Explore

4. Funding Synthesis Note

Purpose and scope

This note synthesises insights from the CoRE-Math Funder–Activity Alignment Matrix and internal scoping notes. It provides an analytical synthesis of the structural roles different funder categories play in relation to CoRE-Math’s mission, and the forms of support they can and cannot realistically provide.

The note is descriptive and analytical, not strategic. It does not propose actions or priorities, but establishes the analytical basis for making strategic choices.

⁠

1. African and regional funders — anchoring and legitimacy capital

Science for Africa Foundation, NRF South Africa, Oppenheimer Memorial Trust, AfDB, AU/NEPAD

African and regional funders embed CoRE-Math in African institutional, research, and policy ecosystems. Their primary contribution is to provide anchoring, legitimacy, and selective capacity funding, rather than to finance large externally coordinated initiatives. Collectively, they are essential for:

African ownership and institutional embedding,

strengthening key regional nodes,

and aligning CoRE-Math with continental and national science agendas.

Within this category, distinct roles can be observed:

African Development Bank – Relevant only where mathematics is framed through applied, system-linked development narratives (skills, data, modelling, economic systems).

AU Commission/NEPAD – Providers of policy alignment and continental legitimacy, rather than programme funding.

NRF South Africa and Oppenheimer Memorial Trust – Primarily node-anchoring and pipeline funders, strengthening selected institutions and postgraduate trajectories, particularly in Southern Africa.

Science for Africa Foundation – The closest African analogue to a research-first strategic partner, with potential to support research-led capacity initiatives at a multi-country scale.

Analytically, this category supplies anchoring and legitimacy capital. It is the space where CoRE-Math connects to African institutional realities and continental agendas. It is not a substitute for EU structural instruments or for public development funding.

⁠

2. EU instruments — structural and coordination capital

Erasmus+ CBHE, IAAMS, COST; conditional Horizon/NDICI options

EU instruments are the only realistic source of large-scale structural and coordination funding for CoRE-Math. They do not fund mathematics as a discipline. They fund systems, architectures, and cooperation frameworks. Two distinct EU logics are relevant.

Structural instruments: CBHE and IAAMS

CBHE supports postgraduate training ecosystems, curriculum development, quality assurance, supervision frameworks, and institutional cooperation.

IAAMS supports large-scale, structured intra-African student and staff mobility embedded in institutional partnerships.

These instruments enable CoRE-Math to function as a coordinated initiative and training architecture. They fund organisational and institutional scaffolding, not scientific agendas.

Coordination instruments: COST

COST Actions fund:

international scientific networks,

working groups,

short-term scientific missions,

agenda-setting and exploratory collaboration.

COST does not fund training systems, stipends, or research projects. It funds the scientific coordination layer, which includes structured networking, comparative and conceptual work, and the exploration of new research–society and Africa–Europe collaboration interfaces. In the CoRE-Math context, COST is relevant as a mechanism for:

Africa–Europe scientific coordination,

thematic and interface development (e.g. industrial mathematics),

preparatory and risk-reducing groundwork for future initiatives.

Future and out-of-scope instruments

Horizon instruments (e.g., MSCA Doctoral Networks) and selective NDICI higher-education calls are future or conditional options, dependent on the maturity of partnerships and architectures. Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters and most Horizon institutional or infrastructure instruments remain structurally misaligned at this stage.

Analytically, EU instruments provide CoRE-Math with structural capital (CBHE, IAAMS) and coordination capital (COST). They are where CoRE-Math can be funded as an organised initiative and as a structured scientific network layer.

⁠

3. Foundations

Simons Foundation, XTX Markets, Volkswagen Foundation, Siemens Stiftung, Mastercard Foundation, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Schmidt Futures; with Bosch and Carnegie as boundary cases

Foundations do not form a coherent sector. They represent distinct philanthropic regimes with very different assumptions about what they fund. They are the space where CoRE-Math can realistically develop:

flagship scientific components,

thematic and interface initiatives,

experimental formats,

leadership and talent layers.

They are not, as a category, a basis for structural sustainability.

