Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

#WomensMonth: I am a woman, not a rock

03 August 2022 | Story Nontombi Velelo | Photo André Damons

Opinion article by Nontombi Velelo, PhD student; Social Science Programme Director and Sociology Lecturer at the University of the Free State.

History reminds us of the 20 000 women who marched to the Union Buildings on 9 August 1956, calling for the free movement of black women in South African urban areas. This act illustrated the sisterhood bond that the early feminist thinkers aspired to, since women from different backgrounds and races participated in the march. The women who participated in the protest challenged the systematic oppressive and racist rules of the apartheid regime. As one reflects on this phenomenon, one recognises solidarity among the women of 1956, which dispels the perception that women cannot unite for a common cause. It also creates an illusion that South African men and women are comrades in the struggle since they fought against colonialism and apartheid and, to some extent, share similar experiences regarding violation of human rights. Therefore, the most logical action is to have a common understanding of systematic oppression, violation, and exclusion.

Post-apartheid, 28 years into democracy, South African women still find themselves existing within similar conditions from the past. Most people invested efforts in unpacking women's experiences as victims of gender-based violence (GBV), the causes of GBV, and possible remedies for GBV. Undoubtedly, GBV has presented itself as a social ill and demonstrates the coercive power dynamics that exist within society. President Cyril Ramaphosa has declared gender-based violence as the South African pandemic, yet the government has undertaken no active efforts to respond rather than react to the phenomenon. Instead, the state has paid lip service to what needs to be done to ensure the safety of women in the country. Between October and December 2021, more than 900 South African women were murdered; these are reported cases, but there are many unreported cases related to GBV and femicide. Approximately 51% of South African women have experienced some form of violence. The call for the free movement of women in the country is far from being answered.

The issue of GBV has distracted us from recognising other existing problems experienced by women in South Africa – unemployment being one of them. Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) reported that 42,1% of South African households are headed by women, 39,6% of urban households are headed by women, and 47,7% of rural households are also headed by women. The issue is that 36,4% of these women are unemployed and living under the harsh realities of extreme poverty – remembering that some are single parents taking care of their dependent family members. We should not forget the problem of absent biological fathers who are neither emotionally nor financially present in their children's lives. They are responsible for ensuring that the basic needs of their children and dependent family members are addressed. We often assume that social grants should help relieve the pressures of unemployment and childcare; however, the reality is that it cannot even reduce half of SASSA beneficiaries' needs due to the escalating prices of commodities. Those fortunate enough to find employment are confronted with the constant battle of pursuing their career ambitions and family lives. Women excelling in their careers are often perceived as having failed in their family responsibilities (being good mothers and wives). The bread-and-butter issues have become a thorny subject for women who are unemployed or pursuing their careers.

The other challenge is the issue of land restitution and distribution and its role in addressing socio-economic inequalities and challenges. Though the land restitution and distribution debates advocate equal land distribution among men and women, few women have land ownership. Approximately 13% of South African women have private ownership of farmland. However, things have not changed for women living in rural areas since the discourse around land reform. Women in rural areas are subjected to the sexist oppression of traditional leaders, who do not recognise the importance of land ownership by women. In some contexts, it is perceived that women do not have any form of rights or privilege to landownership. Social norms do not encourage us to recognise women as landowners – land ownership is often recognised under marriage. If the husband passes on, the land will belong to his family to avoid losing it if a woman remarries. Due to patrilineal inheritance custom, a boy child will often be the one to inherit the land rather than a girl child. Therefore, some traditional norms do not recognise women as entitled to land ownership.

Women are vulnerable to climate change resulting from their poor socio-economic background. Women in rural areas represent a higher percentage of poor communities and depend for their livelihood on the natural resources threatened by climate change. Having a lack of access to natural resources puts women in stressful situations. In most cases, it is the responsibility of women in rural areas to ensure that their dependent family members have access to clean drinking water. When there is no access to water, for example, women would have to find means to get water and, in some cases, even travel long distances to find water. Also, they are the ones expected to gather wood to ensure that their children are fed and have drinking water. In most communities, women are not active participants in decision-making. We have internalised the notion that men are more rational leaders than women; therefore, we tend not to acknowledge women's voices in decision-making.

Commemorating Women's Month

9 August celebrates the monumental achievement of the women of 1956 who fought against sexist and racial segregation. Those women understood their enemy and united in dealing with the enemy. The present-day women are confronted with intersecting challenges. I believe South Africa should not commemorate Women's Month, since women still do not have freedom and still experience the violation of their human rights. We need active solutions, like the 1959 women, to mitigate our challenges. There is nothing to celebrate about being a woman in South Africa, since womanhood is subjected to abuse, violation, and exclusion. Without minimising the efforts and contributions of those who came before us, we should mourn the social injustices directed at, and the traumatic experiences of, South African women. The notion of imbokodo subjected women to systematic dominance, disrespect, violation, and exploitation. The lives of South African women are devalued; they continue to experience trauma imposed by the system of patriarchy.

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.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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