Case Study - Mauritius and the University of Mauritius.pdf

Universities and Economic Development in Africa

CASE STUDY: Mauritius and the University of Mauritius Tracy Bailey, Nico Cloete and Pundy Pillay

Dedication to Dr Kishore Baguant

Dr Kishore Baguant, Director of Quality Assurance at the University of Mauritius, became involved with the Higher Education and Economic Development project in late 2008. As our Mauritius Institutional Contact and Facilitator, Kishore assisted us in scheduling interviews with University of Mauritius stakeholders, and provided us with background information for the site visit as well as considerable insights into the Mauritian context. Over and above this integral role, Kishore also entertained us with his afterhour jokes and stimulating conversation! It was with tremendous shock and sadness that we learnt of Kishore’s untimely passing in May 2010. Our last interaction with Kishore was at the recent HERANA seminar that he organised at the University of Mauritius, which was attended by a number of the board members of the Centre for Higher Education Transformation, as well as the Mauritius Minister of Education and the Secretary for Finance. We feel very honoured to have been part of one of the last big university–community events organised by him. Kishore was not only a brilliant individual, but also a consummate team person and we will miss him. Dr Nico Cloete (Director: Centre for Higher Education Transformation) and the Higher Education and Economic Development project team

UNIVERSITIES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA | MAURITIUS CASE STUDY

iii

Contents

Dedication to Dr Kishore Baguant ..........................................................................................ii

List of tables and figures ........................................................................................................ vi

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... ix

Project group ......................................................................................................................... xi

Acronyms and abbreviations ................................................................................................ xii

Glossary of terms ................................................................................................................. xiii

Higher Education and Economic Development Publications ............................................. xvi

PART 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction to the Higher Education and Economic Development project ........... 1

1.1.1 Overview of HERANA ................................................................................... 1

1.1.2 Project focus and process ............................................................................ 2

1.1.3 The analytical framework for the study ...................................................... 3

1.1.4 What the project is not doing ...................................................................... 5

1.2 Data collection for the Mauritius case study ......................................................... 6

1.3 The focus and structure of this report ................................................................... 7

PART 2: THE MAURITIUS CASE STUDY: BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT ............................ 8

2.1 The Mauritian economy and approach to economic development ....................... 8

2.2 The Mauritian higher education system.............................................................. 15

2.2.1 The size and shape of the higher education system ................................. 15

2.2.2 Higher education expenditure and financing ............................................ 17

2.3 The University of Mauritius ................................................................................ 19

2.3.1 Key moments in the development of the institution ................................ 19


iv

2.3.2 Governance and strategic objectives ........................................................ 20

2.3.3 Institutional finances ................................................................................. 21

PART 3: THE ROLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN MAURITIUS ............................................ 25

3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 25

3.2 The national perspective .................................................................................... 26

3.2.1 Key national stakeholders in relation to the pact ..................................... 26

3.2.2 The role of higher education in national policies ...................................... 27

3.2.3 Governance and policy coordination ......................................................... 31

3.3 The University of Mauritius perspective ............................................................. 32

3.3.1 Institutional narrative(s) on the role of the university .............................. 32

3.3.2 Initiatives around research and innovation ............................................... 38

3.3.3 Initiatives around teaching and learning ................................................... 44

PART 4: THE UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS ACADEMIC CORE............................................ 47

4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 47

4.2 SET enrolments and graduations ........................................................................ 49

4.3 Postgraduate enrolments and graduations ......................................................... 53

4.4 Student‐staff ratios ............................................................................................. 57

4.5 Academic staff qualifications .............................................................................. 60

4.6 Research funding ................................................................................................ 61

4.7 Research outputs ................................................................................................ 63

PART 5: THE ENGAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT‐RELATED ACTIVITIES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS ............................................................................. 66

5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 66

5.2 Engagement and linkages with external stakeholders ........................................ 67

5.2.1 University–government–industry linkages ................................................ 69


v

5.2.2 Incentives, rewards and coordination ....................................................... 74

5.2.3 Summary .................................................................................................... 76

5.3 The connectedness of development activities to the academic core ................... 76

5.3.1 A brief overview of the projects ................................................................ 78

5.3.2 Articulation ................................................................................................ 86

5.3.3 Contribution to strengthening the academic core .................................... 92

5.3.4 Analysis of the connectedness of development projects .......................... 95

PART 6: KEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................... 99

6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 99

6.2 Some macro‐observations about higher education and economic development in Mauritius ...................................................................................................... 100

6.3 Evidence of a pact around the role of higher education in Mauritius? .............. 101

6.3.1 Notions of the role of knowledge and universities in development ....... 103

6.4 The academic core of the University of Mauritius ............................................. 107

6.5 Coordination and connectedness ...................................................................... 110

6.5.1 Knowledge policy coordination and implementation ............................. 111

6.5.2 Connectedness to external stakeholders and the academic core ........... 115

6.6 Concluding comments ...................................................................................... 118

List of sources .................................................................................................................... 121

Appendix 1: List of interviewees ....................................................................................... 123

Appendix 2: Cluster analysis methodology and data ........................................................ 124

Appendix 3: Academic core rating descriptions ................................................................ 128


vi

List of tables and figures

Tables

Table 2.1: GDP per capita vs. Human Development Index in sub‐Saharan Africa (2007) ... 10

Table 2.2: Selected higher education and economic development indicators ................... 12

Table 2.3: Global competitiveness and global innovation .................................................. 14

Table 2.4: University of Mauritius government income (2000/2001–2007/2008) ............. 21

Table 4.1: Mauritius: Total enrolments by field of study (thousands) ................................ 50

Table 4.2: Comparison of total science and technology enrolments (thousands) ............. 51

Table 4.3: Mauritius: Total SET graduates ........................................................................... 52

Table 4.4: Comparison of total science and technology graduates .................................... 53

Table 4.5: Comparison of total postgraduate enrolments in all fields of study.................. 54

Table 4.6: Mauritius: Masters and doctoral enrolments and graduates ............................ 55

Table 4.7: Comparison of masters and doctoral enrolments .............................................. 56

Table 4:8: Comparison of doctoral graduates ..................................................................... 57

Table 4.9: Mauritius: FTE students and academic staff ...................................................... 58

Table 4.10: Comparison of permanent academics with master and doctoral degrees (2007) ............................................................................................................... 61

Table 4.11: Mauritius: Research outputs ............................................................................ 63

Table 5.1: Overview of the development‐related projects ................................................. 85

Table 5.2: Articulation with institutional objectives and national priorities ...................... 87

Table 5.3: Initiation/agenda‐setting, funding sources and implementation agencies ....... 89

Table 5.4: Financial sustainability of the projects/centres ................................................. 90

Table 5.5: Articulation rating (maximum score = 13) .......................................................... 91

Table 5.6: Contribution to strengthening the academic core ............................................. 93


vii

Table 5.7: Strengthening academic core rating (maximum score = 5) ............................... 94

Table 5.8: Summary of ratings ............................................................................................. 95

Table 6.1: Role for knowledge and universities in development in Mauritius ................. 103

Table 6.2: Comparing national and institutional notions of the role of higher education in Mauritius....................................................................................................... 106

Table 6.3: University of Mauritius: Rating of the academic core ...................................... 108

Table 6.4: National coordination of knowledge policies ................................................... 112

Table 6.5: Implementation of knowledge policies and activities ...................................... 113

Table A2.1: Cluster analysis data table .............................................................................. 125

Figures

Figure 2.1: Income by source as a percentage of total income, University of Mauritius (2000–2006) ...................................................................................................... 22

Figure 4.1: Mauritius: Enrolments by field of study ............................................................ 50

Figure 4.2: Comparison of science and technology majors as % of total enrolment ......... 51

Figure 4.3: Mauritius: Graduation rates by field of study ................................................... 52

Figure 4.4: Comparison of science and technology graduation rates ................................. 53

Figure 4.5: Comparison of % postgraduates in enrolment total ......................................... 54

Figure 4.6: Comparison of doctoral enrolments as % of masters and doctors enrolments ........................................................................................................ 56

Figure 4.7: Comparison of total doctoral graduates ........................................................... 57

Figure 4.8: Comparison of 2001 – 2007 FTE student‐staff ratios ........................................ 58

Figure 4.9: Comparison of totals of permanent and FTE academic staff (2007) ................ 59

Figure 4.10: Comparison of ratios of FTE to permanent academic staff (2007) ................. 60

Figure 4.11: Comparison of highest formal qualifications of permanent academics (2007) ............................................................................................................... 60

Figure 4.12: Comparison of research income in market rate USD and PPP$ (millions) ..... 62


viii

Figure 4.13: Comparison of total research income per permanent academic in market rate USD and PPP$ (thousands) ...................................................................... 63

Figure 4.14: Comparison of research publication units per permanent academic ............. 64

Figure 4.15: Comparison of doctoral graduates in given year as % of permanent academics employed ....................................................................................... 65

Figure 5.1: Plotting the development‐related projects ....................................................... 96

Figure 6.1: The four notions of the role of knowledge and universities in development 104

Figure 6.2: Plotting the development‐related projects at the University of Mauritius .... 116

Figure A2.1: Plot of means for each cluster ...................................................................... 127


ix

Acknowledgements

This study would not have been possible without the support and participation of the following organisations and individuals:

Funding The Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Kresge Foundation.

Contributors to the report

Ms Anjana Monogee (University of Mauritius) for providing the academic core data for the University of Mauritius.

Dr Ian Bunting (CHET Consultant) and Dr Charles Sheppard (Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa) for data and analysis of the University of Mauritius academic core.

Dr Gerald Ouma (CHET) for the University of Mauritius financial data. Mr Nelius Boshoff (Centre for Research on Science and Technology, University

of Stellenbosch, South Africa) for data on research output for the University of Mauritius.

Ms Monique Ritter (CHET Consultant) for correspondence with project leaders to finalise project‐related data and for other general research assistance.

University of Mauritius institutional contact and facilitator Dr Kishore Baguant (Director: Quality Assurance) for his assistance in providing background information on the University of Mauritius and scheduling interviews.

Interview respondents at the University of Mauritius: Prof. I Fagoonee (Vice‐Chancellor), Prof. Ameenah Gurib‐Fakim (Pro Vice‐Chancellor: Teaching & Learning), Prof. Soonil Rughooputh (Pro Vice‐Chancellor: Research, Consultancy & Innovation), Prof. K Sobhee (Dean: Faculty of Social Studies & Humanities), Prof. T Bahorun (Department of Biosciences, Faculty of Science), Prof. D Jhurry (Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science), Dr A Bhaw‐Luximon (Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science), Dr Dinesh Hurreeram (Department of Mechanical & Production Engineering, Faculty of Engineering), Mr I Koodoruth (Senior Lecturer: Department of Social Studies,


x

Faculty of Social Studies & Humanities), Mr A Chutoo (Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Faculty of Engineering), Mr M Santally (Virtual Centre for Innovative Learning Technologies), Mr B Rajkomar (Senior Lecturer: Department of Agricultural Economics & Management, Faculty of Agriculture), and Dr V Ancharaz (Head: Department of Economics & Statistics, Faculty of Social Studies & Humanities) Mauritius national stakeholders: Mr Ricaud G Auckbur (Director: Post‐secondary and Tertiary, Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources), Ms Maya Soonarane (Acting Director: Planning and Finance, Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources), Mr R Hittoo (Sector Ministry Support Team Leader for Education Empowerment, Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment), Dr Praveen Mohadeb (Tertiary Education Commission), and Mr S Rama (Principal Financial Analyst: Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment).


xi

Project group

Academic advisers Higher Education Studies: Prof. Peter Maassen (University of Oslo) and Dr Nico Cloete (Director: CHET, and University of the Western Cape)

Development Economics: Dr Pundy Pillay (CHET Consultant)

Sociology of Knowledge: Prof. Johan Muller (University of Cape Town) and Prof. Johann Mouton (University of Stellenbosch)

Researchers Dr Nico Cloete (Director: CHET) Dr Pundy Pillay (CHET Consultant) Prof. Peter Maassen (University of Oslo) Ms Tracy Bailey (CHET Consultant) Dr Gerald Ouma (Kenya and University of the Western Cape) Mr Romulo Pinheiro (University of Oslo) Mr Patricio Langa (Mozambique and University of Cape Town) Mr Samuel Fongwa (Cameroon and University of the Western Cape) Mr Biko Gwendo (Kenya and University of the Western Cape)

Contributors to reports Dr Ian Bunting (CHET Consultant) and Dr Charles Sheppard (Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University) for analysis of the academic core data Mr Nelius Boshoff (University of Stellenbosch) for data on research output

Project assistance Ms Tracy Bailey (Project Manager) Ms Angela Mias (CHET Administrator) Ms Monique Ritter (Research Assistant) Ms Carin Favis (Transcriber)

External Commentator Prof. Manuel Castells (University of Southern California and Open University, Barcelona)

Network Higher Education Research and Advocacy Network in Africa (HERANA)


xii

Acronyms and abbreviations

AREU Agricultural Research and Extension Unit

CCRC Consultancy and Contract Research Centre

CHET Centre for Higher Education Transformation

EHRSP Education and Human Resources Strategy Plan

FTE Full‐time equivalent

GCI Global Competitiveness Index

GDP Gross domestic product

GER Gross enrolment ratio

GII Global Innovation Index

HDI Human Development Index

HERANA Higher Education Research and Advocacy Network in Africa

iBP ICT Business Pre‐Incubator

ICT Information and communication technology

IPR Intellectual property rights

ISI Institute for Scientific Information

KPI Key performance indicators

MCE Multidisciplinary Centre for Excellence

MECHR Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources

MESR Ministry of Education and Scientific Research

MFEE Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment

MRC Mauritius Research Council

Rs Mauritian Rupee

NGO Non‐governmental organisation

PPP Purchasing power parity

R South African Rand

R&D Research and development

SET Science, engineering and technology

SME Small and medium enterprises

TEC Tertiary Education Commission

TMG Technology Management Group

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UoM University of Mauritius

USD United States Dollar

WEF World Economic Forum


xiii

Glossary of terms

Academic core

The academic core refers to a university’s academic degree programmes and research activities.

Gini co‐efficient

The Gini co‐efficient is a standard economic measure of income inequality, based on the Lorenz Curve. It ranges from zero (which indicates perfect equality, with every household earning exactly the same), to one (which implies absolute inequality, with a single household earning a country's entire income).

Global Competitiveness Index (GCI)

The World Economic Forum (WEF) defines competitiveness as the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country. The GCI uses this definition to establish a quantitative tool to help policy‐makers benchmark and measure the competitiveness of a given country. The GCI is based on 12 pillars of competitiveness further divided into three pillar groups, which are:

Basic requirements (institutions, infrastructure, macro‐economic stability, health and primary education);

Efficiency enhancers (higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market sophistication, technological readiness, market size); and

Innovation and sophistication factors (business sophistication, innovation).

Global Innovation Index (GII)

The GII assesses in detail the extent to which different economies benefit from the latest innovation advances, based on three main principles:

There is a distinction between enablers (inputs) and outputs while measuring innovation in an economy. Enablers are aspects that help an economy to stimulate innovation and outputs are the results of innovative activities within the economy.

There are five enabler pillars that are included in the GII: institutions, human capacity, general and information and communications technology


xiv

infrastructure, market sophistication, and business sophistication. The enabler pillars define aspects of the conducive environment required to stimulate innovation within an economy.

The two output pillars which provide evidence of the results of innovation within the economy are scientific outputs and well‐being.

Gross domestic product (GDP)

The GDP is the total market value of all final goods and services produced in a country in a given year, which equals total consumers, investment and government spending, plus the value of exports, minus the value of imports. Changes in the GDP on an annual basis provide a measure of economic growth.

Gross enrolment ratio (GER)

The GER indicates the total enrolment in a specific level of education, regardless of age, expressed as a percentage of the official school‐age population, corresponding to the same level of education in a given school year. The GER is calculated by dividing the number of pupils (or students) enrolled in a given level of education, regardless of age, by the population of the age group which officially corresponds to the given level of education, and multiplying the result by 100. The GER is widely used to show the general level of participation in a given level of education. It indicates the capacity of the education system for enrolling students of a particular age group. It is used as a substitute indicator to Net Enrolment Ratio (NER, outlined below) when data on enrolment by single years of age are not available. The GER can also be a complementary indicator to the NER by indicating the extent of over‐aged and under‐aged enrolment.

Human Development Index (HDI)

The HDI is a summary composite index that measures a country's average achievements in three basic aspects of human development. These include the following:

Health (measured by life expectancy at birth); Knowledge (measured by a combination of the adult literacy rate and the

combined primary, secondary, and tertiary GER); and A decent standard of living (measured by GDP (income) per capita).

The HDI was created to emphasise that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth.


xv

Pact

A ‘pact’ is defined by Gornitzka et al. (2007: 184) as “a fairly long‐term cultural commitment to and from the University, as an institution with its own foundational rules of appropriate practices, causal and normative beliefs, and resources, yet validated by the political and social system in which the University is embedded. A pact, then, is different from a contract based on continuous strategic calculation of expected value by public authorities, organised external groups, university employees, and students – all regularly monitoring and assessing the University on the basis of its usefulness for their self‐interest, and acting accordingly.”

Purchasing power parity (PPP)

The PPP is a rate of exchange that accounts for price differences across countries, allowing international comparisons of real output and incomes. At the PPP$ rate used in this report, PPP$ has the same purchasing power in the domestic economy as USD 1 has in the US.


xvi

Higher Education and Economic Development Publications

The eight case study reports in this series contain the detailed data and analysis for each country and university in the sample. Together, they form the empirical basis for the analysis and discussion of findings contained in the CHET book, Universities and Economic Development in Africa, which was published in August 2011. While every effort has been made to check the data and edit the text in the time available, it should be noted that these case study reports have not been subjected to the publishing rigours of formally published publications. They are therefore made available ‘as is’.

Higher education and economic development: A literature review Pundy Pillay (2010)

This report reviews the international literature on the relationship between higher education and economic development. The review focuses on previous research and theory on the link between higher education and economic growth, the knowledge economy, innovation, and local and regional development. The review would be of interest to academics and students who work in the field of higher education studies. Click here to download a copy of this report.

Linking higher education and economic development: Implications for Africa from three successful systems Pundy Pillay (2010)

This book synthesises the findings of case studies of three systems – Finland, South Korea and North Carolina in the US – that have successfully linked higher education to their economic development initiatives. This publication would be of particular interest to policy‐makers and funders. Click here to download a copy of this report.

Universities and economic development in Africa Nico Cloete, Tracy Bailey, Pundy Pillay, Ian Bunting and Peter Maassen (2011)

This report presents the key findings from each of the eight African case study reports and synthesises these within the analytical framework of the larger study. This publication would be of interest to national policy‐makers, international agencies, funders and university leadership. Click here to download a copy of this report.


1

1.1 Introduction to the Higher Education and Economic Development project

1.1.1 Overview of HERANA The Higher Education and Economic Development project forms part of the work of the Higher Education Research and Advocacy Network in Africa (HERANA). HERANA was established in 2007 and is coordinated by the Centre for Higher Education Transformation (CHET) in Cape Town, South Africa. Key partners include the University of the Western Cape (South Africa), Makerere University (Uganda) and the University of Oslo (Norway). The research component of HERANA investigates the complex relationship between higher education and development in Africa, with a specific focus on economic and democratic development. A second research area explores the use of research in policy‐making. Alongside the research component is an advocacy strategy that aims to:

Disseminate the findings of the research projects; Coordinate existing sources of information on higher education in Africa; Develop a media strategy; and Put in place a policy dialogue (through seminars and information technology)

facilitating interactions between researchers, institutional leaders and decision‐makers. The capacity‐building component of HERANA is the Higher Education Masters in Africa Programme, run jointly between the key partners. The main objective of the project is to contribute to the strengthening of higher education in Africa through building capacity and expertise in African higher education. The

Part 1

Introduction

AT A GLANCE

Overview of HERANA Project focus and process Analytical framework Data collection Focus and structure of the report


2

students contribute to higher education and development research through the research components of the programme. The research and advocacy components of HERANA are funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Kresge Foundation. The Higher Education Masters in Africa Programme is funded by NORAD.

1.1.2 Project focus and process As a point of departure, the overall aim of the project was to investigate the complex relationships between higher education (specifically universities) and economic development in selected African countries with a focus on the context in which universities operate (political and socio‐economic), the internal structure and dynamics of the universities themselves, and the interaction between the national and institutional contexts. In addition, the project aimed to identify those factors (practices, strategies) and conditions (context) – at both national and institutional levels – that facilitate or inhibit universities’ ability to make a sustained contribution to economic development. The project began with a review of the international literature on the relationship between higher education and economic development (Pillay 2010a). This was followed by case studies of three systems which have successfully linked their economic development and higher education policy and planning – Finland, South Korea and the North Carolina state in the US (Pillay 2010b). The next phase of the project involved the collection of data at both the national and institutional levels in the eight African countries and universities included in the study:

Botswana – University of Botswana Ghana – University of Ghana Kenya – University of Nairobi Mauritius – University of Mauritius Mozambique – Eduardo Mondlane University South Africa – Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Tanzania – University of Dar es Salaam Uganda – Makerere University

The countries included in the study were selected for three main reasons: on the basis of previous collaboration; being located in sub‐Saharan Africa; and, on the basis of World Economic Forum (WEF) ratings regarding participation in the knowledge economy in the African context. In each of the collaborating countries the national university was selected, except in South Africa where the


3

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University was regarded as a more ‘comparable’ institution. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with a wide range of individuals in each country, including selected ministries, commissions/councils for higher education and other stakeholders at the national level; and institutional leadership, heads of development‐related projects and centres, and academic and administrative staff. The analysis also draws on various policy and strategy documents (national and institutional levels), as well as quantitative data including national development indicators and statistics relating to the higher education systems and universities in the sample. Throughout the project process, dissemination and advocacy activities have taken place. These have included seminars in many of the African countries in the sample and in Norway, as well as dissemination via the HERANA web site1.

1.1.3 The analytical framework for the study In the knowledge economy, universities are considered to be key institutions for the production of high‐level skills and knowledge innovation, based on the traditional core business of universities – the production, application and dissemination of knowledge. In many countries, higher education has become one of the central areas in the government’s knowledge policies. This means that more policy/political actors than the Ministry of Education, as well as socio‐economic stakeholders (employers’ organisations, funders and research councils), have become interested in higher education and involved in higher education policy. This raises the issue of system‐ and institutional‐level coordination of knowledge policies with adequate structures and processes within the political system, most notably the capacity to coordinate different political activities of the governing of knowledge production, reproduction and coordination. As mentioned earlier, to get a better understanding of the relationship between higher education and development, the research group undertook three case studies (Finland, South Korea and North Carolina state) where there is a well‐established integration of higher education in national development strategies. Of particular interest to our study was to answer the question: What is it about these three systems that enable them to successfully link higher education to economic development? Put another way: What are the core conditions that are present in each of the three systems that enable their higher education sectors to successfully and sustainably contribute to development?

1HERANA web site: http://www.chet.org.za/programmes/herana/.


4

Common to all three systems was a strong, agreed upon framework for economic development aimed at realising an advanced, competitive knowledge economy, and the important role for higher education in this regard. Despite major contextual differences, the three systems exhibited the following conditions for harnessing higher education for economic development:

Their higher education systems had been built on a foundation of equitable and quality schooling. There was also an emphasis on achieving high quality higher education.

They had achieved very high higher education participation rates. Their higher education systems were differentiated (institutional and

public/private) as part of achieving their human capital, research and innovation objectives for economic development.

Their governments ensured a close link between economic and (higher) education planning.

There were effective partnerships and networks between the state, higher education institutions and the private sector to ensure effective education and training, and to stimulate appropriate research and innovation.

There was strong state involvement in a number of other respects including, for example, adequate state funding for higher education; using funding to steer the higher education sector to respond to labour market requirements; and incentivising research and innovation in the higher education sector. Drawing on the review of literature (Pillay 2010a), the implications from the case studies of three successful systems (Pillay 2010b), and preliminary observations from the eight African case studies, we formulated the following analytical propositions:

1. A condition for universities’ contributions to development is the existence of a broad pact between government, universities and core socio‐economic actors about the nature of the universities’ role in development.

2. As a core knowledge institution, the university can only participate in the global knowledge economy and make a sustainable contribution to development if its academic core is quantitatively and qualitatively strong.

3. For linking universities effectively to development a country needs various forms and methods of knowledge policy coordination. In addition, the connections between the larger policy context, universities and development are crucial.

The analytical point of departure for our model is, therefore, that the conditions under which each university in Africa, as elsewhere, is contributing to economic development are influenced by the following three interrelated factors:


5

The nature of the pact between the universities, political authorities and society at large;

The nature, size and continuity of the university’s academic core; and The level of coordination, the effectiveness of implementation, and

connectedness in the larger policy context of universities. These, in turn, are influenced by local circumstances, for example, the nature of the economy of a country, and its political and governance traditions and culture; institutional characteristics, including the ‘loosely‐coupled’ nature of higher education institutions; and the external relations of universities, especially with national authorities, foreign agencies and industry. These analytical propositions give rise to the following sets of research questions:

To what extent is there agreement (a pact) between key stakeholders about the role of higher education, and to what extent does this include a specific role for higher education in economic development? Is there a role for knowledge production and for universities in the national development plan?

What policies, funding, structures and incentives are in place at the national and institutional levels which give expression to the role of higher education in economic development? To what extent is there coordination of these activities between the different national authorities, and between the national authorities, institutional stakeholders and external agencies?

What is the strength of the academic cores of the national (‘flagship’) universities?

Are development activities in the universities connected to external groupings and do these activities strengthen or weaken the academic core? This report presents the data that address these questions in the Mauritian context generally, and with specific reference to the University of Mauritius (UoM). The analytical framework of the study is elaborated further in Part 6 which discusses the key findings for this case study.

1.1.4 What the project is not doing As can been seen from the analytical framework of the project, this study has a considerable scope. However, the project is not attempting to do the following:

Measure or evaluate the extent to which universities are contributing to development, or the impact that their activities have on development in their respective countries;

Include an assessment of the impact or effectiveness of specific institutional policies, units or development projects;


6

Review the number or nature of donor projects, or an examination of the overall contribution of particular external donors to university development; or,

Assume or assert that the primary role for higher education is development, but rather seeks to investigate the factors that either facilitate or inhibit the possible contributions that universities can make to development.

