SUMMARY REPORTSCIENCE GRANTING COUNCILS INITIAVE IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
2018 ANNUAL FORUM & MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING (MEL) WORKSHOP
Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, 6-7 November, 2018
African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS)
Scinnovent Centre

A: SGCI 2018 ANNUAL FORUM MASTERCLASS (6 NOV 2018)
Theme: New Approaches to Funding Research and Innovation in Africa
1. INTRODUCTION
The Science Granting Councils Initiative in Sub-Saharan Africa (SGCI) 2018 Annual Forum brought together
about 120 delegates from 15 the Science Granting Councils (SGCs) in Africa and other science system actors
from across Africa and the world at large. This is in line with the Initiative’s ambition to strengthen the capacitiesof the SGCs in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in order toBox 1: Science Granting Councils Present
support research and evidence-based policies that willcontribute to economic and social development. The
Botswana, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana,
Forum was organised by the African Technology Policy
Guinea*, Kenya, Malawi, Mali*, Namibia,
Studies Network (ATPS) in partnership with theMozambique, Senegal, South Africa*, Tanzania,
Scinnovent Centre who are leading the work to promote
Uganda, and Zimbabwe.
networking among Councils and with other science*: non-participating SGCs invited to the Forumsystem actors.
The theme was driven by the SGCI Commissioned Masterclass Paper on “New Approaches for Funding Researchand Innovation in Africa.” Reposing on the ambitions of African countries for economic and social development
through Research and Innovation (RI), the current and new approaches for RI funding were presented in Draft
Masterclass Paper, whose lead author is Dr Julius Mugwagwa of the University College London. Pan-Africanand global perspectives were then respectively shared by George Essegbey from the Council for Scientific andIndustrial Research (CSIR), Ghana and Stuart Taberner of United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI).
Also present in the Forum were the SGCI Collaborating Technical Agencies, the SGCI Funders, Panel ofAdvisors, and invited science system actors. The objective of the meeting was to share evidence, experiences andgood practices, and to deliberate and develop interventions along the forum’s theme. The Forum supported andstrengthened the voices and views of Councils; and contributed to key Science Technology and Innovation (STI)
policy debates at regional and continental levels. This was evidenced by the invitation extended to the Malianand Guinean Councils to the meeting by the co-host - le Programme d’Appui Stratégique à la Recherche
Scientifique (PASRES) en Côte d’Ivoire. Through an open discussion in plenary, the contributions of Councils

showed that some of them are at different levels of application of the different approaches to funding RI in theirrespective countries. Examples were illustrated by some Councils including the Ministère de l'enseignement
supérieur et de la Recherche-Senegal, Tanzania Commission for Science Technology (COSTECH), Ministry ofEnvironment, Science, Technology and Innovation (MESTI) Ghana, National Commission on Research Scienceand Technology (NCRST) Namibia, with the supporting contributions from the Belmont Forum.
In conclusion, three key themes emerged from the masterclass: (1) the importance of youth involvement indriving the development agenda of our nations, (2) the role of African philanthropy in contributing to RI, and (3)the need for political goodwill in sustaining increased investment in RI in Africa.
2. WELCOME ADDRESSESDr Yaya Sangare, the Executive Secretary of the Programme d’Appui Stratégique à la Recherche Scientifique(PASRES) en Côte d’Ivoire in his opening remarks noted that the SGCI allows for the participating countries toovercome significant barriers of ignorance, of prejudgements and of language in order to work together. For
instance, Côte d’Ivoire, a francophone country has been working successfully with Mozambique, which is a
Lusophone country. The Initiative also allows for these countries to benefit from the scientific and technicalleadership that the authors of the masterclass and the other presenters usually display.
In the spirit of the theme of this year’s meeting, he noted that the continent has many challenges which can beaddressed through research and innovation. It is important therefore to think about new approaches for mobilisingresources that will complement what is being given by the government.
Dr Sangare through PASRES considered it worthy to invite two other countries to this year’s Annual Forum
namely; Guinea and Mali, who are not only neighbouring countries, but also countries that offer added scientificand socio-economic value to the region noting that they will be an interesting addition to the SGCI.
Since 2015, the SGCI has always selected themes for the Annual Forum based on topical around science,technology, research and innovation issues of importance to sub-Saharan Africa countries and has produced
valuable knowledge products of importance to the SGCs and the science communities. This year, the theme wason new approaches for funding research and innovation in Africa. Dr Phethiwe Matutu of the National Research
Foundation South Africa (NRF-South Africa) in her opening remarks urged the SGCs to embrace the research
conducted by the Initiative. For instance, the NRF-South Africa has taken upon itself to look into the 2016 SGCI
“knowledge products” on research excellence and develop frameworks on how they will encourage research
excellence as an organisation. Equally, in 2017, the NRF decided to come up with a strategy as a research council
on public-private partnerships. Dr Matutu encouraged other councils to follow similar strides and institutionalise
the research products from the Forums.
3. KEY MESSAGES FROM THE 2018 ANNUAL FORUM
The 2018 Annual Forum offered an avenue for sharing of evidence and good practices, and to deliberate oninterventions on new funding approaches for RI in Africa. The key messages on the theme emanating from themasterclass are briefly described below:
Governments use public institution funding or interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary programmes,
innovation brokerage, formation of national research funding consortia, co-funding with the SGCs,
investment in high-end research programmes such as research chairs and centres of excellence. In Kenya
and Zambia, there has been multi-institutional/multidisciplinary funding where this has contributed tothe strengthening of research and innovation programmes. South Africa on its part has led in research
infrastructure funding and investment in high-end research programmes and has seen the improvementof research infrastructure and the addition of 240 research chairs currently in position;

