Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 June 2023 | Story Dr Maréve Biljohn | Photo Supplied
Dr Maréve Biljohn
Dr Maréve Biljohn is Head of the Department of Public Administration and Management at the University of the Free State (UFS).


Opinion article by Dr Maréve Biljohn, Head of the Department of Public Administration and Management, University of the Free State (UFS).


Africa Public Service Day was commemorated on 23 June under the theme ‘The African Continental Free Trade Area will require a fit-for-purpose African Public Administration to succeed’. This theme highlights a “fit-for-purpose” public administration, which is of significance for South Africa’s local government sphere given the dismal service-delivery decline in some municipalities. Considering this, a reflection on the state of local governance and service delivery is prudent.


A fit-for-purpose public administration should be anchored in (i) an effective management praxis of systems and processes, as well as (ii) professional and resource capacity that fulfils local government’s mandate of contributing to transformative change in society. Universally this praxis of systems and processes is underpinned by activities of policymaking, organising, human resourcing, financing, work procedures, and control of the functions, structures, and capacities of the public sector. The effective management praxis of public administration systems and processes globally should be underscored by public service traits that are a composite of being professional, qualified, highly skilled, agile, responsive, goal-directed, innovative, and relevant. In South Africa, Section 195 of the Constitution provides the basic guiding principles and values governing the execution of the public administration praxis across the three government spheres.

The public administration praxis in South African municipalities is in distress given the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environment in which it functions. Research shows that this distress is attributed to some municipalities’ inability to execute basic functions and service delivery, poor infrastructure planning and maintenance, financial and revenue-generation challenges, corruption, service-delivery protests, and staff turbulence. Partly, this distress is also symptomatic of challenges emanating from factors within internal and external municipal environments. Inherent to municipalities’ VUCA internal environment, these challenges relate to issues of governance, financial management, service delivery, and labour relations. Their recurring nature has also resulted in them being the focus of South African local government reforms over the past 25 years, including the 2009 Local Government Turnaround Strategy, as well as the 2013 Back-to-Basics campaign. Thus, from the 2022 Auditor-General of South Africa report regarding the Municipal Finance Management Act, it is clear that even the last reform has not yielded the desired impact and outcomes. In this regard, service-delivery challenges remain the Achilles heel of South Africa’s local government landscape. 

Institutionally, a lack of or poor service delivery is evident from factors such as insufficient revenue generation, the non-achievement of service-delivery priorities, and not addressing community needs through municipal integrated development plans. Over the past decade, we have seen these factors expose inefficiencies in the South African municipal praxis of systems and processes that underpin the execution of public administration. These inefficiencies are evidenced in the lack of responsiveness of some municipalities to deliver sustainable services and facilitate community participation through their service-delivery system. Consequently, from a service-delivery perspective, the quality and quantity of service outputs delivered to citizens and service recipients in its external environment are either compromised, inferior, or non-existent. From a community participation perspective, research suggests that a lack of community engagement by some South African municipalities affects their responsiveness to the service-delivery needs of citizens. Examples of this are where community engagement is merely embarked on for legislative compliance purposes, but not necessarily prioritised as part of the formal (policies, plans, strategies) and informal (culture) institutions of the organisation. Hence, community priorities are received but not included in municipalities' formal plans. Another example is where community priorities were planned for, but could not be achieved because of a lack of revenue or funding. Lastly, a lack of responsiveness has been reported as part of the contributory reasons for the service-delivery protests that have been at the doorstep of municipalities over the past two decades.

A closer look

The state of local governance and service delivery in some South African municipalities paints a bleak picture. From this picture, it is apparent that the resilience of municipal service-delivery systems – whose functioning should be underpinned by effective public administration management – is under threat. It is also clear that such an effective management praxis of systems and processes underscoring a fit-for-purpose public administration operates at a deficit. This deficit, which is often the result of internal deficiencies, creates grave consequences for the optimal functioning of the municipal service-delivery system. While these systems are institutionally embedded and operated, their optimal functioning is not exclusively institutionally bound. Instead, their optimal functioning is equally grounded in citizen-centred local governance that informs the outputs of the service-delivery system, and through their participation keeps this system accountable. 

While this is the ideal, it is not always the case, and highlights that South African citizens should play a more constructive role in the local governance of municipal service delivery, to ensure its sustainability. Fortunately, we are seeing a social compact emerge where citizens are becoming more organised in challenging the status quo of local governance in municipalities, to preserve the citizen-centred foundations of our democracy. Similarly, we are seeing a citizenry and organised groups that are taking the initiative to collaborate with the public sector in general to address some of the societal challenges that confront our country. These collaborations and the challenging of the status quo are often grounded in principles of transformative social innovation that consider innovative approaches and solutions to address societal challenges. Apart from challenging the status quo, distributing social and economic resources to achieve social justice during service delivery is inherent to transformation. Innovation can occur through the introduction of a new service, product, or technology but its social aspects are underpinned by collaborations, networks, and partnerships that are formed to identify and implement such innovations.