1.2 Data collection for the Mauritius case study A wide range of data sources have been consulted for the purposes of developing this case study. In order to prepare for the research team’s visit to Mauritius, CHET obtained a letter of cooperation from the vice‐chancellor of the University of Mauritius (UoM), who also approved the selection of Dr Kishore Baguant (Director: Quality Assurance) as our Institutional Contact and Facilitator. The next step was to request background information on the Mauritius higher education system and the university from Dr Baguant. In addition to the background information, Dr Baguant was asked to assist in the scheduling of interviews for the research team and, together with the relevant institutional leadership, to identify five to ten projects that related to either economic development or poverty reduction. The research team visited Mauritius in March 2009 to conduct interviews with national and institutional stakeholders. National stakeholders included representatives from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources (MECHR) and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment (MFEE). Institutional stakeholders at the UoM included various institutional leaders, senior academics and flagship project leaders. The full list of interviewees is provided in Appendix 1. In addition to the site visit and interviews, a range of national and institutional documents have been consulted. These are listed in the list of sources. In developing the case study report, additional information was gleaned from the Internet, as well as further correspondence with interviewees to verify information and fill in gaps. Finally, during July and August of 2010, the first draft of this report was emailed to the vice‐chancellor, the project leaders and other key institutional stakeholders at UoM with a request to provide written feedback on the accuracy of the information and interpretation of data contained in the report. In addition to the written feedback received from a number of individuals, formal feedback was obtained from two university representatives during a seminar in Franschhoek, Cape Town, in August 2010.


7

1.3 The focus and structure of this report This report pulls together a wide range of data on the national development context and the higher education system in Mauritius, as well as the UoM, in order to address the key research questions. The structure of the remainder of the report is as follows: In Part 2, we provide background and contextual information about Mauritius – its economic development and global competitiveness ratings, its approach to economic development policy and planning, as well as the size and shape, governance, policy and financing of the higher education system. A brief profile of the UoM is also provided including key moments in the development of the institution, its governance structure and strategic objectives, and the institutional finances. In Part 3 of the report, we turn to the role(s) of higher education in Mauritius – in general, and in relation to economic development – through an investigation of the ways in which both national and institutional stakeholders talk about and conceptualise the role of higher education, the policies which give expression to these notions, as well as the structures and mechanisms for coordination which relate to higher education. In Part 4 we examine the nature of the academic core at the UoM. In Part 5, we investigate the UoM’s engagement with its key external stakeholders and the incentives for development‐related activities. We also undertake an analysis of the selected development projects at the university, with a specific focus on the connectedness between these activities and the academic core. In particular, we explore the articulation of development activities with national priorities and institutional objectives, as well as with external stakeholders, and the extent to which these activities either strengthen or weaken the academic core of the institution. In Part 6, we provide a summary of the key findings of the report and relate these to the analytical framework and key questions of the study presented in Part 1. This includes a discussion of the nature and extent of the pact around the role of higher education in Mauritius; the nature and strength of the academic core of the UoM; the coordination and implementation of knowledge policies at the national level; and the connectedness of development‐related activities in the university to external stakeholders and to the academic core.


8

2.1 The Mauritian economy and approach to economic development Mauritius is a small island state situated in the Indian Ocean 2000km from the east coast of Africa. Although the total land area is small (2040km2), its exclusive economic zone is quite vast, covering some 1 700 000km2 of seas. In 2006, the population of Mauritius was estimated at just above 1.2 million (Mohadeb 2010). Since independence in 1968, Mauritius has experienced a major structural transformation in its economy. It moved from an agricultural mono‐crop (sugar cane) economy with high levels of unemployment and a low per capita income, to becoming a middle‐income country with almost full employment. In spite of this, Mauritius remains vulnerable to external influences, given the openness of its economy. On the external front, Mauritius is being confronted by new challenges arising from, amongst others, the creation of new economic blocks and competition from former socialist and other newly‐developing and reformed economies. The Mauritian economy enjoyed continuously high and robust growth rates during the second half of the 1980s and the early 1990s. During this period, the major macroeconomic indicators such as GDP, investments, savings rate, balance of payments, inflation and employment, evolved positively in line with the objectives set by government to diversify the economic structure and correct existing imbalances. This remarkable economic performance was attributed to a favourable combination of domestic and external factors, namely:

Political stability Availability of cheap and adaptable labour A dynamic export‐led strategy A vibrant tourism sector

Part 2

The Mauritius case study: Background and context

AT A GLANCE

The Mauritian economy and approach to development Higher education in Mauritius A profile of the University of Mauritius


9

Non‐reciprocal preferential market access under the Lome Convention Sugar protocol agreements Sustained foreign and domestic investment flows

As a result of the decades of consistent growth, GDP (income) per capita reached USD 5 059 in 2005. In PPP terms this converts into USD 12 715 – the highest in sub‐Saharan Africa at that time. The growth of GDP per capita averaged an impressive 3.8% between 1990 and 2005. However, after having experienced a spell of near‐full employment, the country started to experience a resurgence of unemployment in the late 1990s, exacerbated by the more globally competitive scenario and economic liberalisation policies. The previous pattern of development based on low‐cost, low technology, low skill and unlimited supply of adaptable labour which was enhanced by preferential trade agreements has now been surpassed. Increased productivity, quality enhancement, and a shift towards high‐technology have become the pre‐requisites to ensure the development of the country in a dynamic and increasingly competitive world environment. The increasing pace of technological advance and constant international competition has led to calls from business for a new range of policies to meet the increasing challenges. The government has recognised that the strategy to be followed should promote a more diversified level of production using high technology, making a knowledge workforce available, and attracting capital to meet the resulting development needs. With globalisation, the domestic and international environment confronting Mauritius in the future will be much more competitive and demanding, requiring increased emphasis on quality, value‐addition, flexibility and innovation. The growing shortage of skilled labour, coupled with increased pressures for higher wages and salaries and the resurgence of unemployment, are all threatening to reduce the growth momentum of the economy. Government policy in Mauritius is to encourage the manufacturing sector to modernise its operations and diversify its activities to ensure that Mauritian products become more competitive quality‐ and price‐wise. This needs to be done to maintain, and if possible increase, its share in the international markets and to develop the services sector. It is the declared policy of the government to develop the information and communication technologies (ICT) sector and to transform the economy into a knowledge economy thus making it a knowledge hub in the Indian Ocean Region (MESR 2006). This strategy requires a more rational and optimal use of available resources, that is, a steady and continuing growth in total factor productivity, (including labour productivity), a new industrial culture, an improved work ethic, and rapid response capacity. Table 2.1 compares GDP (or income) per capita and the HDI for the HERANA sample of countries and the three international case studies. The difference between the GDP per capita ranking and its HDI ranking reflects divergence


10

between economic and broader social development, and is often a consequence of inequality in access to income, education, health, etc. For example, South Africa’s HDI ranking is 51 places lower than its GDP per capita ranking, and Botswana’s is 65 – these figures are amongst the highest for the countries ranked in this report. It is evident in a number of the country’s social indicators that the impact of growth has been relatively equitable. For example, with respect to its HDI, Mauritius was ranked at 65 out of 177 countries in 2005, the highest ranked country in sub‐Saharan Africa. However, Mauritius’ HDI slipped in 2006 to 79 and to 81 in 2007 (see Table 2.1), although it still remains the highest ranked sub‐Saharan Africa country. Life expectancy and adult literacy rates are high by both sub‐Saharan Africa and developing country standards, at 72.4 years (2005) and 84.3% (1995–2005) respectively (UNDP 2009).

Table 2.1: GDP per capita vs. Human Development Index in sub‐Saharan Africa (2007)

Country GDP per capita (PPP, USD)*

GDP ranking HDI ranking** GDP ranking minus HDI ranking

Botswana 13 604 60 125 ‐65

Ghana 1 334 153 152 1

Kenya 1 542 149 147 2

Mauritius 11 296 68 81 ‐13

Mozambique 802 169 172 ‐3

South Africa 9 757 78 129 ‐51

Uganda 1 059 163 157 6

Tanzania 1 208 157 151 6

Finland 34 526 23 12 11

South Korea 24 801 35 26 9

United States 45 592 9 13 ‐4

Source: UNDP (2009) Notes: *PPP shows a rate of exchange that accounts for price differences across countries, allowing international comparisons of output and incomes. At the PPP$ rate shown in Table 2.1 for the eight HERANA countries, PPP$ 1 has the same purchasing power in the domestic economy as USD 1 has in the US. **177 countries were ranked. The HDI is a composite index measuring deprivations in the three basic dimensions – a long and healthy life (as measured by life expectancy), access to knowledge (adult literacy, and combined primary, secondary and tertiary education enrolment), and a decent standard of living (GDP or income per capita).


11

The combined GER for primary, secondary, and tertiary education in 2005 in Mauritius is high at more than 75% (UNDP 2009).Poverty levels between 1990 and 2005 averaged a low 10% (UNDP 2009). Table 2.2 provides data on quality of the education system, gross tertiary education enrolment rates and global competitiveness, as well as the stage of development of each country’s economy. It shows this data both for the HERANA countries as well as the three international case studies. The latter group has tertiary education participation rates and are all ‘innovation‐driven’ economies. Amongst the HERANA countries, there is a strong correlation between tertiary education participation and global competitiveness, on the one hand, and the stage of economic development on the other. The countries fall into two groups. One group (Botswana, Mauritius and South Africa) has relatively high GDP per capita (Table 2.1) and tertiary education participation with Mauritius and South Africa classified as ‘efficiency‐driven’ and Botswana in transition to this group. The other group, comprising the five other sample countries, has relatively low GDP per capita and tertiary education participation, and is classified as ‘factor driven’. The countries in this latter group are also ranked relatively low in terms of global competitiveness.


12

Table 2.2: Selected higher education and economic development indicators

Country Stage of development (2009‐2010)1

Quality of education

system ranking (2009‐2010)2

Gross tertiary education

enrolment rate (2008)

Overall global competitiveness

ranking (2010‐2011)2

Ghana

Stage 1: Factor‐driven

71 6.25 114

Kenya 32 4.16 106

Mozambique 81 1.53 131

Tanzania 99 1.55 113

Uganda 72 3.7 118

Botswana Transition from

1 to 2 48 7.64 76

Mauritius Stage 2: Efficiency‐driven

50 25.9 55

South Africa 130 15.44 54

Finland Stage 3:

Innovation‐driven

6 94.4 7

South Korea 57 98.1 22

United States

26 82.9 4

Sources: WEF (2010)

Notes: 1 Income thresholds (GDP per capita in USD) for establishing stages of development (WEF 2010: 10): Stage 1 Factor‐driven: <2 000; Transition from stage 1 to stage 2: 2 000‐3 000; Stage 2 Efficiency‐driven: 3 000‐9 000; Transition from stage 2 to stage 3: 9 000‐17 000; Stage 3 Innovation‐driven: >17 000. 2 Ranked out of 139 countries. 3 2005 figure. 4 2006 figure. The 2010 figure by the Botswana Tertiary Education Council is over 20% while in South Africa the figure remained around 16%. 5 2007 figure. 6 2009 figure.

Of the 12 pillars of competitiveness that the WEF uses in the derivation of the GCI (see Note 1b of Table 2.3 for an explanation of these pillars), two are particularly relevant for the purposes of this study: the efficiency‐enhancing fifth pillar (higher education and training) and the twelfth pillar of the innovation and sophistication factors, namely innovation. On both these indicators, Mauritius fares poorly relative to its average competitiveness ranking of 57. With regard to higher education and training, its ranking is 79 out of 133 countries, and for innovation it is 71. On innovation it is ranked at 85. Mauritius appears to owe its middle GCI ranking to other factors: notably institutions, infrastructure, health and primary education, goods market efficiency, financial market, and business sophistication. The Global Competitiveness Report for 2009–2010 reports on Mauritius as follows:


13

Mauritius is ranked 57th this year, the same ranking it held last year, and the second highest in SSA. The country is characterised by strong and transparent public institutions, with clear property rights, strong judicial independence, and a security situation that is good by regional standards. Private institutions are rated as accountable and improving, with strong auditing and accounting standards and a system that protects minority shareholders’ interests. The country’s infrastructure is well‐developed by regional standards, particularly roads, air transport, and telephony. Health standards are also impressive compared with other SSA countries. Further, both goods and financial markets function well with improvements registered in both areas since last year. However, efforts continue to be required in the area of education. Educational enrolment rates remain somewhat low, particularly at the university level; education spending is low; and the educational system gets mediocre marks for quality. Beyond the educational weakness, labour markets could be made more flexible, with stringent hiring and firing laws and wages that are not flexibly determined, although there have been measureable improvements in this area since last year. (Authors’ emphasis) (WEF 2010)

With regard to Mauritius, the WEF evaluation appears to be inaccurate with respect to education. Its participation rate for tertiary education is high (see Section 2.2.1) and the proportion of students attending university both in and outside the country is also relatively high. On innovation, there is some evidence that the country is making steady progress, especially in the university sector. In terms of the WEF’s GCI (GCI, 2009–2010) Mauritius is ranked at 57 out of 132 countries behind South Africa (45) and ahead of Botswana (66) in sub‐Saharan Africa (Table 2.3). According to the WEF, Mauritius is a Stage 2 (efficiency‐driven) economy.


14

Table 2.3: Global competitiveness and global innovation

Country

Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) Ranking*

Global Innovation Index (GII) Ranking**

Botswana 66 (4.08) 86 (2.80)

Ghana 114 (3.45) 105 (2.66)

Kenya 98 (3.67) 83 (2.84)

Mauritius 57 (4.22) 73 (2.93)

Mozambique 129 (3.22) 100 (2.69)

South Africa 45 (4.34) 51 (3.24)

Uganda 108 (3.53) 108 (2.65)

Tanzania 100 (3.59) 98 (2.69)

Sources: *WEF (2009); **INSEAD (2010) Notes: 1. GCI

a) The GCI ranks 132 countries, with the top three countries being Switzerland (with a GCI score of 5.60), US and Singapore.

b) The GCI is derived from three sub‐indices and 12 pillars of competitiveness. The three sub‐indices are “basic requirements” (with four pillars – institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic stability, and health and primary education); “efficiency enhancers” (with six pillars – higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market sophistication, technological readiness, and market size); and “innovation and sophistication factors” (with two pillars – business sophistication and innovation). The basic requirements sub‐index is considered key for factor‐driven economies, the efficiency enhancers are key for efficiency‐driven economies, and the innovation and sophistication factors are key for innovation‐driven economies.

2. GII a) The GII combines innovation inputs (such as institutions, human capacity, information

and communication technology and uptake of infrastructure, market and business sophistication) with innovation outputs (such as science and creative outputs).

b) The top four countries in the GII are Iceland (with a score of 4.86), Sweden, Hong Kong and China.

The overall vision of government was spelt out in the New Economic Agenda formulated in 2000. The main challenge was to move gradually away from traditional sectors to the services sector. The objective was to diversify manufacturing into higher value‐added markets and to consolidate services (financial, ICT, etc.) as a fourth pillar of economic development. To attract new investment and to maintain the country’s competitiveness, a highly productive skilled workforce was seen as imperative. With a view to setting Mauritius on a higher growth path, the country has recognised the importance of developing higher education as a regional hub for high quality education and training, to ensure that the knowledge industry acts as a catalyst in broadening the Mauritian economy, and in providing the necessary support to the existing and upcoming sectors. There has been a dramatic paradigm shift in the development strategy mooted by the government.


15

In summary, it has been accepted by government that the education system, especially higher education, needs to be re‐orientated to respond more effectively to these challenges in order to modernise the economy.

2.2 The Mauritian higher education2 system

2.2.1 The size and shape of the higher education system Higher education in Mauritius can be traced back to the establishment of the School of Agriculture within the Department of Agriculture in 1914, which became integrated into the UoM when it was established in 1965. However, it was only in post‐independent Mauritius that several public higher education institutions were created, which were complementary to UoM. System differentiation Over the years the higher education sector has become increasingly diversified. Currently, it comprises a multiplicity of institutions including publicly‐funded and local private institutions, a branch campus of an overseas institution, one regional institution, and cross‐border supply institutions. Following the establishment of the UoM in 1965, the Mahatma Gandhi Institute was set up in 1970 to promote Indian studies including the arts. This was followed by the Mauritius College of the Air in 1971 with education media as its main responsibility, and the Mauritius Institute of Education in 1973, responsible for teacher training and curriculum development. The University of Technology (UTM) was established in 2000 to focus on demand‐driven programmes. In 2002, the Rabindranath Tagore Institute was set up to further promote cultural education. In an attempt to increase access to higher education and promote lifelong learning and adult and continuing education, the Open University of Mauritius Act was established in 2006. Higher education in Mauritius is also provided by a number of other public institutions which are not under the purview of the sector’s regulatory body, the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC). These include the Swami Dayanand Institute of Management, the Institut Superieur de Technologie, the Industrial and Vocational Training Board, the Mauritius Institute of Health, the School of Nursing, and the Council of Legal Education. The Industrial and Vocational Training Board, which provides mainly vocational courses, also offers selected demand‐driven post‐secondary training programmes at the diploma level in areas such as tourism and hospitality management, textile and clothing,

2The terms ‘higher education’ and ‘tertiary education’ are used interchangeably in this section.


16

information technology, and engineering. The School of Nursing of the Ministry of Health and Quality of Life has the responsibility for providing the initial training for nurses. The Mauritius Institute of Health, also under the aegis of the Ministry of Health and Quality of Life, runs specialised training programmes for medical and paramedical personnel. The Council of Legal Education runs specific courses for barristers, notaries and attorneys. In 2006, 32 private higher education institutions were registered with the TEC offering a total of some 140 accredited programmes on a full‐time, part‐time and distance education basis at various academic levels (certificate, diploma, degree and masters) and professional levels (List of Registered Institutions and Accredited Programmes, 2006). All the private institutions are for‐profit institutions. At present none of the private institutions has awarding powers. They run the programmes of overseas universities (except one which runs programmes of the UoM) through collaborative arrangements, for example, from Australia, France, India, South Africa and the United Kingdom. The programmes are taught by academic staff recruited locally, although a few are taught by academic staff of the respective overseas institutions that come to Mauritius for short periods. The following institutions are also found in the higher education sector:

In 1999, the Institut de la Francophonie pour L’Entrepreneuriat (regional institution) was established following an earlier agreement signed between the then Ministry of Education and Scientific Research (MESR) and the Association of Universites Partiellement ou Entierement de Langue Francaise and l’Universite des Reseaux d’Expression.

In collaboration with local private partners, a branch campus of an Indian university was set up in 2007.

In 2006, there were some 50 overseas institutions and examination bodies providing courses and programmes through distance education and open learning mode (cross‐border supply institutions). These institutions/bodies are based in the United Kingdom, South Africa, India, France/Reunion, Switzerland and the United States (TEC 2007). Several of the institutions also have collaborative arrangements with the local private institutions. It is apparent from the previous discussion that a dynamic and diversified tertiary education system has evolved in Mauritius, with constituent institutions being drawn from publicly‐funded, private and regional sectors. Several of the local institutions, both public and private, have collaborative arrangements with overseas universities. Tertiary education and training in Mauritius is characterised by a multiplicity of providers, as well as being diversified by mode of delivery, field and level of study.


17

Participation in higher education Total enrolment in the higher education sector in Mauritius stood at 33 230 in December 2006. This represented a gross tertiary enrolment ratio of 34.1%3 (Mohadeb 2010). In 2007/2008 this figure had increased to 37.3% (TEC 2008). Other participation data include the following (Mohadeb 2010):

In 2007, more than 74% of students were undertaking their studies locally – of this 62% were in publicly‐funded institutions.

Enrolment in public higher education institutions accounted for 46.5% of the total enrolment and 53.5% were in local private and overseas institutions.

The five higher education institutions taken together (UoM, Mauritius Institute of Education, Mahatma Gandhi Institute, Mauritius College of the Air and UTM), accounted for 42% of the higher education student population with 14 036 students and accounted for 91% of the enrolment in the public institutions.

The UoM is the largest supplier of tertiary education locally, accounting for 22.2% of total higher education enrolment, as opposed to 4.9% for the UTM, 12% for the Mauritius Institute of Education, 2% for the Mahatma Gandhi Institute and 1.2% for the Mauritius College of the Air. Participation rates in tertiary education currently favour women although the distribution by gender across the various disciplines is not known. The Gender Parity Index (the ratio of females to males) for Mauritius tertiary education in 2005 was 1.26 (UNDP 2009). The high demand for tertiary education stems from the recognition of the close linkages between higher education and economic and social development – tertiary education means better jobs and a higher standard of living. With universal primary education being achieved in the 1970s, free education in 1977, and legislation making education up to 16 years of age compulsory, the challenges policy‐makers have had to face have related to broadening access at the higher education level, improving quality, and strengthening the management of the sector (while ensuring equity).

2.2.2 Higher education expenditure and financing Government funding of education in Mauritius is comparatively low at around 4.5% of GDP and around 14–15% of total government expenditure. The share of higher education in the education budget has been around 12% for most of this decade.

3The gross tertiary enrolment ratio is calculated as the percentage of the Mauritian population

aged 20 to 24 years enrolled in higher education programmes locally and overseas


18

In addition to government spending on education, expenditure is also incurred by the private sector, non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) and parents (mainly for maintenance cost and fees for private tuition). According to a study conducted under the auspices of the Association for the Development of Education in Africa and the Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa, the private costs of education in Mauritius were estimated at more than 10% of the government’s recurrent outlay on education (Mohadeb 2010). At the higher education level, government spending accounts for only 25% of total expenditure in this sector. The financing of higher education is basically via the government and students/parents. Students enrolled in public higher educational institutions are funded to a very large extent by the government. Students enrolled in local private higher education institutions and those in overseas institutions pay the full cost of their education. In terms of tuition fees, the position is as follows (Mohadeb 2010):

At the UoM, full‐time undergraduate students do not pay tuition fees. All other students (part‐time and postgraduate) pay tuition fees, although not the full cost.

At the UTM, all students pay tuition fees, although not the full cost. The funds generated annually by the UTM amount to approximately 70% of the requirement for the recurrent budget. The remaining 30% together with the capital budget are met through a government grant.

At the Mauritius Institute of Education, which runs mostly in‐service programmes for teachers, no tuition fee is charged.

The Mauritius College of the Air, whose target group is the working population, providing lifelong learning and continuous professional education, charges tuition fees for all its programmes.

Students in other higher education institutions do not pay tuition fees. Total government expenditure on higher education is about Rs 1 billion.4 This includes grants to higher education institutions (including polytechnics) and scholarships. The institutions raise some Rs 183 million by way of tuition fees, other fees, and research and consultancy fees. Expenditure incurred by students studying in local private institutions and overseas amount to Rs 929.3 million and Rs 2.4 billion, respectively. Total expenditure on higher education is therefore estimated at more than Rs 4.65 billion, out of which Rs 3 billion leaves the country by way of foreign exchange (Mohadeb 2010). The capacity of public higher education institutions to enrol students in Mauritius is limited. Out of the 33 230 students participating in higher education in Mauritius in 2006, 15 464 (about 46.5%) were following courses in

4USD 1 is approximately equal to Rs 30; or Rs 1 billion is roughly equivalent to USD 33 million.


19

public higher education institutions. The remaining 53.5% were following higher education programmes in private local or overseas institutions and these students were paying the full cost of their higher education (Mohadeb 2010). Although students enrolled in public higher education institutions are largely funded by the government, the proportion of state funding varies significantly amongst public higher education institutions. Education at the UoM became free in December 1976. The decision to abolish tuition fees was made in the wake of a political decision by the then government, taken on the eve of the December 1976 general elections. Tuition fees, however, were reintroduced in June 1980, only to be abolished again in 1988. At the UTM, all students – part‐time and full‐time – pay tuition fees, again not full cost, together with administrative charges. In the remaining non‐university public higher education institutions, while some funds are generated, they depend mostly on public funding for both their recurrent and capital budgets (Mohadeb 2010). The private institutions, local and overseas, receive no state funding and, as such, they are self‐financing. They generate their income from various sources, but the highest percentage comes from tuition fees.

2.3 The University of Mauritius

2.3.1 Key moments in the development of the institution5 The legal existence and corporate entity of the UoM were established by the University of Mauritius Ordinance No. 39 of 1965. However, effective work only started in July 1968 when it was decided that three schools – Agriculture, Industrial Technology and Administration – would form the main components of the university in its initial developmental phase. As a developmental university (defined as such by the university), its main objectives were to educate and train students in the areas of knowledge essential for the technological, economic and social development of the newly‐independent Mauritius. Thus, sub‐degree programmes in fields such as agriculture, sugar technology, engineering, public administration, accountancy, banking, secretarial, and legal studies were offered alongside various short in‐service training courses and seminars for both the public and private sectors, essentially to satisfy at least some of the professional workforce requirements of the country. From the late 1970s until the mid‐1980s, with the economic recession in the country, the university went through a difficult period. In the 1983/1984

5 The information in this section was provided by Dr Kishore Baguant as part of the background

information to the institution (Baguant 2009).


20

academic year, the institution experienced the lowest student population in its history, with only 342 students enrolled on award programmes. The 1979 Review Committee on the Organisation and Development of the University recommended a revised approach to the concept of a developmental university and foresaw a more extended range of disciplines appropriate to the changing needs of the country. The 1979 student unrest was a direct result of graduate unemployment. In the following years, a number of new academic and support units were established (e.g. a Computer Centre, a Department of Law, the SSR Centre for Medical Research, a Department of Textile Technology, and a Centre for Extra‐Mural Studies), and other academic units were restructured. These various on‐campus developments and expansions were accompanied by a simultaneous increase in the number and diversity of programmes offered, and the number of students enrolled. Over the past decades, in response to the contemporaneous and emergent needs of the various sectors of the Mauritian economy, the university has progressed from being a mostly in‐service training institution to a fully‐fledged university, concentrating increasingly on bachelors degrees, postgraduate programmes, research and consultancy. The university now has five faculties including Agriculture, Engineering, Law and Management, Science, and Social Studies and Humanities. There are also four centres including the Centre for Information Technology and Systems, the Virtual Centre for Innovative Learning Technologies, the Centre for Professional Development and Lifelong Learning, and the Consultancy and Contract Research Centre (CCRC).

2.3.2 Governance and strategic objectives The vice‐chancellor is the Principal Academic and Administrative Officer and has general responsibility for the direction and management of the university. He is the chairperson of the senate, and the supreme academic authority of the university. The senate is responsible for the academic work of the university both in teaching and research, award of all degrees (other than honorary degrees), diplomas and other academic distinctions, and regulation and superintendence of the education and discipline of students. The vice‐chancellor is supported by (and making up the Management Consultative Committee) two pro‐vice‐chancellors (Teaching and Learning; and Research, Consultancy and Innovation), the registrar, the deans of faculty, directors of centre, the budget director, and the chief librarian. In line with the university’s Strategic Directions (1999–2004), a Quality Assurance Office was set up in October 2002. The main objective of the office was to provide leadership in the setting up and implementation of a Quality Assurance Framework for promoting good practice at the university.