The private sector use retained profits and borrowing for capital markets as well as corporate social
responsibility (CSR) to fund research. They are also using patent buyouts to take over applied researchfrom proof of concept as well as safety and efficacy testing. In Zambia for instance, patent buyouts have
led to the strengthening of research and research dissemination;
Impact investors fund commercialisation ventures through equity and debt to solve market failures witha focus on social goods;
Crowdfunding efforts are made to fund research and commercialisation through equity, contributing tosocial investment and addressing market failures;Page 2 sur 7Charities are funding basic, applied research and clinical trials using grants and co-funding for academia
and SMEs working in neglected areas. This is motivated by the fact that these tend to be niche areas suchas rare diseases where market failure is common;
Cities and regions are funding land, labour and utilities through grants given as incentives to firms that
relocate to a city or region targeting industrial development. This is motivated by the fact that cities andregions are looking to attract particular industrial activities to a particular city or region to boost economic
activities and contribute to rejuvenation of de-industrialised places.

Research and innovation is undoubtedly important as echoed by stakeholders in the Forum, but the challenge
remains on how to mobilise resources to address the issues of funding and hence address the economic and social
challenges of the continent. As Dr Mugwagwa summed it all, there is need to Demonstrate Value and Impact(DVI).
Feedback offered from the experts who gave perspectives on the masterclass paper showed that the models
presented were relevant to local contexts. The role of partners was repeatedly identified as key to any funding
approach especially in the multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary contexts. It was proposed thatreforms should focus on output and impact as is the case in Kenya, emphasise on international competitiveness,
strengthen the science-policy linkages as is the case in South Africa, ensure enhancement of human and societal
benefits as is the case in Namibia and learn from the past as has been done Malawi, even with the potential ofreviving old models.
Institutional reforms were also echoed by the experts as fundamental in providing the enabling environment for
RI to thrive. National priorities still drive funding of which international funders’ priorities only come second.
The Councils, unlike the central governments, have a key role to play as they can engage with more autonomy
with the international funders - these funders desire to engage with institutions with relative autonomy.
The key themes that emerged from the masterclass paper can be summarised into four groups: (1) Consistencyof the funding and the funding mechanisms, (2) Sufficiency of the funding (is the 1% cap ambitious enough?),(3) Relevance of the funding today and how it is addressing the issues of today as well as the issues of tomorrow;and (4) Coordination of the different funding mechanisms. These themes are briefly expounded below:
3.1 CONSISTENCY OF THE FUNDING AND THE FUNDING MECHANISMS
In order to ensure consistency in funding, the Councils need to continually generate evidence of RI impact. The
African Science Technology and Innovation Indicators (ASTII) Initiative run by the NEPAD Agency has hadcountries providing very useful and informative statistics and the Councils can rely on this data to generate
evidence. This will, in turn, enable them to enhance the science-policy linkages. In addition, mapping out of
research and innovation ecosystem is very paramount to developing linkages and partnerships. As one of theparticipants noted, no other person should understand the RI ecosystem in the African countries better than theCouncils. Funders such as the IDRC, DFID and SIDA have most recently been working with African countries
in an ecosystem approach in order to strengthen the roles of local institutions in contributing to their STI agendas.
Therefore, Councils have a leadership and oversight role to play in ensuring consistency of funding.
3.2 SUFFICIENCY OF THE FUNDING (IS THE 1% GDP TO R&D CAP AMBITIOUS ENOUGH?)
African governments agreed to commit at least 1% GDP spending on research and development since 1980.
However, this commitment has not been respected by any of the AU member countries, despite the adoption of
the STISA-2024 Strategy. The average stands at 0.2 to 0.5% GERD. The question was posed on whether this is
too high an ambition given that none of the countries has reached this target yet. Further, the importance ofunderstanding the mind-set of the African politicians as they are the “gateway” to increased and sustainable
