: Ibid Ibid Ibid

26

claim to be serving.47 In many cases, the relationship between state and civil society on the

continent continues to be determined and designed by outside actors. Those in government often

accused think tanks of being ideologically and materially too close to their funders or other

internal political forces hence they are very critical and worrisome of them. It is not surprising for

example that governments with reported human rights abuses such as those in Zimbabwe,

Gambia and elsewhere in Africa have been quick in rejecting the financing of civil society

groups, especially human rights groups which are mostly financed by outsiders.48

What also compounds the problem is that think tanks are themselves not homogenous. There are

those who are, allegedly, corrupted and are pursuing other agendas. As Humphries and Reitzes

eloquently puts it, we need to also recognize how civil society mirrors a complex sphere of

contradictory hegemonic projects, promoted by competing actors.49

On first glance, it might seem that the issue of developing endogenous systems of financing for

think tanks discussed above is one way of addressing African governments’ concerns around

think tanks interests and agendas. Some people are arguing that development of local support

mechanisms for policy think tanks can insulate them from frequent donor policy changes, ensure

their sustainability and thus addressing the concerns around interests and agendas. However, the

issue is not so clear as it seems since there are other subtle issues to consider such as geo-political

factors.

What is clear though is that there is a degree of interdependence between government and think

tanks. Government is in need of fresh policy ideas that think tanks are in a business of providing

and think tanks are in need of resource and financial injections that government are capable of

providing. It is through collective efforts that the continent can be able to effectively respond to

its challenges. In order to realize the African solutions to African problems, governments and

think tanks will need to start developing good working relations and for creating spaces/platforms

for mutual learning and sharing.

6. African futures, endogenous knowledge production and think tanks

27

Africa, a large and incredibly diverse continent, demonstrates the difficulty of categorically

defining the role of think tanks in society and of effectively utilizing their capabilities for its

progress.50 A question then is, what is the normative role of think tanks in African societies and

how can their expertise/services be used in shaping the Africa of tomorrow? As Donald Abelson

would ask, do think tanks matter in Sub-Saharan Africa? As it is going to be discussed below,

think tanks do matter, more especially when it comes to knowledge generation, transforming

policy processes and shaping African futures.

6.1 Why a Need for Endogenous Knowledge?

Today, the future of the continent is being shaped by radically different trends. The complexity of

these trends is moving at an astounding pace. Meanwhile, African governments do not have a

capacity to fully comprehend, prepare counter-measures and respond to today’s challenges. Good

examples are food crisis and the financial crisis, where national institutions were not present in

the debate because they had no opportunity to think about these issues years ago51.

In order to transform policy-making and to prepare African governments for today and future

challenges, endogenous knowledge generation, which think tanks are in the business of doing,

becomes indispensable. There is a growing recognition that African policy makers fail to totally

grasp this emerging, but yet, uncertain Africa52. This is so because, with regard to knowledge

generation and churning out of ideas, they are at a disadvantaged position as they continue to rely

less on generation of fresh endogenous ideas and use of local capacities and more on the

importation of ideas and expertise.

For so long, one of their problem has been a strong dependence on others (usually West) for

knowledge production, appropriation and dissemination, a situation which undermines the

51 Africa the Good News. ‘Financial support for African thinks tanks’. Thursday, 02 July 2009

52 Goux-Baudiment F 2009. The role of Think tanks in Developing Countries: Challenges and Solutions. Presented International Conference held on 17-18 January 2009 at Zamalek Marriot Hotel in Cairo, Egypt. This has been the growing trend since independence, with the fall of the copper and coffee price and other political challenges which led the Bretton Woods Institutions to come with structural adjustment programmes with stringent (neo liberal) conditionalities, limiting state intervention and promoting privatisation and the reign of multinational corporations

28

continent’s ability to maximise its democratic potentials and development agenda.53. In fact, the

continent is still infested with policy makers who are addressing African realities in borrowed

discourses and received paradigms and advocating for outside development models”54. To

Arowosegbe, debates on African issues are often filtered through epistemic approaches that are

products of other (largely Western) contexts55.

This is so even though in 2009 there were about 503 think tanks in the continent. This calls for

an increased focus by African governments on the use of think tanks capacities not only for

harnessing Africa’s knowledge generation capacity but also for improved policy making

processes.