21

The core mission of the university is the creation and dissemination of knowledge and understanding for the citizens of Mauritius and the international community. The university’s vision is to be a leading international university, bridging knowledge across continents through excellence and intellectual creativity (Baguant 2009). The university’s current strategic plan, Strategic Directions 2006–2015, has the following six strategic directions:

1. Knowledge creation 2. Knowledge diffusion 3. Investing in resources 4. Quality culture and good governance 5. National, regional and international collaborations 6. Community outreach

2.3.3 Institutional finances Table 2.4 below shows that the total income received from government increased from USD 6 800 000 in 2000/01 to USD 8 280 235 in 2007/08. Over the period 2001–2006, the largest proportion of the university’s income has come from state allocations, although this proportion has been declining over the past few years as the proportion of income from student fees has increased (Figure 2.1).

Table 2.4: University of Mauritius government income (2000/2001–2007/2008)

Academic year Government income in Rs

Government income in USD

Exchange rate

2000/2001 190 400 000 6 800 000 USD1 = Rs 28

2001/2002 212 600 000 7 592 857 USD1 = Rs 28

2002/2003 210 260 668 7 509 309 USD1 = Rs 28

2003/2004 230 000 000 7 796 346 USD1 = Rs 29.501

2004/2005 249 000 000 8 761 127 USD1 = Rs 28.421

2005/2006 249 050 000 8 412 715 USD1 = Rs 29.604

2006/2007 257 000 000 8 289 520 USD1 = Rs 31.003

2007/2008 265 100 000 8 280 235 USD1 = Rs 32.016

Note: Inflation‐adjusted figures.


22

Figure 2.1: Income by source as a percentage of total income, University of Mauritius (2000–2006)

Despite the increase in state allocation between 2001 and 2006, both the university’s strategic plan and institutional leaders highlighted the problem of inadequate government funding:

During the last decade, the increase in grant from the Government has not matched student enrolment. This situation highly impinges upon the planning activities of the university to meet its set objectives. The quality of provision is the university's greatest strength and as such it should not be allowed to bear the consequences of inadequate funding. (UoM 2006:11)

With every government we’re asked to do more with less, and I think we’ve been able to. We had reserves in years before and now the reserves are all dried up but we’re still managing. We’ve had some crises, we shouted high and loud and we got the money. New institutions at the tertiary level, when they come up, are allowed to charge tuition fees. We are not allowed to charge tuition fees to our undergraduate students. We charge tuition fees only to part‐time undergraduate students and postgraduate students. That’s why I think 90% of all our postgraduate courses are part‐time. And they will be students who are working, earning a living and capable of paying the fees (institutional leader).

77%74%

72% 71%

67%68%

17%20% 20% 20%

25% 24%

1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1%2% 2%4% 4% 5% 4%

1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06

State allocations Student tuition fees Investment income Research contracts All other income


23

Of course this has an impact on research, on building infrastructure. And this is where there’s a lot of aggressivity [sic] to get external grants because every time there’s an EU [European Union] bid we spend a lot of time running after money for research (institutional leader).

In addition to limited government funds, an institutional leader reported that government funds are not provided for infrastructure development:

Now what we don’t get from government is capital funds. This is very limited which means that we are suffocating for space and other kinds of equipment for research and so on. This is not adequate at all. And so we had to become smart and this is where we set up a Trust. Under the activities of the Trust, whatever money you generate, you don’t have to be accountable to the TEC or to the government. You are accountable to the governing body which is the council and the board of trustees. … under the Trust we generate income that we can keep for us for capital development for the university (institutional leader).

Established in 2006, the University of Mauritius Trust has the following objectives:6

1. Generate funds that would be used for specific projects at the UoM or any institution set up by the university or any entity fitting the purpose of the advancement of education, research and development (R&D), and the promotion of innovation.

2. Set up any centre, institution, unit or such entities to carry out such other programmes and activities as a source of superior knowledge and expertise.

3. Offer programmes of studies and courses, comprising the running of courses, conduct seminars, workshops, and executive development programmes and other related activities, which shall aim at promoting the advancement of education. According to an institutional leader, the government provides funding for university research through research grants, but this funding is negligible: “If you get 300 million in whatever currency you were talking about, then only three to five million is spent on research.” Another institutional leader described some of the ways in which they are trying to produce good quality research within the context of a limited budget, especially through seeking external funding and sharing facilities:

[In 2006] the budget for the university, if I am not mistaken, was something like Rs 2.5billion – I mean, to me that’s peanuts.

6Web site: http://www.uom.ac.mu/UoMtrust/Files/BriefUOMTrust.pdf


24

Hardly anything you can do with that. But our academics here … everybody wants promotion, so they will do whatever needs to be done to do some types of research at low cost. … If we get more money we’ll do better research, yes, but we are doing the best from what we do receive in terms of funding. But having said that, we also have to go out and seek funding. So we do have provisions for external sources of funding. In terms of consultancy, in the last two years we’ve doubled and tripled the income we derived from consultancy. Now we receive about Rs 23 million from consultancy and it used to be Rs 5 million or Rs 6 million. So that has enhanced for new types of management. So that money will be ploughed back into research at the university. We’re also adopting new ways to handle research management. I came up with the university central lab concept, that the instruments don’t belong to any particular person but it’s a shared entity, and trying to inculcate that culture of sharing at the university, not only for research but also for consultancy. And that is being accepted now – everybody is accepting the concept of such a mode of operation. … So, we are in a way regenerating research at the University of Mauritius in a new way of handling the research management. (Institutional leader)

However, as another institutional leader explained, when the university raises money, this amount is deducted from the government allocation:

The way the system works is you don’t get a matching grant. For every Rupee or Pound or Franc that you raise at the tertiary education level, the commercial level, they withhold that quantum. So if we generate Rs 1 million then we’ll withhold that Rs 1 million from whatever grant they were supposed to give you initially. So when you apply for Rs 400 million, they say, okay, but in the course of the year you generate say 100 million and then we only give you 300. (Institutional leader)

While foreign donor funds are secured for academic and engagement projects (see, for example, the projects listed in Section 5.3), the university as a whole does not receive any significant foreign donor funds for its infrastructure or operations.


25

3.1 Introduction As was highlighted in section 1.1.3, the existence of a ‘pact’ between national and institutional stakeholders, as well as external stakeholders such as industry and foreign donors, on the role of higher education is a key factor in the extent to which universities are able to make a sustained contribution to development. A pact was defined as a fairly long‐term cultural, socio‐economic and political understanding and commitment between universities, political authorities and society at large of the identity or vision of universities, what is expected of universities, and what the rules and values of the universities are. For the purposes of this study, our interest is in exploring the general nature of the pact, and then the extent to which there is a role for higher education in economic development in the pact. We begin our analysis of the nature and extent of a pact in Mauritius by considering the notions(s) of the role of higher education from the perspective of the national authorities and the institutional stakeholders at the UoM. This includes an investigation of the ways in which both national and institutional stakeholders talk about development and the role of higher education, whether and how these notions are articulated in relevant policy documents, and the extent to which specific structures have been established to give expression to the intent of the policies. It also includes a look into the extent to which matters pertaining to higher education are coordinated across national authorities, and between national authorities, higher education institutions (with a specific focus on UoM) and key external stakeholders.

Part 3

The role of higher education in Mauritius

AT A GLANCE

Key national higher education stakeholders Role of higher education in national policies Policy coordination in the higher education sector Institutional narratives on the role of the university Policies, structures and appointments Research funding Research agenda Linkages with the labour market


26

3.2 The national perspective

3.2.1 Key national stakeholders in relation to the pact The key stakeholders in relation to the higher education sector are the Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment, the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC), the public and private higher education institutions, and the private sector. The roles and importance of each of these stakeholders differs significantly. The Ministry of Education and Scientific Research (now the Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources)7 has been the prime driver of the push towards ensuring that Mauritius, through its tertiary education system, is ready to become a player in the knowledge economy.8 Apart from its resource allocation role, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment has recently embarked on funding a new project, the Science, Technology and Innovation Project, which aims at strengthening linkages between industry and academia/research agencies to encourage research in commercially‐relevant projects. According to a Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment official interviewed, this could be undertaken through the creation of a special fund to be co‐sponsored by industry. In addition, shifting from basic funding of research agencies to project funding on a competitive basis would ensure more efficient use of funds while “rigor in project selection and having a joint panel from industry and research agencies would ensure a market‐driven approach” (MFEE official). The TEC was established in 1988 with the following objectives:

Fostering the development of higher education; Promoting coordination amongst the higher education institutions; Allocating funds to the higher education institution; Making recommendations to the Minister of Education on the development of

higher education; and Advising on policy matters relating to scholarships.

The TEC Act was amended in 2005 and again in 2007 to make it responsible for regulating private provision for higher education, and to promote and enhance

7Since the collection of data for this case study, the ministry has been reorganised once again

into the Ministry of Tertiary Education, Science, Research and Technology (May 2010).

According to a university stakeholder, this has resulted in greater interaction between the

universities and government, including weekly meetings between the minister and the

leadership of tertiary institutions. 8See, for instance, its 2006 document, Developing Mauritius into a Knowledge Hub and a Centre

of Higher Learning.


27

quality assurance in all higher education institutions, public and private. The TEC is a major player in the tertiary education sector playing both policy formulation and regulatory roles. The evidence suggests that the TEC is extremely effective, especially in carrying out its regulatory functions as well as in policy‐making, particularly around institutional funding. Amongst Mauritian universities the UoM stands out both in terms of its dominance with regard to enrolment and it numerous pockets of excellence with regard to research. The private sector is a big player in the provision of tertiary education, particularly outside the universities. However, the role of industry in research has historically been limited but is set to grow rapidly particularly in the light of government incentives such as the Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment initiative described above.

3.2.2 The role of higher education in national policies9

We firmly believe in Mauritius that knowledge drives economic growth and development. Higher education is the main source of that knowledge and of human capital. It is the knowledge promoter required for the social and economic development of any country. (Dr Hon. Vasant K. Bunwaree, Minister of Education, 23 March 2010)

There is a very clearly defined role for higher education in national development in Mauritius. As articulated by the Minister of Education in his opening address at an HERANA seminar in March 2010, this role includes both the production of knowledge and the provision of human capital for economic development, within a broader discourse of moving Mauritius towards a knowledge economy. Two key national strategic plans in particular reflect this consensus on the role of higher education in national development. The first is the Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources’ Draft Education and Human Resources Strategy Plan 2008–2020 (MECHR 2008) and the Ministry of Education and Scientific Research’s Developing Mauritius into a Knowledge Hub and A Centre of Higher Learning (MESR 2006).

9Since the collection of data for this case study, a national stakeholder highlighted some other

policies of relevance to the role of higher education in development including the Labour

Market Information System (published every two years and lists priority fields of study); the

one‐graduate‐per‐family scheme; the initiative to attract 100 000 foreign students to Mauritius

by making it a knowledge hub for the region; and the aim to increase the gross enrolment ratio

from 46% to 72% by 2015.


28

The Draft Education and Human Resources Strategy Plan (EHRSP) 2008–2020 The EHRSP has been formulated in line with the vision of providing a quality education for all and developing a human resource base to transform Mauritius into “an intelligent nation state in the vanguard of global progress and innovation through the development of a culture of achievement and excellence” (MECHR 2008:8). The plan highlights the importance of a highly skilled workforce and a model of lifelong learning for the development of a knowledge economy:

The knowledge economy demands that a human resource development system be developed that is pertinent to the needs of workplace: people have to have the intrinsic flexibility to adapt to changing demands through systematic training and retraining – itself an important appendage of lifelong learning. Indeed, all research points to the fact that the more educated and skilled the people, the better they are able to adapt to changes. Promoting human resource development in line with national economic and social objectives becomes then a critical challenge, and this necessitates fostering a culture of training and lifelong learning at the individual, organisational and national levels for employability and increasing productivity. (MECHR 2008: 15)

The strategic goals for human resource development for the period 2008–2020 are described in the plan as follows (MECHR 2008: 16):

1. Transform Mauritius into a knowledge economy; 2. Build a world‐class human resource base; 3. Develop and implement a lifelong learning policy; 4. Foster R&D for effective human resource development; and 5. Provide professional orientation to prospective entrants in the labour market.

Central to the plan is the universalisation of opportunities for quality education at all levels, from pre‐primary through to post‐secondary education subsectors, and for the training sector. The drive is towards ensuring access to learning opportunities for all and fostering innovation and generating new knowledge for the socio‐economic and sustainable development of the nation. Part I of the plan provides the much‐needed reform strategies that have to be called for if a shift from the traditional to a multi‐pillar economic base is to be a reality, such that the nation becomes more resilient to global changes. It is recognised that the newly emerging sectors necessitate a re‐engineering of the education and human resource development system such that it can be both supportive of these developments, and make room for adjustments to changes in the coming years. It is emphasised that globalisation leaves the Mauritian economy with no choice but to open up and compete with the economies of


29

other countries and concentrate on more knowledge‐ and skill‐intensive activities and higher value‐added financial and business services. The need for major reforms in the current education and training sector is hence strongly felt. Importantly, it is recognised that a major challenge for Mauritius is how to balance access with quality so as to achieve both high access and quality. Part II of the EHRSP reflects on the inefficiencies of the system, of which student retention, failure and attrition, as well as the quality of teaching and learning are central. The most frequently cited inefficiencies of the current education system in Mauritius include the relatively high percentage of students failing and/or repeating the primary school‐leaving examination, and an alarming attrition rate due to young children turning out to be barely numerate and literate. The challenges facing the tertiary education sector in particular are described as follows:

If tertiary education is expected to contribute significantly to the building of skills and the intellectual capacity of the country, there are a number of critical challenges that have to be faced, not least of which are an increased and widened access to quality tertiary education of international standards, carrying a degree of relevance such that it becomes more responsive to the needs of the labour market. Both effectiveness and efficiency as well as an optimal use of financial resources have to be aspired for. (MECHR 2008: 14–15)

The main objective for the tertiary education sector is “to make Mauritius a Knowledge Hub to serve the Region and a Centre for Higher Learning and Excellence” (MECHR 2008: 15). To this end, the plan outlines the following strategic goals for tertiary education (ibid.):

1. Increasing and widening access and ensuring equity; 2. Enhancing quality and relevance; 3. Ensuring financial sustainability; 4. Strengthening sector capability; 5. Meeting student needs; 6. Facilitating research for national development; 7. Enhancing linkages between tertiary education institutions and the economic

sectors; 8. Creating an effective national knowledge and innovation system; and 9. Internationalisation of Mauritian tertiary education.

Developing Mauritius into a knowledge hub and centre of higher learning In 2006, the Ministry of Education and Scientific Research published a document entitled Developing Mauritius into a Knowledge Hub and Centre of


30

Higher Learning which gives higher education a central role in the move towards a knowledge economy in Mauritius:

The Government has decided that, henceforth, knowledge‐based industries will be an increasing source of value added for the economy and a significant component of the new economic model. To that end, it is promoting a Knowledge Hub agenda in which tertiary education will be given greater prominence especially in the fields of Science & Technology, Information and Communication Technologies, Skills Development and in Research & Development in Applied Sciences. (MESR 2006: iv)

The document defines a knowledge hub and its role in relation to economic growth as follows:

A knowledge hub is concerned with the process of building up a country’s capacity to better integrate it with the world’s increasing knowledge‐based economy, whilst simultaneously exploring policy options that have the potential to enhance economic growth. … In short, a knowledge hub is defined as one where knowledge is created, acquired, transmitted and used more effectively by enterprises, organisations, individuals and communities for fostering economic and social development. (MESR 2006: 3)

It is recognised that a strong and dynamic higher education sector is critical for the emergence of the knowledge hub and the document highlights the following key issues in this regard (MESR 2006: iv):

The development of a coherent policy framework linking the new economic trajectory and the tertiary education system; and

Provision of an enabling environment including an appropriate regulatory framework for tertiary education and training and providing appropriate financial incentives for higher education institutions. There is also an emphasis on partnerships between government, higher education institutions and industry:

A feature of globally competitive knowledge‐based economies is that governments, institutions of higher learning and industries work together in those economies to create knowledge hubs. (MESR 2006: 3)


31

The TEC Strategic Plan 2007–2011 The TEC’s Strategic Plan 2007–2011 gives expression to the intentions outlined above for the tertiary education sector. According to the plan, the vision of the TEC is to “Make Mauritius the Intelligent Island of the Region in the Global Village” while its mission is to “Position Mauritius in the Region as a world‐class Knowledge Hub and the gateway for post‐secondary education” (TEC 2007: 5). The TEC’s goals are listed in the plan as follows (ibid.: 5–6):

1. Create an enabling environment for Mauritius to emerge as a Regional Knowledge Hub and a Centre for Higher Learning and Excellence.

2. Contribute significantly in the rapid transformation of Mauritius into the rank of developed countries.

3. Develop Open and Distance Learning as an instrument to increase access to post‐secondary education and lifelong learning locally and regionally.

4. Bring post‐secondary education provision in line with international standards and quality.

5. Encourage institutions to mount programmes that are relevant to the needs of learners, the country and the region.

6. Promote and enhance teacher education and training in order to raise standards of feeder system to post‐secondary education.

7. Instil the principles of good governance, transparency and accountability in the post‐secondary education system.

8. Ensure optimum use of the resources in the [tertiary education institutions]. 9. Sustain research and consultancy. 10. Foster regional and international understanding and cooperation through

diversity of studentship and overseas institutions. 11. Reinforce and empower the TEC to fulfil its mission and objectives.

3.2.3 Governance and policy coordination There is little formal planning in the higher education sector. The TEC provides guidelines to students on strategic priorities in terms of human resources. However, no formal planning of human resource development takes place and there is no evidence to suggest that state funding is used as an instrument to ensure the provision of certain categories of skills. While little planning appears to take place within the tertiary education system, it is clear that effective planning takes place between state organs responsible for development planning and those responsible for tertiary education. With regard to the latter, without resorting to any form of manpower planning, the nature of planning in the education sector suggests more attempts to ensure the provision of generic skills and improving the quality of outcomes.


32

There are no formal structures linking national authorities and higher education institutions.

3.3 The University of Mauritius perspective

3.3.1 Institutional narrative(s) on the role of the university In this section, the ways in which institutional leaders and senior academics talk about and understand the role of the university is explored, particularly in relation to economic development and how they see their university contributing to development. We explore these notions as they are articulated in the university’s key planning and strategy documents, as well as through the interviews conducted with selected institutional leaders and senior academics. Unlike most universities in Africa, the UoM was not established with the expectation that it would produce human resources for the government and civil service. Instead, as highlighted in Section 2.3.1, from the start the university’s role was focused on contributing to development of the country, with a specific focus on training:

As a developmental university, its main objectives were to educate and train students in those areas of knowledge, which were seen as essential for the economic and social development of the newly independent Mauritius. (UoM 2006: 7)

This role was echoed by a senior academic who pointed to the important role played by the university over the years in producing highly skilled professionals for both the public and private sectors:

I think there’s a very strong link and Mauritius can be one of the interesting case studies where you could see the link actually being evidenced. If you want to do that in a technical manner in terms of statistical analysis maybe that link won’t come across. But then you just ask anybody in Mauritius and he or she will tell you that higher education has been critical to the development of the country. If you look at the key civil servants, the ministers and all the important people in key positions, be it in the private sector or in government, they have been formed, they have been trained either at the UoM itself or elsewhere. … But I think if you really want to appreciate the link between higher education and development, that link comes more strongly from science and technology. Probably more from science and technology than from other disciplines, so training


33

of engineers, scientists, technical people – but also other disciplines as well. (Senior academic)

The university’s Strategic Research and Innovation Framework 2009–2015 also highlights the role that the university has played over the years in providing highly‐skilled individuals to the labour market:

UoM research, through its capacity‐building approach, has contributed tremendously to the training of a well‐qualified workforce for various sectors of the economy, hence playing its role fully to shape the nation. Talented PhD graduates have entered employment in key sectors of the economy such as agricultural sciences, ocean sciences, financial services, education, health sciences, and have advanced to more senior positions where they directly influence policy‐making for economic development. (UoM 2009: 3)

In recent years, the university has increasingly emphasised the importance of lifelong learning and continuous professional development for the people of Mauritius. This is articulated in the current strategic plan as follows:

Mauritius has a low tertiary enrolment rate compared to developed countries and developing countries in South‐East Asia and to be able to compete in this modern globalised world where great emphasis is placed on knowledge and skills, more opportunities must be provided to students who wish to benefit from tertiary education. The UoM will thus endeavour to explore various avenues to increase student access and provide quality education to benefit the largest number of students possible, including underserved and lifelong learners while maintaining affordability. … Information and Knowledge, the competitive tools of the century, are growing at an exponential rate. All emerging countries face the growing need to upgrade, and re‐equip their human capital, as the “shelf life” of acquired knowledge decreases. Provision of opportunities to the workforce to return periodically to education to acquire, learn to use, and re‐learn the knowledge and skills needed throughout their professional and personal lives becomes a strategic necessity. (UoM 2006: 19, 22)

There is also a focus on fostering innovative e‐learning systems and the importance of work‐based learning in order to improve the employability of graduates: “We have now introduced work‐based learning, so that you are more prepared for the world of work, and introducing in work‐based learning now entrepreneurship skills and social responsibility, that kind of thing” (institutional leader).


34

Over the years, the university’s role in relation to development has expanded to include a focus on research and innovation, with a particular emphasis on science and technology and links with industry. This shift is highlighted in the university’s current strategic plan as follows:

Since its creation, the University has designed programmes in line with educational developments and to meet the needs of the country, in close consultation with stakeholders. Over the past decades, the University progressed slowly from a mostly in‐service training institution to a fully‐fledged University concentrating increasingly on Bachelor's degrees and postgraduate programmes, research and consultancy activities in response to the contemporaneous and emergent needs of the various sectors of the Mauritian economy. (UoM 2006: 8)

According to an institutional leader, the university played a key role in persuading the government of the importance of R&D:

I think the government has recognised, after us hammering the last so many decades that R&D, R&D, it’s extremely important finally. We’ve heard it and seen the importance of it – because they have a very clear policy of making this country a knowledge industry. To do that you find that you cannot escape from R&D and innovation. (Institutional leader)

Both the institutional stakeholders interviewed and the key university planning and strategy documents place the institution in a central role in contributing to the nation’s economic development and consistently reflect the narrative of the knowledge economy. The strategic plan, for instance, makes reference to government policies and plans for shifting Mauritius to a knowledge economy:

One of the priorities of Government is to develop Mauritius into a Knowledge Hub with a view to supporting its socio‐economic development. Economic growth world‐wide is increasingly being driven by Knowledge. Moreover, the Ministry of Education and Human Resources is laying much emphasis on a world class education at all levels and Universities have a major role to play in the creation of intellectual capital and social wealth. (UoM 2006: 5)

Both the strategic plan and an institutional leader refer to the need for the university to adapt to changes in the economy of Mauritius:

Our island stands today at the crossroads of its future developments. With the proposed reforms of the European Union sugar regime and the increasing trend towards the globalisation of world trade, Mauritius has the impending need


35

to diversify its economy. Our island has embarked on an ambitious development strategy to find new drivers for economic growth. The Government is putting emphasis on the development of the ICT sector and the promotion of Mauritius as a Financial Services platform, a Knowledge Centre and a seafood hub in the region. Measures are also being taken to modernise and restructure the sugar and textile sectors through better technology and greater capitalisation. With all these coming changes, the University today faces the challenge of keeping pace with the developments of the island in view of the intensified global competition by expanding quickly and providing relevant programmes, while ensuring that quality norms are maintained and that due emphasis is given to research and consultancy. (UoM 2006: 12)

The whole idea of industry, the sectoral transformation over years, as you know we were a monocrop, agro‐based [economy] dominated by sugar production. But eventually when sugar was phased out by the sugar protocol and we moved into manufacturing, the EPZ [export processing zone] also declined due to the expensive labour cost. So the university had to play a major role in terms of addressing the sectoral transformation, because we as an institution, as a knowledge provider, were supposed to respond to the demand for labour, which is derived from this sectoral transformation we are highlighting here. So then the whole university, different faculties, had to revisit their programmes, the courses, the research agenda – and to fit in what would be required by the economy as such. (Institutional leader)

Institutional leaders conceptualise the way in which the university can contribute to economic development in a number of ways. The Strategic Research and Innovation Framework, for instance, begins by stating that research “is central to the aims of the University” – one of which is “contributing to society and the economy through knowledge and technology transfer and the application of research in the wider community” (UoM 2009: 2). This orientation is also apparent in the mission of the research strategy: “To foster a society based on knowledge with the right flavours required to achieve economic growth in a sustainable manner” (UoM 2009: 8). A key strategy in this regard is to move from a research‐informed to a research‐intensive institution and to increase the research capacity and outputs of the university (UoM 2009: 3, 17). In addition, innovation is seen as an important complementary aspect to research:

The intimate connections between innovation and business competitiveness are widely documented. Building up the innovative capacities represents a crucial factor to safeguard


36

the future productive fabric of the nation and the region. This fact underlines the need for a plan that will integrate and coordinate all actions taken in all fields and aimed at encouraging transfer to the productive sector as a way of promoting innovation. The University partners with various stakeholders for synergy to bridge the innovation gap. (UoM 2009: 2)

Research is not the only facet for knowledge, you have to look at innovation which is also an important component of knowledge that we are portraying, trying to adopt. The plan is there. We are working on the policy for start‐ups that is being recognised by one of the main committees of the university. There are also outreach programmes that we’re doing in terms of Innovation Week; the last one was last year in March, where we invite the public at large, especially school kids, and show them anything that relates to innovation, be it IPR [intellectual property rights] issues, new tools for experimentation, new gadgets – everything in the limelight. (Institutional leader)

Related to this is a focus on developing an “entrepreneurial flair” amongst staff and students which is described in both the strategic plan and the research and innovation strategy as follows:

In today's global competitive environment, Mauritius is facing more and more difficulty in attracting foreign investors in some sectors of its economy, causing an adverse effect on its level of employment, which invariably affects its socio‐economic conditions. Consequently, there is a need to better prepare our nationals for launching small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to contribute to national economic development. In this line, UoM intends to inculcate in its staff and students the spirit of entrepreneurship, and equip them with the appropriate managerial skills to unleash the entrepreneurial potential in each individual on campus. (UoM 2006: 21)

Using the triple helix concept, the UoM will foster a society based on knowledge with this entrepreneurial flair that is required to achieve sustainable economic growth with due insurance of social wellbeing and cohesion. (UoM 2009: 2)

The emphasis on science and technology and linking them to industry is strongly foregrounded in the key planning and strategy documents. For instance, one of the goals of the strategic plan is to promote emerging sectors, including science and technology, which will position the university in the Mauritius knowledge hub:


37

In order for the University to play a key role in the development of Mauritius towards a Knowledge Hub, the University will focus on science and technology and other key sectors and create synergies to promote the development of well‐defined educational supports to contribute to the sustainable development of the national economy. The UoM aspires to provide assistance to sectors to increase their productivity and competitiveness, encourage and provide new expertise to accelerate the country's participation in emerging regional and global opportunities. (UoM 2006: 20)

In this regard, an institutional leader spoke about an initiative to establish a science and technology park for the university with a view to taking this to a national level. University–industry linkages are also conceptualised in terms of incubation services and start‐up companies, starting with the ICT sector. At the broadest level, the university sees itself as playing the role of a think‐tank on national issues, as articulated in the strategic plan:

As a leading institution of the country having a high pool of intellectual resources and talents, the University will serve as a platform to raise public awareness and promote discussion of social, economic and political issues, and public policies. The University think‐tank will draw on staff from specific disciplines to produce innovative ideas and discussions on current and future issues of national interest. (UoM 2006: 18)

Finally, none of the interviewees expressed a concern about institutional autonomy, or questioned the role of the university in relation to economic development. As one institutional leader commented: “You cannot be in an ivory tower, you cannot afford to. If you get isolated, you won’t get any support, financial support or even moral support”. To the extent that a role for the university in economic development forms part of the narratives of the institutional leadership and other senior academic staff, the question arises: what evidence is there that the institution is walking their talk? As such, we now turn our attention to an investigation of the policies, structures, programmes and funding that have been put in place relating to the institution’s role in economic development. It is important to note that it was beyond the scope of this study to assess or evaluate the effectiveness or impact of these initiatives. Instead, they are included here as part of our analysis of the vision that institutional stakeholders have for the university in relation to economic development.


