Ghanaian Academia Participation in Nation Building: A Conundrum

The Member of Parliament (M.P.) for Sekondi, Mr. Kobby Otchere-Darko has accused Ghanaian academia of apathy, when it comes to nation building. The M.P. believes that a cross-section of academia could contribute constructively to national issues, but they remain quiet and allow the politician to assume more than the necessary powers, sometimes creating chaos for the nation.

I share the sentiments of the M.P but only to an extent. Whilst it is a fact that all hands must be on deck for maximised national benefits, academia does not necessarily have to be in the limelight of politics in order to contribute. The collaboration between government and academia could be constantly effective, as well as smooth, if both parties would operate on transparency and genuinely target national development. After all, academic is expected to research current issues of community and national relevance, then based on empirical evidence, recommend applicable suggestions to policy-makers. Therein lies the challenge.

Every academic and research conference would usually be opened by a minister or a person in a certain key industrial or academic position. The minister or representative would glibly inform delegates that policy-makers expect strong recommendations from the meeting. Sometimes, getting same representatives to close such meetings becomes a challenge. What is crystal clear is that recommendations from such proceeding are simply shelved by the ministers or sections which receive such, because very workable suggstions are not implemented or factored into various national development agenda. Yet that is just a part of the problem.

Research has become a major tool for national development, because it helps to thoroughly unravel issues. Serious nations have explored quality research to make inroads into crucial socio-cultural and geo-political issues, the benefits of which serious investigations are being enjoyed globally. Africa is a major beneficiary of global research, and one continues to hope that the countries therein will muster their resources and focus on research in order galvanise local solutions to African problems. A utopia!

Whereas other communities pump huge sums of money into research activities, African countries squander resources on triviality, especially four-wheeled vehicles we neither can manufacture nor effectively maintain. The discrepancy between funding for research in some of our partner countries and that of Ghana is simply pathetic, ludicrous! The discrepancy is the singular proof that this nation pays lip service to research. Typically, Ghana waits for simple issues to degenerate into chaos, then it begs outsiders to fund research. Yet, other issues exist.

Due to the concept of publish or perish among academia, research activities are on the increase. It is a fact that mediocre, and sometimes, sub-standard work is paraded as research by some academia, but there is also evidence of appreciable quality research. If Ghana genuinely sought recommendations to existing problems, it could find effective ones among researchers in Ghana, which brings me back to the sentiments expressed by the M.P.

If various research recommendations were studied and thoroughly analysed for applicability, policy-makers would be aided in handling community and national issues. There are so many projects initiated by students and academia across all learning disciplines in Ghana. Very promising projects .are locked-up in various departments and store rooms, or shelved by government agencies because neither institution nor government is interested in furthering the research. Yet, some border on critical issues such as energy conservation, recycling, solar energy, health, better learning approaches, to name five.

Ironically, academia is not even listed among key stakeholders of the 40-year Development Plan currently being trumpeted. When the host of GTV’s Talking Point questioned Dr. Nii Moi Thompson about the absence of academia, the latter answered that academia was counted among civil societies. That is not accurate. That Ghana could consider such a long-term national plan without actively involving academia is such a slight, and a telling proof of how the policy-maker belittles education and academia! In contrast, Mr. Otchere-Darko’s sentiments imply his regard for academia; I am quite sure that he would back the inclusion of academia in the stakeholders. 

Academia is not simply apathetic, at least not all of them. But it is the height of frustration to research issues, offer radical recommendations, suggest very workable remedial strategies and continuously be ignored by policy-makers who rather opt for intrepid adhoc solutions. If governments and other stakeholders genuinely desire the co-operation of academia in Ghana, they should bond through research. Government should begin by budgeting realistically for multi-disciplinary research. It should task academia to plunge into applied research for all the ailing critical situations of the country. Most importantly, government must implement the most effective and progressive recommendation from academia. I count on M.P. Otchere-Darko to support academia.

It would be refreshing indeed, if government would strategise through research and explore holistic and sustainable solutions for national crises! Dare we hope?