Advancing scholarship where Africa-based scholars dominate: A systematic review of migrant entrepreneurship in Africa

This paper presents the findings of a systematic multi-level literature review of research on social entrepreneurship in Africa. Our review focuses on work from the last decade, since the first issue of the Africa Journal of Management was published, and the widely cited Academy of Management Perspectives paper “Social entrepreneurship in Sub-Saharan Africa” by Rivera-Santos et al (2015). Through analysis of 128 papers in 35 journals, patterns in research on social entrepreneurship in Africa are revealed and critically discussed, including insights on the field’s growth, where work is being published, who is writing it, and the role of African based scholars. Saebi et al's (2019) multilevel multistage social entrepreneurship framework is also used to classify existing work, and critically identify those aspects of the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship in Africa that have received more and less attention. Finally, these analyses are synthesized to identify opportunities for future scholarship.

This article reviews research on promoting social entrepreneurship and enterprise in Africa. It also presents brief case studies on how select Western universities, NGOs and corporations are partnering with African institutions to help train and launch social entrepreneurs, to open up sources of venture funding and mentoring and to fortify social entrepreneurship ecosystems. The case material highlights opportunities and challenges encountered in supporting social entrepreneurship in Africa and points to research and practical opportunities pertinent to African scholars, educators and practitioners.

Much has been written on the relationship of China and Africa in the past decade. However, the subject of Chinese migrant entrepreneurs in Africa and their articulation with African counterparts was little explored up to the early 2010s. Apparently, this research gap has been closed, as shown by four publications in recent years: three edited volumes and one monography, focusing on this subject. In view of early prejudices on the passive or even disapproving reception of Chinese migrants by Africans, the state of the art underlines the importance and scope of African agency vis a vis Chinese migrant entrepreneurs in Africa. Book Review Article of: (1) Giese, Karsten, Marfaing, Laurence (eds) (2016) : Entrepreneurs Africains et Chinois. Les impacts sociaux d'une rencontre particuliere. Paris : Karthala, 2016. 384 pp. (2) Gadzala, Aleksandra W. (ed) (2015): Africa and China: how Africans and their governments are shaping relations with China. Lanham/Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, xxix + 266 pp. (3) Mohan, Giles, Lampert, Ben et al (eds) (2014): Chinese Migrants and Africa's Development : new imperialists or agents of change? London: Zed books, vi + 185 pp. (4) French, Howard W. (2015): China's Second Continent: how a million migrants are building a new empire in Africa. London: Penguin Random House / New York: Knopf, xi + 304 pp.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess the current status of Institutional Repository (IR) and scholarly communications (SC) in Nigeria. The paper also deliberates the benefits of IRs including how it can help libraries in Nigeria to reduce the cost of purchasing articles and journals.Design/methodology/approachGiven that the paper is an opinion of the current status of SC, a formal documented methodology is not applicable. However, it gives an overview of SC in Nigeria and traces the origin of open access awareness to 2008 when the first open access sensitization workshop was organized in Nigeria.FindingsThe study shows that Nigeria currently has 20 IRs listed in the OpenDOAR and tops the list of journals listed in the Africa Journals Online (AJOL) with 221 journal titles followed by South Africa with 96. Of the 221 Nigerian journals listed in AJOL, only 70 are open access journals.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper is an expression of opinion about current status of SC and particularly IRs in Nigeria. It is not based on any formal methodology. It will be useful for librarians, academic staff and academic institutions generally, especially in developing countries where IRs are still in a developmental stage. Therefore, some of the general recommendations may not be as relevant for those institutions with well-established and flourishing IRs.Originality/valueThe paper shows the current state of IR in Nigeria and deliberates on the impediments to successful implementation of IRs.

PurposeThis paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship, paying special attention to the new narratives that are emerging about this phenomenon in the context of Africa.Design/methodology/approachThe paper addresses this issue, by comparing the meanings of what is called “social” in this context and in developed areas. The paper's particular interest in the use of language and narratives is grounded in the experience of how narratives and stories are genuinely constitutive and perfomative of people's actions.FindingsThis paper reveals that “social” in the social entrepreneurship narratives does not necessarily have the same meaning in different contexts. Specifically, when the phenomenon is re‐interpreted in the context of the discourses that come from a developing area such as South Africa, it adds flexibility and a more local sense to the entrepreneurs' social missions.Research limitations/implicationsThe study was affected by the limited availability of published data on social entrepreneurship in Africa. Economic challenges and failures by governments to access donor funds have resulted in militant governance thereby reducing the role of social entrepreneurship to negligible levels.Originality/valueThe study provides a narrative lens of looking at the challenges that social entrepreneurship is facing in Africa.

