Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 28 - 41, 29.01.2026

İbrahim Hakan Karataş , Bagonza Godfrey

https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757

Öz

Proje Numarası

TUBİTAK BİDEB 2219-2023-2

Kaynakça

  • African Union & Republic of Turkey. (2021, December). Declaration of the 3rd Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit: Enhanced Partnership for Common Development and Prosperity. Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit.
  • African Union Commission. (2014). Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy for Africa 2024 (STISA-2024). African Union. https://au.int/sites/default/files/newsevents/workingdocuments/33178-wd-stisa-english_-_final.pdf.
  • African Union Commission. (2015). Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want (Framework Document). Addis Ababa: African Union.
  • Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.
  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.
  • Buyuktanir Karacan, D. (2021). Science diplomacy as a foreign policy tool for Turkey and the ramifications of collaboration with the EU. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8, 49. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00722-z.
  • Cornell University, INSEAD, & World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO]. (2024). The Global Innovation Index 2024: Uganda. World Intellectual Property Organization. (Uganda ranked 121/133 globally). https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/global-innovation-index-2024/assets/67729/2000%20Global%20Innovation%20Index%202024_WEB3lite.pdf.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  • Daily Sabah. (2016, June 2). Turkey, Uganda strengthen business ties, contributing to East Africa’s welfare. https://www.dailysabah.com/business/2016/06/02/turkey-uganda-strengthen-business-ties-contributing-to-east-africas-welfare.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute. https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute (APRI). https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • East African Science and Technology Commission (EASTECO). (2022). East African Regional Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (2022–2033). Arusha: EASTECO Secretariat. https://repository.eac.int/handle/11671/24495.
  • England, K. V. L. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00080.x.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
  • Eyrice-Tepeciklioğlu, E. (2023). Beyond Summitry: The Role of Hard and Soft Power in Turkey’s Africa Strategy. In Africa and the Formation of the New System of International Relations—Vol. II: Beyond Summit Diplomacy: Cooperation with Africa in the Post-pandemic World (pp. 187-204). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  • Fedoroff, N. V. (2009). Science diplomacy in the 21st century. Cell, 136(1), 9-11. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(08)01636-X.
  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
  • Gluckman, P. D., Turekian, V. C., Grimes, R. W., & Kishi, T. (2017). Science Diplomacy: A pragmatic perspective from the inside. Science & Diplomacy, 6(4), 1–13. https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/sites/default/files/pragmatic_perspective_science_advice_dec2017_1.pdf.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2013). Uganda Vision 2040. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda. (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: National Planning Authority.
  • Gray, K., & Gills, B. K. (2016). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 37(4), 557-574.
  • Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi‐level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649.
  • Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: a state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158.
  • Lee, G. (2009). A theory of soft power and Korea's soft power strategy. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 21(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10163270902913962.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  • Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development, Uganda [MoFPED]. (2019). Science and Technology – Development Policy and Performance Portal. https://development.finance.go.ug/science-and-technology.
  • Ministry of Public Service, Uganda. (2024). Addendum to Circular Standing Instructions (CSI) No.14 of 2024; Revised Schedules 4-A and 5: Salary Structure for FY 2024/2025.
  • MSME Africa. (2022, June 2). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa. MSME Africa. https://msmeafricaonline.com/tika-carried-out-1884-projects-in-the-last-5-years-in-africa/.
  • Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs.
  • OECD. (2019). Policy coherence for sustainable development 2019: Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a90f851f-en.
  • Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities [YTB]. (2024). Türkiye Scholarships and Education Diplomacy Reports. https://www.ytb.gov.tr/en.
  • Royal Society. (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. RS Policy Document 01/10. https://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/New_Frontiers.pdf.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2017). Science and diplomacy: A new dimension of international relations. Springer.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2020). Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7, Article 124. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00609-5. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE Publications.
  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.
  • Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency [TİKA]. (2022, May 31). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa (Press Release). TİKA. https://tika.gov.tr/en/detail-tika_carried_out_1884_projects_in_the_last_5_years_in_africa/ .
  • Uganda Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [MoSTI]. (2017). Ministerial Policy Statement for Science, Technology and Innovation Sector FY2017/18. Kampala: MoSTI.
  • Uganda National Council for Science and Technology [UNCST)]. (2009). The National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. Kampala: UNCST.
  • UNESCO. (2020). Strengthening science, technology and innovation systems for sustainable development in Africa. UNESCO News (8 October 2020; updated 20 April 2023). https://www.unesco.org/en/recommendation-science/sti-africa (Highlights STI as key to SDGs and African development).
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review: Uganda. United Nations. ISBN: 9789211130102. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/dtlstict2020d4_en.pdf.
  • White, E., & Tonymon, L. (2019). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 40(6), 1145–1165.
  • World Bank. (2018). Uganda: Innovation for Uganda’s Development (Report No. ACS23305). Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 28 - 41, 29.01.2026

