Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
08 October 2020 | Story Motsaathebe Serekoane | Photo Supplied

We need to acknowledge that inherent in opening up spaces that were previously reserved for exclusive inhabitation and use is problematic in the contestation for place and symbolic public representation. Broadening the heritage landscape allows us an opportunity to bridge the existing gaps in the heritage space, in particular, askew representation through monuments and declared sites.

The country’s 2030 Developmental Plan requires South Africa to continuously reflect on progress made since the dawn of democracy in 1994. The scope is big; my focus here is on the heritage landscape. I do not want to create an impression that this matter exists in isolation, the intersectional engagement is imminent. The conversation on heritage is vast. My summary of all I have read and heard is that at stake in South Africa, with the historical legacy of segregation policies, is the competing notion of space, conflicting and often-competing ideological notion of commemoration or memorialisation, and the lack of shared collective memory and meaning of public representation. Effectively we don’t know what to do with our historical text and footprints. 

“A community is divided when their perception of the same thing is divided” …Steve Biko

Three questions 

This is a challenge for the notion of inclusion (aka social cohesion) and a threat to preservation and conservation of the country’s heritage resources material. It is equally important that I bring to your attention related conversations with a position that asserts that forfeiting the past for the sake of the future is perhaps an overly simplistic way of conceptualising and describing how society moves beyond conflict or pain. The argument for imagining inclusive spaces necessitates a paradigm shift in our thinking. The literature argues for a move from multiculturalism to interculturalism because of cross-cultural overlaps, interaction, and negotiation. The interculturalism approach goes beyond opportunities and respect for existing cultural differences, to the pluralist transformation of public space, civic culture, and institutions. In line with this view, reconfiguration of public spaces towards inclusive ends would have to emphasise the politics of recognition and negotiation of difference. So where does this leave us? There are no easy answers. As the country embarks on the process of auditing and spatial identity transformation I put forward the following three questions:
• Whose conception of the past should prevail in the public realm?
• Whose conception of the present should prevail in the current realm for the future?
• How do we balance the old and the new so that we do not dump history?

Sustainable change will require consultation and participation

Advancing change affords interested and affected communities to develop an awareness of layered complexities of our history and intersectional voices (some louder than others), and promotes the practices of collaboration and capacity-building with community members to advance sustainable change. Sustainable change will require, in line with the democratic principles, that the review process acknowledges consultation and participation. Ideally, the audit and review process should be designed to encourage conversation, reflection, and social analysis. The transformation of spatial social milieu should assume collective ownership and management of space founded on the permanent and temporary participation of the 'interested and affected parties', with their multiple, varied, and even contradictory political interests. In the review of the current symbolic landscape for inclusion, the spatial identity transformation must be negotiated. It must be developed from a focal point that understands the interrelationship between space and spatial inscription through the form of street names, symbols, and public art. 

I can’t pre-empt the end of the process, the process should inform the outcome. Should it be that some of the statues are to be “repositioned and relocated”, as also stated in the president's speech, this should not be equated to dumping history/historical dumping. Reposition and relocation are plausible alternative arguments in the spatial reconfiguration discourse. If it is done well it should contribute to the educational programme of the country. It should also be kept in mind that memorabilia are protected by the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) No 25 1999. Subsequently, the audit and review will require a nuanced approach guided by the NHRA (including relevant legislation) and leaning towards a process-oriented, person-based approach to allow for agency/agility and new possibilities (cf. SONA pronouncement of imagining the New City). Imminent is a guiding or reference document that draws lessons from review processes demonstrated by, among others, the University of Free State’s review and ultimately relocation of the president MT Steyn statue to the War Museum. I believe the South African Heritage Resources Authority and its Provincial Heritage Resources Authority should guide the process. 

Heritage serves a social and economic function

Just as a footnote, it is prudent that we remind ourselves that heritage, in addition to many things, serves a social and economic function. Although I acknowledge the views that some of the symbols in the public spaces trigger painful memories of the past, losing those will rob the country of its rich narrative that, in line with NHRA, is to be bequeathed to the next generation, but also that can boost the country’s economy through heritage cultural tourism footprints. 

Ultimately, “Our heritage is unique and precious and it cannot be renewed. It helps us to define our cultural identity and therefore lies at the heart of our spiritual well-being and has the power to build our nation. It has the potential to affirm our diverse cultures and in so doing, shape our national character” …NHRA, No. 25 1999

Opinion article by Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer: Anthropology at the UFS.