38

3.3.2 Initiatives around research and innovation

Institutional policies, structures and appointments A key strategy document which outlines the approach and plans relating to the university’s role in economic development is the Strategic Research and Innovation Framework 2009–2015. This document elaborates on the strategic objectives and priorities contained in the current university strategic plan in relation to research and innovation. The overall aim of the UoM Research and Innovation Programme is “to foster research to sustain economic development and growth for social stability and value‐based society” (UoM 2009: 9). The objectives of the strategy include the following (ibid.):

Foster and grow an active research culture that inspires discovery and innovation with emphasis on research of excellence that is world‐significant;

Create synergies, strengthen interdisciplinary and collaborative research through increasing the number of functional and strategic internal and external links;

Build future research and research capacity; and Increase research income from external sources to support more research.

Strategies to achieve these objectives include, amongst others, focusing and supporting research in niche areas, in particular (UoM 2009: 9):

Identifying emerging strategic, interdisciplinary priority areas with a focus on potential income‐generating research and consultancies;

Increasing overall research funding and diversifying funding sources; Rewarding excellence and achievement in research and incentivising

multidisciplinary research activities; Stimulating knowledge transfer and commercialisation; and Integrating research activities into the core research endeavours of the

institution. The university is also in the process of developing a number of policies relating to innovation and links with industry, including policies for incubation services, university companies, start‐ups and spin‐off companies. Over the years, the university has established a number of appointments and structures linked to furthering the institution’s activities in relation to economic development. Prime amongst these is the Office of the Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor for Research, Consultancy and Innovation, which was established in 1993.10 This office manages and provides facilities and funding for all research, innovation and consultancy activities in the institution.

10When this unit was first established, it was known as the Office of the Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor for

Research and Consultancy


39

The CCRC11, located within the Research, Consultancy and Innovation office, was established in 1998 with the aim of encouraging “staff to undertake consultancy in order to establish closer links with industry” (UoM 2006:7). The mission of the CCRC is “to provide expert consultancy and contract research services to local and regional clients so as to contribute to the socio‐economic development of Mauritius within the global economy.”12 As such, the CCRC is responsible for co‐ordinating all consultancy and contract research projects between the university and industry, government and other external stakeholders. The CCRC also manages the intellectual property rights generated by university research, licensing and technology transfer. The CCRC’s Consultancy Watch Unit, established in 2006, assists staff to “identify and develop consultancy opportunities”.13 A Technology Management Group (TMG) was established in 2007. According to the UoM Annual Report (2007–2008), the main aim of the TMG is “to consolidate the liaison between external companies and the university through collaborative research activities while facilitating the commercialisation of research results for the public good” (UoM 2008: 14). Linked to this, the Research, Consultancy and Innovation Office is in the process of establishing a University–Industry Liaison Office which will, amongst other things, “manage requests from the industrial sector to pursue collaborative research and technology transfer activities” (UoM 2009: 25). The university is also in the process of establishing a Technology Watch, the main aim of which is “to showcase technology excellence, promote innovation and entrepreneurship amongst its audience, and act as a central place for Mauritians and Mauritian Diaspora interested in technology and innovation” (UoM 2008: 14).

The university has established an Excellence Park with Multidisciplinary Centres of Excellence (MCEs). According to the Strategic Research and Innovation Framework (UoM 2009: 6), the aim of the Excellence Park is to address “national priorities and opportunities through a more flexible organisational structure for promoting R&D”. It lists the establishment of MCEs in the following areas (ibid.):

Entrepreneurship and SMEs Environment, Energy and Water Exploitation and Conservation of Indigenous Renewable Resources Financial Services Innovation, Science and Technology International Relations and Diplomacy Public Policy Textile and Manufacturing

11When this unit was first established, it was known as the Consultancy Centre. 12CCRC web site: http://www.uom.ac.mu/provcrci/CCRC/ExpServices/welcome.htm. 13Web site: http://www.uom.ac.mu/provcrci/CCRC/Process/cwu.htm.


40

Transport The institution is planning to establish a Science and Technology Park which would have the following functions (UoM 2009: 26):

Offering entrepreneurs and start‐up companies access to venture capital, business planning, financial modelling, market intelligence, deal structuring, recruitment of talent, branding, international markets, quick start‐up space, specialised and high quality services, and other innovation and entrepreneurship services;

Providing consultancy services to help corporate and government clients to establish, develop and run incubators and incubation programmes;

Making recommendations to government – Preferential Policies; and Promoting the investment environment for the park and the role booster of

industrial development. The university has also launched the University Support Network for SMEs. The aim of this project is to maximise the UoM resources and commitment to the development and enhancement of the activities of SMEs, in line with the government policy for promoting the sector. The objectives of the project include the following (Baguant 2009):

1. To provide SMEs with access to the faculties’ knowledge base and expertise; 2. To create awareness and train SMEs on the use of state‐of‐the‐art technologies

for achieving enhanced productivity levels; 3. To assist SMEs to develop innovative products and services through joint

working initiatives between small businesses, specialists and engineers aimed at sharing ideas and commercialising research;

4. To add value to SMEs assisted and to help them increase their goodwill, knowledge and sustainable competitive advantage and ultimately wealth; and

5. To assist SMEs to engage and collaborate in R&D activities in relation to matters of strategic importance to their business. Finally, a Centre for Studies on Sustainable Development was established which seeks to advise and support individuals, communities, businesses and other organisations in Mauritius to create a more sustainable culture that encourages the widespread adoption of thinking and practices that are economically competitive, environmentally sound and socially responsible (Baguant 2009).


41

Research funding14 The recent Strategic Research and Innovation Framework document highlights that a large proportion of government funding to the university goes towards supporting research activities, rather than directly funding research projects:

Internal funding available for the direct costs of research programmes is limited as the principal commitments of the University are to staff salaries and to making a substantial contribution to research services and facilities. A substantial part of the limited funding from the Government goes into participation in international conferences, research grants and infrastructure resource development such as laboratories, information resources and special equipment which are vital for achieving desired outcomes. These are rarely provided for by external funding bodies and are therefore priority items for the limited internal funds available. (UoM 2009: 32)

A project leader reported that while the university is very supportive to academic units in terms of providing facilities and equipment, the biggest problem is that these are not properly maintained:

But the big issues, the big problems at the university, are the maintenance of equipment. So what’s the use of getting in the equipment for these grants, getting them to university and when after five or six years they are not maintained, they have breakdowns and they are just put aside. This is the situation where we have a lot of highly sophisticated equipment which is out of use or which needs maintenance but the university doesn’t have any money to cater for this maintenance. (Project leader)

Both the current strategic plan and an institutional leader made reference to the availability of (competitive) research grants from various national research councils including the Mauritius Research Council (MRC), the Food and Agriculture Research Council and the National Economic and Social Council (NESC). However, some interviewees reported that recent changes in some of

14According to a university stakeholder, since the collection of data for this case study, the

newly‐formed Ministry of Tertiary Education, Science, Research and Technology has earmarked

USD 3.3 million for research, although the modalities are not yet defined. In addition, the

creation of more national research chairs will mean improved salaries and fringe benefits for

academic researchers. It has also come to light that while the level of research funding from

government to the university is quite low, that there is also a problem of the underutilisation of

available funds by the academics themselves.


42

these agencies mean that it is no longer possible to obtain research grants from them. For instance, one project leader spoke about how the role of the major public research granting agencies – the MRC and the TEC – are no longer funding research capacity and development:

[In the late 1990s] That was the time when those institutions really were working towards research development. They have been erring over the last ten years; they have been doing almost nothing over the last ten years because of a lot of pressure. You see, initially those institutions were mounted to develop research. So you could apply for grants, and so on. Now, after some years what happened was that the money that they had been given had not really been transformed into innovation or into the creation of wealth, so that started having a lot of pressure on them – pressure from the government, pressure from the public, from private, and so on. So then they changed everything: instead of continuing in that process of building capacity and saying that this is a long‐term investment, it will not work overnight, let alone pressure, we want to invest and so on – they started changing all the rules. Now nobody will get funding. (Project leader)

An institutional leader said of these agencies: “They have become policemen; they are policing others.” These sentiments were also echoed by another senior academic:

If you look at any of those countries which claim to be the newly industrialised countries of the world, countries like South Korea, Singapore and all of those – higher education has been critical to their economic development. They have really built a research think tank that they have pooled resources from. Unfortunately that is not happening in Mauritius. If it is happening – you know, I feel somehow that what is being said at the government level and what actually that translates too are two different things. The government will tell you that research is important; we want to promote research – and they have put up the MRC. But then on the ground, what is happening? I’m sure you have been talking to several academics – just ask them how much, if any of them has received any grant at all from the MRC. Just see what they say. They tell you, you just can’t get any grant from the MRC. I don’t know what kind of priorities they have; who, if at all, is getting the money. You just can’t get any grant. (Senior academic)

The dean of a faculty reported that they constantly have to apply and reapply for funding in particular disciplinary areas, but that there is no continuity:


43

I would again approach on an individual basis, write to a few to say: You see, I have done this report, I want to do a phase 2, are you willing to support us? They may, they may not. But then there is no institutional arrangement that would facilitate a long‐term research that would contribute to the economic development of this country. (Institutional leader)

A project leader reported that there are also no financial rewards for publishing in academic journals. The Strategic Research and Innovation Framework outlines the following strategies to increase research funding (UoM 2009: 31):

Targeting of major national and international funding schemes; Strategic use of research performance data to identify funding opportunities

and to maintain current strengths in attracting research income; Use of advanced technology for the dissemination and accessibility of research

funding information to the researching community; Encourage industry investment in research training; and Intellectual property creation, management and commercialisation, leading to

innovation outcomes and increased investment in R&D, particularly through involvement with established enterprises and with start‐up companies. Research programme clusters The Strategic Research and Innovation Framework outlines a number of priority clusters for research and innovation activities. One rationale for this approach, articulated by an institutional leader, is to try to overcome what he suggested is a resistance among academics at the UoM and in other institutions towards collaboration. The other rationale, articulated in the Framework, is to make the best of limited resources and to play to the institution’s strengths:

Given the enormous range of sectors and areas in which research and innovation can be applied, and the fact that resources are very limited, prioritisation in terms of research areas is absolutely necessary for fostering any envisaged sustained economic growth. Fundamental research, on the other hand, must not be ignored at any cost – as it merely represents research which may not have an immediate application yet. Amongst others, prioritisation is useful to take advantage of specific strengths, the benefits of focusing research, and the attainment of critical mass and effectiveness in resource deployment. (UoM 2009: 13)

The research programme clusters for the next couple of years include the following (UoM 2009: 27):


44

1. Science and Technology: Agriscience, Business and Technology; Bioinformatics and Biotechnology; Engineering; Food Science and Technology; Marine Science and Technology; Material Science and Manufacturing; Pure and Applied Sciences.

2. Health: Communicable Diseases (CD), Non‐CDs and Epidemiology; Environmental Health; Medical Biochemistry and Applications in Medicine/Health; Nutritional and Healthy Lifestyle.

3. Transforming Mauritius: Economic Studies and Development; Environment and Sustainable Development; Finance and Accounting; Innovation and Intellectual Property; Law and Management; Recreation, Hospitality and Tourism.

4. Safeguarding Mauritius: Alien Diseases and Pests; Crime and Terrorism; Culture, Heritage and History; Diplomacy and International Relations; Languages and Studies in Linguistics.

3.3.3 Initiatives around teaching and learning Institutional policies, structures and appointments There are no specific policies linking teaching and learning to economic development. The university has, however, established a Lifelong Learning Cluster which comprises three centres – the Centre for Professional and Lifelong Learning, the Centre for Information Technology and Systems, and the Virtual Centre for Innovative Learning Technologies. The Lifelong Learning Cluster will pool the human and financial resources from these three centres with the aim of designing tailor‐made programmes and services to lifelong learners and to supervise research projects which relate to ICTs and lifelong learning.15 Linkages with the labour market According to an institutional leader, the government does not provide specific directives or steering in terms of the university focussing on particular skills for the labour market. However, according to this respondent, the university tries as far as possible to respond to key developments in the economy in terms of academic programmes:

There is no kind of directive from government at all. But what we have tried to see, we know that we have a social responsibility as well in terms of producing people who can find work. … As far as possible we have tried to orient this training into areas where there is demand. (Institutional leader)

15Web site: http://www.uom.ac.mu/LLC/index.htm.


45

However, the government – via the Ministry of Finance – does set key performance indicators (KPIs) for the university in terms of “access with relevance to the economy”:

We have to show this flexibility in terms of addressing the national needs and to show visibility in the region, and of course internationally through publications and all the rest that we do as academics. So this is then built into the KPI, which has been increasingly given to us by government, and this comes from the regulatory authorities. (Institutional leader)

Faculties and departments are required to engage advisory committees, which include external stakeholders, around the development of new academic programmes and revisions to curricula:

Each of our programmes of study that we have, we have an advisory committee. So if we have 150 programmes there are 150 advisory committees, made up of people from the private–public sector, NGOs, civil society. And they meet on a regular basis like once a year or so to develop new curricula, to review how this thing was, so especially once you’ve got one lifecycle of regular programmes, three, four or five years – we do that. It’s a very dynamic process, and we review the composition. (Institutional leader)

There is a strong emphasis in the university on improving the employability of graduates. One institutional leader made reference to industry placements in professional programmes such as engineering. There are also internships in some academic programmes, such as engineering, management and some social sciences courses. Perhaps the most significant development, however, is in the area of work‐based learning. In partnership with the University of Bradford, the UoM was awarded a grant from the England–Africa Partnerships in Higher Education16 project of the British Council to incorporate work‐based learning into the undergraduate curricula and to support work placements for undergraduate students to improve their employability. According to the UoM annual report (2007–2008):

Three modules have been developed to allow all undergraduate students to acquire practical knowledge and achieve on‐the‐job competent skills. The modules are progressive over three years, enabling students to join appropriate work settings, for skills acquisition after each year of study. (UoM 2008: 78)

The Work‐Based Learning Unit, located within the Centre for Professional Development and Lifelong Learning, identifies and trains mentors from industry

16 Web site: http://www.britishcouncil.org/learning‐eap‐workbased‐learning‐mauritius.htm


46

who provide guidance and support to students during their work placements. These mentors also assess the students on a range of competencies including communication, team work, improving own learning and performance, solving problems, working and applying numbers, using information technology and developing professionalism (UoM 2008: 78). Finally, the university offers a number of programmes and modules relating to entrepreneurship and SMEs. There are currently modules in Entrepreneurship and SME Management in the following programmes of study: BSc Financial Management, BSc Marine Science and Technology, BSc Mechanical Engineering, MBA (General) and Super GEM in Entrepreneurship open to all UoM students. The Mauritius International Business School offers a BSc Creativity and Entrepreneurship and an MBA Specialisation Entrepreneurship. UoM also offers short courses in entrepreneurship to ICT Business Pre‐Incubator students and as summer courses open to the public. All the above modules/programmes address the issue of the economic importance of entrepreneurship and SMEs, for example, employment creation, diversification of the economic base, democratisation of the economy, import substitution, exports for trade balance, the outsourcing industry, and facilitating innovation and poverty alleviation through a micro‐credit scheme (women entrepreneurship) (Baguant 2009).


47

4.1 Introduction As outlined in the analytical framework (Section 1.1.3), the nature, size and continuity of the academic core is a key factor in the extent to which universities can make a significant and sustained contribution to development. The academic core of universities refers to teaching via academic degree programmes and to research activities (often, but not exclusively of the basic type). In societies where there is a strong pact between higher education and society, the universities have been able (and allowed) to develop a strong core of academic activities that forms the basis for all their activities. The stronger its academic core the easier it will be for a university to defend its institutional identity and integrity against external or internal threats. In addition, a strong, institutionalised academic core will allow the university to invest a large part of its resources in the maintenance and further strengthening of the core, which can be regarded as the main foundation under its specific institutional identity. According to Burton Clark (1998), when an enterprising university evolves a stronger steering core, and develops an outreach structure, its heartland is still in the traditional academic departments, formed around disciplines, and some interdisciplinary fields. The heartland is where traditional academic values and activities such as teaching, research and training of the next generation of academics occur. For the purposes of this project, we have used the following to operationalise the concept of the academic core and to identify important preconditions for the development of a strong academic core in African universities:

Increased enrolments in science, engineering and technology (SET): In African governments and foreign development agencies alike, there is a strong

Part 4

The University of Mauritius academic core

AT A GLANCE

A profile of the UoM academic core: Enrolments in science, engineering and technology Postgraduate enrolments and graduation rates Academic staff‐to‐student ratio Academic staff qualifications Research funding Research output


48

emphasis on SET as important drivers of development (Juma 2005). Included in SET are the agricultural sciences, architecture and urban and regional planning, computer and information science, health sciences and veterinary sciences, life sciences and physical sciences.

Increased postgraduate enrolments: The knowledge economy and universities are demanding increased numbers of people with postgraduate qualifications.

A favourable academic staff to student ratio: The academic workload should allow for the possibility of research and PhD supervision.

A high proportion of academic staff with doctoral degrees: Research (CHET 2010) shows that there is high correlation between staff with doctorates, on the one hand, and research output and the training of PhD students, on the other.

Adequate research funding per academic: Research requires government and institutional funding and ‘third‐stream’ funding from external sources such as industry and foreign donors.

High graduation rates in SET fields: Not only is it important to increase SET enrolments, it is crucial that universities achieve high success rates in order to respond to the skills shortages in the African labour market in these fields.

Increased knowledge production in the form of doctoral graduates: There is a need for an increase in doctoral graduates for two reasons. Firstly, doctoral graduates form the backbone of academia and are therefore critical for the future reproduction of the academic core. Secondly, there is an increasing demand for people with doctoral degrees outside of academia (e.g. in research organisations and other organisations such as financial institutions).

Knowledge production in the form of research publications recognised in ISI journals: Academics need to be producing peer‐reviewed research publications in order for the university to participate in the global knowledge community and to contribute to new knowledge and innovation.

The preconditions outlined above are translated into the following academic core indicators: Indicator 1: Programmes – Strong SET enrolments and graduations Indicator 2: Postgraduates – Increased enrolments and graduations Indicator 3: Teaching loads – Improving academic staff/student ratios Indicator 4: Qualified staff – High percentage academic staff with PhDs Indicator 5: Funding – Availability of research funds Indicator 6: Research output – High or improving output In order to develop a benchmark against which the UoM academic core could be assessed, an analysis was undertaken of South Africa’s 22 contact universities and the seven African universities included in the current study, based on seven input indicators and two output indicators. (See Appendix 2 for a description of the cluster analysis methodology, the detailed data for the institutions included in the analysis, and a graph showing the results of the analysis.) A cluster analysis of the results produced the following four clusters of institutions:


49

Cluster 1 consists of the five South African universities which have a strong focus on both undergraduate and postgraduate studies, which are well‐resourced in teaching and in research, and which have strong research outputs.

Cluster 2 consists of two South African and five African universities which have

a primary focus on undergraduate studies, which have adequate undergraduate teaching resources, and which have good undergraduate but moderate research output rates.

Cluster 3 consists of eight South African and two African universities which

have high proportions of SET students, which have a main focus on undergraduate studies, but which do not have available the same levels of undergraduate teaching resources as Cluster 2. Their undergraduate output rates are satisfactory, but their research output rates fall below the targets set for South African universities.

Cluster 4 consists of seven South African universities which have low

proportions of postgraduate students. Their resource levels are low compared to the other three clusters, their output rates at undergraduate level are unsatisfactory, and their research performance is poor. The UoM appears in Cluster 2 together with Dar es Salaam, Eduardo Mondlane, Botswana, Makerere, Johannesburg and Limpopo. In the analyses which follow, UoM (which had a student enrolment of 7500 in 2007) is linked to: (a) one African university in Cluster 2 (Botswana, which had an enrolment of 16000 in 2007) and (b) Limpopo (which also had an enrolment of 16000 in 2007). UoM is also compared to the Cluster 1 university which is closest to it in terms of enrolment size. This is Rhodes University which had an enrolment of 6000 in 2007. Note that the figures presented in this section are drawn from a current CHET project which is assembling performance indicator data for eight African countries, and which will be published as a CHET report in 2010.

4.2 SET enrolments and graduations Table 4.1 shows that UoM’s SET enrolments grew slowly between 2001 and 2007. Total enrolments in SET increased by only 400 in 2007 compared to 2001. Most of the growth occurred in the field of business and management, whose enrolments doubled from 1 200 in 2001 to 2 400 in 2007. Figure 4.1 shows that the proportion of SET majors in UoM’s total enrolment fell from 50% in 2001 to 42% in 2007.


50

Figure 4.1: Mauritius: Enrolments by field of study

Table 4.1: Mauritius: Total enrolments by field of study (thousands)

Field of study 2001 2003 2005 2007 Average annual

growth rate: 2000‐2007

Science and technology 2.7 2.8 3.3 3.1 2.3%

Business and management 1.2 1.7 2.2 2.4 12.2%

Social sciences, humanities and education

1.4 1.1 1.6 1.8 5.6%

Totals 5.3 5.8 7.2 7.5 6.0%

As indicated in Figure 4.2 and Table 4.2, UoM’s proportion of SET enrolments was comparable to that of Limpopo, which also fell into Cluster 2. Its SET proportions were double those of Botswana (another Cluster 2 universitiy) and Rhodes – which was selected as a small, well‐resourced university with a strong research record.

50% 49% 46% 42%

24% 29%30%

32%

26% 22% 24% 26%

2001 2003 2005 2007

Science & technology Business & management Humanities


51

Figure 4.2: Comparison of science and technology majors as % of total enrolment

Table 4.2: Comparison of total science and technology enrolments (thousands)

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius 2.7 2.8 3.3 3.1

Botswana 2.7 3.5 3.3 3.7

Limpopo 6.3 7.0 7.6 7.5

Cluster 1: Rhodes 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4

The data in Figures 5.5 and 5.6 measure output performance in terms of a university’s ratio between graduates in any given year and student enrolments in that same year. These ratios serve as proxies for cohort output rates, which indicate the proportion of any cohort entering a university expected to eventually complete their degrees or diplomas. The benchmark of 25% is a proxy for a cohort success rate of 75% of entering students obtaining their degrees or diplomas. Figure 4.3 shows that UoM’s average graduate rate for SET improved after 2001, and was above the benchmark rate of 25%. UoM’s average rate of 26% for the period was equivalent to a cohort success rate of 78%, which is a high rate for SET programmes.

50%49%

46%

42%

22%

21%21%

21%

47%

43%

46%

24%

19%21%

23%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius Botswana Limpopo Cluster 1: Rhodes

Limpopo

Mauritius

Cluster 1: Rhodes

Botswana

52%


52

Figure 4.3: Mauritius: Graduation rates by field of study

Table 4.3: Mauritius: Total SET graduates

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius 610 850 882 827

Figure 4.4 shows that UoM’s and Rhodes' performances in producing SET graduates were well above those of the other two universities. UoM’s average cohort success rate for 2001–2007 was 78%, Botswana's 55%, Limpopo's 50%, and Rhodes' an exceptionally high 88%. The data indicate that UoM was, in terms of its SET graduate outputs, an efficient university. Table 4.4 summarises the total SET graduates produced by each of the four universities.

23%

30%26% 26%

25%

30%28% 28%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2001 2003 2005 2007

Science & technology Average for all programmes

Target


53

Figure 4.4: Comparison of science and technology graduation rates

Table 4.4: Comparison of total science and technology graduates

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius 610 850 882 827

Botswana 614 573 625 580

Limpopo 1024 1080 1281 1357

Cluster 1: Rhodes 373 407 394 465

4.3 Postgraduate enrolments and graduations Figure 4.5 shows that the proportion of postgraduate students in UoM’s total enrolment grew from 9% in 2001 to 14% in 2007. Its actual total of postgraduate enrolments increased from 464 in 2001 to 1 052 in 2007.

23%

30%

26%

26%23%21%

17%16%16% 17%

18%

26% 29%

30%

33%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius Botswana Limpopo Rhodes

Limpopo

Mauritius

Cluster 1: Rhodes

Botswana


54

Figure 4.5: Comparison of % postgraduates in enrolment total

Table 4.5: Comparison of total postgraduate enrolments in all fields of study

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius 464 633 1 145 1 052

Botswana 840 1 029 1 439 1 530

Limpopo 1 632 3 032 3 199 2 784

Cluster 1: Rhodes 1 202 1 357 1 330 1 512

Table 4.6 gives details for UoM only of masters and doctoral enrolments and graduates over the period 2001 to 2007. The table shows that rapid growth occurred in masters enrolments as well as masters graduates. Masters enrolments (not including MPhils) increased by 509 (or 145%) and masters graduates by 281 (or 356%) in 2007 compared to 2001. Mauritius reports its senior postgraduate enrolments as MPhil/doctorates. A decision to move a student to either a masters or a full doctorate appears to be taken during his/her research studies.

