Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 June 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Supplied
Dr Herkulaas Combrink
Dr Herkulaas Combrink is representing UFS in a new international research project that aims to improve how evidence is used in public health policymaking.

Dr Herkulaas Combrink, a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences (EMS) at the University of the Free State (UFS), is representing the university in a new international research project that aims to improve how evidence is used in public health policymaking.

Dr Combrink, who is also a co-director of the Interdisciplinary Centre for Digital Futures (ICDF), has been selected as one of the principal investigators in a newly funded project supported by the UK’s International Science Partnerships Fund under the Evidence-Informed Policymaking Programme. Running from April 2025 to March 2026, the project – titled Integrating Evidence for Contextualised Public Health Policy: Lessons from South Africa – explores how different types of evidence can be used more effectively in shaping public health policy. The international collaboration includes researchers from the Centre for Philosophy of Epidemiology, Medicine and Public Health, which is a collaboration between Durham University and the University of Johannesburg; as well as Durham’s Centre for Humanities Engaging Science and Society.

 

From the Free State to global impact

For Dr Combrink, being part of this collaboration highlights the important work being done in the faculty and ICDF that is reaching beyond borders. 

“It’s important to showcase the impact we are making from the Free State that leads to global outcomes,” he said.

The project aims to evaluate an evidence mapping framework to determine how model-based projections and social listening reports can be more effectively integrated and contextualised for policymaking.

“These are two very different data types,” he explained. “The value lies in demonstrating how to apply the framework to different contexts for evidence-based mapping.”

Dr Combrink brings extensive expertise to the team, having worked on both disease modelling and risk communication during South Africa’s COVID-19 response. He was involved in national and provincial social listening initiatives, and used high-frequency social media data to track the spread of misinformation, often referred to as the ‘infodemic.’ 

“We’ve built up enough data within ICDF and EMS to support this study,” he noted.

The goal is not just theoretical. A key outcome of the project is engaging directly with policymakers to refine modelling and risk communication strategies for future pandemics. 

“This will help us to engage with the various departments of health to assist with improving modelling and risk communication work for better social behavioural change,” he explained.

According to Prof Brownhilder Neneh, Vice-Dean for Research and Internationalisation in the EMS faculty, the project reflects the faculty’s growing global presence. 

“Dr Combrink’s participation is a testament to the calibre of scholarship within the faculty,” she said. “It positions EMS as a key contributor to shaping policy and practice with societal impact.”

She added that the collaboration aligns well with the faculty’s vision for global partnerships that are rooted in local relevance.

“By focusing on contextualised evidence for policymaking, this project reflects our commitment to relevance, engagement and global partnership,” she said.

 

What comes next

Over the project’s 12-month timeline, the team will deliver:

• a case study analysis of modelling and social listening during South Africa’s COVID-19 response;
• an extended evidence mapping framework tailored to diverse evidence types;
• policy briefs and practical tools for public health practitioners; and
• a hybrid international workshop in late 2025 bringing together researchers, policymakers and health professionals to test and refine these outputs.

News Archive

Middle East activists speak about peace on the Bloemfontein Campus
2012-03-15

 

Bassem Eid (left) and Benjamin Pogrund discuss the situation in the Middle East.
Photo: Johan Roux
15 March 2012

Peace is a big word in the Middle East, particularly amongst Israelis and Palestinians. After years of conflict, people yearn for peace; they want an end to the killings and the uncertainty. The problem is that both sides are actively doing things that undermine the prospect of peace. There is also double talk, lies and evasion with each side pointing fingers. This was the word from Benjamin Pogrund, an Israeli peace activist, addressing staff and students on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State. He and fellow peace activist Bassem Eid, a Palestinian, visited the campus to speak about the situation in the Middle East.

Both men agreed that peace efforts were hindered by the Israeli and the Palestinian leaders. According to Pogrund, neither the Palestinians, nor the Israelis are leading the way in accepting that the conflict must end.
 
“Both Israeli and Palestinian leaders say let us get together with no pre-conditions. Then the Israeli leaders say, Jerusalem we cannot share, that is not for negotiation. And, they say to the Palestinians you must recognise Israel as a Jewish state. So, what they say is unless you agree to these pre-conditions there can be no talks without pre-conditions.
 
“And the Palestinians in turn say the settlement construction must cease immediately, and unless that happened, there is no point in meeting. And they say we will never acknowledge you as a Jewish state so do not even bother talking about it. And we insist on the right of return of Palestinian refugees. So they also say unless you acknowledge these pre-conditions there is no point in meeting with our pre-conditions. So as you can gather each side blames the other side, each side points the finger and says you are responsible for the lack of progress.”
 
Pogrund said both the Israelis and the Palestinians could demand legitimacy in that part of the world.
 
“Both Jewish and Arabs can say we have history on our side. We have religion on our side, culture.”
 
To compare Israel to Apartheid South Africa is wrong, he said.
 
“It is an occupation, it is repression, but it is not Apartheid.”
 
Eid, who is the director of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, said the Palestinians were close to having a complete independent Palestinian state from 1994 to 1999.
 
“But in one rocket former Israeli Prime minister Ariel Sharon destroyed it.”
 
He said Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005 did not bring political unity.
 
“We, the Palestinians, were supposed to start building the infrastructure of the Gaza Strip but unfortunately Hamas started dancing on that Israeli disengagement and considered it as their own success because of their military resistance against the occupation.” He also said Hamas is satisfied with its hold in the Gaza Strip and Fatah is also very satisfied with its hold in the West Bank. According to Eid, it is convenient for the Israelis that the Palestinians are separated.

 

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