Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
15 August 2025 | Story Martinette Brits | Photo Stephen Collett
Prof Yonas Bahta
Prof Yonas Bahta, Professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics at the University of the Free State, delivered his inaugural lecture on the future of agricultural trade and food security, titled Can We Own the Future? The Ever-Changing Dynamics of Agricultural Trade and Food Security Amid Intensifying Agricultural Drought.

With the world hurtling towards a population of 9,7 billion by 2050 – and Africa set to make up more than a quarter of that – the question of whether we can ‘own the future’ has never been more urgent. In his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State (UFS), Prof Yonas Bahta from the Department of Agricultural Economics warned that climate change, trade tensions, and deepening food insecurity are converging to create unprecedented risks for farmers, economies, and communities.

“We find ourselves at a pivotal moment in human history, characterised by the intersection of climate change, particularly agricultural drought, resource scarcity, geopolitical instability, and the current trade reciprocal tariff, all of which pose significant threats to the foundational structures of global food systems,” he said.

 

From vulnerability to agency

Prof Bahta highlighted the stark reality that the world population is projected to reach 9,7 billion by 2050, with Africa constituting 2,5 billion. “Despite this growth, the agricultural sector predominantly operates at a subsistence level, with diminishing resources available to farming communities, especially smallholder farmers who rely on agriculture as their primary source of employment and sustenance.”

In South Africa, climate change – particularly agricultural drought – is affecting both commercial and smallholder farmers, with cascading effects on food security, employment, and livelihoods. Coupled with disease outbreaks, these factors lead to reduced crop yields, supply shocks, and trade imbalances that ripple through the economy.

Food insecurity remains a critical concern, with approximately 15 million South African households experiencing moderate to severe food insecurity – a figure even higher (25,5%) among households engaged in agricultural activities. Prof Bahta emphasised that these challenges are compounded by “institutional barriers such as the current trade reciprocal tariff by the USA, limited access to credit, crop and livestock insurance, inadequate road infrastructure, and electricity shortages”.

Despite these challenges, Prof Bahta sees clear opportunities. He pointed to Africa, including South Africa’s extensive arable land; research and innovation have highlighted the benefits of integrating traditional techniques with modern approaches such as climate-smart agriculture and its membership of BRICS and other trading partners as levers for resilience and growth. “Securing the future is not about mere assertion but about the stewardship of markets, data, and people,” he said. By aligning trade policy, drought preparedness, and social protection within robust institutions, “the country can transition from vulnerability to agency, from passively observing the future to actively shaping it. In doing so, we may indeed assert with integrity that ‘We own the future’.”

 

About Prof Yonas Bahta

Prof Yonas Bahta is a Professor and NRF-rated researcher in the Department of Agricultural Economics at the University of the Free State. He joined the UFS as a researcher in 2014 and has supervised more than 42 postgraduate students (both MSc and PhD), of whom 29 have completed their studies (10 PhD and 19 MSc).

He holds a PhD (2007) and MSc (2004, with distinction) in Agricultural Economics from the UFS, and a BSc (1994) in Agricultural Economics from Haramaya University, Ethiopia. Prof Bahta serves on the editorial boards of several journals, acts as a reviewer and guest editor, and is a member of several national and international professional bodies.

His work has been recognised with an award from the African Growth and Development Policy Modelling Consortium (AGRODEP), and in 2024 he was rated among the top 2% of researchers globally by Elsevier.

News Archive

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans
2006-05-19

From the left are Prof Magda Fourie (Vice-Rector: Academic Planning), Prof Gerhardt de Klerk (Dean: Faculty of the Humanities), George Weideman and Prof Bernard  Odendaal (acting head of the UFS  Department of Afrikaans and Dutch, German and French). 
Photo (Stephen Collett):

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans

On the survival of a language a persistent and widespread misconception exists that a “language will survive as long as people speak the language”. This argument ignores the higher functions of a language and leaves no room for the personal and historic meaning of a language, said the writer George Weideman.

He delivered the D.F. Malherbe Memorial Lecture organised by the Department Afrikaans at the University of the Free State (UFS). Dr. Weideman is a retired lecturer and now full-time writer. In his lecture on the writer’s role and responsibility with regard to language, he also focused on the language debate at the University of Stellenbosch (US).

He said the “as-long-as-it-is spoken” misconception ignores the characteristics and growth of literature and other cultural phenomena. Constitutional protection is also not a guarantee. It will not stop a language of being reduced to a colloquial language in which the non-standard form will be elevated to the norm. A language only grows when it standard form is enriched by non-standard forms; not when its standard form withers. The growth or deterioration of a language is seen in the growth or decline in its use in higher functions. The less functions a language has, the smaller its chance to survive.

He said Afrikaans speaking people are credulous and have misplaced trust. It shows in their uncritical attitude with regard to the shifts in university policies, university management and teaching practices. Afrikaners have this credulity perhaps because they were spoilt by white supremacy, or because the political liberation process did not free them from a naïve and slavish trust in government.

If we accept that a university is a kind of barometer for the position of a language, then the institutionalised second placing of Afrikaans at most tertiary institutions is not a good sign for the language, he said.

An additional problem is the multiplying effect with, for instance, education students. If there is no need for Afrikaans in schools, there will also be no  need for Afrikaans at universities, and visa versa.

The tolerance factor of Afrikaans speaking people is for some reasons remarkably high with regard to other languages – and more specifically English. With many Afrikaans speaking people in the post-apartheid era it can be ascribed to their guilt about Afrikaans. With some coloured and mostly black Afrikaans speaking people it can be ascribed to the continued rejection of Afrikaans because of its negative connotation with apartheid – even when Afrikaans is the home language of a large segment of the previously oppressed population.

He said no one disputes the fact that universities play a changing role in a transformed society. The principle of “friendliness” towards other languages does not apply the other way round. It is general knowledge that Afrikaans is, besides isiZulu and isiXhosa, the language most spoken by South Africans.

It is typical of an imperialistic approach that the campaigners for a language will be accused of emotional involvement, of sentimentality, of longing for bygone days, of an unwillingness to focus on the future, he said.

He said whoever ignores the emotional aspect of a language, knows nothing about a language. To ignore the emotional connection with a language, leads to another misconception: That the world will be a better place without conflict if the so-called “small languages” disappear because “nationalism” and “language nationalism” often move closely together. This is one of the main reasons why Afrikaans speaking people are still very passive with regard to the Anglicising process: They are not “immune” to the broad influence that promotes English.

It is left to those who use Afrikaans to fight for the language. This must not take place in isolation. Writers and publishers must find more ways to promote Afrikaans.

Some universities took the road to Anglicision: the US and University of Pretoria need to be referred to, while there is still a future for Afrikaans at the Northwest University and the UFS with its parallel-medium policies. Continued debate is necessary.

It is unpreventable that the protest over what is happening to Afrikaans and the broad Afrikaans speaking community must take on a stronger form, he said.

 

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