9%

11%16%

14%

7%

8%9%

9%

21%

18% 17%

19%18%

21%

25%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2001 2003 2005 2007


16%

Limpopo

Mauritius

Cluster 1: Rhodes

Botswana


55

Table 4.6: Mauritius: Masters and doctoral enrolments and graduates

2001 2003 2005 2007 Average annual growth:

2000‐2007

Masters

Enrolments 350 506 954 859 16.1%

Graduates 79 212 346 360 28.8%

MPhil/doctoral

MPhil/doctoral enrolments 114 127 191 193 9.2%

Doctoral graduates 7 5 0 10 6.1%

Total masters + doctoral

Enrolments 464 633 1 145 1 052 14.6%

Graduates 86 217 346 370 27.5%

Since doctoral students, especially in SET, are essential parts of research programmes, Figure 4.6 can be used as a first measure of a university's involvement in research. A university which has strong research programmes should have reasonably high proportions of doctoral students in its grouping of masters plus doctoral students. Figure 4.6 shows that, for the period 2001–2007, UoM enrolled an average of four masters students in regular masters programmes for each MPhil/doctoral student enrolled. This would be a high ratio if all MPhil students eventually moved into full doctoral programmes, which UoM’s graduate totals of doctorates suggest is not the case. Rhodes, which has a strong research record, had an average of three masters enrolments per doctoral student. The comparable ratios for the other universities are Botswana 32 masters enrolments per doctoral enrolment, and Limpopo 12.


56

Figure 4.6: Comparison of doctoral enrolments as % of masters and doctors enrolments

Table 4.7: Comparison of masters and doctoral enrolments

2001 2003 2005 2007

Masters Doctoral Masters Doctoral Masters Doctoral Masters Doctoral

Mauritius 350 114 506 127 954 191 859 193

Botswana 493 8 687 13 755 24 951 41

Limpopo 976 69 1 779 139 1 831 167 1 651 154

Cluster 1: Rhodes 453 175 494 193 605 217 642 235

Figure 4.7 compares the total numbers of doctoral graduates produced by each of the four universities between 2001 and 2007. Rhodes produced 60%, and Limpopo 21% of the total doctoral graduate output of these four universities between 2001 and 2004.

25%

20%

17%18%

2%2%

3%

4%

7%7% 8%

9%

28%28%

26%27%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2001 2003 2005 2007


Limpopo

Mauritius

Cluster 1: Rhodes

Botswana


57

Figure 4.7: Comparison of total doctoral graduates

Table 4:8: Comparison of doctoral graduates

2001 2003 2005 2007

Mauritius 7 5 0 10

Botswana 3 5 6 4

Limpopo 4 10 15 17

Cluster 1: Rhodes 24 27 31 48

4.4 Student‐staff ratios

With reference to Table 4.9, data on the formal teaching hours carried by academic staff at the four universities are not available. Use has therefore been made of proxies that compare student to academic staff growth rates, and ratios of FTE students to FTE academic staff. Because UoM did not provide data on FTE academic staff by field of study, Table 4.5 deals only with academic staff totals. The table shows that UoM’s permanent academic staff total remained constant over the period 2001–2007, and that growth occurred in the employment of FTE academic staff which would include permanent staff plus part‐time and temporary and academic staff. UoM’s total of FTE academic staff grew at average annual rate of 12.8% in this period, which was more than double the rate of increase in FTE student

75

0

10

35 6

44

10

1517

2427

31

48

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2001 2003 2005 2007



58

enrolments. The consequence of this was that Mauritius' ratio of FTE students to FTE academic staff improved from 24:1 in 2001 to 16:1 in 2007.

Table 4.9: Mauritius: FTE students and academic staff

2001 2003 2005 2007

Average annual growth:

2000‐2007

Permanent and FTE academics

Permanent academic staff 194 212 214 201 0.6%

FTE academic staff 200 342 368 411 12.8%

Ratio of FTE to permanent academics

1.0 1.6 1.7 2.0

FTE students and FTE academic staff

FTE students 4750 5102 6120 6618 5.7%

FTE academic staff 200 342 368 411 12.8%

FTE student to FTE academic ratio 23.8 14.9 16.6 16.1

Figure 4.8 compares FTE student to FTE academic staff ratios for 2007 for the four universities. The average ratio for all four universities was less than 20, which is regarded as satisfactory in terms of South African norms.

Figure 4.8: Comparison of 2001 – 2007 FTE student‐staff ratios

24

1517 16

14 14

1617

21

12

16

18

16

23

18

15

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2001 2003 2005 2007



59

Figure 4.9 compares the four universities' 2007 totals of permanent academic staff and FTE academic staff. The point of the comparison is highlighted in the discussion around Figure 4.10.

Figure 4.9: Comparison of totals of permanent and FTE academic staff (2007)

Figure 4.10 can function as a proxy of the load carried by permanent academic staff members, who are expected to be the main supervisors of research students and producers of research publications. Graphs 9 and 10 show that the permanent academic staff of UoM have the highest level of support from temporary and part‐time academic staff (although it should be noted that the management of large numbers of temporary and part‐time staff places a burden on the permanent academic staff). In 2007, UoM had 201 permanent academics and the equivalent of 210 full‐time, part‐time and temporary academic staff.

201

767 753

307

411

767

902

351

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000


Permanent academics FTE academics


60

Figure 4.10: Comparison of ratios of FTE to permanent academic staff (2007)

4.5 Academic staff qualifications Figure 4.11 compares the proportions of permanent academic staff with either a masters or a doctorate as their highest formal qualification for 2007. UoM with 45% and Rhodes with 50% of permanent staff with doctorates have the proportions which research‐based universities should have. Botswana's proportion of 31% is close to the average for South African universities.

Figure 4.11: Comparison of highest formal qualifications of permanent academics (2007)

2.0

1.0

1.2 1.1

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5


Ratio of FTE to permanent academic staff

45%

31%

16%

50%

46%

21%

40%

35%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


Doctorate highest Masters highest


61

Table 4.10: Comparison of ppermanent academics with master and doctoral degrees (2007)


Doctorate highest 91 238 120 159

Masters highest 92 161 303 112

Lower than masters 18 368 334 49

4.6 Research funding17 The information in Figures 5.14 and 5.15 attempts to set out the totals which each university had available for research in 2007. The data should therefore reflect research income rather than expenditure on research. In their annual income statements, South African universities report on their research funding in terms of recurrent research income and research contracts for designated purposes. Rhodes' 2007 income statements did not specifically identify research income, but gave its designated contract income as R 10.9 million. For the purposes of these analyses it is assumed that this R 10.9 million is research funding. Limpopo's 2007 income statements gave its designated research contract income as R 7.2 million. UoM indicates that its income from research contracts was Rs 9.3 million in 2007. This was 2.5% of its total income. Botswana did not provide specific information on research funding. For the purposes of these analyses, it is assumed that Botswana's research income equals 1% of its total income. The calculations of market rate dollars are based on average exchange rates quoted by the central banking authorities of each country. The calculation of PPP is based on estimates contained in the 2008 publication on World Development Indicators. Because these estimates are based on 2005 exchange rates, the following method was used for the 2007 calculations:

The indicator set gives for each country a ratio between the PPP conversion factor and the market exchange rate. For example, the South African ratio is given as 0.61, based on a market exchange rate of R 6.4:USD 1 in 2005.

17 It must be noted that all universities in the sample appear to use different means to estimate

their research income. For the purposes of comparison where no figures have been supplied a

percentage of university income has been used. These figures however are not reliable and

more work needs to be done in further studies to accurately track university research income.


62

The 2007 calculations assume that the 2005 ratio will apply again. So the 2007 PPP conversion factor is taken to be 2005 ratio times 2007 market exchange rate. For example, the conversion factor for South Africa is calculated as 2005 ratio x 2007 exchange rate = 0.61 x 7.0 = 4.27. The calculations in Figure 2.14 are based on the research income totals referred to in the previous paragraphs on research funding. The amounts in local currency were converted to market rate USD and PPP dollars using the methodology referred to previously. The conversion rates used were these:

Mauritius market rate = Rs 31:USD Mauritius PPP = Rs 15.5 per PPPD

Botswana market rate = BWP 6.3:USD Botswana PPP = BWP 3.15 per PPPD

South African universities market rate = R 7.0:USD

South African universities PPP = R 4.27 per USD

Figure 4.12: Comparison of research income in market rate USD and PPP$ (millions)

Figure 4.13 is based on the income totals in Figure 4.12 and the permanent academic staff totals in Figure 4.9. The ratios show that the Cluster 1 university, Rhodes, had at 2007 market rate values USD 4 900 in research income available per permanent academic. The comparable 2007 market rate values per permanent academic were USD 1 500 for UoM, USD 1 300 for Limpopo, and USD 1 000 for Botswana.

0.3

0.8

1.0

1.5

0.6

1.7 1.7

2.4

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0


Market rate $ PPP $


63

The PPP$ figures show that Rhodes had available approximately four times more research funding per permanent academic than UoM, and four times more than Botswana.

Figure 4.13: Comparison of total research income per permanent academic in market rate USD and

PPP$ (thousands)

4.7 Research outputs For the purposes of this study, research outputs are measured in terms of research publications18, and doctoral graduates. Table 4.11 lists UoM’s totals of research publications and doctoral graduates for the period 2001–2007.

Table 4.11: Mauritius: Research outputs

Research publications Doctoral graduates

2001 30 7

2003 26 5

2005 22 0

2007 26 10

18 The research publication data presented here are based on the peer reviewed research

publications data in the Web of Science citation database within the ISI Web of Knowledge,

produced by Thomson Reuters. The database captures papers from all countries that are

published in journals that meet certain criteria of quality as determined by Thomson Reuters.

1.51.0

1.3

4.9

3.0

2.0 2.3

7.8

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0


Market rate $ PPP $


64

Figure 4.14 deals only with research publication units. The target is based on the assumption that a permanent academic should publish at least one research article every two years. The data in the graph show that only Rhodes exceeded this target and that the others fell well short of it. The ratios of UoM and Botswana suggest that each of their permanent academics will publish one research article every seven years.

Figure 4.14: Comparison of research publication units per permanent academic

Figure 4.15 sets out ratios between doctoral graduates and permanent academic staff, with the target again being derived from the research output targets used in the South African higher education system. In this case, the target takes account of the productivity of academic staff in terms of the total of doctoral graduates produced in a given year divided by the total of permanent academic staff employed in that year. The target ratio of 10% is based on these calculations: At least 50% of the permanent staff of a university should be supervising at least one doctoral student, and these students should take on average five years to complete their degrees. So a university with (say) 100 permanent academics should enrol at least 50 doctoral students, and 20% of these should graduate each year. The ratio between permanent staff and doctoral graduates should therefore be at least 10/100 = 10%. The data in the graph show that only Rhodes exceeded this target in 2007. In 2001 Rhodes’s ratio was below the target. The other three universities in the group fell well short of the target of 10%.

0.150.12

0.23

0.64

0.13 0.15 0.13

0.86

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00


2001 2007


65

Figure 4.15: Comparison of doctoral graduates in given year as % of permanent academics employed

3.6%

0.4% 0.7%

7.4%

5.0%

0.5%

2.3%

15.6%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%


2001 2007

Target ratio


66

5.1 Introduction In order to ensure that the core activities of teaching and research are to some extent aligned with national development priorities and can thereby contribute to development in society, universities increasingly emphasise the need to engage with relevant external stakeholders. Furthermore, much of what might be termed the development‐related activities of the university usually fall within the so‐called ‘third mission’, which is variously referred to as ‘engagement’, ‘service’ or ‘community outreach’. This could include academics serving on committees in the public or private sector, providing support to small businesses, responding to requests for short courses, or undertaking contract research for outside clients. More often than not, the economic development‐related projects and activities of the institution fall under its engagement function. In the first part of this section, we explore the UoM’s engagement with its key external stakeholders. Given that the UoM does not, at the institutional level, receive significant foreign‐donor funding, we focus specifically on its linkages with government and industry. In the second part of the section, we turn our attention to an analysis of the extent of the connectedness of the economic development‐related centres and projects included in this study.

Part 5

The engagement and development‐related activities of the University of Mauritius

AT A GLANCE

University engagement and linkages with government and industry Incentives for academics to engage in development‐related activities Coordination of development activities Connectedness of economic development‐related projects and centres to

the academic core


67

5.2 Engagement and linkages with external stakeholders The university’s Strategic Research and Innovation Framework makes reference to linkages and collaboration with both government and industry, rooted in the notion of the triple helix model:

Research and innovation policy is increasingly an outcome of interaction rather than a prescription from Government. UoM aspires to fully integrate the Triple Helix model encompassing the three major institutional spheres ‐ Industry, Academia and Government. This Triple Helix, while recognising the differing goals and stakeholder communities of the three groups, emphasises on the common interest of constituent groups to provide value to the societies in which they are. UoM aims to play a prominent role in research and innovation, on a par with industry and government in a knowledge–based society with an objective to move more toward collaborative relationships. In the Triple Helix model, UoM which is the traditional provider of human resources and knowledge, will then act more as a critical socio‐economic development actor and assume the task of advancing research, innovation and development. (UoM 2009: 23)

Key mechanisms for the transfer of technology to government and industry include consultancy services, outright sale of technology, licensing of technology, joint ventures and start‐up ventures (UoM 2009: 24). Consultancy projects are classified into three types (UoM 2008: 93–94):

1. Research projects involving studies and submission of reports; 2. Routine testing in university laboratories; and 3. Training programmes, executive development programmes and continuous

development programmes. An institutional leader explained that the idea for establishing a science and technology park is partly in order to improve the coordination of research and innovation initiatives in Mauritius:

In Mauritius in a sense we have a lot of infrastructure in place, but not managed properly in a systematic way. We have the informatics cyber parks, we have the industrial parks, we’ve got the research parks, the university is probably part of it. The MSRI is another one. We can have new ones like recreational parks, eco‐parks – I mean, you name it, there are I think five, six or seven of these things, different types of parks. And then there are a lot of institutions which are more or less duplicating work. For example, on the question of IPR issues. The university has its own mechanism, MRC is trying to come up with another


68

mechanism and overlook all the other institutions. You have the IP council, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that also deals with IPR issues. So there’s lots of duplication. But if you look at the details, nobody has real expertise in IPR. They want to put a framework but they cannot provide expertise, for example, how to write claims in IPR, in a patent. We don’t have expertise in Mauritius. I have a patent, I know what I’ve been through in writing the claims, without legal help, nobody to write if you need legal help. So in a sense we are not using our resources properly. We have some institutions like Enterprise Mauritius, we have the NPCC [Mauritius National Productivity and Competitiveness Council], we have SEHDA [Small Enterprises and Handicraft Development Authority]. They are all involved in entrepreneurship, in innovation, in one way or another. But then they all want to provide business plans, solutions – all of them want to do it. So this concept of the national park is essentially to put some order into it. This is what I am trying to do in collaboration with industry and research. (Institutional leader)

Interestingly, much of the emphasis in the key planning and strategy documents is on the university’s relationship with industry and government. There is very little mention of linkages to communities. In the current strategic plan, Strategic Direction 6 relates to community outreach. The first goal is to “help the community to develop, monitor and enhance its vitality” (UoM 2006: 33). Strategies include (ibid.):

Promoting greater participation of University Court in activities; Promoting greater public awareness of current community problems and

issues; Extending the resources and expertise of the UoM to directly address the

community; and Stimulating public involvement by increasing access of community stakeholders

to conferences, open days, and seminars. The second goal focuses on promoting civic engagement. Strategies include (UoM 2006: 34):

Providing opportunities for staff and students to participate in social activities; Collaborating with NGOs and other institutions; Giving sustained voice (speeches, publications, editorials, etc.) to the

importance of civic engagement; and Providing relevant training and professional development activities focused on

civic engagement and public leadership skills.


69

5.2.1 University–government–industry linkages While the emphasis on university–government–industry linkages is clearly articulated in strategy documents and by institutional leaders, what is actually happening on the ground? One institutional leader reported that there are good linkages between government and university academics:

Especially in this government the number of academics participating in national committees, it’s record, from chairing high‐level committees to being members of national, very high powered committees, it’s a very good sign, recognising that we have experience. (Institutional leader)

However, other interviewees suggested that these linkages are limited and ad hoc and that government does not adequately recognise or draw on the expertise available in the institution:

I must also say that there’s no big communication between our policy‐makers in government and us academics. This should be strongly enhanced. And also if you look at the problems that we are facing in Mauritius, traffic congestion for instance; you have been here a few days, you can see. There have been a dozen specialists coming in, going out, coming in and going out. Foreigners, with large reports, stacking in rows. Nothing done. Where we have, I don’t say we have a solution yet, but we could at least have consulted our local people who are professors at the university. We have been assessed by external. We could contribute to try to solve priority issues. So why don’t we get consulted on these issues in the first instance? This is the problem here in Mauritius. (Project leader)

I really deplore the fact that we don’t have those kinds of strong links with the government. I personally feel that the university, as a think tank that we are, is a little left aside. We have not been participating in the policy debate at the level of government in a formal manner. Now having said that things are changing a bit now. And maybe that is a little bit contextual as well. For example, … international trade is very much in the limelight right now, with all the negotiations going on. And at the level of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade there are several committees working on various issues of negotiations, and they systematically invite the university to participate in those committees. So almost every two weeks or so I receive some kind of invitation to attend a seminar or a meeting. I appreciate that because at least I could see that they


70

want the university to be present in those delegations. So, as I said, it’s contextual because the negotiations are very much there that we are being asked to – but once this is over probably we’ll just be back to where we are. But I think it’s important that the university participates in the policy debate in a more formal [way]. Academics are involved in decision‐making in various capacities. We have, for example, many academics of the UoM and elsewhere, who are advisors to the government. My own colleagues, I know of two colleagues who are now advisors to the Minister – it used to be the Ministry of Education but is now Ministry of Industry and Science. … And the Minister himself used to be an academic and he has maintained the close relationship with the university; he comes to the university and he still feels like he belongs here. And this is the kind of thing that I want to be more present in policy‐making because you can’t just leave the academics aside. In Mauritius, and again this is my personal view, I just hope somebody else could corroborate that – my personal view is that we are often seen as being purely academic and that we are not in touch with the reality on the ground, the practical aspects of policy. We do research in a vacuum; we do research just for the sake of publishing in academic journals which few people would really read and few people actually care about, really. But that is not true, I can assure you that is not true. Myself, for example, I think I have evolved over time and I can say that I am very much now policy‐oriented. My research is very much policy‐orientated. It has always been policy‐orientated. I don’t do theoretical research – it is very policy‐oriented. (Senior academic)

One project leader spoke about how the specific ministry and government agency to which his projects are linked do not seem to be interested in drawing on his expertise:

I am a bit disappointed. The data which came out is not being properly used. I have been to a lot of conferences. I must say that I am much more known outside of Mauritius than in the country with regards to these studies. I’m being invited by AIMS – All‐India Institute of Medical Sciences, Cape Town Peninsula University, all these institutions. I’m invited to Vietnam Science and Technology, to talk on various things. But here there’s a problem, there’s a communication problem, because these data could have been quite helpful to manage certain health programmes or whatever. Or even, I won’t say to manage completely, but to contribute. Call me – I can go and give free conferences in schools about eating fruits, vegetables, and what about the cardiovascular situation, how to modulate this issue.


71

But there has not been any sign of anything. … I have talked to the MRC people, the people who have funded me. I said: Let’s go ahead, let’s have these booklets done, let us distribute these booklets. But nothing substantial so far. (Project leader)

Another suggested that government does not understand how academia works and makes unreasonable demands:

It’s very difficult in this country, or I think it’s valid what I’m saying for all the developing world, to make people understand that we’re not geniuses. We’re not going to do anything overnight. Anything that we have to do needs planning, needs long‐term planning. People, when you talk to ministers here or you talk to people who would take decisions, policy‐makers – they will tell you: Well, do you have a product that we can sell tomorrow? … Give us a solution tomorrow, right, as if you just open your drawer and just give it. And there’s no need for you to say that we had not had any financial problems, etc. – no need to mention about all that – they just want the product. (Project leader)

The key link with industry and the private sector appears to be primarily around education and training. As highlighted in Section 3.3.3, the university does engage the private sector via the advisory committees for curriculum review and development, and around work placements. While there is some investment by the private sector for specific training needs, a few respondents reported that this is very limited:

The culture in this country is, the culture from the private sector is, that the government should train people for the private sector. It’s changing now very slowly – the private sector recognising the importance of capacity‐building and training, that kind of thing, it’s changing, but very slowly. (Institutional leader)

The private sector has invested in capacity building at the lower levels, the technical craft level, the vocational training level. (Institutional leader)

We have a student work placement, we have leaflets circulated, sometimes job fairs organised in order to make people in the private sector aware of what we have and what we could to approach. But then you know, it’s like they will tell you: We don’t have funding for this. It boils down to this again, that they don’t have enough funding to sponsor students or to have programmes that would be attractive. (Institutional leader)


72

An institutional leader reported that there is very limited R&D in the private sector, while a project leader reported that it is difficult to engage in private sector collaboration because of limited R&D investment:

We talked to many of the industries here, but they tell you exactly what you are saying – I mean, they aren’t going to do research, even R&D. We saw that as well. Maybe some trials, and demos and minor things. (Institutional leader)

Mauritian private sector investment in R&D as a percentage of GDP is almost negligible. This makes it very difficult to establish research collaboration/joint ventures with the private sector. However, the private sector (banks, companies) has extended financial support whenever solicited for conference/workshop organisation. We have been more successful in attracting collaborations with foreign organisations/institutions … and local embassies (French, British, Indian) through direct contact (project leader).

According to another institutional leader, there are still very few links with the private sector in terms of research and that the private sector tends to expect that it is the government’s responsibility to invest in R&D: “They expect all this [R&D] to be done at the university at the cost of the government.” An institutional leader, who had been involved in a survey of industries in Mauritius, reported that the private sector only engages the university around research in an ad hoc fashion:

So what happened is that we found the linkages are very poor – as long as both research and teaching is concerned, training. We thought of finding something having to do with: What kind of research is there? Is there any strong demand from the industry to the university? But it’s not there; it happens on an ad hoc basis. When there is a project or a consultancy you find an industry want the university to do a research then they approach the university. So it’s on a random basis; nothing systematic. Or even the university might be having expertise, but you don’t have like the private sector say: okay, I will come and sponsor this PhD student, like would be happening in very advanced countries. So that is very much absent. Even training skills, it’s like: Oh, we need, trainers for people who’re working in the EPZ [export processing zone] – they come and approach you – but there is nothing systematically going on. And we’ve been approaching them, the university has been doing many attempts trying to get them. But I think the Faculty of Engineering was one where they had stronger links. (Institutional leader)


73

Two project leaders suggested that part of the problem is that there is no coordinating body between the university and the private sector:

What we lack in Mauritius is: There is no interface between the private sector and the university. Nothing. No interface. And if you look at South Africa you can see loads of institutions are acting as interface between the university and the private sector; here you’ve got none. And they expect you, private sector and even public sector, government, expects you to come up with the products, where you have done all the market study, that you have everything already packaged and that you’re going to give them, and you’re just telling them: This is how you’re going to make profits. I mean, things don’t work like this. How can we make this country understand that we have to use a more rational approach? (Project leader)

We don’t have in fact at the university the institutional setup for a university‐industry linkage, it’s not there yet. The idea has been put forward by the Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor Research and Consultancy, and I think this is forthcoming, but I think we are very much lagging behind; we should have had by now the institutional setup for the university‐industry linkage whereby people from industry, even SMEs, can tap the resources at the university. (Project leader)

The plans for a university–industry liaison office were confirmed by an institutional leader:

Initially I set up the TMG, but it should be a fully‐fledged university–industry liaison office that will bring the proxy between university academia and industry people. So we are looking at a gamut or a spectrum of activities that we can come up with in industries, from consultancy to contract research. And we are going to probably use postdocs in the process as a catalyser. So there’s a whole array of plans that we are coming up with at the moment. But it is all in the papers of the university; it’s being formulated. Discussions are going on; it will emerge very soon. (Institutional leader)

Finally, one respondent spoke about some of the challenges in developing linkages with industry in terms of the attitudes of academics:

The willingness from the part of the academia is there but it is limited. I’m not going to say I’m the exception, but we have a lot of exceptions. We have a new generation at the universities, especially the young academics and technicians, who are very keen on serving the economy. We are very bad marketing


74

people – that I should fairly and squarely admit. We are very bad marketing people – we don’t market what we do. And we don’t have anyone to. But the willingness is there. (Project leader)

5.2.2 Incentives, rewards and coordination If it is the university’s intention to promote linkages with government and industry, and to encourage engagement and development‐related activities, then what incentives and rewards are in place for this? And, how are these linkages coordinated? The Strategic Research and Innovation Framework lists a number of incentives for academics to engage in research. Amongst others, these include (UoM 2009: 19):

The creation of new research groups and centres; Opportunities for research training and for participation in incubation, start‐ups

and contract research; Optimised operations of research laboratory facilities (under the University

Central Laboratory concept); and Research grants.

There are also special incentives, following the 2008 Pay Research Bureau Report, for “multi‐disciplinary research and research likely to contribute to wealth creation, policy formulation and transfer of technology or for the environmental, social and cultural development of Mauritius” (ibid.). However, a project leader argued that the approach to consultancy in the university is not practical:

The other thing is, I think that is quite funny but it is there, there is a policy somewhere, it says that an academic will be allowed to embark on consultancy projects for up to 52 days per year, which gives you one day per week for consultancy work. For me, it’s unacceptable. You can get a project which goes over three months straight away, but you are not allowed to do that because we have 52 days. For instance, myself, I’m being approached for a number of projects and my team, I’ve got a number of people working with me, we are approached quite often. And we always have to check is it! No, this is ridiculous. But, okay, it’s there, for whatever reasons it’s there. But these I would say small things, petty things, which can be addressed, which can be changed. But it depends on – that’s what I said – who drives it and what is the whole objective behind driving it? Do you want to really push it or do you want to push it but at


75

the same time make sure that it’s not going too fast? This is what has happened. They want to push it. They have the willingness, but they are still holding certain things, for whatever reason. (Project leader)

Another respondent suggested that it is important for academics to have the opportunity to spend some time in industry or the private sector but that the university’s sabbatical policy is very limited:

If you look at evolution of the university over here, I would say most of the lecturers were recruited just after leaving university. I finished my undergrad and joined as a lecturer within the next three months. And then I got a scholarship to do my MSc, I embarked on my PhD and I stayed at the university almost all the time. Of course, you do some research and so on, you interact with industry. It’s not enough to have a very good picture of what is happening outside. Reading about it and living it is two different things. So this is very important to be able to move out. Talking about sabbatical, yes, we do have this scheme at the university. If you look at the number of people that have gone on sabbatical at the university, you can count them on your hands. Why? Simply because the university is very reluctant in letting people move out, because if these people move out they may not come back. But that’s the risk that you’ve got to take. In Mauritius we’ve got this job security. For instance, if I resign from the university today I lose all my benefits – so people would not tend to resign. So for the sabbatical they’ve got whatever formula they’ve got – for every eight years you’re eligible for one year sabbatical at the university and this is what it says in one line. But the policy as implemented here is that every time you go overseas or whatever, they deduct that from your sabbatical. I’ve completed 16 years at the university; I am not still eligible for sabbatical. This is how it is. (Project leader)

As highlighted in Section 3.3.2, the key unit in the university for coordinating linkages and activities with government and industry is the Centre for Consultancy and Contract Research. However, a project leader spoke about various examples of shifts in practice but noted that these are still largely uncoordinated:

You have a few people, for instance, I know people from the Faculty of Agriculture – you’ve got quite a few academics there who are doing a tremendous job in food security, in the development of new crops, and so on. You do have people from engineering who are working on the design of products, testing of materials, and so on. The School of Management is quite


76

active in supporting human resource development. So you do have people – bits and pieces everywhere. But they are not working, they don’t have a concerted effort. It’s not something which you have bits and pieces of people working all around, but not in a structured way. And these people have developed a network; they do have their own networks. They are known to industry, they are known to businesses and the government, and so on. Unfortunately it’s not going to happen across the board, that’s for sure. I think in all universities you have these people. What is required is to drive these efforts in one direction. We’ve got to channel the effort in one direction, and that will help in the marketing of what we do at the university, and this is what is missing. (Project leader)

5.2.3 Summary In summary, it appears that while the intention of the university leadership is to increase and strengthen the UoM’s interaction with government and industry, in practice, these linkages are still relatively weak. With regard to government, there was a prevailing concern that government often does not adequately recognise or value the potential contribution of the university in terms of expertise or projects. Limited R&D investment in the private sector and the lack of a coordinating body between the university and industry appear to inhibit the development of significant partnerships and collaboration between the two. At the same time, while there are incentives for academics to engage in research, there do not appear to be any specific incentives or arrangements to encourage university staff to get involved in engagement or development‐related work – whether with government or industry. And, while there is a unit responsible for promoting and coordinating linkages with external stakeholders, it is not clear whether this unit is yet functioning optimally.

