Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
18 June 2020 | Story Prof Karin van Marle and Prof Danie Brand | Photo Supplied
Prof Karen van Marle,left, and Prof Danie Brand.

What are our human rights in the COVID-19 crisis – not which rights do we have, but what are they as social institutions, what are they supposed to do for us? How do rights assist us in world-making? What kind of worlds can they make?

Thomas Hobbes uses rights to justify a strong unitary state. His main problem was how to ensure peace and order – in the current crisis perhaps how to prevent the spread of the virus and ensure our safety and freedom from infection. Hobbes is concerned about the ‘state of nature’, with no authority, no unity, and no foundational principles: a state of total disorder where “the life of man (sic) [is] solitary, brutish, and short”. For Hobbes, anyone with reason will seek to get out of this state of disorder by giving up all rights to the state so that it can create and maintain peace and order – pledging complete, permanent obedience in return for peace and order. In his view, the sovereign has the monopoly to make laws and to enforce them. Human rights here are a justification for the exercise of absolute state power: we hand over our rights so that the state may protect us from chaos. What our rights are, what they entitle us to, and what should be done to advance them – world-making – is handed over to the state. We become passive recipients of state rule.

John Locke also starts with the state of nature – not a state of chaos and danger, but one of orderly relations in the form of natural law. For him, humans are born equal and have natural rights to life, liberty, and property. Humans in Locke’s state of nature are not concerned with their safety and security against chaos but are driven by individual interest. Hence, we place our rights in trust with the state to protect our individual interests in the context of the individual rights of others. We may revolt against the state if it does not protect our individual rights.  Individual freedom and property are central, and individuals create worlds motivated by self-interest. Living in this world is not about sharing it with others, but about protecting and enjoying it for the self.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau sees the social contract as a means of creating equality and collective self-government. The natural freedom of the state of nature has been lost and civil society is enchained. It is only by giving up the natural right to freedom that the social contract can be made possible. At stake here is not individual autonomy or private interest, but general constraint of the common interest. The social contract here is an association where persons unite while remaining free, enabling association based on the common good. He introduces the general will as a way of overcoming decision-making based on individual interest: laws of the state must reflect a concrete community ethos. Rousseau underscores the importance of the state and its law upholding the common interest, not by authoritarian rule but through popular sovereignty. Here, members of a community work together to create a world that reflects a sense of common good. Living and the good life means a life where everyone shares and has equal stakes in the governance and enjoyment of the world.

In more contemporary transformative understandings, human rights require us to talk about and decide together about what is good for all of us, how we can best live together. The overriding concern is what kind of world do we, as a people, want to construct and maintain? As Jennifer Nedelsky (2011), for example, will have it – once a right has been identified, the conversation starts, not ends. This alternative to a classic liberal understanding of rights is to regard it as relational rather than boundary-like structures. It allows individual interests to overlap and sometimes even conflict with one another, but not in a model of stronger rights trumping weaker ones.

This third understanding of rights and how it regulates our relationship with others is closely aligned to the predominant understanding of rights in our Constitution. Its emphasis on state accountability, transparency in decision-making, engaged democracy, and the boundedness of state power clearly eschews Hobbesian absolute state power that is ostensibly exercised in the interest of us all. Its embrace of substantive equality, of rights to food, water, housing, education, and health care and of demands for redress of past injustices, show a concern not only for individual interest, but for fashioning ways of living better together. Its insistence that rights may only be limited for a public purpose, the achievement of which the limitation is rationally related, and the importance of which is proportionate to its impact on individual rights, shows a concern not only for the public good, but also for engendering conversation about what that public good entails and how best to achieve it.

Despite this, human rights in the COVID-19 crisis have mostly been asserted in either Hobbesian or Lockean terms. We hear of human rights in government’s angry response to criticism of the National Coronavirus Command Council, that its decisions should not be questioned and need not be transparent as they are taken in order to protect all our rights to life and health – i.e., we have ‘given up’ our rights so that we may be ‘protected’ from death and disorder. Hobbes also appears in the skop, skiet en donder of our police and defence force’s enforcement of regulations under lockdown. Again, the idea seems to be that we have given up our rights to the freedom and security of the person and freedom from state violence in return for being protected against the ravages of the virus. Locke’s notion of individual freedom haunts complaints about the limitations placed on, for example, individuals’ freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom to trade – the threats by big business to disregard lockdown rules and to commence operations because the lockdown breaches their rights to individual freedom and ‘freedom to transact’. Despite vague calls for the articulation of a ‘new social compact’ or a ‘new economic vision’, we have not seen real alternatives to the understandings of Hobbes and Locke referred to above.  Calls for a new social compact and new economic vision have not been made on the basis of rights, or any normative basis, but rather explicitly on so-called ‘non-ideological’ terms, with an emphasis on efficiency and ‘what will work’.

