Jacob Oppong Nkansah (PhD, DPS)
Updated:28 November, 2025
Introduction
Clark Kerr's concept of the 'multiversity' offers a powerful lens to examine African universities' evolving role in societal transformation amid the pressures of global epistemic hierarchies and a contested space where autonomy, relevance, and identity are constantly negotiated. While rooted in Western contexts, Kerr's questions on institutional strength, resilience, autonomy, and adaptability resonate deeply in Africa. This paper examines how internal political pressures and global influences constrain the strength, autonomy, and identity of African universities, while exploring pathways toward institutional resilience. The central question it poses is whether African higher education can flourish as a city of intellect in a century dominated by fragmented missions, interests, and competing pressures.
The city of the intellect in a century for the foxes?
Clark Kerr's "City of Intellect" metaphor captures the fragmented and politicised landscape of African higher education. Universities across the continent are not only knowledge producers but also sites of political interference, epistemic marginalization (Chimakonam, 2017), and global dependency (Nkansah et al, 2024). As knowledge producers, African universities are becoming more aligned with regional and continental development agendas, such as the African Union's Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Top African universities have advanced significantly in terms of innovation, research output, and global rankings. Institutions such as Stellenbosch University (South Africa), Cairo University (Egypt), Makerere University (Uganda), and the University of Ghana have maintained their prominence. African scholars are continually exercising agency through decolonial scholarship, curriculum reform, international relations, global communications, and advocacy for epistemic sovereignty (Gondwe, 2022; Naidoo, 2021; Chipaike & Knowledge, 2018; Serunkuma, 2024). Through community engagement and research, they are addressing health crises, climate change, and displacement.
However, research universities and scholars face what Kerr described as “hard choices” in an era of global epistemic hierarchies, and the response so far has been mostly the “politics of caution”. In the evolving global research economy, African academics navigate a fragmented intellectual landscape—what Clark Kerr might describe as a "City of Intellect" in a century ruled by foxes. These foxes—embodied by dominant Global North publishing conglomerates and citation metrics that set the terms of scholarly visibility and prestige —often leave African scholars on the periphery of global knowledge production.
Curry and Lillis (2017) highlight how African scholars’ values and research priorities are increasingly reshaped by the demands of international publishing, often dictated by institutions in the Global North. Mills et al. (2023) argue that African intellectual communities are tethered to global networks and Western publishers for recognition, visibility, and financial reward—dependencies that cast long shadows over local publishing ecosystems and threaten the vitality of indigenous journals (Omobowale et al., 2014). Mills et al. (2023) underscore the critical role of global publishing in shaping academic careers across Africa, noting that while African research accounts for over 3% of all indexed publications, this output is heavily concentrated in countries such as South Africa, Egypt, and Tunisia. The uneven distribution reflects broader fragmentation within the continent's intellectual cityscape, often perpetuated by Global North institutions and scholars acting as gatekeepers in global science.
The struggle for scholarly legitimacy among African journals is further complicated by the rise of commercial publishing models and the pervasive discourse around ‘predatory publishing’ (Inouye & Mills, 2021). Despite some growth (from 0.7% of indexed articles in 2008 to 1% a decade later) (Mills et al., 2021; Duermeijer et al., 2018), Africa’s contribution to global research remains nascent, especially when compared to the expanding output from Asia and other regions in the Global South. Moreover, African participation in international research collaborations (IRCs) has faced criticism for perpetuating colonial and dependency dynamics (Nkansah et al., 2024), in which African scholars are relegated to the role of data collectors rather than equal intellectual partners (Kingori & Gerrets, 2019; Nolte, 2019). The rules of engagement, defined by citation indexes, impact factors, and bibliometric performance, are set by Global North institutions, forcing Ghanaian researchers and publishers to compete in a credibility economy (Shapin, 1994) shaped by digital infrastructures controlled by multinational corporations (Mills & Branford, 2022). Ghanaian journals, for instance, despite producing rigorous scholarship on national policy and African scientific issues, are frequently overlooked by international citation indexes (Harsh et al., 2021). This raises a critical question we asked in our previous study that: rather than viewing African journals as casualties of global publishing hegemony, can African knowledge systems coexist and thrive alongside dominant global infrastructures? (Nkansah et al., 2024). Consequently, indigenous African knowledge remains sidelined in global academia, while African scholars, pressured to conform to Western paradigms, often reinforce this imbalance. This reflects Kerr's concern about the fragmentation of purpose in the multiversity, where faculty pursue individual advancement over collective intellectual missions.
