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

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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