government investments in RI was emphasised, as much as gaining political will is not about just talking aboutit, but also about committing resources to the declarations made.
The author of the masterclass paper recommended that the AUC, the Regional Economic Communities (RECs)
and the national governments should work to increase, sustain and operationalise political will. Honouring the
1% GERD commitment will not only involve the reinforcement/advocacy from the international donors, but also
from the civil society and the private sector actors. Private sector actors have the capacity to increase their levelsof funding and their relevance of funding activities. Moreover, if governments provide all funding then the private
sector will not have any impetus to put in their money: a public-private partnership project has been proven tohave better outcomes. South Africa through the NRF shared its experience in mobilizing industry contributions
by observing that context and strategy are the determining factors when engaging partners. They also added that
Councils should play the role of creating an enabling environment for engaging with industry.
Page 3 sur 7

3.3 RELEVANCE OF THE FUNDING TODAY
The relevance of the funding approaches present today and how they are addressing the issues of today, as wellas the issues of tomorrow, was deliberated on. The question was raised on whether the deliberations on RI funding
will always be done by scientists, innovation and policy researchers, or whether it was time that the ministries ofcommerce and finance be involved in these deliberations. This remark was accompanied by the observation thatyouth are continually churning relevant innovations yet the deliberations may not be addressing their specificfinancial needs yet. Ethiopia just recently rebranded its Ministry of Science and Technology to the Ministry ofInnovation and Technology, which speaks to the commitment to valorisation of research and the systems thinking
perspective. These observations tie in with the subject of inclusion whether this be through gender, or otherdemographic dimensions in the discussions. The Authors of the masterclass paper argued their points from anecosystems level approach rather than simply a value-chain level to include the demographic dividend that thecontinent is growing into. The organisers were also challenged to diversify the demographics of the invitees tosuch Forums to allow for a diversity of contributions.
3.4 COORDINATION OF THE DIFFERENT FUNDING MECHANISMS
Whereas some African countries have science granting councils/commissions/agencies and the accompanying
parliamentary Acts that provide the mandates for their institutionalisation, these Acts do not cover very well theissues of funding and its mechanisms. It was proposed through the discussions that this should come out clearlyin the recommendations from the Masterclass paper in order to allow for efficient and effective coordination of
the different funding mechanisms.
Equally, a key theme in the coordination of funding mechanisms is the role of system actors in the coordinationof the funding mechanisms. Firstly, it is important that the Councils themselves first seek to understand theconcept of multidisciplinary/interdisciplinary/transdisciplinary RI before they look to implement them. Other
countries have mastered these approaches better than others, and the latter can benchmark with the former where
possible. Secondly, it is important that each actor plays its role in the system by providing complementary actions.
Development partners were called upon to support countries to reconfigure their RI systems. The Pan-African
perspective showed that development partners can reinforce the operational and infrastructural costs of RI thereby
supporting the capacity building of local institutions. This way, perhaps, answers can be drawn on how to cushion
RI agendas across political and policy regimes.
B: SGCI 2018 MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING (MEL) WORKSHOP (7 NOV
2018)
How the SGCI is making a difference for African Science Granting Councils
The 2018 SGCI Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) workshop unlike in previous years had the special
participation of the Heads of Research Councils and the SGCI Panel of advisors, alongside the Initiative partners,
invited guests and other science system actors. The goal of the MEL workshop was to present progress andshowcase how the SGCI is making a difference in the work of Africa’s Councils. To achieve this, the following
were set as the objectives for this specific year’s workshop:






