Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Op-Ed: 16 Days of Activism: Why attitude is key

25 November 2019 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small

The international awareness campaign on 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence which is taking place from 25 November to 10 December 2019 provides an appropriate opportunity for higher-education institutions to reflect on a crucial issue that is touching the lives of so many women – including students and staff members – across the country, and the world.

2019 has certainly been another challenging year when it comes to violence in general, and then specifically, gender-based violence in higher education.

It was marked by two traumatic incidents: The rape and murder of Media and Film Studies student at the University of Cape Town (UCT), Uyinene Mrwetyana; and the murder of University of the Western Cape (UWC) student, Jesse Hess.

These horrific happenings were painful reminders of the pervasive nature of misogyny and patriarchal violence that impedes the freedom of women in South Africa.

As in the rest of the country, students, staff members, and stakeholders of the University of the Free State (UFS) showed up en masse in response, dressed in black to demonstrate their outrage at gender-based violence during a silent march on our Bloemfontein Campus in September. The sincerity and fervour of the marchers – women and men – was inspiring.

More than symbolism needed

But the question is: Are these symbolic gestures enough? Should we not be doing more?

Abuse is a very physical act – often with dire, physical consequences.

Apart from all the discussions, demonstrations, and denouncements, is there not something we can do to physically fight this scourge?

It is significant that demonstrators across the country were wearing black. Traditionally, this is the colour of mourning and loss. It symbolises not only the loss of life and opportunity that these incidents have caused, but also the loss of trust, innocence, and carefreeness for the wider community and potential victims everywhere.

There was a sad irony in seeing so many young people in mourning mode. After all, one’s study years are supposed to be some of your happiest years. It is a heart-breaking reality that gender-based violence can turn it into your most traumatic.

Powerful influencers: Good and bad

The post-school years is traditionally the time when young people often resolve not only what they want to become – in terms of career options – but also who they want to become. It is a time to sort out your approach to life and to other people and finding your own place in it. A time to determine your own values – the things that form the bedrock of who you are. Too often they fall back on the imperfect role models found in their communities and in celebrity circles, where violence and selfish interests are elevated.

How can we break this cycle of bad influences resulting in violence and abuse? How can we interrupt the process of elevating patriarchal and misogynistic role models?

I have often said that a university or any other institution of higher learning should be a microcosm of what our society should look like. Not because it is perfect and never makes mistakes, but because it is founded on principles of equality, tolerance, excellence, diversity, community upliftment, and forward-thinking – striving for social justice in everything that it does.

While students are on our campuses, we have a unique window of opportunity to influence and guide these young people at a time when they make crucial decisions about the rest of their lives.

And to really play our part as positive influencers, we should give them more than just theory, rhetoric, abstract ideas, and symbolism. We should give them deliberate acts of caring.

Deliberate acts of caring

Two stories transpired at the UFS this year that reminded me of the powerful effect these deliberate acts of caring can have.

Story 1: A second-year BA Journalism student, Precious Lesupi, decided to use her 21st birthday celebrations as an opportunity to give back to the communities around her. Not only did she spend the day with children at the Sunflower Children’s Hospice in Bloemfontein who are afflicted with life-threatening and life-limiting conditions. She also encouraged friends and relatives not to buy her gifts, but to rather make donations towards children battling terminal and chronic illnesses.

Story 2: A lecturer in our Department of Architecture, Hein Raubenheimer, reached out to a colleague who had just acquired a plot of land in an informal settlement. He got other lecturers and students involved by initiating an interdisciplinary research project and a building-supplies donation drive, in order to build a beautiful, eco-friendly home for his grateful colleague.

These two Kovsies did not stop at just talking about solutions. They got physically involved – through deliberate acts of caring, and in the process, they powerfully counter-acted the devastating impact of abuse and neglect we have become so used to.

Getting involved

It is an approach that can extend so much further than just interpersonal relationships.
On a community level, it can culminate in an attitude of looking out for one another’s interests. The practical outflow of this is that people will get involved when they see someone caught up in an unhealthy relationship, venturing into a dangerous area or being harmed in some way. Because they truly care about one another. It is about reaching out and arming one another – not only with information and encouragement, but also with physical support.