5.3 The connectedness of development activities to the academic core A key issue for the relationship between higher education and economic development is to establish a productive relationship between knowledge and connectedness. On the one hand, if there is an overemphasis on the basic knowledge activities of teaching and research – in other words, an excessive inward orientation towards strengthening the academic core – this results in the university becoming an ‘ivory tower’. Or, if the academic core is weak, an overemphasis on knowledge results in the ‘ancillary’ role of the university (i.e. no direct role in development). On the other hand, if there is an overemphasis in the university on connecting to development activities, then it weakens the


77

academic core and the university has little new or relevant knowledge to offer in the exchange relationship. The challenge for universities, then, is to deal with this inherent tension between ‘buffering’ (protecting) the core technologies of the institution, and ‘bridging’ (linking) those with external actors (Scott 2001: 199‐211). In reality, the boundaries between internal and external are not that clear cut. A number of theorists, such as Gibbons et al. (1994) and Scott (2001), have argued that during globalisation and its associated ‘new’ forms of knowledge production, the boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred and permeable. The higher education studies literature describes this problem in terms of the conceptual notion of ‘coupling’ (Scott 2001; Weick 1976); that is, the extent to which the core and the external (or ‘periphery’) are linked with, or connected to, one another. In ‘tight coupling’, the boundary is weak and the university is in a direct, ‘instrumental’ relationship with external actors such as government or industry. In ‘loose‐coupling’, the boundary is stronger, such as in the traditional notion of the university as a self‐governing institution, which assumes an indirect contribution to development. The more complex relationship is with the ‘engine of development’ notion where there are multiple, simultaneous forms of knowledge production and exchange. For the purposes of this study, we are using the term ‘connectedness’ to refer to the relationship (and tension) between the inward focus on strengthening and maintaining the academic core, and the outward focus on linking with external stakeholders and development. We operationalised ‘connectedness’ along two dimensions. The first dimension is ‘articulation’ which has a number of aspects. Firstly, it refers to the extent to which the aims and activities of development‐related activities articulate with national development priorities and the university’s strategic objectives. Secondly, it refers to the linkages the project has with two of the groups of stakeholders in the triangle – the government (usually through specific government departments / agencies) and external stakeholders (e.g. industry, small businesses, NGOs or community groups such as fishers or small‐scale farmers). In particular, our focus is on the extent to which there are linkages with an ‘implementation agency’, (i.e. an external body which takes up the knowledge and/or its products generated or applied through research or training). Thirdly, articulation takes into account linkages generated through sources of funding in two respects: whether the project/centre obtains funding from one or more of the three stakeholder groups (government, an external funder or the university itself); and, the extent to which the project/centre develops a relationship with its funders over time. This latter aspect is determined through the nature of the financial sustainability of the project. The second dimension focuses on the extent to which development activities serve to strengthen the academic core of the university. This was operationalised in terms of the extent to which the work undertaken in


78

projects/centres feeds into teaching or curriculum development; is linked to the formal training of students; enables academics to publish in academic publications (journals, books etc); is linked to international academic networks; and, generates new knowledge (versus applying existing knowledge). These various aspects relating to articulation and strengthening the academic core were converted into indicators which could then be applied to an analysis of the development‐related projects and centres included in the study. On the basis of the indicator ratings, the projects/centres were plotted on a graph depicting the intersection between articulation and strengthening the academic core. In this section, we present the analysis of the connectedness of selected development‐related activities at UoM. These projects, which have an economic development or poverty reduction focus, were identified by the institutional leadership for inclusion in the study. It should be noted that this method of analysis is a work in progress and, in the context of this study, has two possible limitations. The first is that the method of analysis has been developed since completion of the data collection which means that there are some areas of the project data which were not explored in great detail during the interviews. We have, as far as possible, attempted to obtain this additional data from project leaders in the drafting of this report. A second limitation is that the analysis which follows is based on a small number of projects rather than a large representative sample. In addition, the projects selected have an in‐built bias since they were selected by institutional leadership on the basis of their economic development or poverty reduction focus. Despite these limitations, however, we believe that the analysis that follows is an illuminating first step towards the development of a tool which can enable institutions and donors to think critically and strategically about the implications of different models of funding and engagement or development‐related activities.

5.3.1 A brief overview of the projects

The Polymer Group

Location Department of Chemistry (Faculty of Science)Unit head Prof. Dhanjay JhurryTimeframe In development since 1995; ongoingType Research groupWeb site http://www.uom.ac.mu/polymer/

The initial aim of the head of the Polymer Group was to develop an expertise base in polymer science at the university. The first phase focused on building research capacity in the area through PhD training, acquiring the necessary


79

infrastructure and equipment, attaining international scholarly recognition and building academic networks. This first phase included the development of an undergraduate and postgraduate programme in polymer science and recruiting PhD students, as well as undertaking basic research in the field. Building on the expertise base established, phase two will focus on research relating to innovation and developmental issues that are linked to national and regional development programmes. The Group has identified a research theme to which its research activities relate, namely Valorisation of Indigenous Renewable Resources. The aims of this research programme are to develop world‐class research capacity and to promote innovation through interaction with Mauritian and international universities and companies. At present, the following three sub‐themes (and their objectives) have been identified:

1. Polymers in medicine and polymer therapeutics: Biomaterials and drug delivery: a. To develop tailor‐made biodegradable/bioresorbable polymers for use as

medical devices and/or textiles such as implants, cardiac valves, stents and wound dressings;

b. To elaborate novel, self‐assembled polymers in the nanometre size range for applications in the pharmaceutical area and more precisely as controlled drug release devices; and

c. To design and test novel amphiphilic nanocarrier drug delivery systems based on block copolymer micelles.

2. Development of value‐added chemicals and materials from locally available

resources: The objectives are to assist the development of a bio‐based industry in Mauritius through: a. The development of advanced biotechnological processes for the

transformation of sugar‐cane to value added chemicals for various applications including the energy sector; and

b. The exploitation of marine seaweeds and algae (micro and macro).

3. Development of green analytical procedures for the quality control of chemicals and drugs: a. To develop fast, reliable and environmentally‐friendly procedures for

analysis of chemicals and drugs and to assist Mauritian companies in various sectors such as agro‐industry and foodstuffs, textile, paint, soap and detergent, and pharmaceuticals, in achieving enhanced competitiveness.

The first phase of the development of the Group was funded primarily by the UoM, the Mauritius Research Council and the TEC. This included funding for research and MPhil and PhD training. Other funds have been sourced from the International Foundation for Science and the National Research Foundation. The group has collaborated with researchers at universities in France, Switzerland, the United States, Australia, Germany, South Africa and Reunion. Other organisations in their network include the International Union of Pure


80

and Applied Chemistry, UNESCO, the French Embassy in Mauritius, the Association of Commonwealth Universities, and the Association des Universités Francophones.

The Roselle Project

Location Department of Agricultural Productions and Systems (Faculty of Agriculture)

Project leader Mr B RajkomarTimeframe Project began in 2005; Phase I of the project completed in 2010 and

Phase II will be in 2012Type Research programmeWeb site –

The project was initiated by staff in the department during a review of both the research and work on the university farm undertaken in the faculty. The aim of the review was to identify research that could be done that would have practical benefits for society. This was also the time that the university was working on its strategic plan and faculty staff identified novel crop technologies as one way in which their research could make a positive contribution to society, particularly in the context of the sugar industry being phased out and the need for agricultural development and diversification, as well as food security issues and the focus on poverty alleviation at the national level. They identified the Roselle plant (Hibiscus sabdariffa L. Malvaceae) as one crop which could have a lot of potential in the Mauritian agro‐industry. The first phase of the research was to explore the plant itself to find out about its qualities and potential uses. This research has three prongs including agronomics (the economics of producing Roselle as a crop as well as post‐harvest issues such as dry storage), processing, and value‐addition in terms of the phytochemicals in the plant (e.g. the fresh calyx can be used to make juices, jams and other products). One of the outcomes of this aspect was the development of processing protocols. Another was that the Agricultural Research and Extension Unit (AREU) of the Food and Agricultural Research Council took the processing aspect of the project to the next phase by including the Roselle plant in their fruit villages. In 2006, the Roselle research team hosted a workshop with all the major stakeholders involved in research, agricultural extension and poverty alleviation including people from the UoM, the Ministry of Agriculture, the AREU, Enterprise Mauritius, the Mauritius Alliance of Women and the Trust Fund for Vulnerable Groups. In this workshop, the team presented the Roselle plant in terms of its potential for agricultural diversification, for the local market and export, and for poverty alleviation. In 2008, the research team held another dissemination workshop during which they disseminated brochures. They gave the AREU 500 sachets of seed to be distributed to producers – from large‐scale farmers to small and medium producers – as well as groups working in the area of poverty alleviation. At the time of the interview, the research team was


81

waiting for the data to come in on where the seeds were distributed and how successfully the crop is being grown by producers. The team has also distributed seed to other research institutes. Future areas for R&D include the technology required for mechanising production and harvesting for use by large‐scale commercial farmers. The Roselle research team is a multidisciplinary team of four from the Faculty, which covers various aspects including socio‐economic, farming systems, agronomy, biotechnology and entomology. The project is funded from internal funding from the UoM. The intended beneficiaries of the project include small‐scale farmers, the private sector, private processors, students, research and extension organisations, and NGOs promoting empowerment and poverty alleviation.

The ICT Business Pre‐Incubator (iBP)

Location Faculty of EngineeringProject leader Mr Anwar ChutooTimeframe Established in 2006; ongoingType Small business supportWeb site http://vcampus.uom.ac.mu/ict_incubator/

In 2003 the National Computer Board set up an ICT Incubator Centre in order to facilitate the creation of start‐ups through the provision of the necessary infrastructure, logistics and business support. In line with the government policy to make ICT a fifth pillar of the Mauritian economy and to promote entrepreneurship development, the UoM and the National Computer Board jointly set up the iBP. The iBP will complement the work already being done at the National Computer Board’s ICT Incubator Centre. The iBP is funded by the university and the National Computer Board. The aims of the iBP include the following:

To promote a culture of entrepreneurship on the campus by providing students and faculty members with the necessary knowledge and skills for the launching of their own businesses in the ICT sector;

To develop their competences as future business leaders; and To promote the commercialisation of university‐based R&D.

The long term objective is to have students doing industry‐based projects under the aegis of the iBP. The iBP will thus be able to generate its own funding. These students will eventually set up their companies when they leave the university, creating jobs in the process.


82

The iBP offers business counselling and advisory services; preparation of business plans; consulting and counselling on business strategies; training and capacity building programmes; logistic support including access to computers and the internet and other communication facilities; networking with the industry; and, operational support services (legal, accounting, marketing, web development, technical development, public relations). BSc Honours students in the field of information technology are eligible for participation in the project. The first in‐take of students was the 2006/2007 academic year. The project has received funding from the UoM and the National Computer Board. The university provided the space and other amenities for the project, while the NCB provided computers as well as snacks at the workshops on sensitising entrepreneurship on the campus, which were run by UoM staff. Also, a short course on entrepreneurship was run by one of the project team members for three years in a row. According to the project leader, funding received for this project is very limited and the project is mostly being run on voluntary basis.

Review of Strategies for Poverty Alleviation

Location Department of Social Studies (Faculty of Social Studies and Humanities)Project leader Mr I KoodoruthTimeframe February to October 2009Type Short‐term consultancy projectWeb site –

This project, undertaken by staff in the Department of Social Studies, had the following aims:

To make a brief assessment of the impact of globalisation on the main economic activities and the resultant incidence on the main social parameters;

To specifically evaluate how income distribution had evolved and its incidence on (further) pauperisation of segments of the population and propose corrective measures as appropriate;

To examine projects for revenue enhancement through employability/skills enhancement; and

To identify dysfunctions, if any, in the delivery of assistance and social security benefits and propose appropriate remedial action. In addition, the project aimed to assist the government to review policy measures to combat poverty and set up monitoring mechanisms, and to build capacity required among stakeholders involved in combating poverty. The National Economic and Social Council, an independent consultative body which, amongst others, makes recommendations to government on issues relating to social integration and national development, initiated the project.


83

Commissioning or undertaking studies into socio‐economic issues of national importance falls within its mandate. The board of the National Economic and Social Council recommended the retention of the Department of Social Studies to undertake the project and also funded the project. The intended beneficiary of the project was the Ministry of Finance.

Auditing of Manufacturing Companies for Productivity Enhancement

Location Department of Mechanical and Production Engineering (Faculty of Engineering)

Project leader Dr Dinesh HureeramTimeframe November 2008 to March 2009Type Short‐term consultancy projectWeb site http://www.uom.ac.mu/Faculties/FOE/MPED/html/consultancy.html

The aim of this consultancy project was to conduct an audit of manufacturing companies in the light engineering sector in order to make a detailed assessment of their strengths and weaknesses and to propose measures for supporting growth of the individual companies. The project was both initiated and funded by Enterprise Mauritius19 – a government‐funded support institution which is involved in developing strategic plans for each economic sector with the objective of enhancing their contribution to the national economy. The first stage of the audit assessment was at the macro‐level. The report for this stage was submitted to Enterprise Mauritius in March 2009. It is anticipated that on the basis of the report, Enterprise Mauritius would identify additional aspects that could be explored via consultancies.

Socio‐Economic Analysis of the Fishing Communities in Mauritius and Rodrigues

Location Faculty of Social Studies and HumanitiesProject leader Prof. K SobheeTimeframe 2007 Type Short‐term consultancy projectWeb site –

This consultancy project, undertaken during 2007, was undertaken by a team from within the Faculty of Social Studies and Humanities, on request from the Ministry of Agro‐Industry and Fisheries. The project aimed at analysing the socio‐economic problems facing fishers in Mauritius and Rodrigues. It investigated the socio‐economic status of the fishers in Mauritius and Rodrigues, analysing the relation between the number of fishers, the resource and their livelihoods. Surveys were carried out to determine the current status of the coastal community, focusing on financial, environmental, human resource development, health and poverty‐related issues. The study made recommendations on ways and means to improve the economic status of fishers and the literacy and numeracy skills in the fisher community. Proposals

19Web site: http://www.enterprisemauritius.biz/


84

were made for the general upliftment of the social conditions of the fishing community and alternative job opportunities were identified. The project team consisted of, among others, a fisheries economist/planner and a social scientist. Collaborating institutions include the Ministry of Fisheries, the Ministry for Rodrigues and the Mauritius Research Council. The project was funded by the Food and Agriculture Organisation and the Ministry of Agro‐Industry and Fisheries. The key features of these development‐related projects/groups are summarised in Table 5.1. The projects have been categorised according to type and range from longer‐term research‐based programmes to a business support service and once‐off consultancy projects. The economic development focus of the projects/centres ranges from the development of products or processes that can be used to enhance the activities of private sector companies or generate income in poor communities, and to inform policy development. As might be expected, the consultancy projects were initiated and the agenda set by external agencies, whereas the longer‐term research group and programme were initiated by the academics themselves. It also appears that where the initiation and agenda‐setting was done by the academics themselves, there is a much wider range of potential beneficiaries and external linkages, compared to the consultancy projects whose beneficiaries were generally the same groups/agencies responsible for the initiation of the projects.


85

Table 5.1: Overview of the development‐related projects

Project/centre Classification Funder(s) Beneficiaries External linkages Initiation/ agenda‐setting

Economic development focus

Polymer Group Research group University of Mauritius, government agencies, foreign donors

Students and Mauritian companies (e.g. pharmaceutical, energy sector, agro‐industry, textiles)

International academic networks

The academic head of the group

Development of products and procedures which could benefit various industrial sectors in Mauritius

Roselle Project Research programme University of Mauritius

Small‐scale farmers, private sector, research and extension/poverty alleviation organisations, students

Government agencies and NGOs

Academic staff Development of products and processes which could be used by poor individuals or communities to generate income

ICT Business Pre‐Incubator

Business support service

University of Mauritius and government agency

BSc Honours students and the public

Government agency University and government agency

Providing business support to students


Externally‐funded consultancy

Independent consultative body to government

Government ministry Consultative body and government ministry

Consultative body Inform policy‐making and build capacity amongst stakeholders involved in poverty alleviation

Auditing of Manufacturing Companies


Government agency Private sector companies

Government agency and light engineering companies

Government agency Contributing to strengthening companies in a particular sector

Socio‐Economic Analysis of Fishing Communities


International NGO and government ministry

Fisher communities and policy‐makers

Fisher communities, government ministries and government agency

Government ministry Recommendations on how to improve the socio‐economic conditions of target fisher communities


86

5.3.2 Articulation Table 5.2 below summarises interviewee’s responses to the question about the extent to which the project/centre aims and objectives were in response to / articulated with the university’s strategic objectives (as contained in the institution’s strategic plan), as well as the country’s national development priorities. Methodologically, we do recognise that project leaders might have drawn these links more strongly in retrospect than originally was the case in order to give the impression of greater articulation. A deeper exploration of the circumstances of the initiation and agenda‐setting of the project would have enabled us to see these linkages more clearly ourselves. Nevertheless, the reported linkages are sufficient for a first‐level analysis. As can be seen from Table 5.2, all six of the projects reported articulation of project aims to national development priorities. By contrast, three of the projects reported no linkages to the institutional strategic objectives. It just so happens that in these three projects, the initiation/agenda‐setting was done by external stakeholders. This raises an interesting question as to whether there is a link between external initiation/agenda‐setting and an absence of articulation to the institution’s strategic objectives. Table 5.3 indicates the extent to which each project/centre had linkages with an external agency that has or will directly or indirectly ‘implement’ (or utilise) the outputs. Table 5.4 summarises the comments made by project leaders about the financial sustainability of the projects. Finally, Table 5.5 summarises the total articulation ratings for the six projects/centres.


87

Table 5.2: Articulation with institutional objectives and national priorities

Project/centre Funder(s) Initiation/ agenda‐setting

Institutional strategic objectives National priorities

Polymer Group University of Mauritius, government agencies, foreign donors

The academic head of the group

UoM’s strategic plan puts major emphasis on knowledge dissemination through quality courses, knowledge production through world‐class research, team building through creation of centres/groups, engagement in multidisciplinary research, and networking. All of these issues are reflected in the group’s strategic objectives.

Four major areas are identified for research at national level: Agriculture and agro‐industry (food

security); (Renewable) energy (energy security); Medical research and health care; and Research in information technology. A major emphasis of the Polymer Group’s research is on biomaterials and drug delivery, which are key components of modern medicine.

Roselle Project University of Mauritius

Academic staff The project is in line with the university’s objective of providing high quality teaching and participating in addressing national development objectives.

Through research into the Roselle plant, the purpose of the project is to support government’s programmes to encourage entrepreneurship and reduce poverty. In particular, the project is providing agribusiness opportunities, employment creation and export potential.


University of Mauritius and government agency

University and government agency

The project articulates with Strategic Direction 2: Knowledge diffusion, Goal No. 3: Inculcate Entrepreneurial Flair.

The iBP is a response to the government’s policy to make ICT a fifth pillar of the Mauritian economy and to promote entrepreneurship development.


Independent consultative body to government

Consultative body None reported This project links directly to government’s efforts to alleviate poverty in Mauritius. The country does not have a national action plan to combat poverty but rather addresses issues on poverty as per needs of ministries and other stakeholders involved in the fight against poverty.


88

Table 5.2: Articulation with institutional objectives and national priorities (continued)

Project/centre Funder(s) Initiation/ agenda‐setting

Institutional strategic objectives National priorities


Government agency

Government agency None reported As a government funded support institution, Enterprise Mauritius is involved in working out the strategic plan for each sector with the objective of enhancing their contribution to the national economy. The project was undertaken with the objective of making an assessment of the export potential of companies operating in the sector. It also addressed issues pertaining to the type of support that should be put in place to enable the companies develop competitive advantages for their products and services and to give a boost to enterprises which have internal weaknesses.


International NGO and government ministry

Government ministry Only insofar as one of the university’s objectives is to generate income through contract research and consultancies.

The project was in line with the concept of government creating a seafood hub. The study would thus provide the relevant inputs regarding the current conditions under which fishers work in Mauritius and Rodrigues. Moreover, this was in parallel helpful to establish government’s vision of creating the Fishermen Investment Trust.


89

Table 5.3: Initiation/agenda‐setting, funding sources and implementation agencies

Project/centre Initiation/agenda‐setting Funder(s) Implementation agencies

Polymer Group The academic head of the group

University of Mauritius, government agencies, foreign donors

While the group has particular economic sectors in mind for its outputs, no specific links with external implementation agencies were indicated.

Roselle Project Academic staff University of Mauritius The AREU of the Food and Agricultural Research Council took the processing aspect of the project to the next phase by including the Roselle plant in their fruit villages. The AREU also distributed 500 sachets of seed to agricultural producers.


University of Mauritius and National Computer Board (government agency)

University and National Computer Board

While the students who participate in the incubator and who potentially will establish businesses are key intended beneficiaries, no external agency that would take the work done by the iBP to another level was indicated.


National Economic and Social Council (independent consultative body to government)

National Economic and Social Council Ministry of Finance


Enterprise Mauritius (government agency)

Enterprise Mauritius Enterprise Mauritius falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Industry, Science and Research and hence reports the findings to the parent Ministry for working out and implementing policy decisions, if so warranted.


Food and Agriculture Organisation (international NGO) and Ministry of Agro‐Industry and Fisheries

Ministry of Agro‐Industry and Fisheries

Ministry of Agro‐Industry and Fisheries


90

Table 5.4: Financial sustainability of the projects/centres

Project/centre Classification Timeframe Funder(s) Financial sustainability

Polymer Group Research group 1995, ongoing University of Mauritius, government agencies, foreign donors

Funding at national level is very limited. UoM’s funding of research is also very low, accounting for barely 5‐10% of its total annual budget. It becomes therefore very difficult to raise funding for investment in sophisticated equipment or for recruitment of postdocs at international level, all sine‐qua‐non for high‐level research. Group has to raise funds from external donors.

Roselle Project Research programme

2005–2012 University of Mauritius

The second phase of the project will be launched and funding sought in 2010.20 The team has experienced difficulties in securing any further funding from the university or from outside organisations such as the Food and Agricultural Research Council.



2006, ongoing University of Mauritius and government agency

The funding from the university is in terms of facilities and staff time. NCB funds purchased computers for the project. The long‐term objective is to have students doing industry‐based projects under the aegis of the iBP which will enable the iBP to generate its own funding. However, the project is driven primarily on a volunteer basis.



Feb–Oct 2009 Independent consultative body to government

Once‐off consultancy



Nov 2008–Mar 2009

Government agency




2007 International NGO and government ministry


20By August 2010, the project had secured some additional funding up until and including 2011.


91

Table 5.5: Articulation rating (maximum score = 13)

Project/centre Polymer Group Roselle Project ICT Business Pre‐Incubator



Socio‐Economic Analysis of Fishing

Communities

Institutional objectives 2 2 2 0 0 1

National priorities 2 2 2 2 2 2

No. of funding sources 3 1 2 1 1 2

Funding sustainability 3 2 3 1 1 1

Implementation agency 0 2 1 1 2 2

Total articulation rating 10 9 10 5 6 8

Key:

Institutional objectives / National priorities: 2 = Direct (link to specific strategic objective or national priority) 1 = Indirect (broad/general reference) 0 = None (no reported link) No. of funding sources: 1 for each of the following: University; Government; Foreign donor; Income generation Funding sustainability: 1 = Once‐off, short‐term (a project that is one year or less in duration and which receives only one round of funding) 2 = Long‐term but capped (a project that is more than one year in duration and which receives one or more rounds of funding, but the funding is capped) 3 = Ongoing (a project which receives ongoing funding, e.g. from the university or from income generation) Link to implementation agency: 2 = Direct 1 = Indirect 0 = None


92

5.3.3 Contribution to strengthening the academic core Table 5.6 below summarises the information pertaining to each of the projects with regard to their connection to the academic core activities of the university. ‘Core strengthening’ activities include the generation of new knowledge; the involvement of students in the project as part of their formal training; project knowledge and experience feeds into teaching and curriculum development; project knowledge and experience is published in academic publications; and the project is linked to international academic networks. In order to rate the extent to which the projects contribute to strengthening the academic core, each of the five factors highlighted above were assigned a value of 1 when present. The results are captured in Table 5.7. Perhaps not surprisingly, the two research‐based groups are quite strongly linked to the academic core, while the short‐term consultancy projects and the business support activities of the iBP have more limited linkages.


93

Table 5.6: Contribution to strengthening the academic core

Project/centre Classification New/existing knowledge

Link to academic core Link to international academic networks Student involvement Teaching/curriculum Publishing

Polymer Group Research group/ programme

Generate new knowledge

Research forms part of BSc, MSc and PhD training.

Yes Yes Yes

Roselle Project Research group/ programme


Undergraduate students are involved in researching aspects of Roselle.

A PhD student is expected to work on an aspect of the project.

Roselle has been introduced as an example of a new crop in the faculty teaching programmes.

Yes No



Apply existing knowledge

BSc Honours students are targeted for support in setting up businesses.

Opportunities for practical training in, for example, web technologies.

No No




None Results are used to review curriculum content in modules addressing poverty issues.

No No




None Proposals have been made for the development of capacity building programmes that will help the companies improve their productivity levels. But these proposals are for technical rather than academic programmes.