İbrahim Hakan Karataş , Bagonza Godfrey

https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757

Öz

Proje Numarası

TUBİTAK BİDEB 2219-2023-2

Kaynakça

  • African Union & Republic of Turkey. (2021, December). Declaration of the 3rd Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit: Enhanced Partnership for Common Development and Prosperity. Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit.
  • African Union Commission. (2014). Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy for Africa 2024 (STISA-2024). African Union. https://au.int/sites/default/files/newsevents/workingdocuments/33178-wd-stisa-english_-_final.pdf.
  • African Union Commission. (2015). Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want (Framework Document). Addis Ababa: African Union.
  • Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.
  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.
  • Buyuktanir Karacan, D. (2021). Science diplomacy as a foreign policy tool for Turkey and the ramifications of collaboration with the EU. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8, 49. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00722-z.
  • Cornell University, INSEAD, & World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO]. (2024). The Global Innovation Index 2024: Uganda. World Intellectual Property Organization. (Uganda ranked 121/133 globally). https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/global-innovation-index-2024/assets/67729/2000%20Global%20Innovation%20Index%202024_WEB3lite.pdf.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  • Daily Sabah. (2016, June 2). Turkey, Uganda strengthen business ties, contributing to East Africa’s welfare. https://www.dailysabah.com/business/2016/06/02/turkey-uganda-strengthen-business-ties-contributing-to-east-africas-welfare.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute. https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute (APRI). https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • East African Science and Technology Commission (EASTECO). (2022). East African Regional Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (2022–2033). Arusha: EASTECO Secretariat. https://repository.eac.int/handle/11671/24495.
  • England, K. V. L. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00080.x.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
  • Eyrice-Tepeciklioğlu, E. (2023). Beyond Summitry: The Role of Hard and Soft Power in Turkey’s Africa Strategy. In Africa and the Formation of the New System of International Relations—Vol. II: Beyond Summit Diplomacy: Cooperation with Africa in the Post-pandemic World (pp. 187-204). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  • Fedoroff, N. V. (2009). Science diplomacy in the 21st century. Cell, 136(1), 9-11. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(08)01636-X.
  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
  • Gluckman, P. D., Turekian, V. C., Grimes, R. W., & Kishi, T. (2017). Science Diplomacy: A pragmatic perspective from the inside. Science & Diplomacy, 6(4), 1–13. https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/sites/default/files/pragmatic_perspective_science_advice_dec2017_1.pdf.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2013). Uganda Vision 2040. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda. (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: National Planning Authority.
  • Gray, K., & Gills, B. K. (2016). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 37(4), 557-574.
  • Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi‐level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649.
  • Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: a state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158.
  • Lee, G. (2009). A theory of soft power and Korea's soft power strategy. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 21(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10163270902913962.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  • Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development, Uganda [MoFPED]. (2019). Science and Technology – Development Policy and Performance Portal. https://development.finance.go.ug/science-and-technology.
  • Ministry of Public Service, Uganda. (2024). Addendum to Circular Standing Instructions (CSI) No.14 of 2024; Revised Schedules 4-A and 5: Salary Structure for FY 2024/2025.
  • MSME Africa. (2022, June 2). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa. MSME Africa. https://msmeafricaonline.com/tika-carried-out-1884-projects-in-the-last-5-years-in-africa/.
  • Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs.
  • OECD. (2019). Policy coherence for sustainable development 2019: Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a90f851f-en.
  • Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities [YTB]. (2024). Türkiye Scholarships and Education Diplomacy Reports. https://www.ytb.gov.tr/en.
  • Royal Society. (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. RS Policy Document 01/10. https://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/New_Frontiers.pdf.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2017). Science and diplomacy: A new dimension of international relations. Springer.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2020). Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7, Article 124. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00609-5. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE Publications.
  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.
  • Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency [TİKA]. (2022, May 31). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa (Press Release). TİKA. https://tika.gov.tr/en/detail-tika_carried_out_1884_projects_in_the_last_5_years_in_africa/ .
  • Uganda Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [MoSTI]. (2017). Ministerial Policy Statement for Science, Technology and Innovation Sector FY2017/18. Kampala: MoSTI.
  • Uganda National Council for Science and Technology [UNCST)]. (2009). The National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. Kampala: UNCST.
  • UNESCO. (2020). Strengthening science, technology and innovation systems for sustainable development in Africa. UNESCO News (8 October 2020; updated 20 April 2023). https://www.unesco.org/en/recommendation-science/sti-africa (Highlights STI as key to SDGs and African development).
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review: Uganda. United Nations. ISBN: 9789211130102. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/dtlstict2020d4_en.pdf.
  • White, E., & Tonymon, L. (2019). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 40(6), 1145–1165.
  • World Bank. (2018). Uganda: Innovation for Uganda’s Development (Report No. ACS23305). Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 28 - 41, 29.01.2026

