Assessing the University of the Witwatersrand Rural Facilty (WRF) as a sustainability center

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.