Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 January 2025 | Story Charlene Stanley | Photo Supplied
University of the Free State - Main Gate
The THE rankings are known to guide potential students to identify the best institutions for their chosen field of study, allowing them to compare different universities based on the strength of their academic offerings in specific study fields.

The recently published Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings by Subject 2025 shows that the University of the Free State (UFS) is ranked among the top 1 000 global higher learning institutions in its nine evaluated subjects, with most subject areas showing improved results from those recorded in 2024. 

The annually published THE World University Rankings by Subject is a highly regarded, trusted global benchmark for academic excellence in specific disciplines. Its methodology is designed to evaluate universities by employing a range of performance indicators categorised under five core pillars, namely Teaching, Research Environment, Research Quality, Industry, and International Outlook. 

Under Teaching, factors such as reputation, student-to-staff ratio, doctorate-to-bachelor ratio, and institutional income are considered. The Research pillar focuses on aspects such as productivity, citation impact, and influence. Among the other considerations are the income generated from industry partnerships and patents, as well as the number of international students, staff, and co-authored publications.

The methodology is carefully adjusted for each subject, ensuring fairness and accuracy by considering field-specific research cultures and publication practices.

The complete list of UFS subject rankings is as follows:

Law: 301+  *
Arts and Humanities: 501-600 # 
Education Studies: 501-600  #
Psychology: 501-600  #
Life Sciences: 601-800  #
Social Sciences: 601-800 #
Medical and Health: 801-1 000  #

Physical Sciences: 801-1 000 #

*The “+” label indicates that there is no upper limit and is used in instances where the THE does not provide exact ranks for universities beyond this position, therefore grouping institutions together to avoid overly fine distinctions at lower ranking tiers. (Eg. 801+ indicates 801st or lower.)

# The range label (eg. 801-1000), indicates that a university is ranked somewhere within this narrower range, (eg. between 801st  and 1000th. )

For more detail, visit: www.timeshighereducation.com

The THE rankings are known to guide potential students to identify the best institutions for their chosen field of study, allowing them to compare different universities based on the strength of their academic offerings in specific study fields. It also often paves the way for research collaboration, as companies are more likely to partner with highly ranked institutions in a specific sector for research and development projects. Furthermore, strong subject rankings enhance the international reputation of universities and enable comprehensive comparison in particular disciplines.

“This type of global benchmarking is extremely valuable in enhancing the international reputation of the UFS, enabling us to ultimately recruit and attract the most talented students and staff from our region and from across the globe. This aligns with our institutional strategy contained in Vision 130, whereby we aim to grow and extend our impact and influence locally, regionally, and globally,” says Prof Anthea Rhoda, acting UFS Vice-Chancellor and Principal. “Valuable knowledge and insights are also garnered during each evaluation process, allowing us to remain a globally competitive force in higher education, and to take the UFS to even greater heights in the years to come.”

Click to view document Click to view UFS Times Higher Subject Scores

News Archive

Producers to save thousands with routine marketing strategies, says UFS researcher
2014-09-01

 

Photo: en.wikipedia.org

Using derivative markets as a marketing strategy can be complicated for farmers. The producers tend to use high risk strategies which include the selling of the crop on the cash market after harvest; whilst the high market risks require innovative strategies including the use of futures and options as traded on the South African Futures Exchange (SAFEX).

Using these innovative strategies are mostly due to a lack of interest and knowledge of the market. The purpose of the research conducted by Dr Dirk Strydom and Manfred Venter from the Department of Agricultural Economics at the University of the Free State (UFS) is to examine whether the adoption of a basic routine strategy is better than adopting no strategy at all.

The research illustrates that by using a Stochastic Efficiency with Respect to a Function (SERF) and Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) that the use of five basic routine marketing strategies can be more rewarding. These basic strategies are:
• Put (plant time)
• Twelve-segment pricing
• Three-segment pricing
• Put (pollination)(Critical Moment in production/marketing process), and
• Pricing during pollination phase.

These strategies can be adopted by farmers without an in-depth understanding of the market and market-signals. Farmers can save as much as R1.6 million per year on a 2000ha farm with an average yield.

The results obtained from the research illustrate that each strategy is different for each crop. Very important is that the hedging strategies are better than no hedging strategy at all.

This research can also be applicable to the procurement side of the supply chain.

Maize milling firms use complex procurement strategies to procure their raw materials, or sometimes no strategy at all. In this research, basic routine price hedging strategies were analysed as part of the procurement of white maize over a ten-year period ranging from 2002–2012. Part of the pricing strategies used to procure white maize over the period of ten years were a call and min/max strategy. These strategies were compared to the baseline spot market. The data was obtained from the Johannesburg Stock Exchange’s Agricultural Products Division better known as SAFEX.

The results obtained from the research prove that by using basic routine price-hedging strategies to procure white maize, it is more beneficial to do so than by procuring from the spot market (a difference of more than R100 mil).

Thus, it can be concluded that it is not always necessary to use a complex method of sourcing white maize through SAFEX, to be efficient. By implementing a basic routine price hedging strategy year on year it can be better than procuring from the spot market.

Understanding the Maize Maze by Dr Dirk Strydom and Manfred Venter (pdf) - The Dairy Mail


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