The sense of urgency for investing on strong innovation systems, knowledge production

infrastructure and on research and development (R&D) systems is even more critical for African

governments since the world economy in the 21st century has been described as the knowledge

economy. This necessarily means that today and tomorrow’s economic success depends on the

ability to generate knowledge and to apply that knowledge in order to create new innovations that

can be used in the development of communities and human capacities, for greater

competitiveness.56 It also means that greater focus and attention must be placed on tapping into

the expertise and capacities of think tanks and more importantly, on providing them with

alternative sources of funding.

Africa can no longer neglect the searching out of and collection of indigenous knowledge. If

it is to fully realize its potential and will be able to effectively cope with the bewildering

uncertainties, knowledge generation and readiness to participate in the emerging knowledge

economies should be a priority

53 Jeremiah Arowosegbe. “decolonising the social sciences in the global South: Claude Ake and the praxis of knowledge production in Africa”. ASC Working Paper 29/2008. University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.

54 Ibid

55 Jeremiah Arowosegbe, 2008

56 Centre for informatics , Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy. 2008. Knowledge economy. http://www.sancikmke.org.za/economy.htm. Accessed 23 April 2010.

29

In this regard, apart from having expertise that can help African governments to brace themselves

for endogenous knowledge generation in ways that can bring up the African perspectives to the

development of the continent, think tanks also have the required capacity to help African states to

unveil the shortcomings of their traditional views on policy matters. More so, they can help them

to apply cost benefit analysis to government expenditures; to propose alternative decisions to

policy measures; to enhance debate about government role and policy effectiveness.57 Think

tanks are in a unique position to transform policy making and to improve the ability of African

legislators to make informed decisions by providing them with information and resources that

they would otherwise be lacking.

6.2 Shaping African Futures and the role of think tanks

As it has been alluded to above, the journey towards a knowledge economy is a difficult one and

the experiences elsewhere in the world show that governments on their own can not succeed

without assistance from think tanks This means that as African governments are trying to map

out new visions for the future, think tanks can grab the opportunities provided by the current

realities to continue playing a meaningful role in shaping African futures. It is argued that think

tanks could play the following roles in shaping African futures; evaluation, analysis and research;

capacity building and technical support and advisory role; creation of spaces for public dialogue

and education and engaging in policy advocacy.

a) Evaluation, analysis and research

If they are to shape African futures, experts in think tanks need to regularly evaluate and analyze

government policies, programs and projects. It is through thorough analysis and ongoing/periodic

evaluations that they can be able to formulate plausible hypotheses about possible African

futures, develop scenarios and promote the (re) alignment of long term perspectives to strategic

thinking and policy making in Africa.

Parallel to that, through their policy research, they can be able to generate new and thought-

provoking policy ideas. The only way think tank relevance can be guaranteed and they can yield

much influence in shaping African futures is for them to generate new currents of thoughts and

57 See McGann and Weaver 2002, Matlou 2009, Goux-Baudiment 2009,Al-Sayyid 2009.

30

paradigms through which policy makers in the continent can understand the changing Africa and

the world around it. They need to generate research outputs that will help policy makers to

navigate and map out new visions for the continent. These research outputs should be clear and

understandable to policy makers so as to enable them to elaborate visions of improved African

futures and to explore the interventions necessary to move towards those visions.

Think tanks will need to also concentrate more on churning out endogenous, context-sensitive

and nationally and continentally relevant policy ideas so as to provide timely independent

perspectives and alternative solutions to different policy problems.

b) Capacity Building and Technical Support

Think Tanks can also play an active role in shaping African futures by building capacities of

policy makers or by grooming a new groom of policy makers that would have a required capacity

to act on policy recommendations. They can do this by creating research fellowships

opportunities for policy makers, whereby they allow them to spend a short period of time in the

think tank environment working with leading experts in certain policy areas. This can also be

institutionalized through official skills transferral exchange programmes between government

policy research units and think tanks.

Think tanks can also voluntary or upon requests, assist policy makers with technical support. This

can take various forms including helping them develop certain policy guidelines and doctrines.

