1 Introduction

Knowledge production is the practice of creating, researching, analyzing and documenting critical ideas that can provide some observation about worldly phenomena (Nketia 2019). However, the idea that knowledge is infused with power and politics may sound abstract. Academia has been characterized as traditional, hierarchical and selective, founded on patriarchal, imperial and colonial values that construct and maintain gendered roles and regulations (Phillips, Dzidic and Castell 2022). This has been observed to disadvantage how women experience, and identify within, academia. African women’s narratives about their journeys show how power and the politics of knowledge are intrinsically linked to gender (Chege 2006). Thus, intellectual work is understood as the work of those in positions of power.

Despite the adage that “knowledge is power”, insofar as knowledge arms you with the capacity to make better, more informed choices in the world, power also determines who and what can be known and who is allowed to be a “knower”. In this way, power is knowledge. Much of the work of feminist intellectuals, then, has been to disrupt all the ways in which institutionalized patriarchy has denied, invisibilized and exploited the very necessary and longstanding intellectual work of women and minoritized communities (Nketia 2019: 1).

Gender disparities in higher education institutions is a global phenomenon (Davidson and Burke 2004; Airini et al. 2011). The relatively low numbers of women enrolled in universities and employed as faculty members is a starting point for understanding patriarchal university cultures. As Guzura (2012) observes, women’s limited participation in knowledge production should be viewed from a colonial context, which was further reinforced by patriarchy. Oyèrónkẹ́ Oyěwùmí, in her work The Invention of Women: Making an African Sense of Western Gender Discourses (1997) critically examines how colonialism influenced and shaped gender identities in Africa. She argues that Western gender categories were imposed on African societies, leading to the marginalization of women and the erasure of indigenous gender roles (Oyěwùmí 1997).

Another important perspective comes from Mahmood Mamdani, particularly in his book Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism (1996). Mamdani discusses how colonial policies created new forms of authority and governance, often relying on existing power structures, which were predominantly male-dominated. The debate around the extent to which African men collaborated in marginalizing women during colonialism is ongoing, and scholarship on the subject continues to evolve. Some argue that blaming colonialism should not absolve African societies from addressing internal issues of patriarchy and gender inequality. Others emphasize the need to recognize the nuanced ways in which colonial legacies continue to impact on gender dynamics in contemporary Africa.

In this chapter, I examine the ways in which power and politics circulate in Africa’s institutions of higher learning, undermining radical feminist projects where they exist, or excluding conversations altogether through institutional norms and practices (Tsikata 2007). It is worth noting that African feminists have been instrumental in shaping nationalist independence movements across the continent and the struggle against patriarchal violence and global economic imperialism that threatens the lives of women and girls in their communities. And yet, despite these long intellectual traditions across Africa and its diasporas, there is still a perception that African women do not have the time for, or are disinterested/disengaged from, intellectual labour.

The chapter also explores the challenges faced by women in academia as a result of the institutional cultures of African universities. Mama (2005) observes that Africa’s universities remain steeped in patriarchal perspectives; women are generally vastly outnumbered and their intellectual contribution is relegated to the fringes or steadfastly ignored. African feminists who have historically engaged in intellectual labour have been accused of being Westernized elitists (Nketia 2019). Certainly, this seems a betrayal for any well-intentioned African female intellectual engaged in this labour in pursuit of social justice for her people.

The history of African feminist organizing was understandably assumed to be anti-intellectual. That is to say, our feminist foremothers did not have the luxury or access to pursue seemingly bourgeois endeavours like “research” or “theory”. African women were said to be more concerned with “pressing issues”, such as poverty, disease and nation-building and development. And the Indigenous knowledge they may have accessed on a daily basis was not considered “intellectual work” – it was simply the way they did things based on their spiritual inner life. Besides these misunderstandings, the identity of the intellectual was often masculinized, creating a perception that African women did not have the mental acumen to engage in the male-dominated world of knowledge production (Nketia 2019: 1).

Finally, I look at feminist perspectives to examine the marginalization or exclusion of women from knowledge production, and propose strategies that can contribute to a more equitable and inclusive academic environment that values diverse perspectives and ensures that knowledge production is not only gender-sensitive but also actively works towards dismantling systemic gender inequalities. I argue that in the context of limited funding resources and lack of institutional and public support, feminist knowledge production in the region is almost fully dependent on the personal commitment of local scholars. Without this, many are discouraged from articulating and defending feminist ideas, methods and approaches within a gender-hostile academic and sociopolitical environment.

