Latest News Archive

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

Contesting ideologies in sustainable agriculture; looking at nature versus technology

09 May 2022 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Stephen Collett

Prof Franke Inaugural Lecture — Prof Linus Franke delivered his inaugural lecture on the topic Contested Science for Sustainable Agriculture.

Conducting research on weed control for India at the Scottish Agricultural College in Scotland, studying soybean at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture in Nigeria, and working with genetically modified crops at Agrosystems Research, Dienst Landbouwkundig Onderzoek (DLO) in Wageningen in the Netherlands, grain legumes in sub-Saharan Africa, and potatoes in South Africa.

These are some of the agricultural practices that Prof Linus Franke, Academic Head of the Department of Soil, Crop and Climate Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS), has seen and experienced in several countries, which contributed to his extensive knowledge on this matter.

More specifically, sustainable agriculture is his passion and the focus of his life’s work. In celebration of his academic career, this was also the topic of his inaugural lecture: Contested Science for Sustainable Agriculture, delivered on the Bloemfontein Campus on 4 May 2022.

With years of experience in the field, he reflected on sustainable agriculture, firstly stating that it would be good if we could have discussions on sustainable agriculture and the future of agriculture based on empirical evidence. “However, the reality is that ideology and a strong involvement of non-specialists is unavoidable,” he says.

Secondly, he adds, it would be a major improvement if we could move away from embracing universal principles for farming practices and forcing them into a local context. “It would be better if local contexts and aspirations could guide the way in which general production principles are applied.” Adding to that, he states the importance of measurements. “If you want to embrace the concept of sustainability, you must be able to measure it.”

Solutions to environmental problems

In his lecture, he took the audience back to years ago when he was doing his master’s research on organic farming systems, excited about organic agriculture as an approach that holds the promise of tackling major environmental problems in a radical manner. This bout of excitement about the prospects of organic agriculture was, however, short-lived. Fed up with the “dogmatic and anti-science attitude and the tribalism in the sector”, he saw his flirt with organic agriculture as youthful foolishness.

After spending years in India and Nigeria, Prof Franke produced reports on the sustainability and trade impacts of genetically modified crops. People in the organic and green movement, however, have expressed opposed views. “In their eyes, I was one of those short-sighted scientists unable to recognise the dangers of genetically modified (GM) crops.”

Investments in regenerative agriculture have become a means to reduce the pressure to invest in curbing greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use elsewhere. – Prof Linus Franke

This made him wonder what drives these polarised discussions on GM crops and sustainable agriculture in general. “I learned that the strong and almost irrational position that the green movement has taken against GM crops and in favour of organic agriculture is merely a reflection of underlying emotions and preferences,” he says.

He explains two different lines of thinking about how to deal with the ecological challenges associated with agriculture, namely looking at nature to find solutions to environmental problems associated with agriculture, versus the idea that technology will come to our rescue. “The ecological problems we face in relation to agriculture are caused by modern farming technologies. Genetic modification is seen as an extension of the technologies that were responsible for the problems in the first place. To solve the problem, we need to look back at nature, learn from nature, and apply ecological principles to farming. You could argue that this view is rather unscientific and techno phobic. But believing that new technologies will come to recue us in the looming ecological crisis is equally based on a gut feeling, there are no guarantees that this will happen.”

Regenerative agriculture

Despite the strong position taken by the green movement in favour of organic agriculture, the organic movement became stagnant. “In Europe it represents only 5% of the total agricultural production and in South Africa it never really took off. GM crops have been relatively easily accepted here.”

GM crops and organic agriculture may not be major issues in South Africa, but regenerative agriculture has become a big topic and the discussion and dynamics around regenerative agriculture resemble those around organic agriculture.

Prof Linus Franke delivered his inaugural lecture on the topic Contested Science for Sustainable Agriculture. (Photo: Stephen Collett)

"Over time, new approaches to agriculture have emerged, promising radical improvements in sustainability. Including conservation agriculture, holistic grazing, permaculture, and agro-forestry, these new approaches are grouped under the flag of regenerative farming and are attracting much attention. This has stimulated interest in using knowledge of ecological processes to improve agricultural production.

“This is truly positive,” states Prof Franke. “It is great to see farmers in South Africa coming together and thinking about ways to apply some of these principles in their farming practices.”

Many of these approaches have proven their merits, but only under certain conditions. “Although many see regenerative farming approaches as globally applicable solutions to the big ecological challenges of today, it is important to take note of the context and the empirical evidence of the claimed benefits. Inspiration by nature does not necessarily lead to farming practices that are ecologically superior,” he says.

Conservation agriculture, for instance, worked on large-scale mechanised crop farms in Australia and the Americas and it gained a firm foothold in the Western Cape. “But in Africa, including South Africa, conservation agriculture is widely promoted among smallholders, often with disappointing results,” he says.

Another challenge he addressed during his lecture, was that of expectations of regenerative agriculture being way beyond what farmers actually achieve. He found that large food corporations had announced major investments in regenerative agriculture, and by doing so, hoped to reduce their carbon footprint regarding production activities. The big issue here is that it is highly uncertain and questionable whether these improvements in carbon sequestration can be achieved. Prof Franke believes that for some companies, investments in regenerative agriculture have become a means to reduce the pressure to invest in curbing greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use elsewhere.

Watch recording of the Inaugural Lecture below:

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered

2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply. What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations. You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?)

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@ufs.ac.za

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