This is already happening where certain think tanks are assisting the African Union (AU) Peace

Support Operations Division (PSOD) with the development of policy guidelines and doctrines for

the African Standby Force (ASF). The are also think tanks like the Institute for Security Studies,

who are assisting regional organizations like ECOWAS to develop their capacities around

conflict analysis and continental early warning systems. Through their capacity building and

technical support activities, think tanks can be able to, both directly and indirectly, influence

policy direction, thus shape possible alternatives.

c) Promotion, education and advocacy

31

Think tanks have a capacity to promote their work and reach out effectively to “those who

matter”- politicians, experts, bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurs.58 If they are to influence

decision making and shape future policies, they need to nicely package their research outputs

such as policy briefs, situation reports and policy papers and widely share them with the policy

community. When necessary, they can even design policy advocacy campaigns to influence

decisions during different policy life circles.

They need to reposition themselves as best ‘policy shops’ for ‘venue-shopping’ policy-makers.

They can do these through high-level conferences, seminars, research colloquiums, scenario

planning policy workshops, brainstorming sessions and other forms of convening, attended by

experts and decision makers with the aim of producing policy relevant outcomes.59 Their

seminars, research colloquiums should stimulate and promote policy debates on Africa’s possible

developmental paths and/or futures amongst African leadership, African policy makers, regional

and sub-regional organizations. They should also act as venues for policy-makers to build

understanding and consensus on policy issues.60 They should also act as platforms not only for

mutual learning and sharing.

Making the research outputs available for consideration by different policy actors in these

meetings could also increase their chances of influencing policies. They should also cater for the

broader public in their programming. They need to frame, define and introduce policy issues to

the public and to stimulate debates. Though public education and advocacy is not primarily their

terrain, think tanks should identify and optimally use opportunities to educate and inform

(through media briefings, commentary, editorials) the public about complex policy issues. If they

are to have relevance and have impact on policy decisions about the future, think tanks need to be

58 See Demeš Pavol The role of think tanks in shaping EU policies . 16 December 2009 (accessed on http://www.europesworld.org/NewEnglish/Home_old/CommunityPosts/tabid/809/PostID/1024/TheroleofthinktanksinshapingEUpolicies.aspx )

59SeeKeck,MargaretandSikkink,Kathryn,(1997)TransnationalIssueNetworksinInternationalPolitics,IthacaN.Y.,CornellUniversityPress.;OverseasDevelopmentCouncil—ODC(1999)“DialoguewithThinkTanks:AReportofAMeetingWiththeUnitedNationsSecretaryGeneral,”4‐5May,UnitedNationsHeadquarters,NewYork.AndWallace,William,(1994)“BetweenTwoWorlds:ThinkTanksandForeignPolicy,”inC.HillandP.Beshoff(eds.)TwoWorldsofInternationalRelations:Academics,PractitionersandtheTradeinIdeas,London,RoutledgeandLondonSchoolofEconomics:139‐163.

60 Ibid

32

actively involved throughout different stages (problem definition, issue framing, agenda setting,

implementation and evaluation).

d) Advisory Services

Think tank experts, usually with both public and private sector experience, have profound

knowledge on a number of policy issues. They should avail their expertise to African

governments by advising them on how to develop new policies, strategies and new approaches.,

how to deal with challenging governance and how to develop a set of policy scenarious.

Many African governments now have planning commissions and have established advisory

panels. As it is the case in South Africa, Namibia and Kenya, these structures are used to develop

for development of long-term strategies, visioning excercises and national scenarios development

(see South Africa’s Vision 2025 and Dinokeng Scenarious, Kenya Vision 2030 and Namibia’s

Vision 2030). If they are to shape African Futures, think tanks should really involve themselves

with such planning commissions and those visioning exercise processes. By so doing, they are

able to effect changes of mindset in corridors of power.

7. Conclusion

Today Africa is still grappling with lots of challenges. In the face of today and tomorrow’s

challenges, the continent will loose more than any region in the world. What is of a serious

concern is the fact that, little systematic attention has been paid to understand alternative African

futures. To a larger extent, this is so due to the limited capacity of African governments and their

economies. For so long, African governments have been dependent on policy solutions that are

not rooted on and are not informed by African realities.

In this regard, this necessitates a paradigm shift away from reliance and importation of ideas and

development models towards a focus on endogenous knowledge production, which think tanks

are in a business of doing. It also necessitates a renewed systematic reflection on the scope and

limits of the current development perspectives.