2 Gender and the Politics of Knowledge Production

Unlike industrialized countries, where significant research takes place in specialized types of institutions, in Africa most research is conducted in universities, which are thus the main sites where research knowledge is dispensed, acquired and produced (Assié-Lumumba 2006). Intellectuals have argued that for many years the continent’s universities and school systems in general reproduce(d) their colonial legacy. In other words, although the overwhelming majority of institutions of higher learning in Africa today were created after their nations acquired independence, the current landscape and practices of higher education essentially still reflect the colonial legacies (Kessi, Marks and Ramugondo 2020). This situation puts Africa at a disadvantage, because within these institutions of higher learning its scholars follow and imitate the Western education paradigm that emanated from European/Western organic evolution.

Although Africans in general had limited access to education in the colonial era, the situation seems to have been worse for women (Chege 2006). A second layer of colonial education was the drive to contain African women through deliberate policies of “domestication”, purposeful exclusion and marginalization by means of carefully designed programmes and institutions with less-valued formal/non-formal education (Assié-Lumumba 2006).

Further, women’s ability to pursue education has been constrained by a lack of financial resources and support. Many parents in Africa have for a long time preferred to educate a boy child, and not a girl child who will get married and thus be considered not to benefit the family. Therefore, women are often forced to depend on their male counterparts in decision-making from an early stage in the educational sector, where they are often subordinated to men (Zvavahera et al. 2021).

As a result, simple observation, scientific/empirical research, academic publications and various types of reports show that African women are overwhelmingly underrepresented in institutions of higher learning, with two main contributing factors: their underrepresentation in the formal system, and their larger number in the Indigenous system that has endured different forms of “epistemicide” (Paraskeva 2016), in which local knowledge has been deemed irrelevant and targeted for suppression.

Aina (2010) observed that although some institutions have formally complied with gender equity goals by increasing numbers of female students and faculties, their institutional cultures continue to be male-dominated, with entrenched male-privileged relations of power and governance and a refusal to accept feminist scholarship as part of teaching programmes. Several factors contribute to the way gender dynamics shape the production, dissemination and recognition of knowledge in academia. For example, the underrepresentation of women in academic positions, particularly in senior and leadership roles, limits women’s influence in shaping research agendas, curricula and institutional policies related to knowledge production (Aina 2010). The individuals and groups with the power to set research agendas often influence the direction of knowledge production. If decision-makers are predominantly male and hold certain perspectives, it may result in a bias towards topics that align with those perspectives, potentially marginalizing research on issues relevant to women or gender. The recognition and visibility of scholarly work is crucial for academic career progression (Zvavahera et al. 2021). Gender biases may affect the evaluation and visibility of women’s contributions to knowledge production, leading to disparities in promotions, awards and other forms of recognition.

Furthermore, gender bias can manifest in publishing and citation practices, where female scholars face challenges in having their work published or cited at the same rates as their male counterparts. This can impact their academic reputation and career advancement. Moreover, collaborative research is common in academia and power dynamics within research teams can influence whose perspectives are prioritized and whose voices are heard. Women may face challenges in asserting their views or having their contributions overlooked. There may be a gendered division of labour in academia, with women often undertaking more teaching and administrative responsibilities than men. This can limit the time and resources available for women to engage in research and knowledge production (Rathgeber 2013).

Institutional policies related to research funding, grant allocation and tenure can have gendered implications. If these policies are not gender-sensitive, they may inadvertently disadvantage women in their pursuit of research opportunities and career advancement (Zvavahera et al. 2021). Gender stereotypes and biases may influence perceptions of competence and expertise. As a result, female scholars may have to overcome additional hurdles to have their ideas taken seriously or to be seen as leaders in their fields (Onsongo 2006).

Addressing the gender and politics of knowledge production in African higher education requires concerted efforts at various levels. Institutions need to adopt and enforce policies that promote gender equality in hiring, promotion and resource allocation. Efforts should be made to diversify academic leadership and decision-making bodies to ensure a variety of perspectives are considered. Establishing mentorship programmes and support networks for women in academia can help address challenges related to career progression and knowledge production. The curriculum should be critically examined to determine that it reflects diverse perspectives and addresses gender-related issues. Establishing equal access to research funding and resources is crucial for promoting a more inclusive and equitable research environment. By addressing these issues, institutions can contribute to a more equitable and inclusive academic environment, fostering a diverse range of perspectives and enhancing the overall quality and relevance of knowledge production.

The following sections explore how the social relations of gender and institutional structures in Africa’s institutions of higher learning influence women’s entry, retention and progression in their careers and knowledge production.

