The Nordic Africa Institute

Commentary

Prof Akosua Adomako Ampofo: “Academics are not just there to have a good time”

Prof Akosua Adomako Ampofo at the Nordic Africa Institute in Uppsala, Sweden.

Prof Akosua Adomako Ampofo at the Nordic Africa Institute in Uppsala, Sweden. She is the Claude Ake Visiting Chair of 2025. The Chair, set up by NAI together with the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, honours the memory of Professor Claude Ake, a distinguished scholar, philosopher, teacher and humanist, who died tragically in 1996. It is intended for scholars who combine a commitment to scholarship with advocacy for social justice. Photo: Mattias Sköld

Date • 21 Nov 2025

In a new interview, Professor Akosua Adomako Ampofo, this year’s holder of the Claude Ake Visiting Chair, reflects on the role of academics in shaping more just and sustainable societies. Speaking from decades of experience as a scholar and public intellectual in Ghana, she emphasises that research cannot remain confined to the academy.“The more vulnerable a society is, or the more vulnerable people you have in a society, the greater your responsibility to make sure that your research counts for something,” says Adomako Ampofo, a professor of African and Gender Studies at the Institute of African Studies, University of Ghana.

One urgent example she highlights is Ghana’s ongoing crisis of illegal and irresponsible gold mining. Scientific research has clearly documented the environmental and social consequences – from the leaching of cyanide and mercury into rivers to the social problems emerging in affected communities.

Reflecting on Ghana’s political history, Adomako Ampofo draws parallels between earlier periods of military rule – when free speech was sharply curtailed – and current global trends that increasingly challenge scientific knowledge itself.

During Ghana’s military regimes, she recalls “a culture of silence,” where public dissent was restricted but academic research itself was not directly censored. Today, however, she observes a more complex form of interference: public denial of scientific evidence, political manipulation of research findings, and restrictions on what scholars are “allowed” to discuss.