Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 September 2021 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small (Kaleidoscope Studios)
Prof Francis Petersen is Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.


South Africa is in trouble. No matter what your political or ethical persuasion – this much is abundantly clear. And if some of the opinions expressed lately by prominent economists are anything to go by, many are losing faith in whether we can still turn around a downward economic trajectory. 

 

But before we make up our minds either way, it is important to first face a truth that lies at the core of it all:  It is impossible to build a thriving economy on the back of a divided society. This makes societal reform a logical departure point for any economic relief efforts.  

And here the higher education sector has a definite and vital role to play.

On the battlefield of unexpected calamities, the South African economy can be compared to a soldier who has taken too many hits.  First, the devastating impact on so many sectors of our society caused by COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions; followed by the question over misspent or missing pandemic support funds; and then the final agonising blow – the looting and destruction in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal in July, leaving a gaping hole of around 50 billion rand in damages

Equally heart-breaking and disconcerting as the physical damages and loss of life, is the damage caused to our nation’s psyche, with racist and classist fault lines reappearing, fuelled by the divisive rhetoric of unscrupulous leaders.
Looming ominously over this crowded battlefield, are the murky clouds of corruption at the highest level and of the most disturbing kind, which have been systematically and painfully laid bare by the Zondo Commission over the past three years.

We truly find ourselves at a very low point as a nation. Financially, morally, and mentally.

And, like all other sectors of society, higher education needs to ask itself what it can do – if anything – to help fix what is broken. 

Changing role of universities

Universities used to have a rather narrow focus on education and the creation of new knowledge. This role has, however, evolved considerably over the past decade or two. Their function nowadays is very much a societal one, where the focus on using skills and knowledge to make a real difference in the societies they serve and draw their students from – the engaged university.  

Let’s be clear: Higher education cannot solve poverty and inequality. That is the domain of government, which needs to ensure that appropriate policies are in place that will constructively stimulate investment and assistance from the private sector and industry.

The higher education sector needs to focus on its strengths. And that is to do research; to offer advice and come up with possible solutions; to educate and to provide skills that will help uplift individuals, families, and communities.

In short: universities need to deliver graduates who will ultimately build a better society, and through engaged scholarship change the lives of people. 

What has become abundantly clear, though, is that education alone is not enough. The corruption implications and moral dilemmas that many of our highly qualified politicians and leaders are embroiled in, prove that more is needed than just academic aptitude. 

The purpose of universities should therefore not only be to deliver good workers or thinkers. Universities need to deliver good citizens. Citizens that possess unshakeable values and ethics, enabling them to become good leaders.

During a recent 2021 University of the Free State Thought-Leader webinar titled Is South Africa falling apart – where to from here? panellists stated that the role of universities is to create a culture of active citizenry, to play a part in the holistic transformation of society, to ensure the sharing of research and discoveries, and to ensure inclusive academic excellence. These are no small feats and something higher education institutions should strive for.  

Creating a new generation of leaders

While young people spend time on university campuses, it is vital that – along with academic knowledge – universities educate them about the norms and values that form the bedrock of a healthy, thriving society. Not only teaching these values of social justice, respect, tolerance, and care – but also demonstrating how they find practical application.   
Universities should be microcosms of an ideal society, where respect for human rights and diversity, equality, and care underpin all our policies, communication, and interactions.

Universities should consistently use discourse platforms to promote these values and to speak out against things that threaten them, such as corruption, injustice, and prejudice in any form.

But once again, it goes further than that. Not only do we need to teach and encourage our students to speak out. We need to educate them on how to speak out. 

Unfortunately, so many of the student protest actions on our university campuses often fall short in this aspect, as valid concerns and demands are regularly overshadowed by disrespectful rhetoric, accompanied by unwarranted destruction of property and endangering lives. 

Recently, the University of the Free State had the opportunity to host a book launch by Helen Zille, the Federal Council Chairperson of the DA. Among the guests was EFF leader Julius Malema.

Afterwards, some Political Science students remarked how surprised they were to witness the very civil interaction between Zille and Malema – in the light of their very public political spats and differences.

And here lies an important lesson for our young South Africans: that there is a level of maturity that needs to be displayed if we want to take our country forward together. 

We can differ from someone – and passionately express our differences – but retain an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual respect. Our young leaders of tomorrow need to understand that, in the absence of such an atmosphere, reasonable negotiations become impossible, and they run the real risk of thwarting the very cause they are fighting for. 

Interconnectedness of our society

As much as higher education has a clearly defined role, it can only fulfil this role effectively if it is part of a well-functioning, larger system. |

As higher education, government, private sector, and industry, we are interconnected and unable to function properly in isolation.

Universities can, for example, teach young people the value of entrepreneurship and equip them with the necessary skills to contribute to the economy. But without an enabling environment created by government, policies, and commitment, as well as buy-in and support from industry, it all falls apart.

As much as I cannot thrive if my neighbour is suffering, we cannot rebuild our economy if we don’t acknowledge our interdependence and find new, innovative ways to collaborate to move ahead together.  

The age-old principles of ubuntu need to find a renewed, modern application in South Africa today. 

Involving our youth

Whatever form economic rescue efforts take, it must involve the young people of our country. Making decisions that will profoundly influence our youth without involving them in the process, is downright irresponsible. 

We simply cannot afford to alienate our leaders of tomorrow and then expect them to be ready to take over the baton and not repeat the mistakes of their predecessors.

At the University of the Free State, our student participation in university governance structures was at an all-time high of 70% last year. We see this as an important accomplishment – we hope to build on and expand this even further. In most of my dealings with our young leaders of tomorrow, I certainly get the impression that they are keen to make a positive contribution to our country. But they yearn for guidance, encouragement, and opportunities.  

‘Nothing about us without us’, is a slogan used widely in various contexts nowadays, with its roots tracing back to South African disability advocates in the 1980s. It is equally applicable to young people in our current South African predicament.

Our youth needs to be turned from apathy to active involvement. Without them, no economic ‘rescue efforts’ will have long-term sustainability. 

After all: it is their future that is at stake.

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

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