3 Gender and Institutional Cultures

The university is a social space, where matters of governance and leadership significantly affect knowledge production and transfer. Knowledge production, much like other areas of human life, is laden with power relations. Thus, knowledge production is never neutral, neither is it objective nor power free (Chege 2006). Organizational and institutional cultures of African universities, like those of Western-style universities in general, were established to meet the needs of male faculty and students (Rathgeber 2013). Patterns of leadership, beliefs, symbols, structures, ceremonies, power and information flow (Carroll and Mills 2006) are modelled on masculine expectations and experiences. Gender inequalities abound in various aspects of life: in gender-blind governance policies; student, worker and faculty numbers; and institutional cultures that objectify women as sexual (Britwum, Oduro and Prah 2015).

Mama writes that women have never been excluded from Africa’s post-independence universities, a fact to be proud of. However, one cannot take pride in the fact that universities have remained highly male-dominated spaces, culturally and numerically (Mama and Barnes 2007). Morley (2005) affirms that, globally, very little is being done to promote the participation of women in knowledge production in institutions of higher learning. Some of the challenges that female researchers face pertains to lack of support from their universities and peers (Fathima et al. 2020).

The contests around gender in the African university are evident not only in management, curricular and pedagogical issues. Sadly, they also involve the bodily expressions of inequitable power relations. Attention is increasingly being paid to the prevalence of sexual harassment and gender-based violence (GBV) on African campuses (Zvavahera et al. 2021). This can be explained by the fact that many African societies, traditionally, have been patriarchal, with men holding positions of authority and power. This power dynamic can contribute to the normalization of male dominance and control over women, potentially fostering an environment conducive to sexual harassment and GBV. Also, traditional cultural values that prescribe certain behaviours and characteristics as masculine or feminine may lead to toxic masculinity, which can contribute to the perpetuation of aggressive and violent behaviour, including sexual harassment (Aina 2010).

In their examination of institutional cultures and the career trajectories of female faculty, Odejide (2007), Prah (2002) and Tsikata (2007) noted differences in the experiences of respondents relating to the existence of a gender climate capable of slowing down women’s academic progression. Women’s disadvantage with regard to time availability for their careers is particularly related to marriage and child-bearing, which for the majority occurs while they are still in postgraduate education (Beoku-Betts 2004). In most African contexts, women are socially identified as wives, mothers and carers, and spend on average significantly more time caring for children and the elderly than men (Beoku-Betts 2004).

Reproductive responsibilities reduce many women’s opportunities to take up options to study or work internationally, which can be an important source of academic capital and networks that support progression. For example, a study in Rwanda reported that many women “stuck” at junior levels turn down scholarships for studying abroad because of concerns about the impact on their marriage or having young children whom they are unable to leave behind as a result of lack of support at home (Masanja 2010). Professional women are therefore constrained in competing with their male counterparts in terms of allocating time to activities that contribute to career progression, such as grant- and scientific-writing and publication (Beoku-Betts 2004). Since women are expected to play their traditional gender roles in the family, it becomes difficult to balance work and family life (Ngure et al. 2016).

There is empirical evidence for how gender power relations within academic institutions further intersect with gender power relations within the family and wider society to disadvantage women, in ways that may be exacerbated or mediated by other social power relations (Liani, Nyamongo and Tolhurst 2020). Institutional power relations are manifested in operational policies and power structures (formal rules); institutional practices and culture (informal rules); access to the necessary research infrastructure or resources; and inclusion in and expectations of research activities (Liani et al. 2020). Studies contend that female faculty advancement in academia is militated against by various sociocultural and structural factors, such as multiple roles, gender stereotypes, feelings of isolation and discriminatory promotional rules (Kanake 1998; Curtis 2011; Zimmer 2003).

Nonetheless, Onsongo (2006) points out that there is no open discrimination in the university, but subtle discrimination, disguised in promotion procedures and organization culture. Onsongo further observes that requirements for advancement include high academic credentials, lengthy service and productivity (publishing articles, journals and writing books). Morley (2005) affirms that very little is being done to promote the participation of women in institutions of higher learning in Africa. Gender discrimination can manifest in many forms: for instance, limited access to resources, fewer opportunities and assignment to inferior roles like teaching and supervising in undergraduate programmes. Gender discrimination is, thus, the worst impediment to the progress of female researchers in Africa.

Despite increased publicity and discussions surrounding the inequalities that women face in the workplace, there remains a tremendous amount of work to be done to close the gender gap, especially in university management (Onyambu 2019). Women are rare in senior management posts because of the normative masculinity of management (K’Odipo 2013), which is attributed to the fact that, in the past, top management and leadership positions in African countries carried the notion of masculinity and the overall belief that men make better managers and leaders than women (Kiamba 2008). Little wonder that there is a wide gender gap in university Senate (the highest decision-making body that brings together senior academic and administrative staff of the university).

