AERC Evaluation Report June 2024
Loading...
Date
2025
Authors
Haroon, Bhorat
Hoekman, Bernard
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
AERC
Abstract
This report reviews changes in the external environment confronting the AERC and the objectives, programmes, structure, and capabilities of the AERC with a view to inform reflection on the strategic direction of the AERC looking forward. Our goal is to help sharpen the choices confronting the AERC in defining its vision and priorities, the strategy for realizing its goals, and the organization of its activities. We do so by providing a menu of options that can be considered to enhance the value proposition the AERC offers to its stakeholders—individual researchers, partner universities, and African governments. These options have a common denominator: making the AERC the regional leader for conducting independent, rigorous inquiry into problems pertinent to policy challenges confronting African economies, and ‘connecting’ research to African policymakers by leveraging its greatest asset; its extensive network of graduates and researchers that have benefitted from its programmes and participated in its activities.
The choices confronting the AERC are nested. First, a ‘top level’ decision is called for regarding the allocation of resources and effort to distinct components of the ‘production function’ of policy-relevant research. In helping AERC members make this top level decision, we pose a counter-factual question: would there be a compelling case for re creating the AERC structure as it is today if the organization did not exist? Are the gaps and weaknesses in the institutional environment for graduate training and research capacity that motivated the creation of the AERC still prevalent, and support of the type provided by the AERC still needed?
The AERC operates along the entire policy research ‘pipeline’ or ‘supply chain’, including upstream inputs into research capacity (graduate training and capacity building), midstream activities (generating high-quality research), and downstream activities associated with distributing research outputs to ‘consumers’ and ‘customers’ (national policy makers and civil society organizations and institutions working at the continental level). All three activities involve costs, and there are trade-offs across them, especially between general economics training and capacity-building that is not tied to specific policy research projects. Budget constraints and human resource implications of these different types of activities call for a decision whether to continue to support graduate training in Economics, with an associated set of metrics and performance targets, or instead focus capacity-building activities on researchers who contribute to research outputs and outreach and policy engagement activities.
Given this top-level decision, the second-level choices concern measures to improve the quality and impact of each of the component activities. We devote more attention in our discussion of these second-level decisions to research quality, its visibility, and policy impact-related activities. We do so because whatever the top-level decision regarding the balance of efforts and resource allocation for the different elements of the research production supply chain, there is substantial ‘low-hanging fruit’ (low cost, high impact changes to operating modalities) in the production of policy-relevant research and engagement with policy. Low-hanging fruit does not imply business as usual suffices: On the contrary, reaping the potential gains require changes in the organizational structure, governance, and management of the AERC.