Africa as a knowledge society: A reality check

2013

SSRN Journal

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in IntroductionGlobalization has been universally recognized as the predominant force dominating the economic universe. It aims to illuminate the world with economic prosperity by seeking a victory of markets over governments and self-interest over altruism. The phenomenon is enshrined in the global commitment to continuing and accelerating the pace of human development. In recent years, the challenges of globalization have obliged scholars to devote a great deal of attention to the nature and functioning of the knowledge economy (KE). In fact, as globalization has become an ineluctable process (whose march can be stopped only by endangering the prosperity of nations), it has become abundantly clear that, for any continent, region or country to be actively engaged in the global economy, it must espouse competition as a benchmark to prosperity. KE which is central in competition has emerged in the late 1990s as a key theme in the OECD and World Bank reports (World Bank, 2007;Weber, 2011).There is wide consensus among scholars that knowledge created through innovation and technical progress is a long-term driver of economic prosperity. Accordingly, the dynamics of KE mastered by Europe and North America have enabled them to inexorably determine the course development at the international level. South America and Asia have been adapting to the KE challenges of globalization with calculated steps in their current pursuits of national, regional and international projects. In fact, the KE pattern of Japan has set the course for China, Malaysia and the Newly Industrialized Economies of Asia (Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong & Singapore), who are currently shifting toward 'knowledge-based economies' from the 'product-based economies' in the post industrialization period (Chandra & Yokoyama, 2011). While most scholarly attention on KE has been devoted to the emerging economies of Latin America and East Asia, in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and the Middle East & North African (MENA) countries, KE issues are also assuming central stage in discussions on development (Asongu, 2013a).Substantial efforts to understand the structure of the emerging KE have recently been devoted to SSA and MENA countries, either through the fight against software piracy (Andrés & Asongu, 2013; Asongu, 2012ab), financial sector competition (Asongu, 2012c), production value of doctoral dissertations (Amavilah, 2009) or pro-poor nexuses (Asongu, 2013b). These recent waves of stu...

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the Future of Knowledge Economy: Evidence from SSA and MENA Countries

2013

SSRN Journal

“…This inquiry extends the strand by explaining the protection of property rights through history, geography and religion. Second, apart from the highlighted studies by Andrés, Amavilah and Asongu, the paper also steers clear of the KE literature that is not focused on IPRs (AfDB, 2007;Dahlman, 2007;Aubert, 2005;Bizri, 2009;Britz et al, 2006;Lightfoot, 2011;Makinda, 2007). Third, the positioning of the study also improves understanding of African entrepreneurship and business literature (Oseifuah, 2010;Mensah & Benedict, 2010;Singh et al, 2011;Gerba, 2012;Tchamyou, 2015;Asongu & Tchamyou, 2016), especially in the substantially documented need for investment (Anyanwu, 2007(Anyanwu, , 2009Bartels et al, 2009;Darley, 2012;Bartels et al, 2014;Rolfe & Woodward, 2004;Tuomi, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Determinants of Property Rights Protection in Sub-Saharan Africa

Kodila‐Tedika

2016

J Knowl Econ

“…On the other hand, positive linkages between KE and economic growth have confirmed (Chavula, 2010). As far as we know, but for a thin exception (Chavula, 2010), the few SSA and MENA related-papers have been limited to a few dimensions of KE (Aubert, 2005;Britz et al, 2006;Makinda, 2007;African Development Bank, AfDB, 2007). In order to clearly position this paper in the light of existing literature we shall discuss the scope in two strands: policy issues on KE and the KEgrowth nexus.…”

Section: Scope and Positioning Of The Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Earlier, Britz et al (2006) had assessed the question of whether Africa is moving towards a advantage. More so, in order to improve current practices, it is not only important to extend the frontiers of knowledge, but also to diffuse and exploit the existing ones (Stiglitz, 1999).8 knowledge society and found that Africa still has a far way to go down the road and the journey could be quickened with certain preconditions, inter alia: investment in human capital, stopping of brain drain, as well as effective development and maintenance of a physical infrastructure.…”

Section: Scope and Positioning Of The Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

Trajectories in Knowledge Economy: Empirics from SSA and MENA Countries

Andrés

2015

SSRN Journal

In the first critical assessment of knowledge economy dynamic paths in Africa and the Middle East, but for a few exceptions, we find overwhelming support for diminishing crosscountry disparities in knowledge-base-economy dimensions. The paper employs all the four components of the World Bank's Knowledge Economy Index (KEI): economic incentives, innovation, education, and information infrastructure. The main finding suggests that subSaharan African (SSA) and the Middle East and North African (MENA) countries with low levels in KE dynamics and catching-up their counterparts of higher KE levels. We provide the speeds of integration and time necessary to achieve full (100%) integration. Policy implications are discussed.