This critical finding supports Mutunga’s (2015) assertion that women’s low participation in decision-making is as a result of low academic and professional qualifications, confining them to lower level academic and administrative positions. Thus, it is clear that the traditional societal conventions regarding gender and institutional management have always excluded women from occupying managerial positions (Maurtin-Cairncross 2014). Even in contemporary times, culturally, in most African societies it is believed that men should lead and women must oblige (Kiamba 2006).

Finding an appropriate balance between career and family is problematic for many female academics. A study of economists in Ghana and Liberia found that women cited family responsibilities as the single greatest obstacle to their professional growth. The Association of African Universities’ (AAU) Gender Mainstreaming Toolkit (2006) observed that, in most African societies, women were considered “home builders” and had a higher level of responsibility for their children and homes than their husbands. The disadvantaged position of women was reinforced through negative stereotypes towards their abilities. For example, they were seen as unmotivated, incompetent and likely to leave institutions prematurely. Yet, when women portrayed masculine traits like assertiveness and independence, they were negatively assessed (Williams, Phillips and Hall 2015).

The paucity of women in the leadership levels of HEI s compounds the lack of gender-responsive policies. Where there are policies in place, their translation into practice is not adequately or effectively done or monitored, resulting in the maintenance of the status quo (Forum for African Women Educationalists [FAWE] 2015). Without bodies or persons designated to ensuring that these policies are acted upon, they often remain reference documents that are used to show that efforts have been made to address gender inequality rather than demonstrating commitment to action (FAWE 2015). Women’s capacity to participate in and influence the decisions that affect their lives – from the household to the highest levels of political decision-making – is a basic human right and a prerequisite for responsive and equitable governance. Increasing women’s representation and participation at all levels is essential for advancing issues of importance to women on national and local agendas.

Studies have shown that even though academic institutional cultures in many African contexts are visibly opening up to women’s participation they continue to perpetuate working cultures that are not favourable to women’s social and cultural experiences (Mabokela and Mlambo 2015). The literature that exists suggests that gaining an academic position in an African university is challenging for women and that maintaining it is even more difficult (Barnes 2007). This has been matched by a lack of respect demonstrated to them in what Morley and others have termed micropolitics – the “subtext of organizational life in which conflicts, tensions, resentments, competing interests and power imbalances influence everyday transactions in institutions” (Morley 1999: 25).

Reflecting on their early career experiences in a public university in Ghana, female participants in a study stated that they experienced some form of belittling or discrediting as women, including a female assistant professor being addressed as “Mrs” whereas male colleagues were addressed as “Doctor” (Beoku-Betts 2005: 16). The gender relations of family are also carried over into the workplace. Female academics reported that male colleagues took a negative attitude towards women who prioritized their careers over marriage and family obligations (Beoku-Betts 2005), and undermined their status and expertise by expecting them to “serve them like their wives would at home” (Mabokela 2003: 22).

Many women face obstacles in the pursuit of academic careers and in achieving promotion once they have been hired (Liani et al. 2020). To some extent, the concentration of women in the lower academic ranks can be explained by the fact that they tend to take longer to complete their PhDs, spend less time on research and often have fewer publications. Research in Kenya found that men were promoted more quickly than women, especially in public universities, even when they had joined the university at the same time and at the same rank. Interview panels for promotion are usually male-dominated, and female candidates for managerial or professorial positions are often subjected to irrelevant, gender-biased questions (Onsongo 2006).

In Kenya, several studies have identified the importance of male power and patronage networks in promotion decisions (Raburu 2011), which include non-merit factors, such as tribalism, nepotism and political loyalties (Onsongo 2006). Female candidates for academic positions sometimes endure harassment from senior male faculty members who are hostile to women. The promotion criteria also disadvantage female faculty in placing more focus on research at the expense of teaching and postgraduate student supervision activities, which faculty members engage in on daily basis (Malelu et al. 2017).

Traditionally, women also do not get support from their male counterparts or their employing institutions (Cohn et al. 2014). Social and professional capital and networks, including peer groups/collegial networks, mentors and role models, are highly influential in scientific career progression (Liani et al. 2020). Empirical evidence suggests that, compared to men, women tend to have weaker social capital and networks, particularly as a result of limited mobility for conference attendance because of their reproductive responsibilities (Obers 2015). Nixon (2017) observed that female academicians lack access to influential organizations and informal career networks, whereas men have learned the unwritten rules of success. Women face exclusion in such networks through overt ridicule when informal meetings are held in social places traditionally perceived not fit for women, such as bars. This perception of women has affected their access to research funding and mentorship by their male counterparts and superiors who make decisions on these matters.

