Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 June 2020 | Story Andre Damons | Photo Anja Aucamp
Herkulaas Combrink.

A lot can be said about forecasting and modelling, its accuracy, and how it works. Forecasting and modelling provide any decision-maker with plausible predictions or outcomes to give some kind of estimated consequence. Without this field of science, planning would be difficult, as one would simply make decisions without knowing what might potentially happen to a specific cohort, market, or product. Forecasting as a concept can be seen as a set of mathematical, statistical and/or computational tools applied to a set of assumptions about something.

This is according to Herkulaas Combrink of the Centre for Teaching and Learning at the University of the Free State (UFS) and PhD candidate in Computer Science at the University of Pretoria (UP), following the South African government’s modelling of how many people would contract COVID-19 and die, which has come under fire in recent times – with one expert saying it was “flawed and illogical and made wild assumptions”. 

Combrink is of the opinion that South Africa – by using the MASHA Consortium – is using the best minds that the country has to offer. The fact that the leadership took a pragmatic stance and reached out to the scientific community has mitigated a medical disaster in a healthcare system that was not ready a few months ago.

“The government is looking at as many models as they can, but is working very closely with MASHA and the CSIR” says Combrink, who has been involved in clinical surveillance, and also forms part of the modelling team during his secondment to the Free State Department of Health. 

Prof Shabhir Madhi, the former head of the SA National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD), recently said that the initial modelling and fatality estimates were “back-of-envelope calculations”.

According to a news report, the government’s initial model also predicted that 600 COVID-19 patients would need treatment in intensive care units (ICU) in SA by April 1. But by April 18, the last publicly released figures showed that there were 32 COVID-19 patients in ICU.

Tried-and-tested models
The models currently used are tried-and-tested epidemiological models, mathematical models, and economic forecasting models that have been used in the past. It has now been calibrated to the specifications that we know of this disease, which come from publications. The reason why you would use more than one model is to compare models retrospectively, so that you can see what is going on.

“The government immediately reached out to the best minds in the country, and with the aid of the consortium, took a stance to throw scenarios at the different models and stress test them so that they could know that they are using the best possible models to assist in resource management and decision-making. If government responded in a different way and didn’t reach out, we might not have had a lockdown and subsequently would probably have been in a different position where the country wouldn’t be ready.” 

“We can say with a high degree of confidence that the lockdown really helps to ease and flatten the curve in the country. In light of flattening the curve, the right decisions have been made,” says Combrink.

COVID-19 still new
Unfortunately, says Combrink, during the COVID-19 pandemic, there was not enough information related to the disease assumptions and it lacked the rigour and perfection associated with the already existing prediction models. Although it may feel like a lifetime, the first COVID-19 case was only reported in December 2019. Add to this that not all the parameters related to the disease were known in January, it was challenging to determine all the ‘ins and outs’ of this disease. 

“Luckily, the mathematics and statistics of an outbreak have been extensively studied, and as a result, we only needed to use the correct parameters to estimate the spread of the disease in some of the outbreak models. The Minister of Health, Dr Zweli Mkhize, and the national modellers led by Dr Harry Moultrie, were transparent with not only their projections, but also how they derived their conclusions and what parameters they used,” says Combrink.

The most important thing in modelling is to calibrate according to what is known about the disease and people, explains Combrink. “It is impossible to predict people and a disease100% accurately, because you don’t always know how a virus will react to every single person’s body and you can’t predict human behaviour.” 

“So, there is a certain degree of error and a certain degree of confidence that lies within each model, and that is why you evaluate these models on a regular basis. And this is important. You will never be able to say this is the exact number. Just like the weather. If the weather patterns were predicted to be 12 degrees tomorrow, and it turns out to be 16 degrees, you at least packed a jersey. You knew it was going to be cold. The chances that the weather predicts that it will be 12 and it turns out to be 57 degrees, is virtually zero. It gives you more or less an indication what to prepare for

Models are useful, but can also be wrong
Combrink says if you want to apply any model, you need to understand the assumptions and the limitations of the models. Given a certain set of criteria – what are the assumptions you are making and what are the expected outcomes – you can only act according to that. He says, as time goes by, we can now see that there are some models that yield much better results because we can now compare what was predicted two months ago and what is actually happening. 
 “Some models are useful. We can get a better understanding of the pandemic’s possible trajectories or gain an understanding of the impact that different interventions have made. Models are used for decision-making. These decision-making strategies can save lives. That is the purpose of models and modelling during these times.”

Combrink uses the weather forecast to explain how modelling works and that models can be wrong. “Yes, models are wrong all the time. Take the concept of weather as an example. How many times has the weather forecast predicted that there is an 80% chance of rain, and then it doesn’t rain? Models can give you a certain degree of confidence in an outcome related to a specific event or scenario, so that you, with some degree of confidence, can go forth and plan accordingly.” 

“However, models can’t tell you what exactly will happen tomorrow, or the day after. It is not a crystal ball, and it is not a mirror into the future, but it can give you an indication of what is likely possible related to a specific scenario if you used the right variables. Let us consider that there is an 80% chance of rain in the weather forecast; will you a) go to work without an umbrella or b) with an umbrella? If it doesn’t rain, you are at least prepared for the rain because you took your umbrella. If you didn’t take the umbrella and it does rain, you may run into trouble because you did not appreciate the warning of the weather forecast. I think it is this concept that makes modelling so powerful. You can use it as a tool to prepare for things, in the event that it does happen, with a certain degree of confidence. Just like the previous example, there is also a 20% chance that it might not rain, but wouldn’t you want to be prepared?” explains Combrink. 
 
Models are tools that can be used to base decisions on
No one truly knows how the pandemic will play out, and according to Combrink, it can be said with a high degree of confidence that if nothing is done about the pandemic, we know how it would turn out from a healthcare perspective. 
“If you look at some of the global projections they gave months ago (in January and February) and compare it to what they said for March and April, you can see that they predicted, with a fairly good degree of confidence, what actually happened in certain countries. We have a good idea in terms of numbers and how it will play out, but what we will never know is what the impact will be on the socio-economic status of a person, the economy, and the impact on other diseases.”

“We do not know what is going to happen when it comes to mental health and COVID-19, for example. This is why modelling is a multidimensional approach, requiring inputs from various fields. Models can help us in the same way the weather forecast does. It is a tool that we can use to base certain decisions on, to be more prepared, because without it we won’t know to pack an ‘umbrella’ if it is predicted to rain or pack a ‘jersey’ if it is projected to cool down.”

News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

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