LE FINANCEMENT DE LA RECHERCHE DANS LES PAYS NON- HÉGÉMONIQUES ET LA COOPÉRATION

INTERNATIONALE

Rigas ARVANITIS et

Montserrat Alom, Adeline Néron et Kadijatou Marou Sama

SUD-NORD? PAYS NON-HÉGÉMONIQUES?

• Définition : Pays qui ne sont pas en mesure d’influencer « l’agenda » international de recherche

• Pays qui se situent en position subordonnée dans le « marché international des compétences »• Losego, Philippe et Rigas Arvanitis (2008). "La science

dans les pays non hégémoniques." Revue d'Anthropologie des Connaissances 2(3): 334-342. http://www.cairn.info/revue-anthropologie-des-connaissances-2008-3-page-334.htm

• Quel rapport avec le développement? • Définition =/= « en développement » ou « Sud »

CHANGEMENT DE PARADIGME

Régimes de production des connaissances• Régime « national »

• Institutionalisation : mode national etpublic• Communautés scientifiques (nationales &

disciplinaires)• Régime Global (ou Mondial) – pas “International”

• « Agences », Fondations, ONG, entreprises (PPP)• Agences et organismes internationaux: BMG,

Wellcome, WHO, CGIAR…• « Réseaux » : “big science” n’est plus seulement “big

instruments”, mais grands projets comparatifs, mondialisés, expeditions, …

RÉSEAUX OU INSTITUTIONS…

• Quelques rappels :• Le savoir est toujours local• La connaissance scientifique est dépendante des

instruments et des données• Le contexte fait partie des processus de production de

connaissance

• Le « wagnerian dilemma sink or link » • Caroline Wagner : The new invisible college

• Critique de cette position: • Les nœuds du réseau doivent être situés (centres de calcul

de Latour) : Les pôles sont des môles• You cant link if you dont sink !

LE NOUVEAU PAYSAGE DE LA RECHERCHE

• Multiplication des centres de recherche et des « communautés ».

• Renforcement de la recherche dans les universités • Multiplication des bailleurs de fonds

• Inversion public-privé

• Pas de « priorités nationales » • Le mode projet dominant• Excellence et pertinence

5

THE TRANSFORMATION OF RESEARCH IN THE SOUTH

6

EXCELLENCE? EXEMPLE EN AFRIQUE

• Appel d’Abidjan : créer un African research council (ARC) sur le modèle ERC • Initiatives des Centres d’Excellence africains

• Travaux de Ericka Mbula et Robert Tijssen

• Rapport Arvanitis et Mouton • Position any new initiative in an already very populated world of initiatives

• ARC should not be an “additional” or complement to other types of funding.

• Funding excellent individuals, but with active supportive functions• Experience of IFS. PIs should have autonomy and support for structural action.

• Balance among university partners • Confronting the already existing competition among universities

• Cope explicitly with mobility issues (circulation, visas, etc…)• Circulation of individuals in an unequal world.

NORD-SUD / CENTRE-PERIPHERIEUN IMAGINAIRE DEPASSE

• La définition de « l’agenda de recherche »• un processus complexe et multi-acteurs

• (différents agendas car différents groupes d’intérêt au Nord comme au Sud, dans l’imaginaire encore dichotomie agenda Nord versus agenda Sud…) ;

• Pas de Nord-Sud mais des réseaux/financements/regroupements• côté chercheurs (Montserrat Alom) : passe par la

construction et le maintien/développement de réseaux, ainsi que par la co-construction de cadres cognitifs communs étant le fruit d’un long processus d’apprentissage à différents niveaux

• côté bailleurs: (rapport Dodson) gestion partagée des fonds

8

THE RESEARCH SYSTEM(S)?

CROISSANCE DE LA RECHERCHE

10

CROISSANCE DE LA RECHERCHE

INTERNATIONAL CO-AUTHORSHIP IN ARAB COUNTRIES 2000-2010

AGENCIES IN ARAB COUNTRIES

• Africa : 17 countries = around 40 funds/programmes (Mouton, Gaillard & van Lill 2014)

• France (ANR): 40 milliards € = 2% de DIRD & DIRD/PIB= 2.24% of GDP

• USA, NSF: US$ 7 milliards = 1.63% de DIRD US (DIRD/PIB= 2.85%).