In addition to the constraints on taking up networking opportunities, “old boy” networks tend to exclude women when discussing career progression matters such as promotions and scholarships informally over lunch or evening drinks, as reported by a study in Kenya (Raburu 2015). Men also want to co-author and publish with other men, which leaves women with no male mentors and so they end up publishing alone. Unequal access to research funding and resources can limit women’s ability to engage in knowledge production. If women face challenges in securing research grants or accessing the necessary facilities, it can hinder their contribution to academic scholarship (Rathgeber 2013).

However, it is also important to appreciate how managers in African universities argue for or against this exclusionist atmosphere and condition. And their perspectives are varied, based on several factors, including institutional culture, local context and individual beliefs. Some managers may argue that maintaining certain exclusionist practices is essential for preserving cultural or traditional values within the institution as well as for contributing to stability and order within the university, suggesting that a more homogeneous environment might be easier to manage. Others may argue that limited resources, financial and infrastructural, necessitate focusing on specific priorities, potentially leading to exclusionary practices (Assié-Lumumba 1996).

Even with these kinds of arguments, it is important to note that there are managers who have made strides in creating diverse and inclusive environments, by fostering creativity, critical thinking and a broader range of perspectives among students and staff. This is as a result of the need for African universities to be globally competitive and the fact that inclusivity can attract a diverse pool of talent, including international students and faculty. The arguments may also be based on legal and ethical grounds, as mandated in national and international laws that promote equal rights and opportunities in education, for example (Teferra and Altbach 2004).

Gender issues in African higher education are thus complex and require and deserve further study. As discussed above, a variety of initiatives have been implemented to remedy this unhealthy scenario. Although a few of these initiatives have been productive, others have yet to achieve any real change. These initiatives continue to be plagued by subtle resistance, implicit and explicit oversight, a lack of serious recognition, and ignorance.

The following section discusses feminist perspectives in knowledge production and proposes strategies that may contribute to a more equitable and inclusive academic environment – one that values diverse perspectives and ensures that knowledge production is not only gender-sensitive but also actively works towards dismantling systemic gender inequalities.

4 Feminist Perspectives and Knowledge Production

While addressing gender issues in education and knowledge production, the role of feminist thinking in shaping the theory of equality and equity cannot be ignored. Feminism is a global phenomenon that addresses various issues related to women across the world in a specific manner as applicable to a particular culture or society (Mama 2017). Feminist theory is an approach to understanding and conceptualizing gender roles and advocates for the inclusion of women’s interests in social organization. It is an understanding of gender inequality in structural and systematic terms and is committed to a transformation of intersectionally unequal power relations (Bustelo, Ferguson and Forest 2016; Stachowitsch 2018). Feminist knowledge as we see it is also situated, plural, political and contested, reflexive and a product of engagement by feminist researchers, practitioners and activists (Bustelo et al. 2016; Stachowitsch 2018).

I chose to write from a feminist perspective because feminist theories, first of all, explain and suggest directions for change in social and environmental factors that create or contribute to dilemmas and problems experienced by women. Second, they explain and propose interventions for women’s intrapersonal and interpersonal concerns. Third, feminist theories provide a perspective for evaluating social and environmental experiences of groups and individuals, regardless of sex or gender. The emphasis placed on each of these three areas, along with the centrality of additional factors that influence marginalization, oppression and unwarranted constraints, depends on which feminist theory is used (Okoli 2021).

There are different strands of feminism (liberal, radical and Marxist), all acknowledging patriarchy as an oppressive force against women’s freedom but varying in relation to how to create possibilities of change (Haralambos and Holborn 2000; Ramazanoglu and Holland 2002). All agree on the importance of gender equality but they disagree on how to achieve it (Freedman 2002).

The first wave of feminism, liberal feminism, emerged in the early 1900s and advocated primarily for the equal rights of women (Ramazanoglu and Holland 2002). Liberal feminists were concerned with women’s rights in the public spheres, such as receiving fairer access to education and careers (Delamont 2003). According to Haralambos and Holborn (2000), liberal feminism aims for gradual change in the political, economic and social systems of Western societies, with a focus on its cultures and the attitudes of individuals rather than on structures and institutions. Liberal feminism, however, ignores racial and class oppression and fails to address the entrenched nature of patriarchy. It fails to analyze the innate levels of oppression and discrimination that are perpetuated by major patriarchal institutions within society. By not addressing this power issue, it fails to acknowledge the varying degrees of women’s oppression (Haralambos and Holborn 2000).

