Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
15 February 2021 | Story Supplied | Photo Supplied
Dr João Vidal is a research fellow at the Department of Plant Sciences and the Afromontane Research Unit (ARU) at the University of the Free State (UFS).

According to United Nations data projections for 2100, sub-Saharan Africa is set to experience a demographic explosion. The most rapid population growth zones in Africa are in or around mountains and the importance of managing these mountain ecosystems sustainably in order to maintain the benefits to such a growing population is critical, says Dr João Vidal, a research fellow at the Department of Plant Sciences and the Afromontane Research Unit (ARU) at the University of the Free State (UFS). 

The link between human population growth and the demand for water will impact these mountain grasslands. All of Africa’s important rivers originate in mountainous areas. The sustainable management of African mountain landscapes is thus vital for the sustained provision of quality water in suitable quantities. “Water is already limited in some places. This year we are facing another drought in South Africa, and if it was not for the mountains, it could have been much worse. The long-term resilience of Southern Africa’s mountains and their ecosystem services should be an absolute priority for both research and conservation,” says Dr Vidal.

Human population growth has several implications

As a mountain ecologist, his recent research is centred on developing indicators for monitoring biodiversity change in Southern Africa’s mountains. This is a collaborative research project with the South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON), Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, and the University of Pretoria.

Human population growth, as predicted for Southern Africa, has several implications for natural-resource management and biodiversity conservation. “Southern Africa has one of the highest proportions of grassland-dominated mountains in the world, comparable only to Central Asia,” says Dr Vidal. 

In December, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said during the launch of the 2021 Global Humanitarian Overview: “Conflict, climate change and COVID-19 have created the greatest humanitarian challenge since the Second World War. The number of people at risk of starvation has doubled. Hundreds of millions of children are out of school. Levels of extreme poverty have risen for the first time in 22 years.”

According to Dr Vidal this new scenario significantly increases the pressure on mountain environments and their biota, since people will have to find alternative ways of feeding their families, their animals, while the economy struggles to recover globally.

Through his research, Dr Vidal – together with a growing community of practices for Southern Africa’s mountains – aims to understand the socio-ecological functioning of these montane grasslands in order to encourage a science-policy-action interface for their sustainable management in a changing world. 


Alternative ways for measuring environmental change in mountains

Since much global mountain research is focused on forest-dominated mountains, Dr Vidal and his collaborators are developing specific tools to track climate change in grassy mountains.
He explains: “When you look at the available tools for tracking climate change in mountains, you have a tree line for many mountains in the world. However, with the Southern African grassy mountains, it is impossible to use such a tool. We are working on alternative ways for measuring environmental change in our mountains.

“As it gets warmer, certain communities of grasses may retract towards higher elevations because they need a certain minimum temperature to survive. The problem seems to be that current climate change is occurring at a much faster rate than most species might be able to retract. This means that higher temperatures may lead to habitat losses for temperature-vulnerable groups.

“Climate change is also making mountains increasingly vulnerable to ecological invasion by non-native species. The severe temperatures in mountains are a good barrier for many problematic lowland species. But with warmer temperatures in the mountains, these barriers are being weakened, increasing the number of potentially invasive plants in our mountains. With higher temperatures there is potential for a large guild of invasive trees to overrun grassland mountains affecting waterflow into dams and rivers. Examples are pines, willows, gums, and wattles, to name a few.

“The presence of invasive trees, especially along rivers, has long-term negative impacts on the functioning of mountain catchments. These trees destabilise riverbanks, extract large amounts of water, and cause local extinction of endemic montane biodiversity. In drier environments such as grasslands, this exacerbates the fragile water productivity,” he adds.

Global policymakers to recognise the value of grassy mountains 

It is important to draw attention to the value of natural grassy mountain systems around the world and to how threatened they are. The world’s grassy mountains need to be better studied and better placed on the global stage. This will encourage policy makers to recognise these systems and implement appropriate measures to facilitate their sustainable management. 

For the first time in 20 years, the recent International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) report to the United Nations included a chapter focusing solely on mountains. “Policymakers are finally realising how disproportionately important mountain environments are and how dramatically they are affected by climate change,” says Dr Vidal. 

However, African mountains are underrepresented in research literature; it is the only continent for which there is no data included in the IPCC report. There is an urgent need to represent African mountains – especially Southern Africa’s mountains – on the global stage when it comes to climate change,” states Dr Vidal.

Dr Vidal is conducting this study in partnership with Dr Ralph Clark, Director of the ARU on the UFS Qwaqwa Campus

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.

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