Search results

This chapter will describe and assess initiatives by the University of Oslo (UoO) in Norway, the purpose of which has been to expand and improve collaboration with universities in Africa, notably the University of Dar es Salaam (UDSM) in Tanzania. UoO has a long history of North-South cooperation with a wide range of institutions on the African continent. In 2009, the UoO initiated a collaborative program with UDSM entitled “Program for Institutional Transformation Research Outreach” (PITRO) III, supported by Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation (NORAD). The chapter will situate the UoO-UDSM cooperation in relation to Norwegian aid, and compare the program with previous programs, giving attention to the ways they were developed, how problems and challenges were tackled, and the probable consequences for Tanzania’s development. The chapter will compare and contrast the structure and experiences from these programs, and will point out strengths and weaknesses. Attention will be given to the rights-based approach, an important new dimension in North-South cooperation on higher education in Africa. It will be argued that the incorporation of this approach provides a basis for developing new policies and programs that strengthen African collaboration within research, education, and capacity building in higher education.

The emergence of the Chinese aid consensus has come to have profound implications for sustainability. The Beijing Consensus “sovereignty doctrine” of non‐interference, presents a stark contrast to the Washington Consensus architecture of imposed conditionalities and the serving of geopolitical interests. For this reason, from Africa's perspective, the Beijing Consensus appears to represent the preferred comprehensive meta‐narrative for Africa. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the attributes of “good” aid architecture in relation to the peculiarities of Africa's challenges.

In examining its principles, objectives, framework differences and impact, the Beijing model shows that it supports the human rights which “unleash”, empower and protect self‐directed development grounded in ownership and in the strategic interests of recipients.

The Washington Consensus has been problematic for African development because it is economistic and exclusively instrumentalist. While conceding to this shortcoming, the inability of the consensus to appreciate the unique and complex development problems of Africa is more troubling. Comparing the two, the Beijing Consensus, which is multidimensional and encompasses the intrinsic and non‐economic roles of development aid, with the consequence of over‐emphasizing expanding local policy, is adjudged practical for Africa. The conclusion is that the dominant Washington Consensus is too poorly articulated and structured to respond to declared determination for ownership, mitigating capabilities deprivation, and improving development control.

This paper has argued that the basic approach of the Beijing Consensus has been more generous and more attractive for sustainable development in Africa. Much more important, perhaps, is the ability of the consensus to appreciate the unique and complex development problems which occur as a consequence of donor deafness on limited rights and conditionalities. In sum, the Beijing Consensus results in exclusionary changes of “less magnitude and speed” and promotes poverty reduction and sustainable development. Taken together, these factors and practices mean that the Beijing Consensus best serves the staircase of a nation's pathway to indigenous development, when compared with the Washington Consensus. Such a comprehensive meta‐narrative that builds alliances and creates a foundation for enlightened and effective politics of development aid will “unleash”, empower and protect the full potential of Africa.

Africa’s unique social contexts play a transformative role in the development of higher education throughout the continent. As a geographic giant endowed with substantial natural resources and a growing population, Africa is a dynamic – albeit diverse – world player, and amidst the political pacification and democratization of the continent, is also unfolding as an increasingly strong economic force in the world. These many factors contextualize the history and position of higher education in Africa as well. Despite rapid growth in recent years, higher education in Africa is less developed than anywhere else in the world. Major challenges include expanding participation in higher education, poor infrastructure, isolation from society and communities, internationalization and regional cooperation, and aligning the world of education with the world of work. The chapters in this volume are presented within this framework, with the intention that this volume will contribute to the scholarly discourse guiding the development of higher education in Africa.