Latest News Archive

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

UFS talks Open Access 2020

28 November 2019 | Story Legopheng Maphile | Photo Supplied

The Library and Information Services of the University of the Free State (UFS) and the Central University of Technology,Free State (CUT) jointly hosted an Open Science Colloquium on 19 November 2019. The colloquium was in response to the national and international developments in what is referred to as ‘the Open Access 2020 (OA2020) movement’. This movement calls on all parties involved in scholarly communication to take action to make their scholarly outputs open and freely available to all citizens of the world. It is a move against the current subscription-based model of publication, which has proved to be costly and unsustainable, and which limits access to knowledge to a few, making it unacceptable.

Welcoming more than 200 delegates to the UFS, Ms Betsy Eister, Director: Library and Information Services, referred to OA2020 as a disruption in the publishing arena.

Endorsing the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities

The colloquium comes as an endorsement of the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities that the two universities signed eight years ago. As signatories, the UFS and CUT have committed to the wide and free dissemination of its scholarship by means of open access platforms. This declaration was confirmed by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Francis Petersen.

“When the UFS signed the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities in 2011, this university committed itself to the wide and free dissemination of its scholarship by means of open access platforms. At that point, we have already made that commitment to open access platforms.”

Open access vs subscription

Prof Petersen said challenging the current status quo will bring equity into the system, which will “ensure that our younger cohort of researchers and scholars have the ability to freely conduct research, to freely access material, so that we can produce high-quality researchers and scholars for our system”.

Also present was Prof Ahmed Bawa, Chief Executive Officer of Universities South Africa, who echoed Prof Petersen’s message by making a case for management, researchers, libraries and research funders to work together to make OA2020 a reality. “These discussions are very important because it provides us with an opportunity to build international consensus on these things, which is critical in moving forward.”

Prof Ahmed Bawa, Chief Executive Officer of Universities South Africa addressed delegates on the importance of open access.

Mr Glenn Truran, Director of the South African Library and Information Consortium (SANLiC), and Ms Eister addressed the national and local roadmaps, respectively. SANLiC, a consortium that negotiates deals for electronic resource subscriptions on behalf of all 26 public universities and eight research councils, has already started transformative agreement negotiations with international publishing company Taylor and Francis.

The colloquium ended with a declaration signed by members present, hoping that it would be signed by all concerned as a commitment to taking action towards open access. The two universities will ultimately sign the OA2020 Expression of Interest.

• The UFS and CUT Libraries are thankful to Mr Gareth O’Neill and UFS colleagues (Mr Charlie Molepo and Mrs Cornelle Scheltema-Van Wyk), who shared information with the attendees on transformation agreements (also referred to as Plan S) and AmeliCA, respectively. Plan S deals with transformation agreements to be signed with publishers, which are about negotiations with publishers to change from subscription-based to open-access journal publishing models. Mr Molepo and Mrs Scheltema-Van Wyk showcased the open access model that the UFS Library has already implemented, which is what AmeliCA is all about. This involves the publication of nine accredited UFS journals on the Open Journals System platform, which enhance its discoverability and accessibility. It was also a pleasure to listen to Prof Abdon Atangana from the UFS Institute for Groundwater Studies – a classic example of an activist and beneficiary of open access publishing – who was recently named as one of the top-10 cited researchers in the Web of Science, thanks to open access publication.

Betsy Eister, Director: Library and Information Services at the UFS.

News Archive

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during Reconciliation Lecture

2014-03-05

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during the Third Annual Reconciliation Lecture entitled Forgiveness, Law and Justice.
Photo: Johan Roux

No one could have anticipated the atmosphere in which Prof Martha Minow would visit the Bloemfontein Campus. And no one could have predicted how apt the timing of her message would be. As this formidable Dean of Harvard University’s Law School stepped behind the podium, a latent tension edged through the crowded audience.

“The issue of getting along after conflict is urgent.”

With these few words, Prof Minow exposed the essence of not only her lecture, but also the central concern of the entire university community.

As an expert on issues surrounding racial justice, Prof Minow has worked across the globe in post-conflict societies. How can we prevent atrocities from happening? she asked. Her answer was an honest, “I don’t know.” What she is certain of, on the other hand, is that the usual practice of either silence or retribution does not work. “I think that silence produces rage – understandably – and retribution produces the cycle of violence. Rather than ignoring what happens, rather than retribution, it would be good to reach for something more.” This is where reconciliation comes in.

Prof Minow put forward the idea that forgiveness should accompany reconciliation efforts. She defined forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to forego rightful grounds of resentment towards those who have committed a wrong. “To forgive then, in this definition, is not an obligation. It’s a choice. And it’s held by the one who was harmed,” she explained.

Letting go of resentment cannot be forced – not even by the law. What the law can do, though, is either to encourage or discourage forgiveness. Prof Minow showed how the law can construct adversarial processes that render forgiveness less likely, when indeed its intention was the opposite. “Or, law can give people chances to meet together in spaces where they may apologise and they may forgive,” she continued. This point introduced some surprising revelations about our Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Indeed, studies do report ambivalence, disappointment and mixed views about the TRC. Whatever our views are on its success, Prof Minow reported that people across the world wonder how South African did it. “It may not work entirely inside the country; outside the country it’s had a huge effect. It’s a touchstone for transitional justice.”

The TRC “seems to have coincided with, and maybe contributed to, the relatively peaceful political transition to democracy that is, frankly, an absolute miracle.” What came as a surprise to many is this: the fact that the TRC has affected transitional justice efforts in forty jurisdictions, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Liberia. It has even inspired the creation of a TRC in Greensborough, North Carolina, in the United States.

There are no blueprints for solving conflict, though. “But the possibility of something other than criminal trials, something other than war, something other than silence – that’s why the TRC, I think, has been such an exemplar to the world,” she commended.

Court decision cannot rebuild a society, though. Only individuals can forgive. Only individuals can start with purposeful, daily decisions to forgive and forge a common future. Forgiveness is rather like kindness, she suggested. It’s a resource without limits. It’s not scarce like water or money. It’s within our reach. But if it’s forced, it’s not forgiveness.

“It is good,” Prof Minow warned, “to be cautious about the use of law to deliberately shape or manipulate the feelings of any individual. But it is no less important to admit that law does affect human beings, not just in its results, but in its process.” And then we must take responsibility for how we use that law.

“A government can judge, but only people can forgive.” As Prof Minow’s words lingered, the air suddenly seemed a bit more buoyant.

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