Science Advisory to Governments and Regional/Sub-Regional Organizations in West and Central Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Science advice to governments and regional and sub-regional organizations in West and Central Africa has been reviewed. The objectives were to analyze its evolution and characterize the sources of advice. During the colonial period, it was by the colonial administrations and for their needs. At independence, in general, the new nations (particularly French speaking) entered into agreements with the former colonial powers to develop science, technology and innovation capacity for sustainable development. English speaking nations sought more partners outside the colonial experience. Colonial research institutes were increasingly transformed into national research institutes/institutions with national development mandates. Governments increasingly turned to science advice from consultants, inter- ministerial committees, advisory bodies, ad hoc experts’ groups, or a combination of these. Regional/sub-regional organizations sought advice from consultants, ad hoc technical experts’ groups, advisory bodies or a combination of these. Increasingly, science advice is delivered by Africans. Science advice by science academies is most rigorous. The arrival of more science academies, with varying links with governments, indicates that evidence-based science advice is growing in the region.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".