DIRD/PIB : NO CORRELATION IN ARAB COUNTRIES

ARAB COUNTRIES : FEW RESEARCHERS / LOTS OF EXPATRIATES

Countries NbResearchers(2007)

Researchersper 1 millioninhabitants

Expatriates with high skills(approximation)

Egypt 67 652 750 140 000Algeria 5 764 * 170 213 000

Morocco 27 714 780 200 000

Tunisia 15 159 1390 66 000Kuwait 158 57 17 000Qatar 105 (1 204) 42 / 516 1 400Saudi Arabia 716 41 12 000

UAE 3 500 38 3 500Jordan 42 151 !! 420 280 000Lebanon 13 316 / 2 000 325 / 50 17 000

ARAB COUNTRIES: FOREIGN SUPPORT

• Array of funding sources• European Union (2007-2013) :

• Egypt RDI (co-funding) : €11 million in 2007 & € 20 million in 2010

• Tunisia : € 12 million• Jordan : €5 million• Algeria : € 38.6 million programmes , co-funded by the EU

for €21.5 million• Morocco (twinning €1.3 million)• Various “Erasmus mundus” scholarships and TEMPUS

projects• We estimate that the EU has spent the non-negligible

amount of €300 million in the period 2007–2013.

FOREIGN SOURCES OF FUNDING: BOTH BLESSING AND CURSE

UNIVERSITE

18

NIGER

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

Nombre de références Production lissée

Institutions 1995 - 2015 Nbr Refs

UAM, Niger 349

ICRISAT (toutes adresses) Niger=196 214

IRD + ORSTOM (toutes adresses) 229

Instituts Pasteur (toutes adresses) 80

INRAN, Niger 100

CERMES (ou Ctr Rech Med & Sanitaire), Niger 114

AGRHYMET, Niger 81

Epicentre, France et Niger 40

Minist Hlth, Niger / Minist Sante Publ, Niger 52

CNRS, France 46

Hop Natl Niamey, Niger 45

Réseau international schistosomiases RISEAL 19

LASDEL, Niger 12

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

EuropeFrance

Grande BretagneBelgique

AllemagneSuisse

Pays-BasReste de l'Europe

USAAfrique

Burkina FasoSenegal

MaliNigeriaKenya

CamerounReste de l'Afrique

AutresInde

Autres pays

Niger : Number of institutions mentionned 1995-2015

SOURCES DE FINANCEMENT NIGER (N=471 PUB)

National 7 1,5% Gates 44 9,3%

France 92 19,5%

Wellcome

trust 8 1,7%Belgique 11 2,3% ONG France 14 3,0%Grande

Bretagne 12 2,5% ONG US 7 1,5%

Allemagne 9 1,9%Sanofi-Pasteur 15 3,2%

Danemark 5 1,1%

Suisse 4 0,8%

Afrique du

Sud 6 1,3%

Monaco 3 0,6% Brésil 7 1,5%EU 60 12,7% Inde 4 0,8%USA 61 13,0% Tunisie 2 0,4%Int Orga 51 10,8% Initiatives 4 0,8%

AFRIQUE

• Plus de 50 fonds nationaux dans les pays d’afriquesub-saharienne

• (enquête Mouton, Gaillard, van Lill)

23

RÔLES DES AGENCES DE FINANCEMENT

• Define national policy for research• Coordinate between different research institutions• Manage research centres performing research• Manage the status of the research activity inside higher

education institutions• Manage programmes and specific funds• Select and manage funding of scholarships to students and

researchers• Support publishing of scientific journals and publications• Promote valorisation (technology transfer) of research

performed in scientific institutions• Evaluate the effects of policies• Collect statistics on research• Diffusion of scientific culture

CHANGING THE SYSTEM IN ARAB COUNTRIES

• Agencies w/funding by calls (all except Tunisia)• Labelling teams (Tunisia)• “National” Evaluation of research (Morocco) • Budgeting (Morocco – 2000)• Academics promotion• Innovation-related activities : Berytech• Relation to societal challenges: connection to

partners outside research

FACING DIFFICULTIES

• Social needs not taken in consideration• Social pressure on the university system• Social sciences not considered as important• Innovation (‘network paradigm’) has poor success• Technoparks / incubators / innovation “hubs”