The power of caring communities

In the words of American author and organisational behaviour expert, Margaret J. Wheatley: “There is no power for change greater than a community discovering what it cares about.”

I believe that our response to the flood of violence and indifference that threatens to engulf our higher-education campuses, should be to fight it with a renewed sense of ubuntu – transpiring into real, deliberate acts of caring and kindness.

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof. Phillipe Burger

2007-11-26

Attending the lecture were, from the left: Prof. Tienie Crous (Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences at the UFS), Prof. Phillipe Burger (Departmental Chairperson of the Department of Economics at the UFS), and Prof. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS).
Photo: Stephen Collet

A summary of an inaugural lecture presented by Prof. Phillipe Burger on the topic: “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

South African business cycle shows reduction in volatility

Better monetary policy and improvements in the financial sector that place less liquidity constraints on individuals is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the volatility of the South African economy. The improvement in access to the financial sector also enables individuals to manage their debt better.

These are some of the findings in an analysis on the volatility of the South African business cycle done by Prof. Philippe Burger, Departmental Chairperson of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Economics.

Prof. Burger delivered his inaugural lecture last night (22 November 2007) on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein on the topic “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

In his lecture, Prof. Burger emphasised a few key aspects of the South African business cycle and indicated how it changed during the periods 1960-1976, 1976-1994 en 1994-2006.

With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of the business cycle, the analysis identified the variables that showed the highest correlation with the GDP. During the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006, these included durable consumption, manufacturing investment, private sector investment, as well as investment in machinery and non-residential buildings. Other variables that also show a high correlation with the GDP are imports, non-durable consumption, investment in the financial services sector, investment by general government, as well as investment in residential buildings.

Prof. Burger’s analysis also shows that changes in durable consumption, investment in the manufacturing sector, investment in the private sector, as well as investment in non-residential buildings preceded changes in the GDP. If changes in a variable such as durable consumption precede changes in the GDP, it is an indication that durable consumption is one of the drivers of the business cycle. The up or down swing of durable consumption may, in other words, just as well contribute to an up or down swing in the business cycle.

A surprising finding of the analysis is the particularly strong role durable consumption has played in the business cycle since 1994. This finding is especially surprising due to the fact that durable consumption only constitutes about 12% of the total household consumption.

A further surprising finding is the particularly small role exports have been playing since 1960 as a driver of the business cycle. In South Africa it is still generally accepted that exports are one of the most important drivers of the business cycle. It is generally accepted that, should the business cycles of South Africa’s most important trade partners show an upward phase; these partners will purchase more from South Africa. This increase in exports will contribute to the South African economy moving upward. Prof. Burger’s analyses shows, however, that exports have generally never fulfil this role.

Over and above the identification of the drivers of the South African business cycle, Prof. Burger’s analysis also investigated the volatility of the business cycle.

When the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006 are compared, the analysis shows that the volatility of the business cycle has reduced since 1994 with more than half. The reduction in volatility can be traced to the reduction in the volatility of household consumption (especially durables and services), as well as a reduction in the volatility of investment in machinery, non-residential buildings and transport equipment. The last three coincide with the general reduction in the volatility of investment in the manufacturing sector. Investment in sectors such as electricity and transport (not to be confused with investment in transport equipment by various sectors) which are strongly dominated by the government, did not contribute to the decrease in volatility.

In his analysis, Prof. Burger supplies reasons for the reduction in volatility. One of the explanations is the reduction in the shocks affecting the economy – especially in the South African context. Another explanation is the application of an improved monetary policy by the South African Reserve Bank since the mid 1990’s. A third explanation is the better access to liquidity and credit since the mid 1990’s, which enables the better management of household finance and the absorption of financial shocks.

A further reason which contributed to the reduction in volatility in countries such as the United States of America’s business cycle is better inventory management. While the volatility of inventory in South Africa has also reduced there is, according to Prof. Burger, little proof that better inventory management contributed to the reduction in volatility of the GDP.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept