Smart specialisation strategies in sub-Saharan Africa: Opportunities, challenges and initial mapping for Côte d’Ivoire

Figures & data

Figure 1: Smart specialisation strategy (S3): overview of the main building blocks. Source: Authors’ elaborations

Table 1: Mapping IP challenges and Smart Specialisation implementation principles.

Challenges of IP implementation	Smart specialisation approach
Build institutional capacity for the design, monitoring and implementation of STI policies and international cooperation between AU Member States	Flexible, step-based & gradual, S3 allows for policy experimentation and learning
Sound evidence for policy and Monitoring & Evaluation frameworks and exercises	Initial mapping of the economic, scientific and innovation potentials based on quantitative and qualitative inputs as well as international and local experts' assessments Periodic revisions or reviews of the Strategies are encouraged
Make sure that the implementation plans match the needs of varied and diversified territories of the African states	Place-based policy: Valorise existing assets & focus implementation plans on local idiosyncrasies/needs Macroregional strategies, which bring together several regional or sub-national territories, can be adopted for broader missions or societal challenges (e.g. health, energy, security, etc.)
Generate commitment of local & small entrepreneurs and other actors for development	Attention to and monitoring of local (micro-) entrepreneurial dynamics Including local actors in the decision-making process
An inclusive approach to knowledge- & innovation-based development	Collective and inclusive governance and experimentation (learning by doing & by interacting) Stakeholders from the Quadruple Helix
Develop practical steps allowing for the successful implementation of the strategy	Step-based approach and tailored monitoring & evaluation instruments should be implemented Include various actors (quadruple helix) in the operational planning phase – they will help verify the generated ideas in terms of their usefulness and applicability

Source: own elaborations from STI Strategy for Africa, STISA (AUC 2014), Dosso, Kleibrink, and Matusiak (2018) and Dosso (2017)

Table 2: Comparative perspective on key socio-economic indicators of Côte d’Ivoire (2017).

	Côte d’Ivoire	Lower middle-income country group
Access to electricity (% of population)	65.6	86.1
Access to electricity, rural (% of rural population)	36.6	79.1
People using at least basic drinking water services (% of population)	72.9	88.6
People using at least basic drinking water services, rural (% of rural pop.)	57.8	84.9
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (% of GDP)	21.6	15.3
Industry (including construction), value added (% of GDP)	24.7	28.6
Services, value added (% of GDP)	31.9	49.1
Human Development Index (inequality-adjusted)*	0.492 (0.311)	–
Informal employment (% of total non-agricultural empl.)	84.8	n.a.
Manufacturing, value added (% of GDP)	12.3	15.3
Population ages 0–14 (% of total population)	42.2	30.4
Population in the largest city (% of urban population)	38.9	n.a.
Rural population (% of total population)	49.7	59.9
School enrolment, tertiary, female (% gross)	7.6	24.7
Vulnerable employment, female (% of female employment)	84.9	67.7
Vulnerable employment, male (% of male employment)	64,4	63.5

Source: Selected from World Development Indicators (WDI): https://databank.worldbank.org/home, World Bank. (*) UNDP country notes: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/CIV.pdf

Notes: The Lower Middle-Income Group as defined by the World Bank country classification. Agriculture corresponds to ISIC divisions 1–5 and includes forestry, hunting, and fishing, as well as cultivation of crops and livestock production (International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC), revision 3 or 4). Industry corresponds to ISIC 10–45 and includes manufacturing (15–37). It comprises value added in mining, manufacturing (also reported as a separate subgroup), construction, electricity, water, and gas. Services correspond to ISIC divisions 50–99 and they mainly include value added in wholesale and retail trade (including hotels and restaurants), transport, and government, financial, professional, and personal services such as education, health care, and real estate services

Figure 2: Cross-regional agricultural specialisations in Côte d’Ivoire. Source: Ducroquet et al. 2017, Figure 13, p. 36.

Notes: Yamoussoukro (zone 4) is the political capital city and Abidjan (zone 3) is a coastal and the largest city, also considered as the economic capital of the country

Table 3: Overview of S&T performances of Côte d’Ivoire (2016).

Total R&D personnel (HC: Headcount) – Total		5,729
Total R&D personnel (HC) – % Female		22.4
Total R&D personnel per million inhabitants (HC)		241.8
Researchers per million inhabitants (HC)		180.9
Researchers as a % of total R&D personnel (HC)		74.8
Technicians as a % of total R&D personnel (HC)		21.2
Other supporting staff as a % of R&D personnel (HC)		4.0
Scientific and technical journal articles*		177
GERD in ‘000 PPP$ (in constant prices – 2005)		67,056
	GERD – performed by business enterprise %	n.a.
	GERD – performed by government %	76.7
	GERD – performed by higher education %	21.6
STI operational policy instruments (examples)	Strategic Support Program for Scientific Research – PASRES – which was set up as part of the project to create the National Fund for Scientific and Technological Research (FNRST)
	Interprofessional Fund for Research and Agricultural Council (FIRCA)
	FONARI * : Funds for the support of R&I including a women-dedicated Funds:

Source: Extraction from UNESCO Institute of Statistics: http://data.uis.unesco.org, GO-SPIN initiative: https://en.unesco.org/go-spin/about; (*) World Development Indicators of the World Bank and Côte d’Ivoire’s FONARI web page: https://fonari.mesrs-ci.net/

Notes: GERD: Gross Expenditure on R&D. The country also has, among other, a law related to the higher education and a law for the orientation and programming of scientific research and innovation as well as the establishment of a policy for technology exploitation

Figure 3. Côte d’Ivoire Tech Ecosystem mapping by Briter Bridges^®. Source: https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/blog/akwaba-to-the-cote-divoire-tech-ecosystem/

AUC (African Union Commission). 2014. AU Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation for Africa 2024, STISA-2024. Addis Ababa: African Union.

 Google Scholar

Dosso, M., A. Kleibrink, and M. Matusiak. 2018. “Smart Specialisation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Opportunities and Challenges.” Research Article in EAI International Conference on Technology, R&D, Education and Economy for Africa. https://eudl.eu/doi/https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.21-3-2018.2275700.

 Google Scholar

Dosso, M. 2017. Smart Specialisation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Opportunities and Challenges – An Introductory Note. Seville: European Commission, JRC. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/jrcsh/files/smart_specialisation_in_sub_saharan_africa_introductory_note.pdf.

 Google Scholar

Ducroquet, H., P. Tillie, K. Louhichi, and S. Gomez-Y-Paloma. 2017. L’agriculture de la Côte d’Ivoire à la loupe: Etats des lieux des filières de production végétales et animales et revue des politiques agricoles, EUR 28754 FR. Luxembourg: EU Publications Office. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC107214.

 Google Scholar