A university that teaches but does not innovate, that researches but does not apply, will find itself detached from the society it is meant to serve and elevate
Maximising the societal utility function of the university requires recalibrating its output equation, moving beyond the constrained equilibria of teaching and research to incorporate high-impact socioeconomic variables as core performance indicators.
This assertion may sound provocative, even heretical or sacrilegious, in a system where academic prestige and institutional funding are still closely tied to publication metrics. But it is a reality we must confront, especially now, when tools such as ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence generators can produce grammatically sound academic papers in mere minutes, or even seconds. If machines can simulate scholarly output, what then is the unique value of a university in the 21st century?
The answer lies in the third mission of the university: beyond teaching and research, universities must become engines of innovation, enterprise and social impact. In South Africa, where unemployment, inequality and a stagnant innovation index confront us daily, this mission is no longer optional; it is existential.
As early as the 19th century, Wilhelm von Humboldt argued that the university must serve not only as a centre for scientific advancement but as a catalyst for national development and personal growth. This is arguably widely known as the Humboldt Model.
This vision of the university as a societal institution, not merely a site of scholarship, was echoed by John Henry Newman, who, in The Idea of a University (1852), warned against reducing universities to factories of instruction. He observed: “A university is, according to the usual designation, an Alma Mater, knowing her children one by one, not a foundry, or a mint, or a treadmill.”
Newman further asserted that: “Knowledge is one thing, virtue is another; good sense is not conscience, refinement is not humility … and a university cannot fulfil its mission by instruction alone.”
Together, these 19th-century voices remain uncannily relevant today. They remind us that knowledge divorced from impact is an incomplete pursuit and that the true mission of the university is realised not in accumulation, but in application, not in prestige, but in purpose.
The third mission is the priority
The third mission of universities refers to the set of activities and responsibilities that extend beyond teaching (the first mission) and research (the second mission), focusing instead on how universities engage with society, industry and government to contribute to economic development, social transformation, innovation and community empowerment.
The traditional two-mission model of research and teaching no longer meets the needs of a society in crisis. The third mission calls for universities to drive socio-economic development through knowledge transfer, industry partnerships and the creation of new enterprises and industries. This is not just about generating revenue; it is about relevance.
The problem, however, is that although South African universities have excellent researchers, they still underperform in converting knowledge into innovation. The 2023 DHET [Department of Higher Education] Research Report reveals a disappointing trend: high publication output, but minimal patent filings, spin-offs or innovation-linked job creation. The research output of local universities has been increasing over the years. In a world where universities in countries such as the United States and South Korea generate billions of dollars annually from the commercialisation of intellectual property (IP), South Africa remains stuck in a model of knowledge consumption rather than creation.
While concerns about preserving academic integrity, avoiding market overreach and managing institutional resistance, defiance and conflict are valid, they must be situated within a broader recognition of the evolving mandate of the contemporary university. The foundational elements of teaching and research are essential, but they must be integrated with the university’s broader public mission.
The third mission of the university does not erode academic rigour; rather, it enhances scholarship by insisting that knowledge reverberates beyond interdisciplinary boundaries. Fears that the socio-economic impact may dilute the university’s core mission conflate market responsiveness with societal relevance; in truth, some of the most rigorous academic work involves translating theory into transformative real-world interventions.
Resistance from entrenched interests is to be expected, but cannot be allowed to ossify institutional frameworks that no longer serve the common good. Reforming promotion policies to reflect innovation, inclusion, and public good is not a retreat from academic excellence; it is its redefinition for the 21st century.
Why the current system fails to encourage innovation
Our institutional performance frameworks remain focused on the quantity of publications, rather than the effect generated. Researchers are rewarded for outputs, not outcomes, impacts, sustainability or transformation. Subsidy formulas prioritise journal articles over patents, prototypes or new enterprises. Until these policies change, spin-offs and startups will remain secondary initiatives and not core strategies.
Moreover, many university technology transfer offices are under-resourced, under-skilled and often too bureaucratic to support real entrepreneurial action. IP policies are still written with risk aversion, not opportunity optimisation, in mind. The result? Innovations lie dormant in labs, and researchers receive little support in transforming breakthroughs into businesses and, more importantly, new enterprises.