Broader societal capacity and resources needed 

Transformative social innovation’s usefulness as an approach to finding alternative municipal service-delivery solutions reminds us of the citizen-centredness on which the South African local government legislative framework positions our governance and service-delivery systems. Notably, such citizen-centredness relies on society’s broader capacity for social action, citizen agency, and participation. It promotes a more prominent role for citizens to co-create new knowledge and innovative solutions to address municipal challenges. Society’s broader capacity for social action and citizen agency will also be instrumental in shaping the future responsiveness of South African municipalities amidst the recurring challenges cited. Conversely, it is the same societal capacity and citizen agency that should continuously challenge South African municipalities to rethink how fit-for-purpose their public administration is for implementing responsive service-delivery systems.

In conclusion, given the ailing state of service delivery in some South African municipalities, and the concomitant resource and capacity challenges, the reality is that broader societal capacity and resources are needed to restore service delivery. Hence, the local governance of service delivery will require a mix of new modes, constellations, and approaches that upscale citizen agency through the values of sound public governance. This might necessitate public administration and management reforms that reassess the current size and shape of municipalities, with an eye on remaining responsive amidst growing populations, increasing citizen demands, as well as socioeconomic and global challenges.  

News Archive

Important message to UFS students on NSFAS and financial aid in general
2013-02-01

31 January 2013

Dear Students

There remains some uncertainty as well as misinformation within the student body concerning NSFAS and financial aid in general. This communication is intended to provide the facts on the state of student funding at the University of the Free State (UFS). I hope you find this information helpful and that it would guide you in your decisions as you wait to hear from, or hopefully receive funding from NSFAS or any other source.

  1. Every year the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) determines how much funding is available to fund students at all universities in South Africa; this is determined in part by the student numbers. Universities do not ask for, or determine the DHET allocation and are instructed by government that “NSFAS will ensure that the universities comply with the processes, procedures…for the allocated funds.”

  2. On 14 December 2012 the UFS received notice from the DHET that our total allocation would be R108,331,215.66 and that this amount must be apportioned in the following categories:
    General NSFAS Funding R85,174,275.07
    Teacher Training R2,291,940.59
    Disability Funding R1,265,000.00
    Final-Year Programme R19,600,000.00

  3. The UFS received 5 952 applications for NSFAS funding and with the available funding we can only finance up to 3 000 students on the Qwaqwa and Bloemfontein Campuses, provided that those students satisfy the stringent criteria, e.g. the so-called “national means test” determined for all universities in the country. If we funded more students that the available monies allow, the university would be held accountable by the NSFAS Board and the DHET and this would threaten future funding.

  4. Students apply in the previous year and therefore late applications are less likely to receive funding.

  5. Academic merit also counts, therefore students who fail one or more modules are less likely to receive new or ongoing support from NSFAS. The combination of academic standing and financial need are among the important criteria in decision-making on NSFAS funds.

  6. The UFS is one of the few universities with a very efficient record in using every cent made available to support poor students; we are proud of this record. No money is sent back to NSFAS, except small amounts not claimed by students in the disability category. The university is not allowed to shift funds between categories as described in point #2 above.

  7. Allocations are not based on campus, but need.

  8. The UFS sets aside an additional R35,7 million (in 2013) from within its own budget as bursaries so that we can accommodate as many students as possible. We spend every cent of this funding on students.

  9. The UFS also raises millions in bursaries from the private sector to support poor and promising students, though these funds are often linked to the industry granting the money, e.g. Investec for Accounting students and SASOL for Chemistry students. This recruitment of bursaries is a 24/7 commitment of the Marketing Office and the Faculties and Heads of Departments are also active in raising funds from government agencies, parastatals and the private sector for students in their units.

  10. After almost all our 2013 funds were allocated in favour of students, we calculated a shortfall in the NSFAS allocation of approximately R51 million. We are in the process of making an urgent submission to NSFAS to consider this additional allocation, but we cannot guarantee that this plea can or will be met.

Finally, I want all our students to know that the University of the Free State works very hard to raise every cent we can to provide poor students with funding for their studies. Many of my colleagues, including support staff, who do not earn very much, use some of their meagre personal resources to help a student with money for registration or clothing or food. In fact, the No Student Hungry Campaign that raises more than R600,000 by UFS volunteers annually, is another mechanism for trying to assist students who might have money for studies, but not much else.

We do this because we care, and because this is what The Human Project at Kovsies is all about.

I therefore ask for your patience as we continue our labour of raising the funds that enable every deserving student to continue their studies at the University of the Free State.

Should you have any further questions about NSFAS, please leave an email inquiry on choanet@ufs.ac.za or mallettca@ufs.ac.za and we will endeavour to provide you with the information you require.

Sincerely Yours

Jonathan D Jansen
Vice-Chancellor and Rector
University of the Free State

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