Promoting Meaningful and Equitable Relationships? Exploring the UK’s Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) Funding Criteria from the Perspectives of African Partners

Abstract

Against a backdrop of historic inequities between Northern and Southern scholars, the UK’s Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) calls for “meaningful and equitable” research partnerships between UK-based academics and partners in the Global South. This paper draws on qualitative data from three workshops in the Ethiopia, Rwanda and the UK to interrogate GCRF funding criteria from the perspectives of African-based research partners. The GCRF criteria are considered with respect to African partners’ experiences of, and aspirations from, such international research partnerships in order to enrich and extend ongoing debates about power relations in development research. The study finds that GCRF criteria do address many of the familiar historic concerns of African partners, while also identifying ways in which this and similar funding schemes may unintentionally reproduce structural inequities within the South. In highlighting these less visible equity concerns, the paper draws lessons for funders, academics and others concerned with establishing genuinely equitable research partnerships.

Résumé

Dans un contexte d’inégalités historiques entre les universitaires du Nord et du Sud, le Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) du Royaume-Uni fait appel à des partenariats de recherche « qui ont du sens et sont équitables » entre des universitaires basés au Royaume-Uni et des partenaires de pays du Sud. Cette étude s’appuie sur les données qualitatives de trois ateliers tenus en Éthiopie, au Rwanda et au Royaume-Uni pour interroger les critères de financement du GCRF du point de vue des partenaires de recherche basés en Afrique. Les critères du GCRF sont examinés par rapport aux expériences et aux aspirations qu’ont les partenaires africains de ces partenariats de recherche internationaux afin d’enrichir et d’aller plus loin dans les débats actuels sur les relations de pouvoir dans la recherche pour le développement. L’étude constate que les critères du GCRF répondent à bon nombre des préoccupations historiques habituelles des partenaires africains, tout en identifiant également les moyens par lesquels ce programme de financement et d’autres programmes similaires peuvent reproduire involontairement des inégalités structurelles dans les pays du Sud. En mettant en évidence ces préoccupations d’équité moins évidentes, l’article tire des enseignements pour les bailleurs de fonds, les chercheurs universitaires et d’autres acteurs qui cherchent à établir des partenariats de recherche véritablement équitables.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Briefing note documents and workshop materials associated with the ‘Cracking collaboration’ project (Stevens et al. 2013) were shared by Rachel Hayman from INTRAC. The briefing note captures key findings, learning and recommendations from a project funded by the Development Studies Association from 9 case studies.

  2. 2.

    What administration constituted was unclear, but core staff salary, research, training, office rent, vehicle running cost were some of the items considered as administrative expenses.

  3. 3.

    The education policy in Tanzania until recently stated that girls who became pregnant in school were to be expelled and not allowed to return following their pregnancy. In 2009, the “Law of the Child” Act, 351 was passed by the Tanzanian parliament, which amends this policy and allows girls to return to school. However, it is still unclear whether it will actually be enforced. (Pfeiffer et al. 2017, p. 7).

References

  1. NB In line with efforts to standardise Ethiopian names in the scientific literature (Mesfin 2010), Ethiopian authors are listed by their first names.

  2. Aniekwe, C.C., R. Hayman., A. Mdee., J. Akuni., P. Lall., and D. Stevens. 2012. Academic-NGO collaboration in international development research: A reflection on the issues.

  3. An-Na’im, A.A. 2006. African constitutionalism and the role of Islam. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barrett, A., M. Crossley, and H. Dachi. 2011. International collaboration and research capacity building: Learning from the EdQual experience. Comparative Education 47 (1): 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2011.541674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Berhanu Denu, and Getachew Zewdie. 2013. Project impact of the guideline to determine charities’ and societies’ operational and administrative costs (70/30 guideline)phase III. http://esap2.org.et/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Report-10_7030-Phase-III_Sep2013.pdf. Accessed February 2020.

  6. Bradley, M. 2017. Whose agenda? Power, policies, and priorities in North-South research partnerships. In Putting knowledge to work: Collaborating, influencing and learning for international development, ed. L.J.A. Mougeot, 37–69. Warwickshire: Practical Action Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brouwer, H., and J. Woodhill. 2016. The MSP guide. How to design and facilitate multi-stakeholder partnerships. Wageningen: Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen UR.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cornish, H., J. Fransman, and K. Newman. 2017. Rethinking research partnerships: Discussion guide and toolkit. www.christianaid.org.uk/resources/about-us/rethinking-researchpartnerships (Accessed 27 February 2020.

  9. Daniel Messele Balcha, The Impact of Charities and Societies Proclamation No. 621/2009 on Addressing HIV/AIDS Issues in Ethiopia, 16 Int’l J. Not-for-Profit L. 53. 2014. https://www.icnl.org/resources/research/ijnl/the-impact-of-charities-and-societies-proclamation-no-621-2009-on-addressing-hiv-aids-issues-in-ethiopia-pdf. Accessed January 2020.

  10. Dupuy, K., J. Ron, and A. Prakash. 2015. Who survived? Ethiopia’s regulatory crackdown on foreign Funded NGOs. Review of International Political Economy 22 (2): 419–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. FDRE/Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. 2009. Proclamation 621/2009, A proclamation to provide for the Registration and Regulation of Charities and Societies, Addis Ababa.

  12. Fransman, J., B. Hall, R. Hayman, P. Narayanan, K. Newman, and R. Tandon. 2018. Promoting fair and equitable research partnerships to respond to global challenges. Rethinking Research Collaborative. https://rethinkingresearchpartnerships.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/fair-and-equitable-partnerships_research-report-public.pdf. Accessed February 2020.