No No


94

Table 5.6: Contribution to strengthening the academic core (continued)

Project/centre Classification New/existing knowledge

Link to academic core Link to international academic networks Student involvement Teaching/curriculum Publishing




An MPhil/PhD student worked as research assistant.

Undergraduate students are involved in focus group discussions as part of their degree requirements.

Yes – both in terms of content (research findings) and methodology.

No No

Table 5.7: Strengthening academic core rating (maximum score = 5)

Project/centre Teaching / curriculum

development

Formal training of students


Academic publications

Link to international academic networks

Total rating

Polymer Group 1 1 1 1 1 5

Roselle Project 1 1 1 1 0 4

ICT Business Pre‐Incubator 0 1 0 0 0 1

Review of Strategies for Poverty Alleviation 1 0 1 0 0 2

Auditing of Manufacturing Companies 0 0 1 0 0 1

Socio‐Economic Analysis of Fishing Communities 1 1 1 0 0 3

Key: 1 = Yes 0 = No


95

5.3.4 Analysis of the connectedness of development projects In order to analyse the development projects identified for the study, we operationalised the notion of ‘connectedness’ along two axes – the first, articulation, refers to the extent to which there is some coherence between the development projects/centres and the objectives and priorities of government and the institution, as well as linkages between the project and key external stakeholders, and especially implementation agencies. The second axis considers the extent to which the development projects/centres serve to strengthen or weaken the academic core of the institution. The total ratings for each project in terms of its articulation and contribution to strengthening the academic core of the university are summarised in Table 5.8 below. Using these ratings, each of the projects is then plotted on the articulation and academic core axes in Figure 5.1.

Table 5.8: Summary of ratings

Project/centre Articulation Academic core

Polymer Group 10 5

Roselle Project 9 4

ICT Business Pre‐Incubator 10 1

Review of Strategies for Poverty Alleviation 5 2

Auditing of Manufacturing Companies 6 1

Socio‐Economic Analysis of Fishing Communities 8 3


Figure 5.1: Plotting the development‐related projects

Key: PG Polymer Group RP Roselle Project RPA Review of Strategies of Poverty Alleviation AMC Auditing of Manufacturing Companies FC Socio‐Economic Analysis of Fishing Communities iBP ICT Business Pre‐Incubator

Following the analytical proposition, our assumption would be that for development‐related projects to make the most sustained contribution to development they would best fall within the top right‐hand quadrant in the graph – that is, their activities articulate with national priorities and institutional strategic objectives; they have close linkages with key external stakeholders, especially any implementation agencies; and, they contribute towards strengthening the academic core of the institution. As can be seen from Figure 5.1 only two of the projects – the Polymer Group and the Roselle Project – fall within the top right‐hand quadrant of the graph. Despite the fact that the agenda‐setting for the unit is done by the academic head of the group, rather than in consultation with external stakeholders, and

PG 5, 10

RP 4, 9

RPA 2, 5

AMC 1, 6

FC 3, 8

iBP 1, 10

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Direct articulation

Indirectarticulation

Weakening academic core

Strengthening academic core


97

that the group does not have any linkages with specific implementation agencies, it does score high on the other articulation indicators. More importantly, however, compared to the other projects in the sample, the Polymer Group makes the greatest contribution to strengthening the academic core of the institution through the strong links between project activities and teaching and curriculum development, student involvement, generating new knowledge, publishing and linking to international academic networks. It is perhaps not surprising that the three projects which fair the least well in terms of strengthening the academic core are all once‐off consultancy projects. Whilst these projects no doubt made a direct contribution of some kind to economic development in some aspect, the extent to which this contribution can be considered sustainable is questionable since the academics involved in these projects are, through their participation, taken away from the core business of the university. In a sense, this links to the notion of the role of the university as ‘instrument of development agenda’ (see Part 6) where academics are drawn upon as experts in relation to some development issue. Furthermore, reflecting on the information provided in Sections 3.3 and 5.2, it is our contention that where projects are located on the articulation and academic core axes, it has more to do with the choices of individual academics, academic units and donors than it does on a particular institutional approach. We could also argue that the scattered picture which emerges points to a number of tensions facing the institution including, for example, the imperative to generate third‐stream income or to partner with external stakeholders to enhance the relevance of university activities, versus strengthening the academic core activities of the university. The lack of institutionalisation of externally‐funded projects was reflected upon by one respondent as follows:

It’s a sort of package, because I think it should be a win‐win situation for everybody. It should be a win‐win situation for the researcher. It should be a win‐win situation for the persons who are being supervised, that is the PhD students, and also for the country. I think it should be three‐fold – because if you look at this university most, as you’ve just said, many projects are sporadic. People come up in the morning: Okay, I’ll do this today, and when it’s over, well, that’s it. The guy gets one paper, two papers out of it and there’s no absolute follow‐up, no sustainability – what next? And most probably the work has been done using some few technicians without any students being involved or some very few students being involved and these students never come up with, for example, a MPhil or PhD degree, which would be quite suitable for the country. (Project leader)


98

Another project leader disputed this last statement about the lack of involvement of students. In an email response in August 2010, he stated the following:

One can counter argue that many are doing a lot of effort to supervise MPhil/PhD students. Figures show clearly that the percentage students enrolled on MPhil/PhD programs have considerably increased over the last ten years at UoM. (Project leader)


99

6.1 Introduction A vast amount of data has been gathered and presented in the preceding sections of this report. But what does this tell us about the possible contribution that higher education in Mauritius can make to the country’s economic development? In order to answer this broader question, we return to the key concepts and questions which were summarised in section 1.1.3. Here, our point of departure was that higher education’s role in and contribution to economic development can best be understood by investigating the following three interrelated factors:

The nature of the pact between the universities, political authorities and society at large;

The nature, size and continuity of the university’s academic core; and The level of coordination, the effectiveness of implementation, and

connectedness in the larger policy context of universities. Furthermore, these factors need to be considered in relation to various contextual features including local circumstances, institutional characteristics and external relations. By way of concluding this report, we review and analyse the data presented in order to answer the following questions:

1. How does Mauritius fare on the preconditions for an effective and productive relationship between higher education and economic development identified in the international case studies (see Pillay 2010b)?

Part 6

Key findings

AT A GLANCE

Macro‐observations about higher education and economic development in Mauritius

The nature of the pact around the role of higher education in Mauritius The strength of UoM’s academic core The connectedness of the university’s development‐related activities to the

academic core


100

2. To what extent is there a pact between key stakeholders (national and institutional) in Mauritius about the role of higher education in general, and in relation to economic development in particular?

3. Does the UoM, as a specific case, have capacity to make a contribution to

economic development in terms of: a. The nature and strength of the academic core;, and b. The connectedness of its development‐related activities to the academic

core?

6.2 Some macro‐observations about higher education and economic development in Mauritius Pundy Pillay’s investigation of three systems (Finland, South Korea, North Carolina state) suggested a number of ‘preconditions’ for an effective and productive relationship between higher education and economic development (Pillay 2010b). These were summarised in section 1.1.2.

How does Mauritius fare in meeting these preconditions?

1. High quality schooling. Participation rates are high at both the primary and secondary levels. However, there is considerable concern about inefficiencies in the system particularly around completion rates at the primary levels and quality of provision and outcomes throughout the system. The government has recognised that major efforts have to be made to ensure that quality is improved if Mauritius is to become a serious player in the knowledge economy.

2. Effective economic and education planning. There is no doubt that education

planning attempts to move in tandem with economic planning. Serious efforts are being made to ensure that the tertiary education system is capable of producing the requisite magnitude and types of skills needed for a globalising and knowledge economy.

3. The role of the state. The state plays an important role with respect to funding,

encouraging private sector provision of higher education, and more recently in funding of R&D and innovation. The recent documents relating to research and innovation, and human resource development, suggest that the state will play a much more proactive role in ensuring that the tertiary education system moves sufficiently rapidly to meet the needs of the government’s changing development strategy.

4. Partnerships. In general, partnerships between the universities and the private

sector appear to be at an early stage of development. It is encouraging to note


101

that the government is putting in place funding initiatives to encourage such partnerships around research and innovation.

5. Institutional differentiation. In spite of being a relatively small system, there

appears to be considerable differentiation within the tertiary education system, with a university, a university of technology and a range of other post‐secondary institutions, as well as both public and private providers.

6. Quality. Serious questions have been raised about the quality of educational

provision across the system. This problem has been recognised in government documents and efforts are being made to address it at all levels of the system.

7. Funding. State funding of tertiary education is relatively low in international

and developing country terms. Some effort is being made to address the low levels of R&D funding but it is clear that much more needs to be done in this area if Mauritius is to compete effectively in the knowledge economy.

8. Innovation. Up to this point Mauritius has not invested sufficiently either in its

universities or its private sector nor has it provided appropriate incentives for partnerships to develop between these two sets of important actors. There is little evidence outside pockets of excellence at UoM to suggest any significant level in science and technology innovation or its diffusion.

6.3 Evidence of a pact around the role of higher education in Mauritius? For the purposes of this study, we use the definition of a pact provided by Gornitzka et al. (2007: 184):

A ‘pact’ is a fairly long‐term cultural commitment to and from the University, as an institution with its own foundational rules of appropriate practices, causal and normative beliefs, and resources, yet validated by the political and social system in which the University is embedded. A pact, then, is different from a contract based on continuous strategic calculation of expected value by public authorities, organised external groups, university employees, and students – all regularly monitoring and assessing the University on the basis of its usefulness for their self‐interest, and acting accordingly.

The key actors of the pact are national, institutional and external stakeholders. It is assumed that the stronger the pact between universities, university leadership, national authorities and society at large, the better the universities will be able to make a significant, sustained contribution to development.


102

Our interest is in exploring the extent to which there is a pact around the role for higher education in economic development in Mauritius. Key to the development of such a pact is agreement or consensus that there should be a role and then about what that role should entail. In order to investigate this aspect, we have sought to address the following questions:

1. Is there a role for knowledge production and for universities in the national

development plan? 2. How do the relevant national authorities and institutional stakeholders talk

about and conceptualise the role of universities?

The role of knowledge and universities in national and institutional policies and plans were operationalised into a series of indicators. These indicators were then rated on a 3‐2‐1 scale by three of the researchers. The indicators and the ratings (indicated by shading) are presented in Table 6.1 below. At the national level, of the eight countries under study, Mauritius is the most orientated towards investing in human capital formation and towards a knowledge economy as key drivers of development. In terms of the criteria used in this study to assess national governance and policy coordination, the concept of a knowledge economy features strongly in Mauritius in their national development plan – as does the role for higher education in development in their national policies and plans. Amongst the UoM leadership interviewed, there was agreement that the university’s role is focussed on contributing to the development of the country. When the sugar industry was phased out and the attempted creation of an export processing zone did not take off, the university became, as knowledge provider, key in terms of addressing sectoral transformation. This required different faculties to revisit their programmes, courses and research agendas. Amongst the leadership there was a strong emphasis on knowledge, both for professional training and in terms of production and application. Most interviewees commented on the important role played by the university over the years in producing highly skilled professionals for both the public and private sectors, and how links have been established with employers to aid in curriculum design. More recently, lifelong learning and continuous professional development have started receiving more attention, as has developing an entrepreneurial flair amongst staff and students. The university is also trying to institutionalise its pool of intellectual resources which, through numerous advisory task teams and commissions, form part of many government think‐tanks on national issues. None of the interviewees expressed a concern about institutional autonomy, or questioned the role of the university in relation to economic development.


103

Table 6.1: Role for knowledge and universities in development in Mauritius

National Rating = 6/6

The concept of a knowledge economy features in the national development plan

3 Strong Appears in a number of policies

2 Weak Only mentioned in one policy

1 Absent Not mentioned at all

A role for higher education in development in national policies and plans

3 Prevalent Clearly mentioned in development policies

2 Weak

1 Absent

Institutional (UoM) Rating = 5/6

Concept of a knowledge economy features in institutional policies and plans

3 Features strongly in strategic plan and/or research policy/strategy

2 Vague reference in strategic plan or research policy

1 Not mentioned at all

Institutional policies with regard to the university’s role in economic development

3 Institutional policy

2 Embedded in strategic plan, research policy etc

1 No formal policies

FINDINGS:

There is strong agreement (pact) about a development model and the role of higher education in development, at both national and university levels.

Mauritius is the only country and university in the HERANA sample that has accepted that knowledge, and by implication higher education, is key to development.

The reconstitution of the ministry of education and higher education shows that Mauritius is actively trying to reorganise at the government level to achieve greater coordination towards their notion of a developmental state.

There is awareness, and policies, about the importance of the knowledge economy approach across ministries.

6.3.1 Notions of the role of knowledge and universities in development In terms of notions of the role of the university, how do national and institutional stakeholders conceptualise the role of higher education and the university in development? And, to what extent is there consensus or disjuncture between the national and institutional levels? Our conceptual framework for addressing these questions comprises four notions of the relationship between higher education (especially universities) and national


development. These four notions21, which are elaborated upon below, emerge in the interaction between the following two sets of scenarios:

Whether or not a role is foreseen for new knowledge in the national development strategy, and

Whether or not universities, as knowledge institutions, have a role in the national development strategy. These two sets of scenarios, and the concomitant four notions of the role of universities, are depicted in Figure 6.1 below:

Figure 6.1: The four notions of the role of knowledge and universities in development

The four notions are elaborated as follows:

The university as ancillary: In this notion, there is a strong focus on political/ideological starting‐points for development. Consequently, it is assumed that there is no need for a strong (scientific) knowledge basis for

21 These four notions are based on ideas developed by Maassen and Cloete (2006) and Maassen

and Olsen (2007).

AncillarySelf‐

governing

Instrument Engine

University not part of development strategy

No/marginal role for new knowledge in development

strategy

Central role for new knowledge in development

strategy

University part of development strategy


105

development strategies and policies. Neither is it necessary for the university to play a direct role in development since the emphasis is on investments in basic healthcare, agricultural production and primary education. The role of universities is to produce educated civil servants and professionals (with teaching based on transmitting established knowledge rather than on research), as well as different forms of community service.

The university as self‐governing institution: Knowledge produced at the university is considered important for national development – especially for the improvement of healthcare and the strengthening of agricultural production. However, this notion assumes that the most relevant knowledge is produced when academics from the North and the South cooperate in externally‐funded projects, rather than being steered by the state. This notion portrays the university as playing an important role in developing the national identity and in producing high‐level bureaucrats and scientific knowledge – but not directly related to national development; the university is committed to serving society as a whole rather than specific stakeholders. This notion assumes that the university is most effective when it is left to itself, and can determine its own priorities according to universal criteria, independent of the particularities of a specific geographical, national, cultural or religious context. It also assumes there is no need to invest additional public funds to increase the relevance of the university.

The university as instrument for development agendas: In this notion, the university has an important role to play in national development – not through the production of new scientific knowledge, but through expertise exchange and capacity building. The focus of the university’s development efforts should be on contributing to reducing poverty and disease, to improving agricultural production, and to support small business development – primarily through consultancy activities (especially for government agencies and development aid) and through direct involvement in local communities.

The university as engine of development: This notion assumes that knowledge plays a central role in national development – in relation to improving healthcare and agricultural production, but also in relation to innovations in the private sector, especially in areas such as information and communication technology, biotechnology and engineering. Within this notion the university is seen as (one of) the core institutions in the national development model. The underlying assumption is that the university is the only institution in society that can provide an adequate foundation for the complexities of the emerging knowledge economy when it comes to producing the relevant skills and competencies of the employees in all major sectors, as well as to the production of use‐oriented knowledge. Table 6.2 below summarises the notions of the role of higher education held by national and institutional stakeholders, and indicates whether the notion is strong, prevalent, present or absent altogether. While acknowledging that there


106

is seldom a single notion within the university about the role of higher education, at UoM there was a very strong emphasis in both the interviews and the key planning and strategy documents that the university must be connected, through its role as a knowledge institution, to national development. The knowledge economy notion runs concurrent with that of the instrument for development notion but, interestingly, the latter is directed at government and business, while there is very little mention of linkages to communities.

Table 6.2: Comparing national and institutional notions of the role of higher education in Mauritius

Notions National stakeholders Institutional stakeholders

Ancillary No ancillary notion The university was never seen as being inactive in national development

Self‐governing Readily acknowledge autonomy, but with strong contribution to development discourse

For as long as anybody can remember, the university was seen as having an active role in development

Instrument for development agendas

Only complaint is that university can do more, and more relevant, activities

Very instrumental, with the university regarded as being important in solving a range of societal problems

Engine for development Dominant policy discourse

More than an orientation, it is the dominant discourse

Key:

Strong Prevalent Present

FINDINGS:

In terms of notions of the role of the university in development, at the national level and institutional levels there is agreement about the engine of development notion.

At the national level there is some dissatisfaction that the university is not doing enough to contribute to development, but this is sometimes mixed with a rather more traditional instrumentalist notion.

At the university level, the main dissatisfaction is that government is not supportive enough for the academics to contribute more towards development.


107

6.4 The academic core of the University of Mauritius The university’s unique contribution to development is via knowledge – either transmitting knowledge to individuals who will go out into the world and contribute to society in a variety of ways (teaching), or producing and disseminating knowledge that can be applied to the problems of society and economy (research, engagement). Part of our conceptual framework for understanding what impacts on a university’s ability to make a sustainable contribution to development therefore focuses on the nature and strength of its knowledge activities. According to Burton Clark (1998), when an enterprising university evolves a stronger steering core and develops an outreach structure, its heartland is still in the traditional academic departments, formed around disciplines and some interdisciplinary fields. The heartland is where traditional academic values and activities such as teaching, research and training of the next generation of academics occur. Instead of ‘heartland’, we use the concept ‘academic core’. According to our analytical assumption, it is this core that needs to be strengthened if flagship universities – such as those included in this study – as key knowledge institutions, is to contribute to development. While most universities also engage in knowledge activities in the area of community service or outreach, our contention is that the backbone or the foundation of the university’s business is its academic core – that is, its teaching via academic degree programmes, its research output, and the production of doctorates (those individuals who, in the future, will be responsible for carrying out the core knowledge activities). Furthermore, in societies where there is a strong pact between higher education and society, the universities have been able (and allowed) to develop a strong core of academic activities that forms the basis for all their activities. Our interest in the academic core of the UoM has the following two dimensions:

1. What is the strength of the academic core of the institution? 2. Has the academic core been strengthening or weakening in recent years?

In Part 4 of this report, we presented a detailed profile and analysis of the nature and strength of the UoM academic core. The analysis was undertaken on the basis of seven key indicators (see Table 6.3 below). The rating of the UoM indicators was undertaken on the basis of a cluster analysis which included South Africa’s 22 contact universities and the seven other African universities included in the study.


108

Table 6.3: University of Mauritius: Rating of the academic core

Indicator Strong (3) Medium (2) Weak (1)

1 Science, engineering and technology enrolments and graduations

SET students = 42% in 2007. 26% of students expected to graduate.

2 Postgraduate / undergraduate enrolments ratio Masters / PhD enrolment ratio

Proportion of postgraduates at 13% for 2001‐2007. PhD enrolments as % of masters and doctoral enrolments = 18% in 2007.

3 Teaching load: Academic staff / student ratio

Overall ratio at 1:16 (2007). SET ratio not available.

4 Proportion of academic staff with doctorates

45% of permanent academics have doctorates (2007).

5 Research income per permanent academic staff member

USD 3 000 per permanent academic.

6 Doctoral graduates Graduates in 2007 constituted 5% of permanent academics

7 Research publications Outputs in 2007 were 0.13 of publications per permanent academic.

The following observations can be made about the academic core data for the UoM:

1. SET enrolments – UoM’s SET enrolments grew slowly from 2 700 in 2001 to 3 100 in 2007. Most of the growth occurred in the field of business and management, where enrolments doubled from 1 200 in 2001 to 2 400 in 2007. The proportion of SET students remained high (at 42%) in 2007 compared to the proportions of other students in UoM’s selected cluster. UoM’s SET graduation rate was well above those of other universities in its selected cluster, but below that of the exceptionally high rate of a Cluster 1 university with which it is being compared.


109

2. Increased postgraduate enrolments – UoM’s total enrolment of postgraduate students grew from 9% in 2001 to 14% in 2007. It reported rapid growth in masters enrolments as well as masters graduates. Masters enrolments (not including MPhils) increased from 350 in 2001 to 859 in 2007 (an average annual increase of 16.1%). Masters graduates increased from 79 in 2001 to 360 in 2007 (an average annual increase of 28.2%). A point which must be noted is that UoM reports its senior postgraduate enrolments as MPhil/doctorates, with the decision on the final track of a student being taken during his/her research studies. What is a concern is that very few of these joint MPhil/doctoral students appear to move into full doctoral studies. The UoM produced an annual average of only seven doctoral graduates between 2001 and 2007.

3. Teaching load – UoM’s FTE academic staff more than doubled the growth in

FTE student enrolment. As a consequence, its FTE student to FTE academic staff ratio fell from 24:1 in 2001 to 16:1 in 2007. This improvement was the result of the university employing a considerable number of temporary and part‐time academics in 2007. Its permanent academic total was 201 in 2007 and its FTE academic staff total 411. This shows that the university’s permanent academics must, by 2007, have had reasonable teaching loads.

4. Qualifications of staff – In 2007 45% of UoM’s permanent academic staff had

doctorates as their highest formal qualifications. This is a proportion which is close to that of a Cluster 1 university which is strong in research.

5. Research funding – UoM indicates that its income from research contracts was

Rs 9.3 million in 2007, which was 2.5% of its total income. This amount was equivalent to USD 300 000 at market exchange rates and in purchasing power parity units, PPP$ 600 000. These converted sums, when divided by UoM’s total of permanent academics become: USD 1 500 per academic and PPP$3 000 per academic. These ratios, compared to the amounts available to South African universities which are strong in research, are low and suggest that UoM may not have been able to adequately fund its research activities.

6. Doctoral graduates – Between 2001 and 2007, doctoral graduates increased by 6%. However, this was coming off a low base of only seven. This results in the very low ratio of 2.8% of doctoral graduates to permanent academic staff.

7. Research publications – In terms of research publications UoM’s output is low.

Its 2007 ratio of publication units per permanent academic was, at 0.13, well below the ratio of 0.50 which has been set as a target for South Africa’s research universities.

On the input side, UoM is strong in SET enrolments and increases in postgraduate enrolments. It has also managed to decrease the staff teaching load through the appointment of part‐time staff, which shifts the workload to administration of part‐timers. The qualifications of staff are above the average for South African universities.


110

The main input weakness seems to be lack of research funds, which presumably impacts on the weak outputs in doctoral graduates and research publications. It also seems that the university will have to do a serious rethink of incentives if it wants to become a knowledge producer that can contribute significantly to an engine of development approach.

FINDINGS:

The knowledge production output variables of the academic core do not seem strong enough to enable the UoM to make a sustainable contribution to development.

The university is not changing significantly from a predominantly undergraduate teaching institution, with a strength in SET and business studies, to a research institution.

On the input side, UoM scores strongly on SET graduations, but weak on doctoral graduates and ISI publications.

The most serious challenges to strengthening the academic core seem to be to increase research funding, doctoral graduation rates and research outputs.

6.5 Coordination and connectedness Knowledge policies have become increasingly important in the context of the knowledge economy. Broadly speaking, knowledge policies refer to political mechanisms (such as policies and incentives) that are aimed at improving the (knowledge) capacity of a country to participate in the global knowledge economy. Such policies thus relate to the higher education and science and technology sectors, and to high‐level skills training, research and innovation. The coordination of knowledge policies can take place at the level of both policy formulation and policy implementation. In this project ‘coordination’ is used to refer to more structured forms of interaction, mainly between government and institutions; in other words, the knowledge policies and implementation activities of different government departments, particularly departments of education, science and technology, and research councils. Of specific interest to this study is the coordination of knowledge policies across ministries involved with higher education, science, technology and innovation, as well as those responsible for economic development or planning. Implementation can be regarded as a component of the coordination of government policies and is a complex combination of agreement (relevant parties support the policy) and capacity to design and apply the implementation mechanisms or instruments. At the national level we looked at the role of the ministry responsible for higher education, steering and funding. At the


111

institutional level, indicators dealt with aspects such as units or structures to implement strategic plans, incentives and rewards, special teaching and research programmes that link to economic development and funding support for research. Another key issue for the relationship between higher education and economic development is to establish a productive relationship between knowledge and connectedness. On the one hand, if there is an overemphasis on the basic knowledge activities of teaching and research – in other words, an excessive inward orientation towards strengthening the academic core – this results in the university becoming an ‘ivory tower’. Or, if the academic core is weak, an overemphasis on knowledge results in the ‘ancillary’ role of the university (i.e. no direct role in development). On the other hand, if there is an overemphasis in the university on connecting to development activities, then it weakens the academic core and the university has little new or relevant knowledge to offer in the exchange relationship. The challenge for universities, then, is to deal with this inherent tension between ‘buffering’ (protecting) the core technologies of the institution, and ‘bridging’ (linking) those with external actors (Scott 2001: 199‐211). For the purposes of this study, we are using the term ‘connectedness’ to refer to the relationship (and tension) between the inward focus on strengthening and maintaining the academic core, and the outward focus on linking with external stakeholders and development. In this section, we address the following three questions relating to coordination and connectedness:

1. Does government coordinate policies and steering mechanisms that enable the university to contribute to development?

2. Does the university connect to external groupings in ways that promote development?

3. Do development activities in the university strengthen or weaken the academic core?

6.5.1 Knowledge policy coordination and implementation At the national level, there is effective planning between state organs responsible for development planning and those responsible for tertiary education. With regard to the latter, without resorting to any form of ‘manpower planning’, the nature of planning in the education sectors suggests attempts to ensure the provision of generic skills and improving the quality of outcomes. However, there are no formal structures linking national authorities and higher education institutions.


112

Table 6.4: National coordination of knowledge policies


Economic development and higher education planning are linked

3 SystematicFormal structures Headed by senior minister

2 SporadicClusters / forums

1 Weak Occasional meetings

Link between universities and national authorities

3Specific coordination structures or agencies

2Some formal structures but no meaningful coordination

1 No structures, and political rather than professional networks

Coordination and consensus building of government agencies involved in higher education

3Higher education mainstreamed across government departments

2Intermittent interaction with ineffective forums

1 Higher education issues limited mainly to one ministry or directorate

FINDINGS:

At the national level, there are considerable coordination activities, including clusters and the reorganisation of the national ministry.

While there are many personal networks between government officials and particular university leaders, which contributes to a shared understanding about the university’s role in development (pact), the question is whether these contribute towards strengthening the sector.