İbrahim Hakan Karataş , Bagonza Godfrey

https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757

Öz

This study examines Uganda’s Science, Technology, Innovation, Research and Development (STIRD) ecosystem within the intersecting policy contexts of national development strategies, East African regional frameworks, continental African Union (AU) agendas, and Türkiye’s emerging science diplomacy in Africa. The rationale stems from the growing need for policy coherence and strategic partnerships to effectively mobilise STI for sustainable development. The research aims to analyse Uganda’s STIRD policy architecture, assess its alignment with East African Countries (EAC) and AU strategies, and explore opportunities for trilateral cooperation with Türkiye. Employing a qualitative methodology, the study uses document analysis of over 30 key policy texts, including Uganda’s Vision 2040, the National STI Policy (2009), EAC’s Regional STI Policy (2022), STISA-2024, and Türkiye-Africa summit declarations. The findings reveal strong convergence in policy priorities—especially in agriculture, health, education, ICT, and industrial innovation—across Uganda, regional bodies, and Türkiye’s development engagements. However, gaps in implementation, coordination, and resource mobilisation persist. The study proposes strategic synthesis through trilateral STI initiatives, capacity-building partnerships, and institutional linkages to enhance coherence and impact. It concludes that science diplomacy, when strategically aligned, can bridge policy and development goals across multi-level governance.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uganda science diplomacy STIRD policy trilateral cooperation Türkiye–Africa relations.

Etik Beyan

Ethical Considerations This research adhered to ethical standards, including respect for participants' rights and confidentiality. The study was ethically approved by the Istanbul Medeniyet University Social and Humanities Ethics Board. AI Use Disclaimer The authors disclose the use of AI in the research process, manuscript preparation, and data analysis. Specifically, ChatGPT 4.5 was used as a tool to assist with proof reading of the research. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and ethical considerations of any AI-generated content included in the manuscript.

Destekleyen Kurum

This research was funded and supported by the TÜBİTAK BİDEB 2219 Postdoctoral Research Program, Term 2023-2.