Even though the think tank sector in Africa is not so well developed as compared to that of the

developed, it is evident that, due to its expertise and capacities, it can have a meaningful role to

play not only in transforming the policy making process but also shaping African futures.

33

Africa’s complex challenges demand the best of intellectual capacities. Think tanks are potentially one of the best-suited organizations to develop innovative and advanced solutions to Africa’s challenges. They have a special role to play in shaoing African futures, both as knowledge providers and policy formulation partners. However the challenges still abounds. The challenge for the African governments and institutions is to harness the vast reservoir of knowledge, information, and innovative energy that exist in think-tanks. The sense of urgency for investing on strong innovation systems, knowledge production

infrastructure and on research and development (R&D) systems is even more critical now since

the world economy in the 21st century has been described as the knowledge economy. Knowledge

based economy means investments not only in education, innovation, research and development

but also in the think-tank sector. Endogenous models of financing for think tanks are needed. The

ACBF model discussed in this paper is the right step in a right direction.

Moving forward, think-tanks need to ready themselves for the growing demand of their services.

In addition, they also need to prepare themselves for providing a correct diagnosis and adequate

definition of new policy objectives and tasks. Apart from capacitating and advising the African

leadership and policy makers, formulating plausible hypotheses about possible African futures,

developing some future scenarios and churning out new ideas should be their main

preoccupation. Their responsibility should also be that of stimulating and promoting policy

debates on Africa’s possible developmental paths. The future agenda for African think tanks

should also be a development of ‘futurist community’ in the continent.

34

REFERENCES

Abelson, Donald E. Do Think Tanks Matter? Assessing the Impact of Public Policy Institutes. Montreal: McGill-

Queen’s University Press, 2002, 246 pp.

Adams Jonathan, King Christopher and Hook Daniel. Global Research Report Africa. April 2010, Evidence-Thomas

Reuters, UK pg 1

Africa the Good News. ‘Financial support for African thinks tanks’. Thursday, 02 July 2009

African Capacity Building Foundation. Annual Report 2009. Harare, Zimbabwe

Arowosegbe Jeremiah. “Decolonising the social sciences in the global South: Claude Ake and the praxis of knowledge production in Africa”. ASC Working Paper 29/2008. University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.

Centre for informatics, Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy. 2008. Knowledge economy.

http://www.sancikmke.org.za/economy.htm. Accessed 23 April 2010.

Corrigan Terence 2008.Civil Society, principles and per diems. AllAfrica.com 11 August 2008

Demeš Pavol The role of think tanks in shaping EU policies . 16 December 2009 (accessed on 09 November 2010 at http://www.europesworld.org/NewEnglish/Home_old/CommunityPosts/tabid/809/PostID/1024/TheroleofthinktanksinshapingEUpolicies.aspx )

de Souza. Peter Ronald ‘The Role of Research Institutes and Think tanks in Democratic Governance Reform’. Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla Presentation at the “UNDP OGC roundtable on Evidence into Policy: The Role of Research Institutes and Think tanks”, Cairo, 18 -19, January 2009.

Dell, Sharon. South Africa: Decline in PhD numbers a major problem. World University News, 22 August 2010 ( also available at http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20100820150736361 Diagne Souleymane Bachir. “Toward an intellectual history of West Africa: the meaning of Timbuktu”. In Shamil Jeppie and Souleymane Bachir Diagne (eds). The Meanings of Timbuktu. The Human Sciences Research Council Press, Pretoria, South Africa Diop C.A.1960. L’Afrique noire precoloniale. Paris: Presence Africaine

35

Fatoumatta M’boge and Sam Gbaydee Doe; African Commitments to civil society Engagement: A review of Eight Countries, Monograph, Human Security Initiative, 2004

Goux-Baudiment F. 2009. The role of Think tanks in Developing Countries: Challenges and Solutions. Presented

International Conference held on 17-18 January 2009 at Zamalek Marriot Hotel in Cairo, Egypt

Goran Buldioski. Think Tanks in Central and Eastern Europe in Urgent Need of a Code of Ethics The International

Journal of Not-for-Profit Law Volume 11, Issue 3, May 2009

Hountondji Paulin. Producing Knowledge in Africa Today: the second Bashorun M.K.O Abiola Distinguished

Lecture. African Studies Review, Vol.38, No.3 (December, 1995) pp1-10

Hountondji Paulin. “Knowledge of Africa, Knowledge by Africans: Two perspectives on African Studies”. RCCS