Present progress against Jan. 2019 (SGCI) East Africa Research Hub (EARH) log frame targets;
Present specific “story of change” in the context of SGCI log frame indicators and the SGCI Evaluative
Learning Framework (ELF) system of “acquiring”, “adapting” and “applying” knowledge;
Provide an opportunity for the Councils to engage in the monitoring and learning process by providing
inputs to emerging stories of change and identifying any stories that may have been documented;
Share and reflect on emerging stories – what has worked and what needs improvements; andReflect on how political economy (PE) study results are informing technical support, and share plans forphase 2 analysis and case studies.

The theory of change of the SGCI is anchored on its log frame based on a “joined-up” SGCI. This year’s
workshop was built to enable the sharing of stories, not only from the Initiative but also from the Councils
themselves, based on the specific targets of i) more effective research management practices among SGCs; ii)
increased use of STI indicators to design and monitor research programs, and to implement policies; iii) increased
knowledge transfer to the private sector and cooperation among the Councils; and, iv) increasingly coordinatedand networked Councils.

Page 4 sur 7

4. STORIES OF CHANGE” IN THE CONTEXT OF SGCI LOG FRAME INDICATORS AND THE SGCIEVALUATIVE LEARNING FRAMEWORK (ELF) SYSTEM OF “ACQUIRING”, “ADAPTING” AND“APPLYING” KNOWLEDGE
The Collaborating Technical Agencies (CTAs) presented their “stories of change” while providing an opportunity
for Councils and other participants present to engage in the monitoring and learning process by providing inputs
to emerging stories of change and identifying any stories that may have been documented. The stories of change
revolved around the CTA themes namely:
4.1 THEME 1: RESEARCH MANAGEMENTThe objective of Theme 1 of the SGCI being to strengthen research management of Science Granting Council’sin the 15 African countries by developing and delivering appropriate and needs-driven training, technicalintervention and leaning opportunities as well as building communities through collaborative partnershipnetworks, SARIMA (the Southern Africa Research and Innovation Management Association, South Africa) has
focused on four (4) areas when assessment of the quality of research call competitions is considered namely; i)the call for application ii) the reviews and assessments iii) the award and iv) the monitoring, learning andevaluation.
Through the intervention shared with Dr Ismail Barugahara, it was observed that the Uganda National Council
for Science and Technology (UNCST) is now able to clearly set out detailed guidelines in a call for proposal by
UNCST, Scinnovent Centre and ACTS within the Initiative. Concretely, they have been able to specify theirpermissible and non-permissible budget expenditures, code proposals using the online research management
system, and the issuance of customised feedback to all applicants. In addition, the UNCST recommends thatSARIMA should get more involved in the research management processes taking place in the SGCs. This way,
the actual SGC capacity needs can be clearly identified and appropriately addressed.
4.2 THEME 2: USE OF STI INDICATORSThe New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) is the development agency of the African Union andhas been accorded the mandate of championing the use of STI indicators for designing programmes and public
policy interventions. To do this, they take a differentiated approach towards the Councils, of which some have
granting functions, others are national agencies for STI statistics and data management and others budgeting
while at the same time other Councils have a multiplicity of roles.
The Fonds National de la Recherche et de l’Innovation pour le Développement (FONRID) is supporting the
PNDES (Plan National de Développement Economique et Social) which is anchored on three main agenda,
namely: i) institutional reform and administration modernisation ii) revitalising promising sectors for the
economy and employment and iii) human capital development. This national plan is set to transform Burkina
Faso to a modern economy anchored on manufacturing and a dynamic service in the tertiary sector for an average
projected economic growth of 7.7%, create at least 50,000 jobs per year and reduce the effect of poverty to 35%.
They have leveraged on NEPAD’s training on the use of database systems for impact evaluation in order thatthey can evaluate how the results of these projects contribute to the main goals of PNDES.
4.3 THEME 3: KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER TO THE
AGREEMENTS AND GRANTSPRIVATE SECTOR & COOPERATION

