Beyond Wishful Thinking: The Promise of Science Engagement at the Community Level in Africa Jimoh Amzat Department of Sociology, Usman Danfodiyo University, Sokoto and University of Johannesburg, Department of Sociology, Johannesburg ABSTRACT This article discusses the impediments to science-community engagement and identifies five forms of underdevelopment sentiments: primordial, mystical, ethnoreligious, conspiracy, and fatalistic. It also critically examines wishful thinking, which takes the form of superficial recommendations that do not hold any implications for society except on the paper on which they are written. This article argues that both inadequate community-science engagement and wishful thinking are inimical to the African transformation agenda. The article explains community engagement (CE) as a “practical” paradigm and approach to action research, which provides a way of moving beyond wishful thinking. CE is an implementation research approach that can replace wishful thinking with practical solutions by building a community’s capacity to address its issues scientifically and sustainably. The article concludes that it is through engagement with science and community-oriented implementation research that desired transformations can be achieved in Africa. Keywords: Community engagement, science, wishful thinking, Africa Introduction Community engagement (CE) is not only a research approach but also a development approach that involves mobilization of people to enhance a desired transformation. It is a form of active grassroots efforts involving all the stakeholders and community members to design and work towards specific goals or projects. The assumption is that the world is bereft not of ideas but of the implementation of practical ideas, that is, how to move from theoretical or abstract to practical implementation. In this case, the (human) scientists become implementers or establish links that ensure Copyright © 2020 SAGE Publications www.sagepublications.com (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC and Melbourne) Vol 36(2): 206–228. DOI: 10.1177/0169796X20910600