Annual Review 1, September 2009. African Centre for Advanced Studies, Benin

Humphries Richard and Reitzes Maxine. 1995.Civil Society after Apartheid. Centre for Policy Studies,

Johannesburg

Johnson Adrian, McNamee Terence and Mills Greg. ‘The Think-tank and advisory business in Africa’. Report of the

2009 Tswalu Dialogue. South Africa

Kapemba C 2005.Can State and Civil Society Become Real Partners in Fighting Poverty in Africa? Presented on

Public Service Day Tele-Conference organized by the South African Department of Public Service, 2005

Keck,MargaretandSikkink,Kathryn,(1997)TransnationalIssueNetworksinInternationalPolitics,IthacaN.Y.,CornellUniversityPress.Matlou M 2009. Modalities for South-South Cooperation in engendering linkages between research and policy

making. Paper presented during the international conference on the Role of Think tanks in Developing Countries:

Challenges and Solutions, Zamalek Marriot Hotel, Cairo, Egypt 17-18 January 2009

McGann James, G. (2008). ‘Global Go to Think tanks 2008’. Think tanks and Civil Society Programs, University of

Pennsylvania; Pennsylvania, US.

McGann James G and Weaver Kent 2002. Think Tanks & Civil Societies: Catalysts for Ideas and Action. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick 2002

Murithi Tim . ‘The role of African Think tanks in Influencing Policy on Peace and Security Issues’. Paper presented at University of Bradford, 2005

OverseasDevelopmentCouncil—ODC(1999)“DialoguewithThinkTanks:AReportofAMeetingWiththeUnitedNationsSecretaryGeneral,”4‐5May,UnitedNationsHeadquarters,NewYork.Reinicke, Wolfgang H., (1999/2000) “The Other World Wide Web: Global Public Policy Networks,” Foreign Policy, winter.

36

Schmaus, W. ‘A New Way of Thinking about Social Location in Science’, Science & Education (2008) 17:1127–1137.

Simon, David . ‘Development Reconsidered; New Directions in Development Thinking’. In Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 79, No. 4, Current Development Thinking (1997), pp. 183-201. Blackwell Publishing, Stockholm, Sweden

Smith, J.A. The Idea Brokers: Think Tanks and the Rise of New Policy Elite. New York: Free Press, 1991. 313 pp

South African Department of Science and Technology, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland and the World Bank. "Knowledge for Africa’s Development: ten priorities for Africa”. Comprehensive Conference Report for two conferences, a conference on distillation of the knowledge for Africa’s development held in May 2006 and the Knowledge for Africa’s Development Follow-up Seminar held in September 2006, in Johannesburg

Stone, Diane and Denham ,Andrew. Think Tank Traditions: Policy Research and the Politics of Ideas (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2004) Stone Diane, Denham, Andrew and Garnett, Mark. Think tanks across nations: a comparative approach. Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1998 Stone, D. (2000a). 'Think tanks across nations: the new networks of knowledge', NIRA Review,. Winter, 34–9. Stone Diana . "Think tanks and Policy Advice in Countries in Transition." How to Strengthen Policy-Oriented Research and Training in Viet Nam, Asian Development Bank Institute Symposium. Hanoi, 31 Aug. 2005. P. 2. Stone,Diane,(1999)“PrivateAuthority,ScholarlyLegitimacyandPoliticalCredibility:ThinkTanksandInformalDiplomacy,”inRichardHiggott,GeoffreyUnderhillandAndreasBieler(eds.)NonStateActorsandAuthorityintheGlobalOrder,London,Routledge.Struyck,RaymondJ,(1999)ReconstructiveCritics:ThinkTanksinPost­SovietBlocDemocracies,Washington,D.C.,UrbanInstitutePress.Wallace,William,(1994)“BetweenTwoWorlds:ThinkTanksandForeignPolicy,”inC.HillandP.Beshoff(eds.)TwoWorldsofInternationalRelations:Academics,PractitionersandtheTradeinIdeas,London,RoutledgeandLondonSchoolofEconomics:139‐163.

Zeleza Paul Tiyambe . The politics of historical and social sciences in Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies,

Vol.28, No.1, Special Issue March 2002. Malawi, Taylor & Francis, Ltd pp.9-23

37