The institutional landscape for African Studies research conducted within the continent is characterised by significant epistemological and structural challenges. This is particularly acute in Lusophone contexts, which remain under-examined in broader continental debates about knowledge production and institutional capacity. This comparative study analyses the specific epistemological challenges and institutional prospects facing African Studies research conducted within Mozambique. It aims to identify systemic barriers and to compare emergent institutional models that support locally anchored scholarship. The study employs a comparative case study design, analysing documentary sources and interview data from a purposive sample of key research institutions, funding bodies, and academic departments. A thematic analysis was conducted to identify cross-cutting challenges and divergent institutional trajectories. A dominant finding was the persistent marginalisation of endogenous epistemologies, with over 70% of analysed research outputs privileging Western theoretical frameworks. Comparatively, institutions with formal community engagement protocols demonstrated greater success in integrating local knowledge systems and securing sustained local funding. The development of a robust, self-sustaining African Studies field in the country is contingent on deliberate institutional reforms that centre epistemic diversity and create sustainable funding ecosystems independent of external agendas. Institutions should develop explicit epistemic inclusion policies and establish dedicated research funds for community-co-designed projects. National policy must incentivise cross-institutional collaboration to build critical mass and shared infrastructure. African Studies, epistemic justice, knowledge production, institutional development, Mozambique, comparative research This paper provides the first systematic, comparative analysis of institutional models for African Studies in a Lusophone African context, introducing a novel framework for assessing epistemic integration within research programmes.
Eduardo Mondlane (Sat,) studied this question.