Opponent is profes sor Tove Faber Frandsen from University of Southern Denmark. The examinin g committee members are associate professor Jonas Lindahl from Umeå unive rsity\, professor Göran Sundqvist from University of Gothenburg and profe ssor Merle Jacob from Lunds University.

Supervisor is Björn Hammarfelt.
The defence is publicly open and can be followed on campus\, room: C203. It can also be followed online\, < a title="link to zoom " href="https://hb-se.zoom.us/j/64834040214" target= "_blank" rel="noopener">click here for zoom.

Abstract
This thesis investigates the producti on\, visibility\, and use of agricultural research in Mozambique by focusi ng on three interconnected dimensions: (i) the coverage of African scienti fic literature in major bibliographic databases\; (ii) the thematic and st ructural characteristics of agricultural research in Sub-Saharan Africa\, with a specific focus on Mozambique\; and (iii) the degree to which this r esearch is cited and mobilized in agricultural policy-related documents. U sing a combination of bibliometric methods and content analysis of policy documents\, the study analyses how agricultural research is generated\, re presented in major databases\, and mobilized in policy-related documents.< br />The study consists of three linked empirical analyses. The first anal ysis compares the coverage of a dataset of 837 African journals drawn from African Journals Online (AJOL) across Web of Science (WoS)\, Scopus\, Dim ensions\, and OpenAlex. The second part focuses on the analysis of the pro duction of research on agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa and Mozambique be tween 2000 and 2020\, with special attention to a comparison between WoS a nd OpenAlex data for conducting bibliometric analysis in the case of Mozam bique. The third part analyses 98 policy and policy-related documents coll ected from the Ministry of Agriculture and other agricultural institutions to examine whether and how academic literature is cited and mobilized in these texts. It combines content analysis with citation context analysis t o identify the types of sources referenced and the functions performed by cited academic literature in policy documents.
The findings show that African research remains underrepresented in selective international data bases such as WoS and Scopus\, while more inclusive platforms such as Dime nsions and OpenAlex capture a wider range of African journals indexed in A frican Journals Online (AJOL). Of the 837 AJOL journals\, Dimensions cover s 663 and OpenAlex 477\, compared with 147 in Scopus and 94 in WoS. Howeve r\, broader coverage does not substantially alter the trend identified in previous research on African science: South Africa\, Nigeria\, Ethiopia\, and Kenya continue to dominate production\, collaboration\, and visibility . In agricultural research specifically\, the regional landscape remains m arked by international collaboration and thematic focus on farming\, food security\, and climate-related topics. In Mozambique\, Eduardo Mondlane Un iversity (UEM) stands out as the main actor in agricultural research\, sus taining collaboration networks with regional partners and European countri es and institutions.
The analysis of agricultural policy documents reveals that technical reports and grey literature play a central role alo ngside academic sources. Of 1\,216 references identified in the policy cor pus\, 103 (8.5%) were academic sources. Citations appear mostly in organic and confirmative roles\, while direct engagement with local academic publ ications is limited. Citations provide observable traces of research use\, but they do not by themselves demonstrate how research agendas or policy decisions were shaped.
By combining database coverage analysis\, bi bliometric analysis\, and citation context analysis\, the thesis examines how agricultural research is made visible in bibliographic databases and r epresented in policy documents in Mozambique. The thesis also contributes to discussions of research use beyond academia by showing that policy docu ments are spaces where academic\, technical\, and institutional knowledge are brought together and mobilized\, rather than simple channels through w hich scientific findings are transferred into policymaking.