Africa over the past decade, the troubling reality remains that the everyday livelihoods of Africans have not kept pace with macroeconomic growth, and per-capita GDPs on the continent persistently lag behind the rest of the world. We submit that entrepreneurship can address this stubborn income gap in Africa if—and only if—it is able to evolve beyond its current state of necessity-based informality into one that is vibrant and robust enough to promote sustained economic growth and generate long-term, viable livelihoods across the continent. To gain understanding of the state of entrepreneurship in Africa, Omidyar Network launched the Accelerating Entrepreneurship in Africa Initiative in 2012. To execute this multiphase research project, we partnered with Monitor Deloitte South Africa (formerly Monitor Group). We set out together to identify the challenges facing African entrepreneurs and to pinpoint the most trenchant barriers inhibiting high-impact entrepreneurship. The first phase of the initiative began with a survey of 582 entrepreneurs in six sub-Saharan African countries: Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, and Tanzania. The survey was augmented by 72 in-depth interviews and then benchmarked against 19 global peers. The survey focused on four critical aspects of entrepreneurial environments: Entrepreneurship assets: financing, skills and talent, and infrastructure Business support: government programs and incubators Policy accelerators: legislation and administrative burdens Motivation and mindset: legitimacy, attitudes, and culture The initiative’s second phase brought together business, government, and thought leaders to analyze the survey findings and to examine the state of entrepreneurship in Africa more closely. The sessions were held in October 2012 at the inaugural Entrepreneurship in Africa Summit in Accra, Ghana. Convened by Omidyar Network in collaboration with the African Leadership Network and Monitor Deloitte South Africa, the summit drew more than 300 relevant leaders from both private and public sectors to participate in a solutions-driven dialogue on fostering high-impact entrepreneurship across the continent. This article pres-