Perhaps, to end, in this lack is where opportunity – bound to lurk in any crisis – is also found in this crisis. Crisis is, after all, at the root of critique.  The collective shock to our systems may just re-alert us to the need to continuously assert our rights, but not without the necessary critical reflection. We should assert our rights against the wanton exercise of state power and even against other people if they do us harm, but in ways that invite conversation about what is good for all of us and how we can not only build better worlds and live better, but build them better and live better together.  

Opinion article by Prof Karin van Marle, Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, and Prof Danie Brand, Director: Free State Centre for Human Rights 


News Archive

Studies to reveal correlation between terrain, energy use, and giraffe locomotion
2016-11-18



More than half of giraffes in captivity in Europe are afflicted by lameness. This high prevalence represents an important welfare issue, similar to other large zoo animals.

According to Dr Chris Basu, a veterinarian at the Royal Veterinary College in the UK, giraffes in captivity are often afflicted by overgrown hooves, laminitis and joint problems. Diagnosis and treatment is limited by our understanding of anatomy and function, more specifically the locomotion of these animals. Although the giraffe is such a well-known and iconic animal, relatively little has been studied about their locomotor behaviour.

Dr Basu recently visited South Africa to do fieldwork on the locomotion of giraffes as part of his PhD studies under the mentorship of world-renowned Professor of Evolutionary Biomechanics, Prof John Hutchinson. This project is a joint venture between Dr Basu and Dr Francois Deacon, researcher in the Department of Animal, Wildlife, and Grassland Sciences at the UFS. Dr Deacon is a specialist in giraffe habitat-related research. 

Together Prof Hutchinson and Drs Deacon and Basu form a research group, working on studies about giraffe locomotion.

Wild giraffe population decrease by 40% in past decade

“Locomotion is one of the most common animal behaviours and comes with a significant daily energetic cost. Studying locomotion of wild animals aids us in making estimates of this energetic cost. Such estimates are useful in understanding how giraffes fit into ecosystems. Future conservation efforts will be influenced by knowledge of the energy demands in giraffes.

“Understanding aspects of giraffe locomotion also helps us to understand the relationships between anatomy, function and evolution. This is relevant to our basic understanding of the natural world, as well as to conservation and veterinary issues,” said Dr Deacon.

Locomotion study brings strategy for specialist foot care

On face value it seems as if foot disease pathologies are more common in zoo giraffes than in wild giraffes. “However, we need a good sample of data from both populations to prove this assumption,” said Dr Basu. 

This phenomenon is not well understood at the moment, but it’s thought that diet, substrate (e.g. concrete, straw, sand and grass) and genetics play a part in foot disease in giraffes. “Understanding how the feet are mechanically loaded during common activities (standing, walking, running) gives our research group ideas of where the highest strains occur, and later how these can be reduced through corrective foot trimming,” said Dr Basu.

Through the studies on giraffe locomotion, the research group plans to devise strategies for corrective foot trimming. At the moment, foot trimming is done with the best evidence available, which is extrapolation from closely related animals such as cattle. “But we know that giraffes’ specialist anatomy will likely demand specialist foot care,” Dr Basu said.

Studying giraffes in smaller versus larger spaces

The research group has begun to study the biomechanics of giraffe walking by looking at the kinematics (the movement) and the kinetics (the forces involved in movement) during walking strides. For this he studied adult giraffes at three zoological parks in the UK. 

However, due to the close proximity of fencing and buildings, it is not practical to study fast speeds in a zoo setting. 

A setting such as the Willem Pretorius Nature Reserve, near Ventersburg in the Free State, Kwaggafontein Nature Reserve, near Colesberg in the Karoo, and the Woodland Hills Wildlife Estate in Bloemfontein are all ideal for studying crucial aspects such as “faster than walking” speeds and gaits to measure key parameters (such as stride length, step frequency and stride duration). These studies are important to understand how giraffe form and function are adapted to their full range of locomotor behaviours. It also helps to comprehend the limits on athletic capacity in giraffes and how these compare to other animals. 

Drones open up unique opportunities for studying giraffes

The increasing availability of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)/drones opens up unique opportunities for studying locomotion in animals like giraffes. Cameras mounted onto remotely controlled UAVs are a straightforward way to obtain high-quality video footage of giraffes while they run at different speeds.

“Using two UAVs, we have collected high definition slow motion video footage of galloping giraffes from three locations in the Free State. We have also collected detailed information about the terrain that the giraffes walked and ran across. From this we have created 3D maps of the ground. These maps will be used to examine the preferred terrain types for giraffes, and to see how different terrains affect their locomotion and energy use,” said Dr Deacon.

“The raw data (videos) will be digitised to obtain the stride parameters and limb angles of the animals. Later this will be combined with anatomical data and an estimation of limb forces to estimate the power output of the limbs and how that changes between different terrains,” said Dr Basu.


Related articles:

23 August 2016: Research on locomotion of giraffes valuable for conservation of this species
9 March 2016:Giraffe research broadcast on National Geographic channel
18 Sept 2015 Researchers reach out across continents in giraffe research
29 May 2015: Researchers international leaders in satellite tracking in the wildlife environment

 

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