The focus of Theme 3 in strengthening partnerships among Africa’s SGCs and the private sector has been to
move forward with the collaborative agreements that were signed the previous year. A number of Councils haveformed collaborative partnerships e.g. Mozambique and Namibia, the East African Community, Côte d’Ivoire
and Sénégal, and Sénégal and Burkina Faso. Public-private partnerships are also being concluded with Malawi
having three (3) proposals being funded, Mozambique having two (2) proposals being funded among otheractivities.
Through these activities the value of face-to-face meetings has been found to be very valuable in knowledge
sharing activities. The team has also put in place a strategy for private sector engagement and monitoring, as wellas one on supporting cooperation agreements which have facilitated the engagements with the SGCs. In thatregard, the formation of the collaborative projects between Mozambique and Namibia showed that active
interaction between the SGC staff in both Councils was crucial. In addition, the national databases of researchers
in different fields of study in the two countries made matching of reviewers easier. As for Ghana, which is in theprocess of defining the institutional framework for Technology Commercialization Unit (TCU) and Ghana
Innovation and Research Commercialisation (GIRC) Centre later to a fully-fledged agency, the financial support
under the theme 3 pledged by Ghana has doubled as a result of these activities from 25,000 USD to 50,000 USD.
Page 5 sur 7

4.4 THEME 4: BUILDING NETWORKS AMONG THE COUNCILS AND OTHER SCIENCE SYSTEM ACTORS
Theme 4 of the SGCI led by the ATPS in partnership with the Scinnovent Centre shared their experience on how
the SGCI promotes and monitors uptake of knowledge products. To promote uptake, the project team ensures
relevance of these knowledge products by prioritising key issues/topics of immediate interest and relevance to
the SGCs, enhancing quality by generating policy-relevant knowledge and evidence, addressing timeliness byfacilitating access to the knowledge products through effective communication and facilitating sharing of lessons
and experiences through Forums and Meetings. On the other hand, the project team is intensifying efforts intracking knowledge uptake by the SGCs. The team has effectively used interviews conducted during themeetings, the evaluation forms and performance indicators such as number and type of participants to perform
monitoring.
As reported from the experience during the 2018 Annual Regional Meeting in Ghana, the SGCI created a platform
for exploring possibilities of SGCI engagements through the Councils and Commissions mainly in West Africawith the ECOWAS Division of STI which is in charge of valorisation of research products and strengthening thegovernance of research institutions among others. In addition, the SGCI is a key member of the technical working
group for the GIRC Centre. Representatives from FONRID reported that they do receive the knowledge outputs
that result from the SGCI research, but they would like to know exactly how they can implement theserecommendations as sometimes this is not explicit given the idiosyncratic political economies in the Councils.
5. POLITICAL ECONOMY (PE) STUDY RESULTS
The political economy study (Case Studies of the Political Economy of Science Granting Councils in SubSaharan Africa and How the political economy influence the evolution of science funding in sub-Saharan Africa)
was launched in 2016 targeting case studies from Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ethiopia and Senegal. The CTA
feedback on the report (on which they have effectively developed actions towards) showed that there is bias inresearch funding towards agriculture and health, funding for research is more externally driven, research often
gained little recognition internationally, data was difficult to find, and there is lack of engagement with the private
sector.
With regards to the possibility of a 2nd phase of the study, recommendations issued were to conduct a study thatwould either i) produce future scenarios which can be used by SGCs and CTAs to inform strategy and decisionmaking ii) create a series of case studies which can be used to inform SGCs and CTA strategy and thinking about
governance and operational modes iii) explore how national level SGCs can maximise the positive impact ofinternational and regional policy and funding initiatives in national level STI narratives and practice.
Feedback received showed that it would be most feasible to link the 2nd Phase of the political economy paperwith the issues on uptake and institutionalisation of knowledge output, which were earlier highlighted.
6. SGCI PHASE 2: TOWARDS CO-DESIGN AND CO-IMPLEMENTATIONThe 2nd Phase of the SGCI, set to run from 2019-2023 is about deepening and sustaining the SGCI in Africa, withthe ambition of supporting the existing 15 SGCI member countries, supporting the SGCI thematic areas, but withgreater emphasis on gender equality/ inclusivity and research excellence
In that regard, the focus of the new phase as would be managed by the CTAs will focus on the following areas,
marked as high priority areas. These were presented to the Councils and others present for feedback anddeliberation.
Theme 1 - Research Management•