Proje Numarası

TUBİTAK BİDEB 2219-2023-2

Kaynakça

  • African Union & Republic of Turkey. (2021, December). Declaration of the 3rd Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit: Enhanced Partnership for Common Development and Prosperity. Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit.
  • African Union Commission. (2014). Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy for Africa 2024 (STISA-2024). African Union. https://au.int/sites/default/files/newsevents/workingdocuments/33178-wd-stisa-english_-_final.pdf.
  • African Union Commission. (2015). Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want (Framework Document). Addis Ababa: African Union.
  • Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.
  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.
  • Buyuktanir Karacan, D. (2021). Science diplomacy as a foreign policy tool for Turkey and the ramifications of collaboration with the EU. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8, 49. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00722-z.
  • Cornell University, INSEAD, & World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO]. (2024). The Global Innovation Index 2024: Uganda. World Intellectual Property Organization. (Uganda ranked 121/133 globally). https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/global-innovation-index-2024/assets/67729/2000%20Global%20Innovation%20Index%202024_WEB3lite.pdf.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  • Daily Sabah. (2016, June 2). Turkey, Uganda strengthen business ties, contributing to East Africa’s welfare. https://www.dailysabah.com/business/2016/06/02/turkey-uganda-strengthen-business-ties-contributing-to-east-africas-welfare.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute. https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute (APRI). https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • East African Science and Technology Commission (EASTECO). (2022). East African Regional Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (2022–2033). Arusha: EASTECO Secretariat. https://repository.eac.int/handle/11671/24495.
  • England, K. V. L. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00080.x.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
  • Eyrice-Tepeciklioğlu, E. (2023). Beyond Summitry: The Role of Hard and Soft Power in Turkey’s Africa Strategy. In Africa and the Formation of the New System of International Relations—Vol. II: Beyond Summit Diplomacy: Cooperation with Africa in the Post-pandemic World (pp. 187-204). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  • Fedoroff, N. V. (2009). Science diplomacy in the 21st century. Cell, 136(1), 9-11. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(08)01636-X.
  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
  • Gluckman, P. D., Turekian, V. C., Grimes, R. W., & Kishi, T. (2017). Science Diplomacy: A pragmatic perspective from the inside. Science & Diplomacy, 6(4), 1–13. https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/sites/default/files/pragmatic_perspective_science_advice_dec2017_1.pdf.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2013). Uganda Vision 2040. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda. (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: National Planning Authority.
  • Gray, K., & Gills, B. K. (2016). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 37(4), 557-574.
  • Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi‐level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649.
  • Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: a state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158.
  • Lee, G. (2009). A theory of soft power and Korea's soft power strategy. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 21(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10163270902913962.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  • Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development, Uganda [MoFPED]. (2019). Science and Technology – Development Policy and Performance Portal. https://development.finance.go.ug/science-and-technology.
  • Ministry of Public Service, Uganda. (2024). Addendum to Circular Standing Instructions (CSI) No.14 of 2024; Revised Schedules 4-A and 5: Salary Structure for FY 2024/2025.
  • MSME Africa. (2022, June 2). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa. MSME Africa. https://msmeafricaonline.com/tika-carried-out-1884-projects-in-the-last-5-years-in-africa/.
  • Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs.
  • OECD. (2019). Policy coherence for sustainable development 2019: Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a90f851f-en.
  • Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities [YTB]. (2024). Türkiye Scholarships and Education Diplomacy Reports. https://www.ytb.gov.tr/en.
  • Royal Society. (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. RS Policy Document 01/10. https://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/New_Frontiers.pdf.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2017). Science and diplomacy: A new dimension of international relations. Springer.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2020). Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7, Article 124. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00609-5. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE Publications.
  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.
  • Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency [TİKA]. (2022, May 31). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa (Press Release). TİKA. https://tika.gov.tr/en/detail-tika_carried_out_1884_projects_in_the_last_5_years_in_africa/ .
  • Uganda Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [MoSTI]. (2017). Ministerial Policy Statement for Science, Technology and Innovation Sector FY2017/18. Kampala: MoSTI.
  • Uganda National Council for Science and Technology [UNCST)]. (2009). The National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. Kampala: UNCST.
  • UNESCO. (2020). Strengthening science, technology and innovation systems for sustainable development in Africa. UNESCO News (8 October 2020; updated 20 April 2023). https://www.unesco.org/en/recommendation-science/sti-africa (Highlights STI as key to SDGs and African development).
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review: Uganda. United Nations. ISBN: 9789211130102. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/dtlstict2020d4_en.pdf.
  • White, E., & Tonymon, L. (2019). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 40(6), 1145–1165.
  • World Bank. (2018). Uganda: Innovation for Uganda’s Development (Report No. ACS23305). Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

POLİTİKA VE DİPLOMASİ ARASINDA KÖPRÜ KURMAK: BÖLGESEL, KITASAL VE TÜRKİYE'NİN STRATEJİK BAĞLAMINDA UGANDA’NIN BİLİM, TEKNOLOJİ VE YENİLİKÇİLİK MANZARASI