The emergence of Marxist and radical feminism sought to improve women’s rights through empowerment, emancipation and transformation (Delamont 2003; Hughes 2002). Radical feminism brought to light the idea of “the personal is political” (Morley 1999: 3), a strong commitment to understanding a woman’s personal experience in relationship to existing power structures and the oppressive forces within society at large. Marxist feminism does not attribute women’s exploitation entirely to men, but sees capitalism as the principal source of women’s oppression rather than patriarchy. Like radical feminism, it views women’s unpaid work as housewives and mothers as one of the main ways in which women are exploited. Marxist feminists desire a revolutionary change, a society where gender inequalities disappear (Haralambos and Holborn 2000). Marxist feminists further believe that women’s oppression is a consequence of capitalism and that their role within the family keeps them in a dependent position (Delamont 2003).

The realization that women’s experiences are to a large extent influenced by their location and context has led to feminists like Spivak (2000) advocating the use of different feminist perspectives in the analysis of women’s oppression. The diversity of women’s location has meant that feminists have developed different strategies to overcome their oppression. This has led to the emergence of other feminist perspectives, such as postcolonial feminism, postmodern feminism and African feminism (Beasley 1999). This paper draws on African feminism because there are certain aspects of African culture that continue to play an important role in determining women’s participation in the continent’s social, economic and political development. Another reason for drawing on African feminism is that, often, assumptions are made – especially in early Western feminist writing – which imply that women in low-income countries lack organized forms of addressing issues that affect women (Mama 2017).

It is important to highlight the diversity in African feminism, just as there are different strands in Western feminism. Nnaemeka (2005) observes that the plurality of African feminism reflects the fluidity and dynamism of the cultural imperatives, historical forces and localized realities that condition women’s activities and movement in Africa. However, Nnaemeka (2005) further notes that there are commonalities, too, and shared beliefs among the different African feminisms. Because African feminism is based on African culture and is resistant to Western feminism, it has different characteristics and objectives. For example, African feminism is distinctly pro-natal, meaning that African feminism values the reproductive roles of women, and the ability to give birth is not considered subordinate to other roles women play in society (Mikell 1997). This pro-natal aspect is reflected in the fact that, in many parts of Africa, women strive to bear and rear children in addition to having economic and political roles (Mikell 1997).

Whereas Western feminism tends to emphasize autonomy for women, African feminism has tended to emphasize culturally linked communal forms of public participation (Tamale and Oloka-Onyango 2000). The language of African feminism is one of collaboration and negotiation with men and sometimes involves a compromise. It therefore “does not seek to disrupt, deconstruct and eliminate patriarchy as is advocated by radical western feminism” (Nnaemeka 2005: 6). The underlying framework for African feminism points out that the forces of patriarchy that pervade most African societies skew the balance of rights to mainstream development in favour of the male gender (Tamale and Oloka-Onyango 2000).

Although there have been attempts to redefine the concept of gender in African development, to include more than the direct and overt violations of the rights of women, these have been hindered by the dominant patriarchal ideologies of governments and communities (Mama 2006). However, postcolonial feminism in Africa is characterized by the fight against male domination and inequality. It is typified by the fight against gender-based violence and traditional practices that are harmful to women, and promotes property and inheritance rights, equality in education and equal participation in governance. A major tool is advocacy, lobbying and activism. It was during this era (between 1975 and 1985) that the African continent noticed the springing up of several civil society groups and non-governmental organizations that sought to promote the rights of women (Olutayo and Yalley 2019). The line of argument in this paper has been to identify and discuss the impact of the various feminist movements in Africa on knowledge production.

University education is an ideal environment for the production of scholarship on women’s and gender issues. Women’s studies was the academic arm of the women’s movement in the 1960s and still exists in tandem with feminist scholarship. It is a key example of a new intellectual arena emerging in many universities in Africa. Women’s studies functions to develop a woman-oriented understanding of the world, to seek out the causalities for the oppression of women and examine the strategies for change. The field has been motivated to transform society in order to achieve equality for women (Mama 1996). Gender studies emerged out of women’s studies. Feminists, especially liberal feminists, contended that the total liberation, equality and development of women can best be achieved when men and women are considered in the development process. Thus, the philosophy of gender and development has become prominent in the quest for women’s development (Olutayo and Yalley 2019).