The state of intellectual freedom is, in many ways, both a Treflection of the degree of openness and inclusiveness of our societies and of the state of democracy. Academic freedom, in the words of Thandika Mkandawire, is, in truth, about the building of a new civilization. It is a site of struggle for democracy, and one could argue that where intellectual freedom really exists, authoritarianism and fundamentalism will find it more difficult to go unchecked. When, in November 1990, participants in a CODESRIA conference held in Kampala, Uganda, were adopting the Kampala Declaration on Intellectual Freedom and Social Responsibility, the continent was experiencing profound political changes, with authoritarian regimes collapsing one after the other, or receding as democratic space expanded with the struggles and intense pressures for democratic change coming from civil society and social movements. The state was then still seen as the main perpetrator of academic and intellectual freedom violations, but it certainly was no longer seen as the only institution or actor that was guilty of such restrictions. As can be seen in the conference papers and report1, most of the phenomena that we are witnessing more clearly today were already quite discernible then: groups based in civil society could harass scholars or public intellectuals for writing or making public statements that were considered to be contrary to religious principles, or to national interests, or to dominant social values, customs and ‘traditions’. Donors could also restrict the freedom of research in many different ways. Within the academia itself, the violations of academic freedom could take forms ranging from sexual harassment, through the trading of grades for different kinds of favours, to student groups threatening academic staff or other students and wreaking havoc on university campuses. The triumph of neoliberalism, and dominant notions of political correctness, and the rise of fundamentalisms of different kinds have led to the shrinking of spaces for critical thinking, not only in society, but also on our campuses. What were emerging phenomena then have now become major problems, with university campuses like Garissa University College in Garissa, Kenya, and the Ahmed Baba library in Timbuktu being raided by armed fundamentalist groups or rebel movements. Disciplines like history are barely surviving. Although it is now recognized that higher education and research have been key to all the successful and sustainable structural transformation and development experiences of the past few decades, most policy makers of our continent tend to be dismissive of the social sciences and humanities. Yet without the social sciences and humanities, no deep understanding of global and local challenges, and therefore no genuine human and people-centered development and meaningful empowerment of civil society and ordinary citizens are possible. The good news is, as one of the participants in the conference held in Lilongwe, Malawi, in April this year to celebrate the 25th anniversary conference of the Kampala Declaration, rightly pointed out, there are provisions explicitly protecting academic freedom in the constitutions of fifteen African countries, and in many of these cases, the inspiration came from the Kampala Declaration. The part of the Kampala Declaration that is rarely mentioned, but which is equally important, is the part dealing with the social responsibility of academics and intellectuals, more generally. The number of professors and lecturers who pay insufficient attention to ethical issues is, unfortunately, very large. This could be anything from the neglect of teaching and the responsibility to supervise theses and dissertations and mentor graduate students and junior colleagues, to a total lack of interest in the issues and challenges facing the communities where the universities are located. Too large a number of academics are prioritizing moonlighting activities instead of their duties at the institutions where they are employed. Yet the defense of academic freedom and the autonomy of the institutions of higher learning are best done if they go with a strict adherence to ethics, accountability, and the fulfillment of the social responsibility of academics. The development of a vibrant knowledge economy in Africa is something that CODESRIA has always taken keen interest in and researched with relentless vigour over the years through its programmes. At its 14th CODESRIA General Assembly held in June 2015, which focused on the creation of Africa’s futures in an era of global transformation, one of the key points over which there was a broad consensus is the need for research and new knowledge, and to critically interrogate the narrative and counter- narratives, not only on Africa’s development, but also on innovations and technology as engines of growth and development in Africa. One critical issue today is, precisely, that of the private appropriation, out of power and profit motives, of knowledge produced through scholarship that has been funded with public resources, thus making the availability of that knowledge to African universities or African and southern development extremely difficult. The future of Africa’s knowledge economy is, therefore, a subject that has continued to generate vigorous debate. In one of the articles featured in this issue of CODESRIA Bulletin, titled: Defining Structural Transformation in Africa, Carlos Lopes calls for a shift away from the present economic models in various African countries. He identifies poor investment in research and development as one of the banes of growth in Africa, in addition to several other political, social, environmental and economic factors. Henning Melber’s article in this issue of the Bulletin: Development and Environment: The Challenges for Research Collaboration in and with Africa underscores the importance of new research and new knowledge for development while drawing attention to the gap in knowledge production between the North and the South. He however noted that ‘‘relevant insights for local policy makers and communities in the South generated by new research end in peer reviewed journals whose commercial publishing priority remains prohibitive for access by those who might benefit most from it.’’ The subject of restricted access to scientific knowledge and scholarly communication (which, in effect, is a form of restriction of research and academic freedom), which Melber decried in his article, was the focus of an international conference hosted by CODESRIA in Dakar, 30 March - 1 April 2016, with the theme: ‘‘Open Access and the Future of the African Knowledge Economy’’. The conference which drew participants from 20 countries in Africa and across the globe focussed on the value of open access to scholarly communication in an increasingly globalised knowledge economy. The urgent need for the African scientific community to engage the open access movement as a driver of change and development on the continent was emphasized. A call was also made for a stronger South-South dialogue and cooperation on open access and scholarly communication at the conference which also had a strong participation by UNESCO, the Latin America Council of Social Sciences (CLACSO), the Indian Citation Index, Africa Journals Online (AJOL), the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa, the Academy of Social Sciences of South Africa (ASSAF), and several other partner institutions such as the Human Sciences Research Council, the Nordic Africa Institute, and the African Studies Centre of Leiden. A report from the conference is included in this Bulletin. Also in this Bulletin, we have featured tributes to two of Africa’s great scholars: Thandika Mkandawire and Helmi Sharawy, who are both among the founding fathers of CODESRIA. The tributes are in recognition of their long association with and service to CODESRIA, and the African social science community. Thandika is one of the leading global scholars of the day, whose devotion to the African cause and contribution to knowledge on the continent is very widely acknowledged. In the words of Jimi Adesina, ‘‘Thandika was always driven by giving voice to Africans and elevating African voices. His was not simply being Africa-focused but facilitating the authentic interlocution for Africa and its peoples’’. The Kampala Declaration was adopted during his tenure as executive secretary of CODESRIA. The theme chosen for the colloquium held in Malawi to celebrate Thandika the scholar, mentor, pan Africanist, institution-builder, friend, and eternal CODESRIA militant, was Thinking African: Epistemological Issues. Indeed, both as a CODESRIA leader and in his own work, Thandika has consistently engaged social science concepts and theories from a critical point of view, interrogating their significance for Africa and the continent’s peoples. He has tried to enhance the visibility of African scholarship both within Africa and globally, and promoted scholarship that contributes to the enhancement of the freedom, well-being and dignity of the peoples of the continent. Helmi Sharawy is also one of the most illustrious leaders of our community who played a pioneering role in the development of CODESRIA, in the promotion of the study of Africa, and in the formation of a number of institutions and associations, such as the African Association of Political Science (AAPS). He was elected and served two terms as a member of CODESRIA’s Executive Committee. Helmi has also been a great champion of African liberation. Many great leaders, such as Amilcar Cabral, Agostinho Neto, Eduardo Mondlane and others, who visited Cairo during the years when Gamal Abdel Nasser was the President, were invited to his home and enjoyed the hospitality of his family. On 11 May 2016, CODESRIA and the Arab and African Research Centre in Cairo organized a round table to celebrate Professor Helmi Sharawy. Some of the tributes to Sharawy and Mkandawire are published in this issue of the Bulletin. The people who have made, and continue to make, great contribution to scholarship in Africa and to the growth and development of CODESRIA are many. More celebrations, taking different forms, will therefore follow. We also invite articles on, or critically engaging the work of, great African intellectuals and their contributions for publication in the CODESRIA Bulletin, or in other CODESRIA journals. Bonne lecture!