Distinct foundation logics include:

Disciplinary excellence foundations (e.g., Simons): Relevant for high-level scientific communities and flagship research-training components.

Individual excellence foundations (e.g., Humboldt): Relevant at the talent and leadership layer, not the programme layer.

Education system and skills foundations (e.g., Mastercard): Potentially relevant where mathematics is embedded in large-scale higher-education and skills narratives.

Thematic and systems foundations (e.g., Siemens Stiftung): Relevant only under strong alignment with education, digitalisation, or sustainability agendas.

Experimental and agenda-setting foundations (e.g., Volkswagen Foundation, Schmidt Futures): Relevant for piloting new models and research–society interfaces.

Interface and leadership foundations (e.g., XTX Markets): Relevant for industrial mathematics, modelling, and selective research-leadership trajectories.

Foundations such as the Bosch Stiftung and the Carnegie Corporation serve as analytical boundary cases, illustrating significant structural misalignments with CoRE-Math’s doctoral system ambitions.

Analytically, foundations supply programmatic and innovation capital. They enable distinctive components and experiments, not CoRE-Math’s institutional backbone.

⁠

4. Public development funders (non-EU) — development and institutional capital

IDRC, Norad / Nordic instruments, VLIR-UOS / ARES, MFA Finland, NWO-WOTRO successors, UNESCO-IBSP, DAAD

Public development funders operate under a development-cooperation logic. They do not fund mathematics as a discipline. They fund institutions, systems, and development-relevant knowledge. This category includes both system-level development donors and national academic cooperation agencies. Their relevance to CoRE-Math depends entirely on whether mathematics is framed as:

public knowledge infrastructure,

a component of higher-education and research systems,

and a contributor to development outcomes.

Within this category, distinct roles can be observed:

DAAD – A national academic cooperation agency, relevant primarily for doctoral and early-career pipelines, staff development, and structured university partnerships; complementary public-development support anchored in institutions rather than networks.

IDRC – A systems-of-research funder, relevant where CoRE-Math is framed around research capacity, institutional ecosystems, and development-anchored knowledge production.

Norad and Nordic instruments – Deep higher-education capacity funders, supporting doctoral systems, staff development, and long-term institutional partnerships.

VLIR-UOS / ARES and MFA Finland – Bilateral, university-centred cooperation funders, strengthening specific institutional environments rather than networks.

NWO-WOTRO successors – Conditionally relevant for development-oriented and interdisciplinary research where mathematics is embedded in applied agendas.

UNESCO-IBSP – A small-scale catalytic and convening actor, relevant for legitimacy, activation, and positioning rather than sustained financing.

Analytically, this category supplies development and institutional capital. It is the space where CoRE-Math can connect to long-horizon capacity instruments and development systems. It is not a space for funding mathematics networks as such.

⁠

5. Specialist mathematics funders

CIMPA, ICTP, ICMS, CIRM, IMU-CDC, EMS-CDC, LMS

Specialist mathematics funders are relevant to CoRE-Math almost exclusively at the level of concrete scientific activities. They support and host:

advanced research schools,

focused workshops and short thematic programmes,

limited fellowships, visits, and participation support.

Engagement occurs through the thematic alignment and co-design of specific activities, typically hosted within their own institutional programmes. They do not fund:

networks or platforms,

long-term programmes,

institutional systems,

or externally coordinated clusters.

Mobility and supervision exposure exist only as small-scale by-products of schools, visits, and programmes. They are individual- or event-centred and not accessible or scalable for CoRE-Math as a cluster instrument. Analytically, this category sustains the disciplinary ecosystem in which CoRE-Math operates. It provides scientific depth, continuity, and legitimacy — but it cannot finance CoRE-Math as an organised initiative.

⁠

6. Cross-cutting analytical conclusion

Across all funder categories:

CoRE-Math’s funding environment is structurally plural.

No category can support the whole mission.

Some needs — notably infrastructure and shared resources, as well as parts of coordination — remain structurally underfunded across all categories.

CoRE-Math’s sustainability challenge is therefore not primarily to “find the right funder”, but to orchestrate different categories coherently, with clear awareness of what each can and cannot provide.

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ··· in the right corner or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.