Publishing without production
South Africa has made significant strides in research output over the past two decades. According to the 2023 DHET Report on Research Outputs, public universities produced just more than 23 000 accredited publication subsidy units in 2021, a sharp increase from approximately 7 000 in 2005. A compound annual growth rate of 6.84% is also reported since 2005. In fact, South Africa is now among the top 30 countries globally in research output volume. According to the survey done by the National Intellectual Property Management Office (NIPMO) which sits in the Department of Science and Technology and deals with publicly funded research and development (R&D) IP, 60% of South African universities reported that they were not empowered to commercialise their Intellectual Property (IP) through spinoffs, start-ups or incubators.
But the innovation pipeline tells a far less impressive story:
- According to NIPMO (National Intellectual Property Management Office), in 2022, South African universities collectively filed only 158 patent applications, with less than 50 patents granted. Of these, only a fraction have led to licensing agreements or spin-off ventures.
- By contrast, in 2022, approximately 828 patents were issued for MIT, generating a total licensing revenue of $82.7 million. Stanford University earns between $50 million and $100 million a year in licensing revenue. Strong technology transfer ecosystems enable these figures.
- South Africa’s overall Global Innovation Index (GII) 2023 ranking was 59th out of 132 countries, with a particularly low performance in indicators such as knowledge absorption, university–industry collaboration and innovation linkages.
These figures suggest a structural disconnect between what we publish and what we produce. Our researchers are working hard, but the system they work within does not yet reward translation into products, services or impact.
This disconnect is even more stark when we consider unemployment. South Africa has about 46% youth unemployment, yet our universities are not functioning as active drivers of job creation through entrepreneurship or innovation. The irony is that we are generating knowledge in a society that desperately needs solutions.
From papers to patents: Changing the culture
To truly unlock the third mission as we have defined, we must change the academic culture. That begins by redefining what constitutes success. If patents, licences and commercial ventures are not valued alongside publications, they will always remain afterthoughts.
Second, universities must embrace entrepreneurship not just as a support programme, but as a curriculum principle. We need engineers who design businesses, not just bridges and structures. We need chemists who build startups, not just write lab reports. We need social scientists who develop and implement scalable interventions, rather than just producing policy papers. The knowledge economy demands innovators and inventors, not only academics.
Third, academic promotions, particularly to senior ranks such as professorship, must be aligned with the third mission of universities. It is no longer appropriate to continue advancing academics who do not demonstrate meaningful contributions to innovation, enterprise development or societal impact. Many current promotion policies at South African universities remain disconnected from this imperative. They reward traditional research outputs while neglecting the broader mission of translating knowledge into real-world value. This misalignment must be urgently addressed if universities are to remain relevant and responsive to national development needs.
We must also empower students to see themselves not just as graduates-in-waiting, but as entrepreneurs-in-training. Capstone projects should not end in marks, but rather in marketable products. Universities must make space for failure, experimentation and venture building, not just lectures and exams.
Innovation must pay
Ultimately, the funding model needs to change. The government and the higher education department must reform the research subsidy system to reward institutions for innovation outputs, outcomes and impacts, including registered IP, commercial revenue, societal benefit and transformation. Universities must be encouraged to take equity in spin-offs, reinvest in innovation hubs, and provide IP royalties to inventors. The message must be clear: research that creates public value should be publicly rewarded.
This is not a new idea. As the Roman philosopher Seneca noted in the 1st century CE: “Ideas are seeds but without action, they wither in the wind.” South African academia is fertile with ideas. It’s time we began harvesting them for the public good.
Towards a productive university
In an era where AI can write essays and summarise research, the competitive edge of a university lies not in how much it publishes but in how much it produces. Real products. Scalable services. Measurable solutions. Effective enterprises.
Publishing for prestige is no longer enough. Producing for the people is the new imperative. Transforming society is the only way for universities to maintain their relevance and survival.
The university of the future must be a factory of ideas and a foundry of enterprises and new future enterprises. That is how we generate not only knowledge, but jobs and opportunities. That is how new industries are created. Not only credentials, but fundamental change. The spin-off must not remain a spin-off. It must become the main story.
Let us also seek a more profound truth, one that goes beyond publication metrics and hollow incentives. Let us build universities whose innovations illuminate the path not only to better jobs, but to a more just, inclusive and transformed society, through our collective efforts as institutions of higher learning.
The volume of its academic publications will not benchmark the university of the future, but by its real-world output efficiency, measured in the number of lives it uplifts, the employment systems it activates and the innovation pipelines it engineers into society.
Professor Fulufhelo Nemavhola is an academic. He writes in his personal capacity.