1 minute read
Analysing the impact of the SKA on science policy in Africa
from Contact 04
Jekoniya Chitereka, PhD student at the University of Leeds
Jekoniya hails from Zimbabwe and is a PhD student at the University of Leeds in the UK. His thesis is on science, technology and innovation policy in Africa, using the SKA as a case study, and he visited SKA HQ earlier this year to meet the Strategy team.
“One of the things I’m looking at is the benefit of all this investment in astronomy, economically, socially and politically. I’m also looking at the impact in terms of governance.
Visiting SKA HQ has enlightened me in a lot of spheres. I’ve had a real insight into the dynamics involved in managing such a big science project, the potential benefits that can be accrued from this endeavour, and how the players involved interact. We used to call it blue skies research but to me there are now immediate benefits that I can pinpoint, for example we discussed WiFi and its link with radio astronomy. We also talked about how we foster engagement between science and society, so the public appreciates this kind of investment.
The impression I got from the DARA and DARA Big Data programmes is that they are laying a strong foundation and building a critical mass of skills towards the 4th Industrial Revolution in Africa with artificial intelligence (AI) solutions which may have a direct impact on science, technology and innovation policy and how national governments link that to their development plans. Hence astronomy is viewed as playing an enabler role.
The main takeaway for me is that implementation of a big science project is not a walk in the park; it’s a complex thing on its own and the number of stakeholders involved also affects the dynamics. The governance of science itself, and trying to have a common ground, that’s not an easy task. It takes a lot in terms of diplomacy, a lot of negotiation skills and managing expectations. For governments to get involved in such projects it requires a lot of influencing and making a case for science among competing interests.”