Regional governments' popular policies that contribute to the massification of higher education in Africa continue to trouble the continent's higher education system, resulting in infrastructure deficits. In Ghana, for instance, the government's introduction of the Free Senior High School policy in 2017 has led to massive numbers competing for the few public universities, thereby compelling universities to increase admission intake beyond their capacity. Even as market demands and global trends increasingly shape what students in Africa want, most university graduates have no jobs awaiting them after graduation. Despite these challenges, the African higher education sector is expanding rapidly, marked by rising student enrollment and international collaborations.
As we argued in our previous article, financial autonomy is not just a luxury but a necessity for safeguarding institutional independence and breaking neocolonial tendencies (Nkansah et al., 2024). However, in Africa, financial autonomy remains a challenge for universities. The government supports many universities' budgets, although they are inadequate for research and innovation. The acquisition of government funding and finance has most often resulted in “tension of battle” between universities and the government. For instance, in Ghana, in the early 1990s, the Rawlings administration introduced a monthly Book and Research Allowance for academics—a measure designed to supplement low salaries and encourage scholarly activity. Nevertheless, while it offered financial relief, it did little to incentivize actual publishing or research output (Mills et al., 2023). Over the decades, this allowance has become a flashpoint in Ghana’s politicised academic ecosystem. Proposals to reform or replace it have repeatedly triggered resistance from the powerful University Teachers Association of Ghana (UTAG), which has often threatened strike action whenever the subsidy is challenged. Each time, the government has retreated, underscoring the delicate balance between academic autonomy and political expediency. In 2019, after years of consultation, the government proposed a new National Research Fund valued at USD 50 million. However, its implementation has stalled, caught in bureaucratic inertia and political indecision. Although Ghana allocates 0.4% of its GDP to research and development, the bulk of this funding flows to government research institutes, leaving universities reliant on international donors and external collaborations. This disconnect has led to fragmented coordination between government-funded research bodies, such as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), and the country's universities (Mills et al., 2023). Reliance on external funding from the Global North alternatively further compromises research agendas and perpetuates neocolonial dynamics and academic dependency (Nkansah et al, 2024). This dependency reinforces the influence of global actors—the “foxes” in Kerr’s metaphor—who shape the rules of scholarly legitimacy through citation metrics, funding priorities, and publishing norms. Breaking this cycle requires rethinking African higher education as a strategic priority and as a space for independent thought and societal transformation.
In Kerr's metaphorical "City of Intellect," African universities are not autonomous towers of scholarship but instead contested spaces where political influence often overrides academic independence. Within African universities, where knowledge institutions are meant to thrive as diverse and dynamic communities, political actors—the proverbial foxes—often infiltrate the city gates, reshaping its governance to serve partisan agendas. In many African countries, the leadership of higher education institutions is deeply entangled with political interests, undermining the foundational principles of academic autonomy and freedom. This dynamic undermines the negotiation power of academia and compromises the integrity of higher education governance. Their influence fragments the intellectual landscape, making it difficult for universities to function as cohesive, independent entities. In Ghana, for instance, this politicisation is particularly pronounced. Government appointments to university governing councils are frequently based on political loyalty rather than institutional needs. Such appointments often suppress dissenting voices and discourage critical engagement, turning universities into extensions of political machinery rather than bastions of intellectual freedom. This explains Kerr’s position that the foxes—those cunning actors who manipulate systems for strategic gain—are not only global publishers and funders but also domestic political elites who shape the rules of engagement within national academic systems. The result is persistent erosion of institutional autonomy, with academic freedom subordinated to partisan interests. This political meddling transforms the university from a space of inquiry into a site of negotiation, where scholars must navigate shifting allegiances and bureaucratic constraints. The consequences are far-reaching. When university leadership is beholden to political interests, strategic planning, research priorities, and institutional development are all subject to external interference. This weakens the university’s role in national development and global scholarship, leaving African academics vulnerable in a competitive global research economy where autonomy and credibility are essential.
