Assessing the University of the Witwatersrand Rural Facilty (WRF) as a sustainability center
Date
2010-07-30T11:00:51Z
Authors
Riethmiller, Annamarie Dorothea.
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Background: The WRF interfaces academically between science and politics and
empirically between the developed and developing worlds. The question arises as to
whether or not the WRF is an effective knowledge system conduit for science and
technology to address sustainability challenges academically and also practically towards
implementation to the extent that for practical purposes it is already a sustainability
center as defined herein
Important considerations include but are not limited to, the following:
1 Sustainability is regarded possible only if science and technology are
mobilized to action at an increased pace.
2 Climate change has become an important consideration, the effects of which
forces global environmental change, but as perceived at local level.
Considerations used to assess the WRF were:
1. History and influence.
2. The current milieu of the WRF against the backdrop of the Southern
African poor suffering a vulnerability crisis exacerbated by climate
change.
3. The framework of Boundary Organizations and the effectiveness of the
WRF as a boundary organization to influence sustainability positively.
4. Sustainability addresses multidisciplinary problems, demanding multidimensional
answers and enhanced understanding and communication. Is
the WRF an in-action, multi-dimensional sustainability center?
5. Implementation – Does the WRF enhance outcomes?
Methods:
This is a pilot study which investigated the WRF, a physical presence boundary
organization in a poverty node, as a sustainability center. The qualitative method was
followed. The WRF becomes a case-study inside this framework. Ten knowledgeable
parties with first hand experience about WRF activities and relevance in the community were interviewed. Interviewees were asked a set of closed questions and then invited to
participate in a discussion on their replies to paint an in-depth practical picture about the
WRF. In this way an understanding of the relevance of the WRF in respect of
sustainability was gained. Results: All participants agreed the WRF is salient, credible
and produces legitimate information. The foundations for boundary organizations
recognized by the literature imply the WRF, as a conduit for multi-dimensional
sustainability enhancing programmes, is in practical terms a sustainability center. The
WRF is a node for multi-level multi-national research, communication and problemsolving.
Against the wider concepts of boundary organizations also as dealt with by the
literature, the WRF can be regarded as in-action sustainability with a physical presence
on the border, both academically between science and politics and practically between
the developed and undeveloped worlds.
This assessment shows the WRF is in practical terms a sustainability center. It enhances
communication; unifies role-players and stimulates an inclusive problem-solving
approach to research. It is visualized that a more formal classification as sustainability
center with relevant personnel, for instance by the appointment of a sustainability
manager, will enhance coordinated sustainability driven outcomes for the region. This
could assist in mitigating the effects of climate change as well.