Readers following the AU summit on national TV news could be forgiven for wondering if the event on their screens is the same as that being described in this blog and on the pages of SciDev.Net.

It ‘was’ exactly the same event, only my colleagues from the broadcast media who came to Addis in their hundreds mostly ignored the discussions on science and climate change. They focused instead on conflicts: conflicts between heads of state for top jobs in the AU; conflicts between Ethiopia and Somalia, in Sudan and even in Rwanda where the country wants to heal and move on from the genocide.

This is not to say that Africa is conflict-free. But that the clips on our TV screens did not reflect the bulk of what was discussed at the AU this week, nor did the broadcasts convey much of a sense that Africa is on the move — the overwhelming impression that delegates went home with. This week’s summit showed that a confident and emboldened AU (with its planned new parliament and court of human rights) will be key to the continent’s future. It is unfortunate that many viewers and listeners inside and outside Africa will never know, because broadcasters chose to turn their cameras elsewhere.

Readers following the AU summit on national TV news could be forgiven for wondering if the event on their screens is the same as that being described in this blog and on the pages of SciDev.Net.

It ‘was’ exactly the same event, only my colleagues from the broadcast media who came to Addis in their hundreds mostly ignored the discussions on science and climate change. They focused instead on conflicts: conflicts between heads of state for top jobs in the AU; conflicts between Ethiopia and Somalia, in Sudan and even in Rwanda where the country wants to heal and move on from the genocide.

This is not to say that Africa is conflict-free. But that the clips on our TV screens did not reflect the bulk of what was discussed at the AU this week, nor did the broadcasts convey much of a sense that Africa is on the move — the overwhelming impression that delegates went home with. This week’s summit showed that a confident and emboldened AU (with its planned new parliament and court of human rights) will be key to the continent’s future. It is unfortunate that many viewers and listeners inside and outside Africa will never know, because broadcasters chose to turn their cameras elsewhere.

After close to 12 hours of discussion delegates emerged at midnight on 30 January with some decisions. The scientists, according to the AU’s commissioner for science Nagia Essayed, ended up with a result better than they might have expected.

Summiteers also pledged to move ahead with a merger of the two intellectual-property organizations that separately serve Anglophone and Francophone countries in the AU. The new organization will be called the Pan African Intellectual Property Organization. Setting this up is likely to prove complicated in practice, but doing so is necessary for an Africa-wide consensus on IP, which is independent of the politics of France and Britain.

There was also agreement on a 20-year strategy for biotechnology, new diplomatic-style passports for scientists that wll allow them to travel throughout the continent without visa restrictions. 2007, moreover, has been designated as Africa’s year for innovations.

Less certain at this stage is the verdict on a planned new strategy for biosafety, which had financial backing from Germany. The biosafety strategy (if implemented) will have AU countries enforce the world’s toughest biosafety regulatory regime, which will go beyond the regulations of the UN Cartagena Protocol.

Two issues that failed to make it this time were the Africa-wide science fund, and a planned new council of heads of state to oversee AU decisions in science and technology. Essayed says she is not about to drop the ball on both of these issues just yet.

All-in-all, not a bad night for science.

After close to 12 hours of discussion delegates emerged at midnight on 30 January with some decisions. The scientists, according to the AU’s commissioner for science Nagia Essayed, ended up with a result better than they might have expected.

Summiteers also pledged to move ahead with a merger of the two intellectual-property organizations that separately serve Anglophone and Francophone countries in the AU. The new organization will be called the Pan African Intellectual Property Organization. Setting this up is likely to prove complicated in practice, but doing so is necessary for an Africa-wide consensus on IP, which is independent of the politics of France and Britain.

There was also agreement on a 20-year strategy for biotechnology, new diplomatic-style passports for scientists that wll allow them to travel throughout the continent without visa restrictions. 2007, moreover, has been designated as Africa’s year for innovations.

Less certain at this stage is the verdict on a planned new strategy for biosafety, which had financial backing from Germany. The biosafety strategy (if implemented) will have AU countries enforce the world’s toughest biosafety regulatory regime, which will go beyond the regulations of the UN Cartagena Protocol.

Two issues that failed to make it this time were the Africa-wide science fund, and a planned new council of heads of state to oversee AU decisions in science and technology. Essayed says she is not about to drop the ball on both of these issues just yet.

All-in-all, not a bad night for science.

The public part of the summit is now over.

Heads of state are meeting in closed session before they issue a set of summit resolutions. This session could last late into the night. Several leaders are known to be cross at having been lectured-to for a day-and-a-half (by scientists) when they could have spent the time actually taking policy decisions. So much for the idea of making policy decisions based on good scientific advice, then?

The betting so far remains that a new, continent-wide strategy for biotechnology will be the most concrete outcome from this summit in science and technology. Expect also a strong resolution on climate change. The big question is whether anyone will pledge funds for the planned Africa-wide science fund. This idea needs to be backed with money from inside Africa if it is to fly.

The public part of the summit is now over.

Heads of state are meeting in closed session before they issue a set of summit resolutions. This session could last late into the night. Several leaders are known to be cross at having been lectured-to for a day-and-a-half (by scientists) when they could have spent the time actually taking policy decisions. So much for the idea of making policy decisions based on good scientific advice, then?

The betting so far remains that a new, continent-wide strategy for biotechnology will be the most concrete outcome from this summit in science and technology. Expect also a strong resolution on climate change. The big question is whether anyone will pledge funds for the planned Africa-wide science fund. This idea needs to be backed with money from inside Africa if it is to fly.

Earlier this morning, UK government adviser Nicholas Stern led a debate on climate change in which he hinted strongly that rich countries ought to pay to resolve a crisis that they helped to cause. This goes further than the official UK government line, but was a wise move on the part of Stern.

Several speakers responded by repeating the point that while Africa contributes least to human-induced global warming, it will suffer most from the effects of climate change. President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda summed up the mood among many in the hall: “In causing global warming [developed] countries are committing aggression against us.”

Earlier this morning, UK government adviser Nicholas Stern led a debate on climate change in which he hinted strongly that rich countries ought to pay to resolve a crisis that they helped to cause. This goes further than the official UK government line, but was a wise move on the part of Stern.

Several speakers responded by repeating the point that while Africa contributes least to human-induced global warming, it will suffer most from the effects of climate change. President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda summed up the mood among many in the hall: “In causing global warming [developed] countries are committing aggression against us.”

Every political summit needs a young-Turk, someone to remind the old guard that leadership isn’t for life. Yesterday, summit-planners gave a keynote slot to Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda. Tall and of slim build, Kagame is not from the evangelical school of public speaking, but he managed to hold his audience with carefully-chosen words, and a vision that few (if any) of his colleagues were able to match. This includes a promise that Rwanda will aim to spend 3 per cent of its national income on research and development within the next five years – matching the proportion of spending that is common in the developed world. The AU average at present is less than 0.5 per cent.

Every political summit needs a young-Turk, someone to remind the old guard that leadership isn’t for life. Yesterday, summit-planners gave a keynote slot to Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda. Tall and of slim build, Kagame is not from the evangelical school of public speaking, but he managed to hold his audience with carefully-chosen words, and a vision that few (if any) of his colleagues were able to match. This includes a promise that Rwanda will aim to spend 3 per cent of its national income on research and development within the next five years – matching the proportion of spending that is common in the developed world. The AU average at present is less than 0.5 per cent.