Titre de la présentation - TECFA
Transcript of Titre de la présentation - TECFA
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.