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 28 - 41, 29.01.2026

İbrahim Hakan Karataş , Bagonza Godfrey

https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757

Öz

Bu çalışma, Uganda’nın Bilim, Teknoloji, İnovasyon, Araştırma ve Geliştirme (STIRD) ekosistemini; ulusal kalkınma stratejileri, Doğu Afrika bölgesel çerçeveleri, Afrika Birliği’nin (AU) kıtasal gündemleri ve Türkiye’nin Afrika’daki yükselen bilim diplomasisi gibi kesişen politika bağlamlarında incelemektedir. Bu çalışmanın gerekçesi, sürdürülebilir kalkınma için Bilim, Teknoloji ve İnovasyon’un (STI) etkin şekilde seferber edilebilmesi adına politika tutarlılığına ve stratejik ortaklıklara olan artan ihtiyaca dayanmaktadır. Araştırma, Uganda’nın STIRD politika yapısını analiz etmeyi, bu yapıların Doğu Afrika Topluluğu (EAC) ve Afrika Birliği stratejileriyle uyumunu değerlendirmeyi ve Türkiye ile üçlü iş birliği fırsatlarını keşfetmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Nitel bir metodoloji benimseyen çalışma; Uganda Vizyonu 2040, Ulusal STI Politikası (2009), EAC Bölgesel STI Politikası (2022), STISA-2024 ve Türkiye-Afrika zirvesi bildirileri gibi 30'dan fazla temel politika belgesinin doküman analizine dayanmaktadır. Bulgular, özellikle tarım, sağlık, eğitim, bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri (BİT) ve endüstriyel yenilik alanlarında; Uganda, bölgesel kuruluşlar ve Türkiye’nin kalkınma iş birlikleri arasında güçlü bir politika öncelikleri uyumu olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Ancak uygulama, koordinasyon ve kaynak mobilizasyonunda hâlâ önemli boşluklar bulunmaktadır. Çalışma, üçlü STI girişimleri, kapasite geliştirme ortaklıkları ve kurumsal bağlantılar yoluyla stratejik bir sentez önererek politika tutarlılığının ve etkinliğinin artırılmasını önermektedir. Sonuç olarak, stratejik olarak hizalanmış bilim diplomasisinin, çok katmanlı yönetişim düzeylerinde politika ve kalkınma hedefleri arasında köprü kurabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uganda bilim diplomasisi STIRD politikası üçlü iş birliği Türkiye–Afrika ilişkileri

Proje Numarası

TUBİTAK BİDEB 2219-2023-2

Kaynakça

  • African Union & Republic of Turkey. (2021, December). Declaration of the 3rd Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit: Enhanced Partnership for Common Development and Prosperity. Africa–Türkiye Partnership Summit.
  • African Union Commission. (2014). Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy for Africa 2024 (STISA-2024). African Union. https://au.int/sites/default/files/newsevents/workingdocuments/33178-wd-stisa-english_-_final.pdf.
  • African Union Commission. (2015). Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want (Framework Document). Addis Ababa: African Union.
  • Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.
  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.
  • Buyuktanir Karacan, D. (2021). Science diplomacy as a foreign policy tool for Turkey and the ramifications of collaboration with the EU. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8, 49. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00722-z.
  • Cornell University, INSEAD, & World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO]. (2024). The Global Innovation Index 2024: Uganda. World Intellectual Property Organization. (Uganda ranked 121/133 globally). https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/global-innovation-index-2024/assets/67729/2000%20Global%20Innovation%20Index%202024_WEB3lite.pdf.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  • Daily Sabah. (2016, June 2). Turkey, Uganda strengthen business ties, contributing to East Africa’s welfare. https://www.dailysabah.com/business/2016/06/02/turkey-uganda-strengthen-business-ties-contributing-to-east-africas-welfare.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute. https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • Dal, E. P., & Dipama, S. (2023). Assessing Turkey–Africa engagements (Policy Brief No. PB023/03). Africa Policy Research Institute (APRI). https://doi.org/10.59184/pb023.03.
  • East African Science and Technology Commission (EASTECO). (2022). East African Regional Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (2022–2033). Arusha: EASTECO Secretariat. https://repository.eac.int/handle/11671/24495.
  • England, K. V. L. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00080.x.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
  • Eyrice-Tepeciklioğlu, E. (2023). Beyond Summitry: The Role of Hard and Soft Power in Turkey’s Africa Strategy. In Africa and the Formation of the New System of International Relations—Vol. II: Beyond Summit Diplomacy: Cooperation with Africa in the Post-pandemic World (pp. 187-204). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  • Fedoroff, N. V. (2009). Science diplomacy in the 21st century. Cell, 136(1), 9-11. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(08)01636-X.
  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
  • Gluckman, P. D., Turekian, V. C., Grimes, R. W., & Kishi, T. (2017). Science Diplomacy: A pragmatic perspective from the inside. Science & Diplomacy, 6(4), 1–13. https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/sites/default/files/pragmatic_perspective_science_advice_dec2017_1.pdf.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2013). Uganda Vision 2040. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda, National Planning Authority (NPA). (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: NPA.
  • Government of Uganda. (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21 – 2024/25. Kampala: National Planning Authority.
  • Gray, K., & Gills, B. K. (2016). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 37(4), 557-574.
  • Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi‐level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649.
  • Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: a state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158.
  • Lee, G. (2009). A theory of soft power and Korea's soft power strategy. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 21(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10163270902913962.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  • Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development, Uganda [MoFPED]. (2019). Science and Technology – Development Policy and Performance Portal. https://development.finance.go.ug/science-and-technology.
  • Ministry of Public Service, Uganda. (2024). Addendum to Circular Standing Instructions (CSI) No.14 of 2024; Revised Schedules 4-A and 5: Salary Structure for FY 2024/2025.
  • MSME Africa. (2022, June 2). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa. MSME Africa. https://msmeafricaonline.com/tika-carried-out-1884-projects-in-the-last-5-years-in-africa/.
  • Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs.
  • OECD. (2019). Policy coherence for sustainable development 2019: Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a90f851f-en.
  • Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities [YTB]. (2024). Türkiye Scholarships and Education Diplomacy Reports. https://www.ytb.gov.tr/en.
  • Royal Society. (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. RS Policy Document 01/10. https://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/New_Frontiers.pdf.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2017). Science and diplomacy: A new dimension of international relations. Springer.
  • Ruffini, P. B. (2020). Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven literature: a critical review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7, Article 124. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00609-5. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE Publications.
  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.
  • Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency [TİKA]. (2022, May 31). TİKA carried out 1884 projects in the last 5 years in Africa (Press Release). TİKA. https://tika.gov.tr/en/detail-tika_carried_out_1884_projects_in_the_last_5_years_in_africa/ .
  • Uganda Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [MoSTI]. (2017). Ministerial Policy Statement for Science, Technology and Innovation Sector FY2017/18. Kampala: MoSTI.
  • Uganda National Council for Science and Technology [UNCST)]. (2009). The National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. Kampala: UNCST.
  • UNESCO. (2020). Strengthening science, technology and innovation systems for sustainable development in Africa. UNESCO News (8 October 2020; updated 20 April 2023). https://www.unesco.org/en/recommendation-science/sti-africa (Highlights STI as key to SDGs and African development).
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review: Uganda. United Nations. ISBN: 9789211130102. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/dtlstict2020d4_en.pdf.
  • White, E., & Tonymon, L. (2019). South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 40(6), 1145–1165.
  • World Bank. (2018). Uganda: Innovation for Uganda’s Development (Report No. ACS23305). Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Toplam 44 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Afrika Çalışmaları
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