113

Table 6.5: Implementation of knowledge policies and activities


Role of the ministry responsible for higher education

3Organised ministry with capacity to make predictable allocations

2Spots of capacity with some steering instruments

1 Weak capacity with unpredictable allocations

Implementation to ‘steer’ higher education towards development

3 StrongInstruments such as funding / special projects that incentivise institutions/individuals

2 WeakOccasional grants for special projects

1 Absent No particular incentive funding

Balance / ratio of sources of income for institutions

3Government, fees and third stream

2Mainly government plus student fees

1 Mainly government with external funders

Funding consistency22 3A stable, transparent public funding mechanism based on criteria agreed upon by all actors involved

2Funding allocations somewhat predictable but do not allow for long‐term planning nor reward enterprising behaviour

1 No clear funding or incentives from government

22Our original rating for funding consistency was ‘2’. However, since the collection of data for

this case study, it came to light that the way in which tertiary education institutions are funded

(‘programme‐based budgeting’) does allow for some degree of long‐term planning on the part

of institutions.


114

Institutional (UoM) Rating = 13/18

Specific units, funding or appointments linked economic development

3Specific units, funding or appointments

2Economic development initiatives aspect of a unit or appointment

1 Mainly ad hoc, staff‐initiated operations

Incentives and rewards for development‐related activities

3Incentives / counts towards promotion

2Some signals but largely rhetoric

1 No mention

Teaching programmes linked to the labour market

3Targets for enrolments in fields considered to be of high economic relevance

2Some programmes in response to specific industry requests

1 No new programmes linked to labour market

Special programmes linking students to economic development

3Entrepreneurship, work‐based learning and/or incubators for students mainstreamed

2Ad hoc programmes

1 No special programmes

Research activities are becoming more economy‐oriented

3Research policy/strategy has an economic development focus

2Some research agendas have an economic development focus

1 Ad hoc project funding

Levels of government and institutional funding for research

3High

2Medium

1 Low

FINDINGS:

While the university does have development‐related structures and special programmes linking it to development initiatives, the problem is that in too many cases these initiatives are driven by individuals rather than being institutionalised. In addition, these special implementation efforts need to be more connected.

Despite policies that extol the importance of research related to development activities (mainly through focus themes), research related to development is not rewarded through incentives beyond the traditional academic promotion system.

At the national level, one of the weaknesses is implementation of new policies, particularly those that require a shift of resources. In addition, while there are some steering instruments and mechanisms, these do not seem strong enough to ‘redirect’ the system.


115

6.5.2 Connectedness to external stakeholders and the academic core A number of institutional stakeholders reported that there are good linkages between government and university academics. The UoM’s Strategic and Research and Innovation Framework uses the ‘triple‐helix’ model to frame linkages and collaboration with government and industry. Key mechanisms for the transfer of technology to government and industry include consultancy services, outright sale of technology, licensing of technology, joint ventures, and start‐up ventures. Consultancy projects include research projects, routine testing in the university’s laboratories, training programmes, executive development programmes, and continuous development programmes. There is a serious attempt to institutionalise collaboration through establishing various parks (e.g. science and technology, industrial, research), as well as structures such as Enterprise Mauritius, the Mauritius National Productivity and Competitiveness Council, and the Small Enterprises and Handicraft Development Authority – all of which are involved in entrepreneurship or innovation in one way or another. However, two serious shortcomings were raised: firstly, that government does not draw adequately on the expertise of the academics and, secondly, that there is poor coordination between the key stakeholders. A number of respondents suggested in different ways that the interactions are ad hoc and that often particular government departments are not interested in utilising data and findings from development‐orientated projects. The considerable research and innovation infrastructure is not systematically coordinated amongst the different initiatives. Even the Centre for Consultancy and Contract Research at UoM, which was established to provide greater coordination between internal and external interests, was reported to be largely uncoordinated. At the UoM, there is considerable private sector involvement in curriculum review and development, and work placements. However a number of respondents felt the scale of work placements was not large enough. It has already been mentioned that there is little private sector investment in R&D, and that it happens in an ad hoc manner. Two institutional leaders argued that there is no existing coordinating body; however, it was mentioned that there are plans afoot for a university‐industry liaison body. It was also mentioned that linkages with the university and government, and particularly the university and industry, will be enhanced with greater staff exchange. It was certainly noticeable for the research team that links with government and development projects were much stronger with academics that had been seconded to government for limited period‐specific projects. With regard to the connectedness of development‐related activities to the academic core, the articulation and academic ratings applied to the six projects/centres (section 5.3) are presented again in Figure 6.2 below.


Figure 6.2: Plotting the development‐related projects at the University of Mauritius

Key: PG Polymer Group RP Roselle Project RPA Review of Strategies of Poverty Alleviation AMC Auditing of Manufacturing Companies FC Socio‐Economic Analysis of Fishing Communities iBP ICT Business Pre‐Incubator

Following the analytical proposition, our assumption would be that for development‐related projects to make the most sustained contribution to development they would best fall within the top right‐hand quadrant in the graph; in other words, their activities articulate with national priorities and institutional strategic objectives; they have close linkages with key external stakeholders, especially any implementation agencies; and they contribute towards strengthening the academic core of the institution, rather than weakening it.

PG 5, 10

RP 4, 9

RPA 2, 5

AMC 1, 6

FC 3, 8

iBP 1, 10

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Direct articulation

Indirectarticulation

Weakening academic core

Strengthening academic core


117

As can be seen from Figure 6.2, only two of the projects – the Polymer Group and the Roselle Project – fall within the top right‐hand quadrant of the graph. Despite the fact that the agenda‐setting for the unit is done by the academic head of the Polymer Group, rather than in consultation with external stakeholders, and that the group does not have any linkages with specific implementation agencies, it does score high on the other articulation indicators. More importantly, however, compared to the other projects in the sample, the Polymer Group makes the greatest contribution to strengthening the academic core of the institution through the strong links between project activities and teaching and curriculum development, student involvement, generating new knowledge, publishing and linking to international academic networks. It is perhaps not surprising that the three projects which fair the least well in terms of strengthening the academic core are all once‐off consultancy projects. Whilst these projects no doubt made a direct contribution of some kind to economic development in some aspect, the extent to which this contribution can be considered sustainable is questionable since the academics involved in these projects are, through their participation, taken away from the core business of the university. In a sense, this links to the notion of the role of the university as ‘instrument of development agenda’ where academics are drawn upon as experts in relation to some development issue. Furthermore, it is our contention that where projects are located on the articulation/connectedness and academic core axes has more to do with the choices of individual academics, academic units and donors than it does on a particular institutional approach. We could also argue that the scattered picture which emerges points to a number of tensions facing the institution including, for example, the imperative to generate third‐stream income or to partner with external stakeholders to enhance the relevance of university activities, versus strengthening the academic core activities of the university.

FINDINGS:

While there is evidence of connectedness between the university and industry or the private sector, these linkages are mostly confined to the level of units or centres rather than institutional‐level partnerships.

Unlike most of the universities in the HERANA sample, UoM is involved in a wide array of R&D consultancies with, or for, industry.

Projects/centres that are considered by university leadership to be strongly connected to development tend to score well on the articulation indicators – in other words, they reflect national priorities (and to a lesser extent institutional objectives), have more than one funding source and, in some cases, plans for financial sustainability, and may have a connection to an implementation agency.


118

Some of these projects/centres also manage to keep a strong connection to the academic core of the university, whilst others are virtually disconnected from these core knowledge activities.

At the university there are ‘exemplary’ development projects/centres. The problem is scale: there are simply not enough, and some seem overly dependent on exceptional individuals.

6.6 Concluding comments Mauritius, similar to the case studies included in our international comparison (Finland, Korea and North Carolina state), made the notion of ‘knowledge economy’ a strong feature of their new economic growth strategy. The importance of higher education and high‐level knowledge features strongly in a number of policies. In addition, there are high levels of participation in schooling, a strong awareness of improving quality, and an expanding and differentiated tertiary education system. National political actors and the university leadership share the notion that higher education is an instrument for development and the key component of their knowledge driven notion of development. Their main concern is that the expertise of the academic staff (instrument) is not yet applied efficiently enough. On the side of the academics there is frustration that they are not given sufficient incentives and rewards to fulfil a knowledge production and innovation role. Neither the government nor the university leadership regard the university as an ancillary, and there were no apparent autonomy conflicts. On both sides the concerns were about not delivering on the broadly agreed upon goals. Within the university, the strategic plan reflects many of the knowledge economy notions. For example, lifelong learning and continuous professional development are receiving more attention, as well as developing an ‘entrepreneurial flair’ amongst staff and students which is described in both the strategic plan and the research and innovation strategy. There are also special academic programmes attempting to provide students with appropriate labour market knowledge skills through work–based learning, participation in incubators and entrepreneurship courses. Apart from establishing structures such as the Office of the Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor Research and Innovation, five research clusters have been identified to concentrate research focus and resources. However, while research activities are becoming increasingly economy orientated, it seems that government funding for research remains very low, and is becoming more difficult to access. The internal incentive/reward structure of the institution has also not changed to reflect the new direction. It could be argued that the pact is not strong enough to enable the government to make the necessary trade‐offs to allocate


119

more resources to the knowledge project, and the same applies within the university. And there is little financial support from industry or external funders. What does the academic core of the UoM tell us about the ‘state of knowledge’? Mauritius has a relatively high enrolment and graduation in SET, and there is substantial growth in postgraduate enrolment, but not in doctoral graduation. The teaching load is quite favourable, if somewhat inefficient, and the permanent staff are well qualified, but the production of knowledge according to ISI publication output is very low. Funding for research is very low, and seems to be getting more, and not less difficult, to access. Despite the positives mentioned, unless there is a stronger PhD output (producing a cadre of possible researchers), and a substantial increase in research resources and productivity, the UoM will find it very difficult to operationalise its knowledge economy ambitions. The national education department has some capacity to facilitate interaction, but it seems that this role is increasingly fulfilled by the Tertiary Education Commission. As is the case in so many other countries, the department of education is not strong in the hierarchy of government departments, and is thus restricted in terms of the steering/coordinating role it can play. However, it does seem that neither amongst government departments, nor between government and institution, is there strong formal coordination. A number of respondents suggested in different ways that the interactions between the government and the university community are more ad hoc than systematic, and that often particular government departments are not interested in utilising data and findings from development‐orientated projects. A corollary complaint was that government does not draw adequately on the expertise of the academics. The university has made considerable progress in institutionalising development projects. Within the university a number of dedicated posts, units and centres (particularly the Centre for Consultancy and Contract Research) have been established to improve coordination and ensure sustainability. Key mechanisms for the transfer of technology to government and industry include consultancy services, outright sale of technology, licensing of technology, joint ventures and start‐up ventures, executive development programmes and continuous development programmes. Consultancy projects include research projects, routine testing in the university’s laboratories, and training programmes. The very ambitious science and technology park is probably the largest attempt to coordinate and institutionalise research and consultancy projects. Also in the pipeline, in addition to structures such as Enterprise Mauritius and the Small Enterprises and Handicraft Authority, is the attempt to establish a formal university‐industry council.


120

Not only have certain teaching programmes been established to respond to labour market needs, but formal curriculum consultation committees and processes have been established across the institution to improve labour market linkage. Much of the emphasis in the university’s key planning and strategy documents is on the UoM’s relationship with industry and government, with very little mention of linkages to communities – indicating that the university sees its development role as a triangle with government and industry. This is interestingly reflected in the six development projects/centres included in the study – all had strong and direct articulation between project aims and national priorities. However, this was not the case in terms of articulation with institutional objectives where three of the projects did not report any direct linkages. It is perhaps not surprising that two of these projects were once‐off consultancy projects which were initiated by external agencies. In terms of connectedness to external stakeholders, five of the six projects had either direct or indirect links with implementation agencies – and most of these projects were initiated and funded by external agencies. While there is no doubt that the six projects in various ways make important contributions to development in their field of expertise, particularly in the application of expertise, the overall low ratings for contributions to strengthening the academic core is worrying since this is the main business of the university. And, according to our analytical framework, suggests that it inhibits the university’s potential to make a significant and sustained contribution to development. In conclusion, both government and intuitional leaders have a strong knowledge economy discourse and have an impressive array of policies in place. The coordination of these policies is still a major problem, and the pact does not seem strong enough for government to make resource trade‐offs to support this vision, nor has the university managed to strengthen its academic core sufficiently to shift from a rather traditional teaching to a knowledge producing and innovation intuition.


121

List of sources

Baguant K (2009) Background Information on the University of Mauritius. Document prepared for research team prior to the site visit

CHET (2010) Cross‐National Higher Education Performance Indicators. DRAFT. Cape

Town: Centre for Higher Education Transformation Cloete N, Maassen P, Pillay P, Bailey T, Pinheiro R and Muller J (2010) Higher Education

and Economic Development: Analytical Framework. Cape Town: Centre for Higher Education Transformation

Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartsman S, Scott P and Trow M (1994) The

New Production of Knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. California: Sage Publications

Gornitzka Å, Maassen P, Olsen JP and Stensaker B (2007) ‘Europe of knowledge’:

Search for a new pact. In: P Maassen and JP Olsen (eds), University Dynamics and European Integration. Dordrecht: Springer, pp181‐214

Juma CC (2005) Going for Growth: Science, technology and innovation in Africa. Report. Harvard: The Smith Institute

MEAC (1984) White Paper on Education. Mauritius: Ministry of Education, Arts and

Culture MTESRT (1992) White Paper on Science. Mauritius: Ministry of Tertiary Education,

Science, Research & Technology MECHR (2008) Draft Education and Human Resources Strategy Plan 2008–2020.

Mauritius: Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources MESR (2006) Developing Mauritius into a Knowledge Hub and a Centre of Higher

Learning. Mauritius: Ministry of Education and Scientific Research Mohadeb P (2010) Higher education financing in Mauritius. In: P Pillay (ed), Higher

Education in East and Southern Africa. Cape Town: Centre for Higher Education Transformation

OECD (2008) Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society. Paris: Organisation for

Economic Cooperation and Development Pillay P (2010a) Higher Education and Economic Development: A literature review. Cape

Town: Centre for Higher Education Transformation


122

Pillay P (2010b) Linking Higher Education and Economic Development: Implications for

Africa from three successful systems. Cape Town: Centre for Higher Education Transformation

Scott WR (2001) Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Pearson Education International TEC (2009) List of Indicative Priority Fields of Study 2009/2010. Mauritius: Tertiary

Education Commission TEC (2007) Strategic Plan 2007–2011. Mauritius: Tertiary Education Commission TEC (2008) Participation in Tertiary Education, 2007. Mauritius: Tertiary Education

Commission UNDP (1990) 1990 Human Development Report. New York: United Nations

Development Programme UNDP (2009) Human Development Report 2009. Overcoming barriers: Human mobility

and development. New York: United Nations Development Programme UoM (2006) Strategic Directions 2006–2015. Mauritius: University of Mauritius UoM (2008) Annual Report 2007–2008. Mauritius: University of Mauritius UoM (2009) Strategic Research and Innovation Framework 2009–2015. Mauritius:

University of Mauritius WEF (2009) The Global Competitiveness Report 2009‐2010. Geneva: World Economic

Forum WEF (2010) The Global Competitiveness Report 2010‐2011. Geneva: World Economic

Forum Weick K (1976) Educational organisations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 21:1‐19 World Bank (2004) Mauritius: The New Economic Agenda and Fiscal Sustainability.

Washington, DC: The World Bank World Bank (2006) World Bank Development Report 2006: Equity and Development.

Washington DC: The World Bank World Bank (2007) Building Knowledge Economies: Advanced Strategies for

Development. Washington, DC: The World Bank


123

Appendix 1: List of interviewees

University of Mauritius

Prof. I Fagoonee (Vice‐Chancellor) Prof. Ameenah Gurib‐Fakim (Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor: Teaching & Learning) Prof. Soonil Rughooputh (Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor: Research, Consultancy &

Innovation) Prof. K Sobhee (Dean: Faculty of Social Studies & Humanities) Prof. T Bahorun (Department of Biosciences, Faculty of Science) Prof. D Jhurry (Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science) Dr A Bhaw‐Luximon (Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science) Dr Dinesh Hurreeram (Department of Mechanical & Production Engineering,

Faculty of Engineering) Mr I Koodoruth (Senior Lecturer: Department of Social Studies, Faculty of Social

Studies & Humanities) Mr A Chutoo (Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Faculty of

Engineering) Mr M Santally (Virtual Centre for Innovative Learning Technologies) Mr B Rajkomar (Senior Lecturer: Department of Agricultural Economics &

Management, Faculty of Agriculture) Dr V Ancharaz (Head: Department of Economics & Statistics, Faculty of Social

Studies & Humanities)

Mauritius national stakeholders

Mr Ricaud G Auckbur (Director: Post‐secondary and Tertiary, Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources)

Ms Maya Soonarane (Acting Director: Planning and Finance, Ministry of Education, Culture and Human Resources)

Mr R Hittoo (Sector Ministry Support Team Leader for Education Empowerment: Ministry of Finance and Economic Empowerment)

Dr Praveen Mohadeb (Tertiary Education Commission) Mr S Rama (Principal Financial Analyst: Ministry of Finance and Economic

Empowerment)


124

Appendix 2: Cluster analysis methodology and data

A K‐means clustering analysis was applied for the identification of four statistically significant and distinct clusters. Averages for 2005 to 2007 were used for input variables as well as non‐financial output variables. Financial data for 2007 were used. Original values for all variables were statistically scaled to make the data comparable and to ensure equal weighting for all variables. The following input variables were used for the clustering analysis:

% headcount enrolments in science, engineering and technology (% SET) % masters and doctoral headcount enrolments (% M & D students) Inverse of the student: academic/research staff FTE ratio (inverse of stud: staff

FTE ratio) % of permanent academic/ research staff with a doctoral degree (% staff with

PhD) % private income Total income per FTE student (purchasing power parity dollar thousands)

(income per FTE) Academic staff costs per FTE academic (purchasing power parity dollar

thousands) (staff cost per FTE). The following output variables were used for the clustering analysis:

Graduation rate (number of graduates in a given year/ enrolments in a given year x 100)

Research outputs (doctoral graduates + research publications). The data values are shown in Table A2.1 over page. Figure A2.1 lists the universities in the four clusters and plots the means for each cluster.


125

Table A2.1: Cluster analysis data table

INPUT INDICATORS OUTPUT INDICATORS

Total 2007 head counts (thousands)

Averages for 2005‐2007 2007 only

2007 income 2007 expenditure Averages for 2005‐2007

% SET % M & D students

Student: staff FTE ratio

% Staff with PhD

% Private Income

Income per FTE(purchasing power parity

dollar thousands)

Academic staff costs per FTE academic (purchasing power

parity dollar thousands)

Graduation rate

Weighted research output per permanent academic

LARGE CONTACT

Tshwane University of Technology

51 38% 3% 31 12% 16% 10.5 81.0 19% 0.27

University of Pretoria 49 38% 15% 18 38% 40% 24.8 92.8 24% 1.36North West University 45 20% 8% 30 43% 37% 12.6 106.2 24% 1.17University of Johannesburg 42 31% 5% 16 18% 27% 15.9 46.0 23% 0.94University of Nairobi 39 30% 16% 16 71% 34% 9.9 58.7 16% 0.45University of KwaZulu Natal 38 32% 14% 18 30% 37% 21.2 96.1 21% 1.07Makerere University 34 31% 7% 18 31% 15% 5.9 48.7 26% 0.51

MEDIUM CONTACT

Cape Peninsula University of Technology

29 48% 2% 26 11% 27% 15.3 98.1 22% 0.20

University of the Free State 25 29% 12% 17 49% 30% 18.2 73.6 21% 1.27University of the Witwatersrand

25 48% 23% 11 45% 51% 39.7 96.7 21% 1.52

Walter Sisulu University 24 26% 1% 30 9% 5% 8.7 108.6 12% 0.05Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University

24 30% 7% 29 34% 25% 18.4 120.1 23% 0.82

Stellenbosch University 23 41% 22% 16 61% 51% 36.4 90.9 25% 2.03Durban University of Technology

23 48% 2% 28 7% 11% 12.4 108.9 20% 0.14

University of Cape Town 21 42% 18% 13 58% 42% 40.0 99.3 26% 2.13University of Dar es Salaam 18 39% 10% 15 50% 16% 8.6 44.1 24% 0.40University of Ghana 26 18% 6% 29 47% 15% 6.3 68.5 20% 0.53

SMALL CONTACT

University of Limpopo 16 44% 11% 16 16% 19% 21.3 77.5 21% 0.31Vaal University of Technology

16 48% 1% 31 12% 13% 11.4 81.5 15% 0.12

Eduardo Mondlane University

16 50% 3% 12 19% 14% 5.6 24.9 8% 0.03

University of Botswana 16 25% 23% 17 20% 10% 14.8 85.6 22% 0.27University of the Western 15 31% 10% 19 43% 41% 22.3 84.0 20% 0.91


126

INPUT INDICATORS OUTPUT INDICATORS

Total 2007 head counts (thousands)

Averages for 2005‐2007 2007 only

2007 income 2007 expenditure Averages for 2005‐2007

% SET % M & D students

Student: staff FTE ratio

% Staff with PhD

% Private Income

Income per FTE(purchasing power parity

dollar thousands)

Academic staff costs per FTE academic (purchasing power

parity dollar thousands)

Graduation rate

Weighted research output per permanent academic

Cape University of Venda 12 31% 3% 34 35% 14% 10.0 100.3 16% 0.24Cape University of Technology

10 45% 3% 28 29% 14% 13.0 79.2 22% 0.32

Mangosothu University of Technology

10 59% 0% 44 5% 13% 10.6 140.9 17% 0.03

University of Zululand 9 16% 5% 32 38% 30% 15.9 95.9 21% 0.70University of Fort Hare 9 18% 6% 21 19% 37% 15.6 94.2 20% 0.45University of Mauritius 8 42% 15% 16 45% 6% 3.7 20.9 27% 0.94Rhodes University 6 22% 14% 17 50% 29% 26.9 107.7 32% 1.65

Notes: 1. The calculation of purchasing power parity dollars (PPP$) is based on estimates contained in the World Bank’s (2008) World Development Indicators report.

Because these estimates are based on 2005 exchange rates, the following method was used for the 2007 calculations: The indicator set gives for each country a ratio between the PPP conversion factor and the market exchange rate. For example, the South African ratio is

given as 0.61, based on a market exchange rate of R 6.4 per USD in 2005. The 2007 calculations assume that the 2005 ratio will apply again. So the 2007 PPP conversion factor is taken to be 2005 ratio times 2007 market exchange

rate. For example, the conversion factor for South Africa is calculated as 2005 ratio times 2007 exchange rate = 0.61 x 7.0 = 4.27. 2. The financial data for the following three universities were based on the following assumptions:

University of Nairobi: academic staff costs assumed to = 35% of total expenditure Eduardo Mondlane University: academic staff costs assumed to = 35% of total expenditure University of Dar es Salaam: (a) academic staff costs assumed to = 35% of total expenditure; (b) private income = donor income.


127

Figure A2.1: Plot of means for each cluster

% SET% M & D students

Inverse of stud: staff FTE ratio

% Staff with PhD

% Private Income

Income per FTE

Staff cost per FTE

Graduation Rate

Weighted Research Outputs

Cluster 1 0.27 1.54 1.04 1.00 1.33 1.78 0.50 1.03 1.72

Cluster 2 0.19 ‐0.10 0.78 ‐0.23 ‐0.72 ‐0.58 ‐1.25 0.10 ‐0.53

Cluster 3 ‐0.86 0.04 ‐0.37 0.46 0.47 ‐0.14 0.22 ‐0.14 0.11

Cluster 4 0.84 ‐1.07 ‐1.00 ‐1.14 ‐0.89 ‐0.49 0.58 ‐0.63 ‐0.86

‐1.50

‐1.00

‐0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

Cluster 4 Tshwane University of Technology,

Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Walter Sisulu

University, Durban University of Technology, Vaal University of

Technology, Central University of Technology, Mangosothu University of Technology

Cluster 3 North West University, University of Nairobi, University of KwaZulu ‐Natal, University of the Free State, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, University of Ghana, University of the Western Cape, University of Venda, University of Zululand, University of Fort Hare

Cluster 2 University of Johannesburg,

Makerere University, University of Dar es Salaam, University of Limpopo, Eduardo Mondlane

University, University of Botswana, University of Mauritius

Cluster 1 University of Pretoria,

Witwatersrand University, Stellenbosch University, University of Cape Town, Rhodes University

Cluster 1

Cluster 3

Cluster 2

Cluster 4


128

Appendix 3: Academic core rating descriptions

Indicators Strong (3) Medium (2) Weak (1)

1 Strong science and technology

SET enrolments growing, and SET share of enrolment shape increasing. Graduation rates of cohorts of SET students minimum of 70%.

SET share of enrolment shape steady. Graduation rate of cohorts of SET students 60% to 70%.

SET enrolments static, and SET share of enrolment shape declining. Graduation rate of cohorts of SET students below 60%.

2 Increased postgraduate enrolments and outputs

Postgraduates at least 25% of total enrolment. Masters and doctoral enrolments and graduates increasing. Ratio of masters to doctoral enrolments no more than 5:1. Ratio of graduates in year to enrolments in same year: masters 25%, doctorates 20%.

Postgraduates as proportion of total enrolments above 10% and increasing. Ratio of masters to doctoral enrolments no more than 10:1. Ratios of graduates to enrolments: masters 20%, doctorates 15%.

Postgraduate enrolments and graduates grow at average annual rate below that of undergraduates. Postgraduates 10% or less of total enrolment. Ratio of masters to doctoral enrolments above 10:1.

3 Teaching loads of academic staff

FTE academic staff ratio close to growth in FTE students. FTE student to academic staff ratios maximum of 15:1 for SET, and maximum average of 20:1 for: all programmes.

FTE students grow at faster rate than FTE academic staff. FTE student to academic staff ratios close 20:1 for SET, close to 30:1 for all programmes.

FTE students grow at faster rate than FTE academic staff ratio. FTE student to academic staff ratios more than 20:1 for SET, and 30:1 for all programmes.

4 Qualifications of academic staff

At least 50% of permanent academic staff have doctorates.

Between 30% and 50% of permanent academic staff have doctorates.

Less than 30% of permanent academic staff have doctorates.

5 Availability of research funding

Annual research funding of at least USD10 000 per permanent academic.

Annual research funding of between than USD 2 000 and USD 10 000 per permanent academic.

Annual research funding of less than USD 2 000 per permanent academic.

6 Doctoral graduates Doctoral graduates in given year = 10% or higher of permanent academic staff.

Doctoral graduates in given year between 5% & 9.9% of permanent academic staff.

Doctoral graduates in given year < 5% of permanent academic staff.

7 Research publications

Ratio of 0.50 or higher of publication units per permanent academic.

Ratio of publication units per permanent academic between 0.25 and 0.49.

Ratio of publication units per permanent academic < 0.25.

Documents

Case Study - Mauritius and the University of Mauritius.pdf