The objective of study was to assess and evaluate factors that affect entrepreneurial activities carried out by formal and informal migrant entrepreneurs from Ethiopia who conduct business operations in the nine provinces of South Africa. The study was descriptive and exploratory in nature. The design of the study was descriptive and cross-sectional. Data were collected from a stratified random sample of 3,045 migrant entrepreneurs from Ethiopia who conduct business in the nine provinces of South Africa. Stratified random sampling was used for the selection of eligible entrepreneurs. The study found that about 76% of businesses operated by migrant entrepreneurs from Ethiopia were profitable, whereas the remaining 24% of businesses were not profitable. About 32% of entrepreneurs were attracted to South Africa due to better infrastructural facilities. About 25% of entrepreneurs were attracted to South Africa due to better socioeconomic conditions. About 78% of migrant entrepreneurs had conducted business in South Africa for five years or more at the time of data collection. About 34% of businesses paid tax to the South African Revenue Service (SARS) on a regular basis. About 38% of businesses employed at least one South African in their businesses. About 85% of entrepreneurs stated that they had good working relationships with members of the various local communities in South Africa.

Innovation scholars disseminate their significant findings through international scientific journals. We conducted content analysis of 2,869 peer-reviewed articles on innovation in Africa, examining their origins, themes, collaborative networks, and scholarly influence. These articles, spanning the years 2015–2021, were curated from the Web of Science database across scientific, social science, and humanities journals. The findings reveal that 46.3% of these articles lacked contributions from African organizations or scholars, while 25.1% involved collaborations between African and non-African entities. A remaining 28.6% were exclusively authored by African scholars, with South African universities being the most frequent contributors. Notably, articles authored by scholars from non-African institutions garnered more citations and appeared in journals with higher impact factors. Key themes within these articles revolved around the knowledge economy, African business innovation, agricultural advancements, and the role of mobile phones in knowledge dissemination and marketing. Surprisingly, sustainability topics were notably absent. South Africa, Kenya, and Ghana featured prominently in the discussions. In conclusion, it is imperative to foster broader participation from African nations and scholars in innovation research and ensure a stronger African perspective in international publications. Additionally, as open-access publishing gains momentum, concerns about escalating publishing costs warrant attention.

The academic landscape is fraught with challenges, particularly for scholars whose identities intersect with marginalised backgrounds. This reflective paper explores the nuanced implications of revisions, corrections or rejections (RCRs) on the academic journey of a Black isiZulu-speaking African woman scholar in Audiology from South Africa. It contends that the effects of RCRs extend beyond the confines of a single manuscript, impacting the scholar’s sense of self, existence within the academic realm, and the deliberate ‘cancelling’ of one’s knowledge. Focusing on the unique challenges faced by African scholars, particularly the perceived emphasis on publishing as a measure of belonging, the paper employs a benefit-risk evaluation lens. This approach delves into the complex interaction between personal and environmental factors, shedding light on the multifaceted considerations that African scholars grapple with to establish their presence within the academic sphere. The paper outlines the well-known ‘publish or perish’ phenomenon, emphasising the hypercompetitive nature of the academic and research environment. Peer review, considered a critical component in the publication process, is explored for its role in quality assurance. However, the paper contends that the peer review process can inadvertently perpetuate inequalities, especially for scholars from underrepresented backgrounds. Thematic analysis of reviewer reports from papers I recently submitted forms the core of the paper. Seven emergent themes, such as the influence of proximity to native English speakers and the dominance of Western narratives, illustrate the challenges I faced in both local and international journals. Notably, the paper provides direct quotes exemplifying each theme, offering a very personalised perspective on the adversities encountered during the publication journey. The paper situates the field of audiology within the broader context of institutional and systemic racism, highlighting the underrepresentation of certain racial groups within the profession. It argues that this underrepresentation extends to knowledge generation and publishing, perpetuating the normalisation of Euro-American-centric norms and the exoticisation of Afrocentric standards. The reflective paper concludes by asserting that epistemological racism, intertwined with individual and institutional racism, stifles my pursuit of decolonisation and Africanisation of speech-language and hearing knowledge and practice. It contends that the peer review process, often Euro-American-centric, contributes to the silencing and exclusion of diverse knowledges, hindering local knowledge development and intellectual practices. In navigating the academic minefield, the paper calls for a re-evaluation of existing norms and practices within the peer review process to create a more inclusive and equitable academic environment for scholars with diverse backgrounds.