İbrahim Hakan Karataş 0000-0001-5569-014X

Bagonza Godfrey Bu kişi benim 0000-0001-5421-7000

Proje Numarası TUBİTAK BİDEB 2219-2023-2
Gönderilme Tarihi 19 Haziran 2025
Kabul Tarihi 20 Ekim 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Ocak 2026
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2026 Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Karataş, İ. H., & Godfrey, B. (2026). Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context. Africania, 6(1), 28-41. https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757
AMA 1.Karataş İH, Godfrey B. Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context. Africania. 2026;6(1):28-41. doi:10.58851/africania.1722757
Chicago Karataş, İbrahim Hakan, ve Bagonza Godfrey. 2026. “Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context”. Africania 6 (1): 28-41. https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757.
EndNote Karataş İH, Godfrey B (01 Ocak 2026) Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context. Africania 6 1 28–41.
IEEE [1]İ. H. Karataş ve B. Godfrey, “Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context”, Africania, c. 6, sy 1, ss. 28–41, Oca. 2026, doi: 10.58851/africania.1722757.
ISNAD Karataş, İbrahim Hakan - Godfrey, Bagonza. “Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context”. Africania 6/1 (01 Ocak 2026): 28-41. https://doi.org/10.58851/africania.1722757.
JAMA 1.Karataş İH, Godfrey B. Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context. Africania. 2026;6:28–41.
MLA Karataş, İbrahim Hakan, ve Bagonza Godfrey. “Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context”. Africania, c. 6, sy 1, Ocak 2026, ss. 28-41, doi:10.58851/africania.1722757.
Vancouver 1.Karataş İH, Godfrey B. Bridging Policy and Diplomacy: Uganda’s STIRD Landscape in Regional, Continental and Türkiye’s Strategic Context. Africania [Internet]. 01 Ocak 2026;6(1):28-41. Erişim adresi: https://izlik.org/JA67DU95HR