Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 October 2025 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Anja Aucamp
Food Environment
Students at the UFS are making daily food choices under tight budgets. The 2025 Food Environment Survey by the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics sheds light on these challenges.

What’s for dinner? For most students, that question is about more than taste. It’s about budgets, storage space, time, and whether the food will even last until tomorrow. At the University of the Free State (UFS), researchers have been listening closely to students’ experiences, and the results tell a powerful story.

Earlier surveys in 2020 and 2022 showed that many UFS students struggle with food insecurity and that hunger is linked to academic performance. Now, the new 2025 UFS Food Environment Survey digs deeper, providing fresh data on how students plan, shop, store and stretch their food.

The release comes at the perfect moment: the world is about to mark World Food Day on 16 October 2025 under the theme, Hand in Hand for Better Foods and a Better Future. At the UFS, that spirit of “hand in hand” is already at work through the Eat & Succeed programme and the efforts of the Food Environment Task Committee (FETC), the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, the Food Environment Office, the Department of Sustainable Food Systems and Development, and the Division of Student Affairs’ vegetable tunnels where academic and support staff are working together to build a healthier, more supportive food environment.

 

Navigating food choices on a tight budget 

Led by Prof Louise van den Berg, Associate Professor from the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, the 2025 survey received replies from 1 586 undergraduates, a group that reflects the student body. The findings confirm what many already know: students are resourceful, but they’re also facing real challenges.

On average, students eat from three food groups a day, instead of the recommended five. Many skip on protective foods like fruit, vegetables and dairy; not because they don’t want them, but because they’re harder to afford or to keep fresh. Almost a third of students don’t have a fridge, and those who do often share small spaces. That means foods like milk, cheese, yoghurt, fruit and vegetables can go off in just a day or two. For students living on tight NSFAS budgets, buying fresh food often feels like a gamble. She says the risk of food spoiling often outweighs the benefit of buying it at all.

Shopping habits reflect these pressures too. Many students shop only once or twice a month, favouring shelf-stable foods like maize meal, noodles, and canned goods. “While such foods can fill stomachs and stretch budgets, they do not provide the same balance of nutrients as diets that regularly include fresh produce, lean proteins, and dairy,” comments Prof Van Den Berg.

She continues, pointing out another finding: when buying food on campus, students place price and convenience above everything else. “This highlights not a lack of interest in eating healthily, but rather the practical decisions students must make every day with limited money, limited time, and limited storage.”

Still, it’s not all bad news. The survey shows that most students are already making smart choices by limiting sugary drinks and salty snacks. The main gap is simply access to affordable, perishable foods that boost health and concentration.

That’s where the UFS initiatives come in. The Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, the FETC, and the Food Environment Office are working to raise awareness through programmes such as Eat & Succeed by sharing practical shopping tips, affordable healthy options, and exploring ways to improve access to safe food storage on campus. Prof Van Den Berg also believes that small, practical changes, such as making fruit and vegetables more available at fair prices, or helping students to learn how to stretch groceries further, can have a big impact on student wellbeing.

 

Supporting students to eat well and succeed

The results of the latest survey show that our students aren’t careless with their diets. They’re doing the best they can with what they have. “Our job is to make it easier for them to ensure that they can purchase affordable, portion-sized fruit, vegetables and dairy products without worrying about storage or spoilage. Such initiatives would help bridge the gap between financial constraints and the need for protective foods in students’ diets,” says Prof Van den Berg.

At the end of the day, the 2025 Food Environment Survey is about more than statistics only. It’s about listening to students, understanding their daily struggles, and finding real solutions, because when students have the right fuel, they have a much better chance of succeeding; both in the classroom and in life.

News Archive

Fire as a management tool questionable in arid and semi-arid grassland areas
2015-03-24

Wild fire in the grassland
Photo: Supplied


The influence of fire on the ecosystem in the higher rainfall ‘‘sour’’ grassland areas of southern Africa has been well established. However, less information is available for arid and semi-arid ‘‘sweet’’ grassland areas, says Prof Hennie Snyman, Professor in the Department of Animal, Wildlife, and Grassland Sciences, about his research on the short-term impact of fire on the productivity of grasslands in semi-arid areas.

Sour and sweet grassland areas can be defined as receiving either higher or lower than approximately 600 mm of rainfall respectively. In quantifying the short-term impact of fire on the productivity of grasslands in semi-arid areas, a South African case study (experimental plot data) was investigated.

“Burned grassland can take at least two full growing seasons to recover in terms of above- and below-ground plant production and of water-use efficiency (WUE). The initial advantage in quality (crude protein) accompanying fire does not neutralise the reduction in half of the above-ground production and poor WUE occurring in the first season following the fire.

“The below-ground growth is more sensitive to burning than above-ground growth. Seasonal above-ground production loss to fire, which is a function of the amount and distribution of rainfall, can vary between 238 and 444 kg ha -1 for semi-arid grasslands. The importance of correct timing in the utilisation of burned semi-arid grassland, with respect to sustained high production, cannot be overemphasised,” said Prof Snyman.

In arid and semi-arid grassland areas, fire as a management tool is questionable if there is no specific purpose for it, as it can increase ecological and financial risk management in the short term.

Prof Snyman said: “More research is needed to quantify the impact of runaway fires on both productivity and soil properties, in terms of different seasonal climatic variations. The information to date may already serve as valuable guidelines regarding grassland productivity losses in semi-arid areas. These results can also provide a guideline in claims arising from unforeseen fires, in which thousands of rands can be involved, and which are often based on unscientific evidence.”

For more information or enquiries contact news@ufs.ac.za

 

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