The politicisation of university leadership in Africa, particularly when appointments are driven by political loyalty rather than academic merit, has significant implications for both institutional and student autonomy. In the “City of Intellect,” students are meant to be active citizens—engaged, critical, and free to explore diverse intellectual pathways. However, when university governance is entangled with political interests, this city becomes less a space of free inquiry and more a controlled zone where dissent is discouraged and conformity is rewarded. When students perceive their universities as extensions of political power rather than independent intellectual communities, trust erodes. Therefore, the presence of the foxes distorts the intellectual terrain, making it harder for students to navigate freely and flourish as autonomous thinkers. This can lead to disengagement, apathy, and brain drain, as students seek education in environments where academic freedom is protected.
Pathways toward institutional resilience
Clark Kerr emphasizes adaptability to a range of societal demands while cautioning about the perils of institutional rigidity. African universities must embrace change and adopt initiatives like the hybrid knowledge systems model (Woldegiorgis, 2025), which offer pathways to integrate African and global epistemologies in equitable ways.
Also, while Kerr's emphasis on financial pluralism and institutional autonomy offers valuable lessons for African universities seeking to reduce their overreliance on state funding, it is not without its critics. In particular, in contexts with weak regulatory frameworks, financial diversification may exacerbate inequalities, prioritise profit over pedagogy, and marginalise local knowledge systems. For African universities, the challenge lies in diversified funding and societal engagement while avoiding the pitfalls of commodification and loss of academic autonomy. Consequently, rather than imitating Kerr's financial pluralism, African institutions must critically analyse these concepts and tailor them to their distinct socio-economic, cultural, and historical contexts. For instance, universities can collaborate with traditional leaders, religious institutions, and local businesses to raise funds for targeted projects such as student scholarships, infrastructure, and research guided by principles of mutual benefit, transparency, and respect for academic freedom. This internal engagement is not just a necessity, but an opportunity for African universities to build trust and mutual understanding, ensuring that the university's financial strategies align with the needs and aspirations of the society it serves.
In a city dominated by global metrics and citation indexes, African universities must assert the value of context-specific research that addresses regional challenges and cultural realities. To manage the dominance of Global North publishers and elevate African scholarship, African universities should reimagine their overreliance on Global North scholarly metrics and standards by creating regional open-access publishing consortia that reflect local contexts and pool resources across African universities. They should invest in editorial training, peer-review systems, and digital infrastructure in local journals to meet international indexing standards. Established universities on the continent should collaborate and advocate for inclusion in global citation indexes through partnerships with indexing bodies. Develop African-specific metrics that value contextually relevant scholarship. This would help scholars navigate the city of intellect strategically, rather than being trapped by its global gatekeepers. African journals can therefore thrive within the city of intellect, rather than being overshadowed by global foxes. The government's role is critical in encouraging universities to host and support journals focused on national and regional issues. This would restore balance in the credibility economy and reinforce the multiversity’s local relevance.
Also, African universities must reclaim institutional autonomy by resisting political interference in governance and leadership appointments. This means strengthening internal democratic structures and ensuring that academic merit, not political loyalty, guides decision-making.
Conclusion
In Clark Kerr’s City of Intellect, African universities are not monolithic institutions but rather multiversity—complex, multi-purpose entities navigating a labyrinth of competing demands. Within this city, the terrain is shaped by fox-like complexity: cunning actors, shifting alliances, and strategic maneuvering define the rules of survival. These foxes — whether political elites, global publishing conglomerates, or digital gatekeepers, set the terms of legitimacy, visibility, and reward. African universities must navigate the 'fox-like complexity' of competing demands—political, epistemic, and technological. The challenge is not merely to survive, but to thrive—to reclaim intellectual sovereignty and redefine the terms of engagement. In Kerr’s city of intellect, the foxes may be clever, but the multiversity must be wise—adaptive, resilient, and rooted in its own intellectual traditions. Only then can African higher education institutions transform from fragmented outposts into vibrant, self-determined nodes in the global knowledge network.
