Country focus and regional patterns

In terms of countries, although Zambia had an early start, it was soon overtaken by Kenya (1980s) and subsequently Tanzania (early 1990s) and Zimbabwe

Подпись: Graph 1: total publications on urban agriculture, 1970-1998

(mid to late 1990s). As noted above, Zambia’s research was dominated by foreign researchers compared to Kenya, Tanzania, Zimbabwe and South Africa where a crop of local researchers competed for research space. However, the more northerly one goes, the higher this research has been donor dependent in terms of research funds. Pure aca­demic research not linked to donor programmes is hard to find except probably in South Africa (see Stren, 1994; Mbiba and Huchzermeyer, 2002).. .

By 2000, certain features were clear:

• Countries in the South dominate, especially Zimbabwe and South Africa. South Africa is now

attracting funds from key donors that are scuttling out of Zimbabwe. Attracting donor funds to Harare, even for a small academic workshop, is now close to impossible.

• Other subjects areas, land, technology, skills train­ing and extension needs are coming to the fore.

• South Africa’s output is also on the increase and is likely to be more pronounced as a result of increasing poverty, current positive donor support and a diverse research base in universities in the big cities such as Durban, Cape Town, Pretoria, Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth. Research on tech­nologies, new theoretical interpretations and entry points are likely to emerge here.

Подпись: Graph 2: urban agriculture publications by subject focus in East and Southern Africa, 1970-1998

In the greater part of the region, research will remain donor driven in the long term.

• In the smaller countries research output has remained low over the years (Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, Botswana, Namibia). In the DRC, Mozambique and Angola, language differences and conflict situations have hindered the sharing of some materials from ongoing research in cities of those countries (see Figure 18.3).

If the Obudho and Foeken (1999) bibliography were to be updated today, certainly the number of publications would be found to be many times more the maximum recorded then. Much of this
remains as grey literature in the countries or offices of the donor organisations running programmes in those places.