Offer training on knowledge and practice of research excellence through the piloting use of tools such as
the Research Quality Plus (RQ+) assessment framework and training in unconscious bias
• Support case studies to deepen knowledge and implementation of Research Ethics• Support development of on-line grant management system, including software acquisition• Offer training on research finance and risk management (from raising funds to granting)• Support strategic communication of research results• Support studies on research excellence and gender inclusivity
Theme 2 - Use of STI Indicators to design and monitor research programs and to formulate and implement
policies•

Support Councils to develop STI data collection tools and platforms to measure R&D and innovation
processes and performance in firms and social sectors

Page 6 sur 7•Build the capabilities of Councils to use industry and social sector-level metrics to design policies andprogrammes• Fund Councils to convene dialogues with policy-makers in order to exchange, share and disseminate
data-derived key messages, or to advocate for increased investment in research and innovation
Theme 3 A - Support knowledge transfer to the Private Sector•

Fund projects that provide solutions to private sector needs and interests (product development projects
with potential for commercialization:• Support studies on partnerships between public (universities and research institutes) and the private
sector. The research will include approaches for assessing the impacts of such research• Support Councils to convene dialogues between academia or research bodies and private sector groups
in order to promote linkages and ensure demand-led research
Theme 3 B - Cooperation agreements and grants•

Deepen support for inter-SGC cooperation agreements including funds for meetings to design andmanage such agreements.
• Fund cooperating Councils to support projects on research for development themes (e.g., energy, waterand sanitation)• Support joint consultative meetings between/ among Councils
Theme 4 - Networking among Councils and with other Science System Actors•••

Support 3 annual forums (2020 – 2022) covering specific themes and informed by commissioned papers
Support 2 regional meetings (2020 in Southern Africa and 2021 in Francophone Africa)
Facilitate and monitor uptake of knowledge products (commissioned/ synthesis papers, policy briefs,
books)

Feedback received showed that while these are necessary and ambitious steps of the SGCI, there is still a need to
articulate how these programmes will be sustained beyond the Initiative. Councils were called upon to not wait
for the Initiative’s programmes to start but to also ensure that they initiate what they can within their own
capacities. Nonetheless, Councils noted that they would need the SGCI’s 2nd phase to focus on monitoring andevaluation, upscaling of research projects, research ethics especially in collaborative research, creating a databaseof scientists to ensure that calls are better targeted to intended audience and aligning the Initiative to the global
and regional goals like the Agenda 2030.
7. WAY FORWARD
The SGCI 2018 Annual Forum and MEL Workshop provided an opportunity for the Initiative to deliberate on
the new funding approaches for RI in Africa and also look through the work that has been conducted through theyear, while reflecting through the areas of action for the Initiative’s 2 nd Phase. The rich discussions that ensued
during the Forum showed that considerable strides had been taken, but there is still a lot that remains to be done
to strengthen the SGCs and other science system actors in SSA. While these two key meetings achieved a lot,
more contacts will be made with the councils to especially close in on the focus that the Initiative will take forthe coming years. The narration of the “stories of change” told by the CTAs in collaboration with the Councils
would need to be reflected upon to ensure that what has worked and what needs improvement alike is well
captured. The masterclass paper that was discussed will be finalised and shared accordingly. The theme for the
next year’s Annual Forum will be identified early in 2019 in partnership with the Councils, the Initiative
Management Team and other science system actors. Importantly, as reflected in one of the key messages, councils
are urged and challenged to come up with strategies for the institutionalisation of the knowledge outputs that theInitiative produces.

Page 7 sur 7