News Archive

Conference: Expanded ARV treatment
2005-03-02

VENUE: University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa
DATE: 30 March 2005 - 1 April 2005

  • ARV Programme as on 24Feb Download Word document
     
  • Programme Special events Download Word document


    Official web site www.fshealth.gov.za/subsites/arvc

     


    Rationale for the Conference
    At the time of the planned Conference, much ground would have been covered, both in the Free State and in South Africa, in respect of the expanded public sector ARV treatment programme in respect of research, experiences in practice, training of staff, treatment of patients, lessons learned, successes and failures, etc. The time would then be quite opportune to share these in a systematic manner with other provinces and countries, as well as with the large variety of stakeholders and role players in the ARV and related domains, be they academics and researchers, policy makers and service/facility managers, the variety of caregivers, and the community organisations and affected patients.

The Conference and current research
The proposed Conference is, firstly, directly linked to the current research on the public sector roll-out of ARV treatment in the Free State conducted by several research institutions (e.g. CIET, CHSR&D, UCT Lung Institute). Secondly, the Conference could and would serve as a forum for other research groups in the country and further a field to report and share knowledge and experiences on ARV treatment and related initiatives. Lastly, the Conference will stage a golden opportunity for researchers and scientists, on the one hand, and policy makers, managers, and caregivers (as knowledge users), on the other hand, to engage in cross-disciplinary discourse on this mutual and topical theme.

Theme of Conference
Expanded ARV treatment in the Free State: sharing experiences

Focus
The focus is primarily on public sector ARV treatment in the Free State, but also initiatives/activities/perspectives of relevance to the Free State elsewhere in the country at large and further a field, as well as relevant ARV initiatives in the public, private, NGO and FBO sectors. Bear in mind, however, that ARV treatment is but part of a much more comprehensive approach to HIV and AIDS. The Conference will, therefore, not narrowly focus on the ARV treatment programme only. The broader context, other relevant dimensions, and a comprehensive approach to the challenges of HIV, AIDS and TB are of equal importance.

The purpose of the Conference
Enhance meaningful exchange, mutual understanding and collaboration among researchers, scientists, policy makers, managers and practitioners in the field of ARV treatment and related fields.

Share experiences in the various spheres of ARV treatment and related spheres (policy, management, practice, research, training, public-private-civil society sectors).

Record, reflect and report on the establishment of the ARV treatment programme in the Free State, and in within the context of the comprehensive HIV/AIDS programme.

Disseminate important research results on ARV treatment and related themes to health policy makers, managers, practitioners, communities and to the research community.

Stimulate discourse among various disciplines and various stakeholders/role players involved in ARV treatment and related programmes.

Sensitise and acquaint researchers to the requirements of policy makers, managers and practitioners in respect of ARV treatment and related fields.

Facilitate the implementation of research results in ARV treatment policy, programmes and practice.

Dissemination of Conference-related information
Information generated during the Conference could feed into policy, management and practice of ARV treatment, the training accompanying such programme, and the existing body of knowledge. After the Conference the information will be disseminated via the Internet and by scientific and popular publications.

Date and duration
Set for 30 & 31 March & 1 April 2005; to commence at 09:00 on the first day (30 March) and to end at 16:30 (1 April) the third day.

Format and scope of Conference
Alternating plenary, parallel sessions and debates focused on topical issues and interest groups. The Conference will strive to be maximally interactive and participative.

Themes and topics to cover:

  • Policy, management and health services/practice (various levels and contexts – clinical treatment, information, IT systems, pharmacy, laboratories, nutrition)
     
  • Research covering all relevant disciplines and diverse dimensions of ARV treatment and related themes
  • Training and evaluation of training
  • Patients, communities and civil society organisations
  • Public, private, NGO, FBO initiatives and partnerships

Emphasis will be on the Free State, however, with of significant involvement from other provinces, SADC countries, and countries further a field. The thrust will be to export lessons and experiences from the Free State, but also to import lessons and experiences from other provinces, countries and sectors.

Presenters
Key presenters from the Free State, other provinces, South Africa, from the private, FBO and NGO sectors, and from several other countries

Delegates
About half of the delegates will be Free State stakeholders and role players (all levels and all contexts). The other half will be role players and stakeholders in the ARV and related fields from other provinces, the national level, and other countries, as well as from the private, public and non-governmental sectors.

Focused workshops
Provision will be made for half-a-day or one-day workshop initiatives on the third day (1 April 2005).

Enquiries
For more information please contact:

Prof Dingie van Rensburg
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development
University of the Free State
PO Box 339
Bloenfontein
SOUTH AFRICA
9300

Contact:
Carin van Vuuren
Conference Organiser
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development
University of the Free State
P.O.Box 339
Bloemfontein
South Africa
9300
Tel +27 (0) 51 401 2181
Fax +27 (0) 51 4480370
Cell 0832932890
e-mail: arvconference.hum@mail.uovs.ac.za

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