Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
03 May 2021 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Sonia Small
Prof Robert Bragg recently participated in a live panel discussion with leaders from the food and beverage sector, debating the challenges facing the industry and sharing their lessons and solutions.

Prof Robert Bragg from the Department of Microbiology and Biochemistry at the University of the Free State formed part of a live panel discussion with leaders from the food and beverage sector, debating the challenges facing the industry and sharing their lessons and solutions.

The discussion, part of a week-long virtual event (19-23 April), was attended by more than 1 300 attendees representing 500 food manufacturers, retailers, ingredient companies, and laboratories from 83 countries.

The magazine, New Food, coordinated the initiative that focused on food integrity. Speaking with Prof Bragg at the session that centred around animal welfare, zoonotic disease, and antibiotics, were Catherine McLaughlin, Chair, Responsible Use of Medicines in Agriculture (RUMA); Vicky Bond, UK Managing Director, The Humane League; and Daniela Battaglia, Livestock Development Officer, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

The rise of antibiotic resistance

James Russell, President of the British Veterinary Association (BVA), was the moderator of the discussion that also touched on the issues surrounding animal welfare; how animal welfare can impact meat quality; avoiding future zoonotic disease; the rise of antibiotic resistance; ethical considerations to be mindful of; and the use of pesticides and safety considerations.

Prof Bragg specifically talked about antibiotic resistance. “Mankind has major problems with antibiotics,” he said. 

He asked if animal agriculture can be sustained without the use of antibiotics and stated that it was necessary to look at alternatives. Possible solutions he suggested include improved vaccines, bacteriophages, and phage enzymes. He, however, believes that biosecurity will be the most effective alternative. 

Living in a post-antibiotic area

Disinfectants are one of the biosecurity measures taken to minimise the risk of infectious diseases. “But it is important to be aware of the fact that as resistance to antibiotics increases the resistance to disinfectants also increases,” said Prof Bragg. 

He continued: “An increase in the use of disinfectants increases the resistance to disinfectants. This is also evident in humans, especially now during the COVID-19 pandemic. Much of these disinfectants are also of poor quality,” he said. 

According to Prof Bragg, we are living in a post-antibiotic era. “Although food standards are higher in developed countries such as in Europe – where people can pay more for poultry that were fed diets with reduced antibiotics, it is important to keep in mind that people cannot pay the same for poultry in developing countries. These countries often import poultry from countries where the food standards are not that high and where birds were treated to diets containing more antibiotics. A large supplier of poultry in Africa is small-scale farmers, who also feed their birds food containing higher levels of antibiotics.” 

“We need to look at the antibiotic problem as a global problem; a concern that will be with us for a while,” said Prof Bragg.

One solution provided by the group was for mankind to reduce its meat intake and moving to a more plant-based diet. This will have a significant effect on animal welfare as well as reducing the demand for antibiotics.

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