It is important to note that numerous universities have made efforts to increase the participation of women as students and faculty members. Often, these efforts have come as a result of lobbying and activism by feminists. Affirmative action strategies undertaken by public universities have included reducing the entrance requirements for women; providing remedial courses for women; and/or providing financial assistance specifically for female students. However, assessments of the value of affirmative action strategies have been mixed. On one hand, they have led to slightly higher levels of female participation, but on the other hand they have sometimes backfired, with men accusing women of favouritism and female intellectual inferiority (Pereira 2017).

Despite the growth in feminist scholarship, masculinist thought continues to dominate intellectual work and this has restricted the character of knowledge produced. Gender continues to be absent from the analysis and this is seen, firstly, by simply not placing women’s presence and concerns on the agenda of intellectual work or by doing so in ways that are limiting and distorted. Secondly, it involves ignoring how masculinities may be inscribed in structures, processes and practices of domination. Pereira (2017) notes that most scholars show astoundingly little or no awareness of concepts and perspectives that arise out of feminist scholarship. Contributions also reflect highly uneven levels of gender awareness, with only one or two writers demonstrating far more sensitivity than most to theory and concepts that focus on gender. What this suggests is that feminist thought and imagination are permeating the work of some among the present generation of scholars but remains relatively rare. It is important to acknowledge the potential for feminist scholarship to transform the ways in which African realities are understood, with attendant implications for progressive social change. However, this possibility has patently not materialized, despite the rapid expansion of feminist intellectual work inside and outside the academy since the early 1980s (Pereira 2017).

These criticisms notwithstanding, many universities have established programmes in gender studies and/or women’s studies and/or centres. The programmes were set up to meet different types of needs. Although the number of women’s and gender studies centres at universities has grown, they have had limited impact on changing gender relations at these institutions. They often operate in isolation from other departments and the mainstream activities of the universities; they lack adequate staff and resources to run gender sensitization programmes; and their directors sometimes have little knowledge of or interest in gender issues (Rathgeber 2013). As Diaw (2007) and Shackleton (2007) observed, these centres were established in ways that muted their effectiveness and were symptomatic of the low institutional priority accorded gender in universities. Such low prioritization arises out of ignorance about gender issues and an absence “of serious engagement with the realities of gendered power relations or theorization around gender in the workplace” (Shackleton 2007: 36).

These attitudes, which underscore institutional cultures, result in a persistent institutional reaction that tends to neutralize attempts to confront “specific gender challenges” (ibid.). This confirms that, in spite of official approval, gender centres have to continuously engage with institutional cultures expressed in the personal attitudes and actions of key individuals within the university administration in order to avoid marginalization or outright rejection. Notwithstanding such problems, over the past two decades these centres have produced a cadre of trained feminist scholars and activists who now bring their skills and knowledge to different facets of their societies (Adomako Ampofo et al. 2004; Onyango 2007).

5 Strategizing Gender Equity in African Universities

As we think about our universities as sites of knowledge production in the twenty-first century, we ask: If the universities remain unequal and difficult places for women, what kind of male or female citizens are they now turning out? Has enough been done to decolonize the structures, expectations and horizons of our universities? If social burdens imposed on female students and faculty, which prevent them from taking their places in traditionally configured academies, are actually increasing, where should our priorities now lie? It is clearly time to rethink and act and support the work of transnational feminist networks and organizations (Mama and Barnes 2007). It is imperative, therefore, that rigorous feminist work adopts considerable reflexivity about the assumptions used to make sense of “what is”: social realities and the ways in which these realities are re/presented in knowledge production.

The necessity for gender and feminist studies to deal with masculinist and patriarchal domination in an environment where substantive representation of women is shunned and administratively stifled cannot be overemphasized. Thus, applying a feminist perspective is crucial for addressing equity and equality in knowledge production in universities in Africa (Carotenuto, Kirin and Prienda 2014). Universities have the potential to accelerate this process by undertaking a set of strategic activities, which include adopting an intersectional approach that considers the interconnectedness of gender with other social categories, such as race, class, ethnicity and sexuality (Tamale and Oloka-Onyango 2000). This perspective recognizes that individuals may experience, simultaneously, multiple forms of discrimination and privilege, which allows for a more nuanced understanding of power dynamics and helps in addressing multiple dimensions of inequality. In the same vein, feminist perspectives encourage a critical examination of power structures within universities. This involves questioning and challenging hierarchical systems that perpetuate gender-based inequalities, in academic positions and decision-making roles.

Implementing critical feminist pedagogy within academic programmes to challenge traditional gender norms and power structures is essential (Amaefula 2021). This involves creating curricula that closely examine patriarchy, masculinist ideologies and their impact on various aspects of society. It also means developing inclusive curricula that incorporate feminist theories and perspectives (Bennett 2002). The implication of this is the integration of diverse voices, acknowledging the contributions of female scholars and addressing gender-related issues in various disciplines.

