ETHIOPIA
bookmark

Marshalling the diaspora: Ethiopia’s ‘unsung model’

Ethiopia has a unique ‘model’ of deploying its intellectual diaspora – academics, researchers and high-level professionals – by integrating their competence, experience, knowledge and networks with that of nationals to help resolve societal questions in their home countries and advance knowledge-generation.

This modality of deploying the intellectual diaspora with the aim of drawing major lessons and experiences from it to advance higher education, research and innovation is the focus of this article.

The genesis

In 2018, the erstwhile Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Ethiopia (MOSHE), now subsumed under the Ministry of Education (MOE), established an advisory council with objectives and plans to help support its mission.

The council was composed of (mostly) senior academics and researchers drawn from both inside the country and the diaspora outside, with expertise in an array of disciplines and fields.

During its three years of existence, the council had executed remarkable academic and professional tasks as well as engaged in other major and burning national issues.

The model

The MOSHE model was designed around a well-established value of ‘giving back to the country pro bono. This was fully embraced by both the diasporans and the national experts, motivated by appealing calls of the government, but particularly the MOSHE.

The success of the model, however, could be attributed to the dynamics of confidence, enthusiasm, and outlook of the ministerial team – a trio consisting of a woman minister and two state (deputy) ministers who hailed from major national universities.

The trio, with their director generals and consultants, initially undertook a deliberative audit of active, engaging and visible academics and researchers both at home and the diaspora.

On that account, they established nine working groups and appointed a chair (diaspora) and a co-chair (national) for the respective groups to jointly steer them.

The working groups, with 10-20 members covered a wide array of themes that MOSHE identified as important, among others, governance and leadership; quality; research; faculty and staff development; linkages, diaspora engagement and resource mobilisation.

The advisory council also appointed an overall chair (drawn from the diaspora) which convened the chair and the co-chairs of the respective working groups and who also interacted with the ministry directly.

It is notable that MOSHE initially took a ‘liberal’ approach in pursuing membership recruitment drives – on the basis of self-nomination and nomination.

Consequently, some rather junior academics joined. It later became evident that a few joined the body to raise their profiles and status as they made no (meaningful) contributions and did not show serious commitments.

The tasks

The advisory council, through its working groups, had undertaken numerous laudable tasks. Members vigorously participated in developing and revising curricula and programmes for the country’s higher education institutions.

Major national conferences and doctoral classes and consultations were also held in a number of universities steered and supported by members of the advisory and their professional colleagues and friends.

Some diaspora academics managed to bring a contingent of experts to the country to engage in conferences and doctoral seminars and explore opportunities for partnerships in graduate education and research.

The advisory council members also helped to develop, as well as review, numerous higher education policies and provided key input and feedback to the ministry. The ‘binary’ intellectual and professional deliberations between the diaspora and the nationals – which helped steep the national imperatives with an international outlook – lent more credibility to the initiatives.

The body was also involved in a number of other broader issues of national and global significance.

For instance, to combat COVID-19 in Ethiopia, the council established a number of task forces which were engaged in public awareness, resource mobilisation, research, educational delivery and community service and social support. The body closely interacted and supported the ministry of health and other relevant stakeholders.

The lessons

The contribution of the advisory council, in every respect, was outstanding. It created an environment of meritorious and substantive deliberations, and pursued rigorous actions and an outlook less encumbered by the often debilitating socio-economic and socio-political cacophony.

Furthermore, the ‘informal colleges’ that got established and the personal and professional partnerships that got forged, through a snowball effect, were tremendous.

MOSHE not only had a short lifespan of some three years, but entertained two ministers at the helm with gaps in their enthusiasm, ambitions, visions and interest in engaging and deploying the advisory council.

The unique model faced waning enthusiasm, and lacked modest engagements, in the second phase. A sheer impudence to unduly prop up a parallel body with confoundingly similar objectives and cosmetic changes, in the second phase, cannibalised its resources and networks. This sucked the energy out of the council, ultimately disenfranchising it.

However, the erstwhile body continued to operate through formal and informal channels, hinting at the resilience of such bodies and their reproducible tenets.

The MOSHE was subsequently subsumed within the Ministry of Education in 2021, with a number of senior executives and one of the state ministers now at the helm.

MOE has established a new advisory body that constituted most nationals and a few diaspora returnees.

The importance of drawing on the intellectual diaspora continues to resonate with MOE, owing to the key and effective engagements and successful outcomes of the erstwhile council.

Accordingly, there is high anticipation – and demand – to continue to re-engage the intellectual diaspora with MOE in a systematic manner – through some reconfiguration.

Going forward

A number of African countries – Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria and Senegal – claim to have several millions in the diaspora.

While the numbers are difficult to establish, the numbers of the intellectual diaspora are also as staggering.

A US study on its diaspora, some years back, showed one-in-two Africans as having some kind of a college experience, describing the group as one of the most learned contemporary migrants, indicating their huge potential.

In recognition, a number of initiatives, including the African Diaspora Programme supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York strive to encourage engagement between the community of the intellectual diaspora and home institutions.

Such efforts need to be vigorously scaled up by exploring innovative and novel ways such as the unsung Ethiopian intellectual diaspora engagement model to help advance higher education in Africa.

This commentary emanated from the Higher Education Forum for Africa, Asia and Latin America (HEFAALA), which organised its third high-level symposium in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in April, under the theme ‘Academic Collaboration in Africa, Asia and Latin America in the Post-COVID World’. The forum, established by the International Network for Higher Education in Africa, which jointly organised the event with Saint Mary’s University and the Association of African Universities under the auspices of the African Union Commission and support of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, embedded ‘Mobility and Intellectual Diaspora’ as one of the main themes of the event.

Professor Damtew Teferra served as the chair of chairs and co-chairs of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Ethiopia advisory council and is the chair of the current Ministry of Education advisory council. He is also the director of research and academic planning at the Association of African Universities, Ghana, and the founding director of the International Network for Higher Education in Africa at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.