The field of artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved considerably in the last 60 years. While there are now many AI applications that have been deployed in high-income country contexts, use of AI in resource-poor settings remains relatively nascent. With a few notable exceptions, there are limited examples of AI being used in such settings. However, there are signs that this is changing. Several high-profile meetings have been convened in recent years to discuss the development and deployment of AI applications to reduce poverty and deliver a broad range of critical public services. The authors provide a general overview of AI and how it can be used to improve global health outcomes in resource-poor settings. They also describe some of the current ethical debates around patient safety and privacy. The research paper specifically highlights the challenges related to women menstrual hygiene and suggests AI technology for improving the menstrual hygiene and healthcare services in resource-poor settings for women. Many health system hurdles in such settings could be overcome with the use of AI and other complementary emerging technologies. Further research and investments in the development of AI tools tailored to resource-poor settings will accelerate the realization of the full potential of AI for improving global health in resource-poor contexts.

The idea that migrant entrepreneurs contribute to the employment creation of host countries justifies a need to interrogate their lived experiences post-COVID-19. The study attempts to explore the lived experiences of Nigerian migrant entrepreneurs and the question of enterprise sustainability post-COVID-19. A total of 18 recruited migrant entrepreneurs of Nigerian extraction were interviewed. The inclusion criteria include migrant entrepreneurs with no less than 10 years of non-interruptive entrepreneurial experiences as migrants in South Africa. The exclusion criteria include unregistered enterprises. The NVivo (v.12) qualitative tool was employed for the identification of themes and sub-themes, and the Content Analytical tool was used to analyze the various themes. The motivating factors for migration for many entrepreneurs are the need for business expansion, the hostile economy of the host country, availability of infrastructure and amenities for business expansion. The lived experiences and challenges include hostility, xenophobia, unease access to loans, exclusion, and cultural and communication barriers. The post-COVID-19 experience includes constraints to palliative measures and other governmental supports for enterprise sustainability. The study concludes the need for appropriate policy action for the integration of migrant entrepreneurs who directly contribute to the economic growth of the host country for a win-win outcome. Received: 4 April 2024 / Accepted: 30 December 2024 / Published: 11 January 2025

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on “Entrepreneurial migration: characteristics, causes and effects”.Design/methodology/approachLiterature review.FindingsStudies on immigrant entrepreneurship have become increasingly popular and the importance of social context and social connections has been recognized by scholars. However, research on their effects on immigrant entrepreneurship has been rather limited. This special issue explains the essential steps of the entrepreneurial process by immigrants (i.e. host country choice, entrepreneurial engagement, new venture creation, business network development and corporate political activities) and discusses the effects of immigrant entrepreneurs on their host countries.Originality/valueThe paper presents a review of literature on entrepreneurial migration and social impacts.

Much has been written on the relationship of China and Africa in the past decade. However, the subject of Chinese migrant entrepreneurs in Africa and their articulation with African counterparts was little explored up to the early 2010s. Apparently, this research gap has been closed, as shown by four publications in recent years: three edited volumes and one monograph, focusing on this subject. In view of early prejudices on the passive or even disapproving reception of Chinese migrants by Africans, the state of the art underlines the importance and scope of African agency vis à vis Chinese migrant entrepreneurs in Africa. This has been underlined unison in the four books under review.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to understand the role of the migrant entrepreneur’s social capital and specifically their family social capital in the success of their crowdfunding ventures.Design/methodology/approachThis paper develops an exploratory single case study of the Persu Bag started by a Chinese migrant entrepreneur in the USA, which was documented through in-depth interviews, email communication, social media interactions and secondary documents publicly available. This paper draws on crowdfunding and social capital literature to fulfil the purpose and adopt the perspective of the migrant entrepreneur in the study.FindingsThe study shows that the crowdfunding migrant entrepreneur’s family network contributes with their operand and operant resources from both the country of residence and country of origin. Besides having financial capacity, institutional knowledge and experience from both the host and home countries, the family network in both countries make the crowdfunding immigrant entrepreneur’s families more resourceful, providing additional benefits to the crowdfunding migrant entrepreneurs in the development of the campaign and crowdfunded venture.Originality/valueThis study broadens the understanding of the ways migrant entrepreneurs can rely on their family social capital for building financial capacity and starting a crowdfunded venture.