Conducting research that exposes and analyzes gender inequalities within the academic environment can serve as a basis for advocating policy changes and raising awareness about the need for substantive representation of women in academia (Pereira 2017). Engaging in institutional advocacy and activism to challenge gender-based discrimination as well as launching visibility campaigns that showcase the contributions of female scholars in various fields may help to highlight the achievements of women and challenge stereotypes, contributing to changing perceptions about women’s capabilities and expertise. This may involve collaboration with women’s rights organizations, student groups and other stakeholders, to press for policy changes and institutional reforms (Bennett 2002).

Establishing networking and mentorship programmes that specifically support female scholars can provide women with the support and guidance needed to navigate a hostile environment (Carotenuto et al. 2014). This could involve advocating for and working towards the implementation of gender-inclusive policies within academic institutions, which includes policies related to hiring, promotion and tenure, and addressing gender-based discrimination. Creating awareness by organizing workshops and training sessions on gender sensitivity, inclusivity and the impact of masculinist and patriarchal ideologies is a much-needed strategy (Bennett 2002). Media platforms and public outreach can be utilized to raise awareness about the challenges women face in academic settings. This can create public pressure, draw attention to the need for substantive representation of women in academia and contribute to raising awareness and fostering a more supportive and respectful academic culture (Rathgeber 2013).

Legal avenues to address gender-based discrimination could also be explored. Depending on the context, legal action or the threat of legal action may sometimes be effective in compelling institutions to address issues of inequality (Gaidzanwa 2007). Collaborating with allies who share the goal of challenging masculinist and patriarchal domination can amplify the impact of advocacy efforts. This could include building alliances with like-minded individuals and groups, both within and outside the academic community, and encouraging men within academic institutions to actively support gender-equality initiatives (Rathgeber 2013). Engaging men as allies is essential for challenging and changing the norms and structures that perpetuate gender-based discrimination.

The ways in which power and resources circulate serve, on one hand, to undermine feminist projects where they exist in universities, or to exclude gender conversations altogether through institutional norms and practices (Gaidzanwa 2007; Tsikata 2007; Bennett 2002). Addressing masculinist and patriarchal domination requires persistence and a commitment to long-term systemic change. By employing a combination of these strategies, gender and feminist studies can contribute to transforming institutions and creating environments that are more inclusive, equitable and supportive of the substantive representation of women.

6 Conclusion

It is evident that there is a huge gender gap in knowledge production in African universities and that the existing organizational structures of universities are not conducive to bridging it in the near future. The limited participation of women in knowledge production results from their limited access to education and related resources. Writing about gender relations in Africa, Okeke states that women are still struggling to be accepted as citizens, let alone being enabled to practise and enjoy the rights of citizenship (Okeke 2003). In the current global climate, African women’s movements that seek participation in nation-building processes and activities are actually losing ground, in some instances (Barnes 2007). Thus, institutional cultures in modern African universities maintain the ability to produce and reproduce ways of knowing that privilege certain kinds of maleness and sideline and marginalize other ways of knowing and of knowledge production.

The affirmative action activities undertaken by several universities have not made an obvious difference in enhancing the participation of women. However, there is a growing number of trained and articulate female social scientists, many of whom have the potential to be role models for female students and junior researchers. In time, as the critical mass of female social scientists grows, they will make their way into existing male networks and find a more powerful voice. Universities in Africa have the potential to accelerate this process by undertaking a set of strategic activities, which include enacting and implementing policies that advance the interests of female researchers and creating communities of researchers to assist women in sharpening their skills so that they can fully participate in research, leading to economic development. More introspection, research and activism are required to put additional flesh on the existing theoretical and descriptive bones of this situation, so that new generations of academics in Africa may conceptualize and participate in fuller, and more meaningful, transformative institutional policies and practices (Barnes 2007).

More important is the fact that feminist gains in intellectual work cannot be taken for granted. The challenge presented here is one of developing and consolidating autonomous spaces that are sufficiently supportive of critical interventions for sustaining feminists in their work. There is a clear need to find ways of broadening and deepening spaces for feminist scholarship on Africa. Mobilizing and capacity- and theory-building among feminists are strategic priorities here. There is also a need to promote forums for exchanging ideas and engaging in collective intellectual work. Masculinist domination of scholarship on Africa will simply not deliver the goods in producing knowledge that is up to the task of transforming our institutions and our societies in the direction of gender equality and social justice.