(Tunisia /Egypt / Lebanon) but the economic system does not fund innovative entrepreneurs• (Paradox of innovation: low level of support and rather

important activity)

ISSUES : RELEVANCE AND INTERNATIONALIZATION

• Weak institutionalisation of research • Fragmentation • No Social sciences (but see Arab Council Soc

Sciences , U$ 2 millions)• Promotion system based on foreign publications

: publish locally and die globally vs publish globally and die locally

• Foreign collaboration and cooperation as absolute necessity.

EN CONCLUSION

• Les hégémonies ne sont pas visibles dans les réseaux – ne sont pas une question d’influence

• Les réseaux légitiment des objets de recherche : rôle clé des agences (« areas of concern »)

• Les financements changent les carrières –consolidation de la recherche (Hanafi statement)

• Compétition sur le sens de l’excellence…

PERTINENCE ET INTERNATIONALISATION

• Institutionalisation of research / projects• Promotion system based on foreign publications

: publish locally and die globally vs publish globally and die locally

• International collaborations/multi-actor governance

• Social sciences

30

FOREIGN SUPPORT

• Array of funding sources• European Union (2007-2013) :

• Egypt RDI (co-funding) : €11 million in 2007 & € 20 million in 2010

• Tunisia : € 12 million• Jordan : €5 million• Algeria : € 38.6 million programmes , co-funded by the EU

for €21.5 million• Morocco (twinning €1.3 million)• Various “Erasmus mundus” scholarships and TEMPUS

projects• We estimate that the EU has spent the non-negligible

amount of €300 million in the period 2007–2013.

CHANGING THE SYSTEM

• Funding by calls (example Arab countries…)• Labelling teams (Tunisia)• Evaluation of research systems• New budgeting• Academics promotion• Innovation-related activities• Relation to societal challenges: connection to

partners outside research

DIFFICULTIES

• Social needs not taken in consideration• Social pressure on university system• Social sciences not considered as important• Innovation (‘network paradigm’) rarely mix with

public policies on research and international development

• Innovation policies mainly limited to incubators/innovation hubs…

OVERCOMING LIMITATIONS..

• Position any new initiative in an already very populated world of initiatives• ARC should not be an “additional” or complement to other

types of funding.• Funding excellent individuals, but with active

supportive functions• Experience of IFS. PIs should have autonomy and support

for structural action.• Balance among university partners

• Confronting the already existing competition among universities

• Cope explicitly with mobility issues (circulation, visas, etc…)• Circulation of individuals in an unequal world.

ARC: STRONG ASSETS COULD BE

Support basic research of high quality, not linkeddirectly to innovation or applied research: change of vision of what research is about

Easy access to funding, independence of PIs Influence in the political economy (other funding

bodies): international bodies WB, WHO … privatefoundations, national funds, NGOs

Offer co-funding Aim at transparency and legitimacy of the ARC

ISSUES TO BE ADRESSED• Funding mixes

• Agencies, topics, clustering,, see ACE (a historical move: from inside funding to competitive projects, from projects to larger initiatives, from teams to networks and clusters of knowledge )

• Central to all these funding issues: what government instruments are used in Africa (see Cabaneand Tantchou 2016)

• Funding and choice of topics :• Researcher vs agencies : cognitive frames of agencies are reinterpreted and apropriated by

researchers, learning process=thus, agencies do not impose a frame (what about EU?)

• Funding and publications • funding affects directly the quantity of the science produced. What are the measuring

instruments?

• Issues on academic freedom:• Give a new role to Pis (see IFS experience): young researcher need some independence to take

root in their university

• Dependency of careers upon funding • Continuity instead of opposition of consultancy and research activity.

• Attractiveness of research :• research vs teaching (do not repeat WB errors)

• Brain drain and mobility : Funding as a conscious instrument • Returnees: Its not the money, its the environment and the family

• Funding and mobility : Cope explicitly with mobility issues (circulation, visas, etc• Circulation of individuals in an unequal world.