  13. Fransman, Jude, and Kate Newman. 2019. Rethinking research partnerships: Evidence and the politics of participation in research partnerships for international development. Journal of International Development 31 (7): 523–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gebre Yntiso. 2016. Reality checks: The state of civil society organizations in Ethiopia. African Sociological Review 20 (2): 2–25.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Georgalakis, J., and P. Rose. 2019. Introduction: Identifying the qualities of research-policy partnerships in international development—a new analytical framework. IDS Bulletin 50 (1): 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF). 2017. Criteria for GCRF Funding. https://www.ukri.org/files/legacy/international/global-challenges-research-fundsagcriteria-pdf/. Accessed 31 January 2020.

  17. Hall, B.L., and R. Tandon. 2017. Decolonization of knowledge, epistemicide, participatory research and higher education. Research for All 1 (1): 6–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hayman, R. 2018. Fair and equitable research partnerships: new report and resource materials. Intrac blog. https://www.intrac.org/fair-equitable-research-partnerships-new-report-resource-materials/. Accessed January 2020.

  19. Ishengoma, J.M. 2017. North-South research collaborations and their impact on capacity building: A Southern perspective. In North-south knowledge networks towards equitable collaboration between: Academics, donors and universities, ed. T. Halvorsen and J. Nossum. Oxford: African Books Collective.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mesfin Tadesse. 2010. Standardization of Ethiopian names in the scientific literature. Ethiopian e-Journal for Research and Innovation Foresight (Ee-JRIF), 12 (1).

  21. Mitchell, R., S. Asare, and P. Rose. 2018. Equity in international research collaborations: Evidence from the African Education Research Database. Cambridge Global Challenges Annual Conference. https://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/centres/real/downloads/GCRF%20annual%20conference%20(Mitchell%20Asare%20Rose%202018).pdf. Accessed 27 February 2020.

  22. Mitchell, R., P. Rose, and S. Asare. 2020. Education research in sub-Saharan Africa: Quality, visibility and agendas. Comparative Education Review. 64 (3).

  23. Mlambo, Y. A., and Baxter, A. 2018. “What can I offer America?” A postcolonial analysis of faculty motivations and perceptions in North-South university partnerships. FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education, 4 (3). https://doi.org/10.32865/fire20184319.

  24. Pfeiffer, C., C.K. Ahorlu, S. Alba, and B. Obrist. 2017. Understanding resilience of female adolescents towards teenage pregnancy: A cross-sectional survey in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Reproductive Health, 14 (1).

  25. Rose, P., P. Downing, S. Asare, and R. Mitchell. 2019. Mapping the landscape of education research by scholars based in sub-Saharan Africa: Insights from the African Education Research Database. Cambridge: Synthesis report. REAL Centre, University of Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3242314.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Stevens, D., R. Hayman, and A. Mdee. 2013. ‘Cracking collaboration’ between NGOs and academics in development research. Development in Practice 23 (8): 1071–1077. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2013.840266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tabulawa, R. 2017. Interdisciplinarity, neoliberalism and academic identities: Reflections on recent developments at the University of Botswana. Journal of Education (University of KwaZulu-Natal) 69: 11–42.

  28. Verschuuren, J. 2018. New roles of CSOs for Inclusive Development. Summary literature review—CSOs in sustainable development in Ethiopia, May 2018blog post. https://includeplatform.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Finaltwopager_Verschuuren.pdf. Accessed 10 February 2020.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank ESRC, DSA and the University of Bristol for funding the workshops drawn on in paper, and the participants for taking time from their busy schedules to contribute their valuable insights on partnerships and collaboration. We are grateful to Rachel Hayman and James Copestake for guidance and materials in preparation for the first workshop, and to Mhairi Gibson, Kate Tapper, Leon Tikly and Sarah White for their academic insights and support. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tigist Grieve.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix: Workshop details

Appendix: Workshop details

Location, date & funder Focus Activities Participants Participants field of study
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (3 days, 2016–2017)
Funded by University of Bristol
Academic-NGO research collaborations Round table & group discussions; presentations & responses from different sectors. 17 academics (13 Ethiopian, 4 UK); 7 NGOs; 1 thinktank; 1 policy Education
Int Development
Economics
Anthropology
Gender studies
Population studies
Health
Psychology
Kigali, Rwanda (1 day, 2019)
Funded by University of Bristol
Global research partnership and collaboration. Round table & group discussions; presentations. 34 academics (19 Rwandan, 7 Tanzanian, 5 Ethiopian, 3 UK) Education
Int Development
Bristol, UK (2 days, 2019)
Funded by Development Studies Association (DSA), Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), University of Bristol
Interdisciplinary research collaboration and partnership Round table & small group discussions; presentations & responses from different stakeholder groups. 26 academics (2 Kenyan, 2 Tanzanian, 2 Ethiopian, 20 UK); 1 INGO; 2 NGO; 1 thinktank Education
Policy Int Development
Economics
Anthropology
Health
  1. Data sources: Workshop notes, participant small group reflection notes and presentations
  2. Some participants attended more than one workshop; three invited academic participants were denied a UK visa, and one was unable to obtain official permission for travel from his government

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grieve, T., Mitchell, R. Promoting Meaningful and Equitable Relationships? Exploring the UK’s Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) Funding Criteria from the Perspectives of African Partners. Eur J Dev Res 32, 514–528 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-020-00274-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Capacity development
  • Equity
  • Global Challenges Research Fund
  • International development
  • Research collaborations
  • Research partnerships