What will South Africa’s next white paper on science and technology look like?
Science and research cannot save a country from itself. As Stellenbosch-based policy and innovations systems analyst Michael Kahn put it: The tail of a National System of Innovation cannot wag a country’s economy—especially if the tail is small, as in South Africa.
Although a scientific heavyweight on the continent, South Africa’s science system has struggled to pervade and buoy its economy. R&D has not been able to increase sluggish economic growth or curb rising unemployment and inequality. But all is not gloomy. South Africa has made strides in creating a functioning system from the detritus of Apartheid’s militaristic and exclusionary science agenda.
It is twenty year since South Africa’s first White Paper on Science and Technology was published in 1996, two years after the first democratic elections. According to science minister Naledi Pandor, it is high time to write another. Last month Pandor said a draft paper — and a decadal plan to drive R&D — could be expected during 2017.
So what will the paper hold? And what was good — and bad — about its predecessor? At her offices in Pretoria late last month, Pandor had this to say:
“The world of science and technology has moved on since 1996.” From new technology (few people had cellphones in 1996), to the digital economy, the way we treat diseases, investment in science and technology on the continent, to the growth of China as a dominant world player—all of these changes will shape the way forward, she said. “We’ve been looking at the progress that we’ve made and areas in which we have to do more.”
So what was right about the 1996 white paper? Perhaps the country’s greatest achievement in the research space in the last 20 years has been in training. In its preface, then-deputy science minister Brigitte Mabandla wrote: “Currently the race and gender disparities in science and technology are unacceptably high. We need to address this imbalance proactively, not just because it is right to do so, but because if we do not we will simply not have adequate human resources to deal with our problems.”
According to the 2002 STI indicators (compiled by the National Advisory Council on Innovation, which was established through the White Paper), 386,000 students enrolled in universities in South Africa in 2000. By 2014, that number had almost tripled to 969,154, with a third enrolled in science, engineering and technology fields. Doctorates awarded rocketed from 795 in 2000 to 2,258 in 2014. Importantly, for South Africa with its pervasive racial inequality, more than half of the 2014 PhD graduates were black.
But while the number of qualified candidates is on the rise as envisioned by the White Paper, the jobs are not forthcoming. And the demographic profile of people working in science, particularly in higher education institutions, remains stuck in the past. According to NACI there were approximately 30,000 people working in R&D in South Africa in 1999. In 2013-14, that number had declined to 28,014. The majority of these positions were in higher education, most held by white men and women. Although the number of research papers published by South African researchers has increased from fewer than 6,800 in 2000 to 12,071 in 2014 and the country’s citations have improved, this research is being done by the same increasingly burdened cohort of researchers.
One explanation for the contraction of the scientific job market could be that industry, traditionally a major funder of R&D and employer of graduates, has not come to the table. In fact, it has moved further away from the innovation space. Analysts argue that this is just another aspect of the investment apathy that struck South African business in the face of political and regulatory instability. In 2013-14, business employed 22 per cent of South Africa’s R&D personnel, and for the last two years trailed government in R&D spending.
This was not the future envisioned in the 1996 White Paper. Government is desperately trying to push innovation through entities like the Technology Innovation Agency, which is meant to bridge the gap between innovative idea and marketable product, and the National Intellectual Property Management Office, which patents government-funded research. However, the White Paper stated that government should only play an enabling role, not an active one. “It is then the role of the private sector to recognise the importance of innovation spending from the point of view of competitiveness,” it said.
Back in her Pretoria office, as the finishing touches are laid to the new National Research Foundation building next door, Pandor says this active hand in innovation is something scientists complain about. "I get a sense from talking to scientists that they think we’re too focused on innovation, things with a commercial purpose. We must ensure that what we’re doing is encouraging people to be exploratory, think beyond where we are," she says, not giving away whether she agrees with the comments.
The old white paper did extol the importance of basic research. But it’s likely that the DST—despite its reputation for clean governance and accountability—has lacked the size and heft to fulfill all the ambitions set out in the white paper. A great deal of the legislation passed in the wake of democracy in South Africa was ambitious to the point of naivety—it was more a vision of what the country wanted to be than what was possible with the resources at hand.
So what more can be done, if industry remains coy and if the DST is unable to leverage more budget? “SA has the capability to be among the leading innovative nations in the world, but to use the positive features that we have in the most constructive way possible, we must have policies and instruments that allow engagement and support, and allow intellectual capability to thrive,” says Pandor. She won’t show her cards just yet.
Nevertheless, her words reflect the optimism and hope that infused the first white paper. We can certainly expect more of that ambition in democratic South Africa’s second one. But hopefully its new incarnation will be more grounded in reality and, with that grounding, have precise and well-defined steps to achieve our aspirations.
Sarah Wild is an award-winning freelance journalist based in Johannesburg.