AERC research programme : an evaluation

Evaluation covers the period 1988-1995. AERC has achieved an amazing esprit de corps among researchers and other network participants, and can be thought of as the cement that holds African economic researchers together. Notable achievements and shortcomings are as follows. AERC has funded 164 research proposals, the final reports for 106 of which have been accepted, 97% of which have received positive external reviews. In addition, 34 AERC Research Papers have been published, along with 44 project-generated journal articles and books. There is evidence that research quality has improved while progressing through the various stages and filters of the research process, although researchers have agreed that the quality of the data gathered is unreliable and a major effort to improve it is needed. Since 1988, the scope of the research topics has broadened as has the research domain and output of projects completed by the same sets of investigators over time. Proposals seem to be fairly representative of the African region and its many languages. Women, however, are under-represented within the researcher pool. Most studies have been deductive, examining existing techniques and models related to policy within Africa. Only a few projects have adopted an inductive approach, namely, the projects on informal and formal financial markets and interlinkages. The results of these have been widely cited in development literature as they improve understanding of African financial markets. In terms of the policy relevance of thematic projects, the evidence is mixed: an AERC-commissioned report in 1994 concluded that the projects were not relevant, while 70% of respondents to a questionnaire on the subject felt the opposite. Network researchers strongly endorse the National Policy Workshops as one of the best marketing vehicles for AERC research outputs. Finally, while it is obvious that AERC has made an enormous effort to ensure the relevance of its research, relevance has to be linked to the themes and issues emphasized in the research portfolio; the titles of the four research themes (and corresponding groups) do not reflect accurately the topics that come under their respective umbrellas. The researchers feel that individual research group cultures prevail and that the present four thematic areas, while on target at the program's outset, are too limiting and should be expanded to include topics related to poverty alleviation.