Biography
Jacob Oppong Nkansah is a Research Assistant at the Department of Education Policy and Leadership (EPL) at The Education University of Hong Kong. He holds dual doctoral degrees: a Ph.D. in Social Studies Education from the University of Education, Ghana, and a Doctor of Policy Studies from Lingnan University, Hong Kong, where he was awarded a prestigious full scholarship in recognition of his academic excellence. Jacob’s research is situated at the nexus of global and international higher education, the global research ecosystem, education policy, social policy, and health social work. With a commitment to interdisciplinary inquiry and policy-relevant scholarship, Jacob contributes to advancing understanding of how global trends influence educational systems, research collaboration, and the socio-political dimensions of academic mobility. His work informs both academic discourse and practical policy development in the context of increasingly interconnected educational landscapes.
Reference
Chimakonam, J. O. (2017). African philosophy and global epistemic injustice. Journal of Global Ethics, 13(2), 120-137.
Chipaike, R., & Knowledge, M. H. (2018). The question of African agency in international relations. Cogent Social Sciences, 4(1), 1487257.
Curry, M. J., & Lillis, T. M. (2017). Global academic publishing: Policies, perspectives and pedagogies. Multilingual Matters.
Duermeijer, C., Amir, M., & Schoombee, L. (2018). Africa generates less than 1% of the world's research; data analytics can change that. Elsevier.
Gondwe, G. (2022). Can African scholars speak? Situating African voices in international communication scholarship. Media, Culture & Society, 44(4), 848-859.
Harsh, M., Bal, R., Weryha, A., Whatley, J., Onu, C. C., & Negro, L. M. (2021). Mapping computer science research in Africa: Using academic networking sites for assessing research activity. Scientometrics, 126, 305–334
Inouye, K., & Mills, D. (2021). Fear of the academic fake? Journal editorials and the amplification of the predatory publishing discourse. Learned Publishing, 34(3), 396–406.
Kingori, P., & Gerrets, R. (2019). The masking and making of fieldworkers and data in postcolonial Global Health research contexts. Critical Public Health, 29(4), 494–507.
Mills, D., Branford, A., Inouye, K., Robinson, N., & Kingori, P. (2021). “Fake” journals and the fragility of authenticity: Citation indexes, “predatory” publishing, and the African research ecosystem. Journal of African Cultural Studies, 33(3), 276–296.
Mills, D., Kingori, P., Branford, A., Chatio, S. T., Robinson, N., & Tindana, P. (2023). Who counts? Ghanaian academic publishing and global science (p. 228). African minds: South Africa.
Naidoo, K. (2021). Academic Agency in Curriculum Development in a Discipline at a South African Comprehensive University. University of Johannesburg (South Africa).
Nkansah, J. O., Oldac, Y. I., & Yang, L. (2024). Dependency and neocolonialism in international research collaboration: evidence from a Ghanaian elite university. Higher Education, 1–19.
Nolte, I. (2019). The future of African studies: What we can do to keep Africa at the heart of our research. Journal of African Cultural Studies, 31(3), 296–313
Omobowale, A., Akanle, O., & Adeniran, A. I. (2014). Peripheral scholarship and the context of foreign-paid publishing in Nigeria. Current Sociology, 62(5), 666–684.
Serunkuma, Y. K. (2024). Decolonial dilemmas: the deception of a "global knowledge commonwealth" and the tragedian entrapment of an African scholar. Africa Spectrum, 59(1), 10–24.
Shapin, S. (1994). ‘‘Galileo, courtier’’: The practice of science in the culture of absolutism. Oxford Univer-sity Press, 99(2), 505–507
Woldegiorgis, E. T. (2025). Hybrid knowledge systems: an alternative pathway to decolonising higher education in Africa. Comparative Education, 1–19.
To cite this paper: Nkansah, J.O. (2025). Positioning the state of African Universities in Clark Kerr’s ‘multiversity’ Discourse: A call to action. Universities & Intellectuals. https://chelps.eduhk.hk/page/detail/871