The future of major research institutes at the University of Witwatersrand is hanging in the balance after the management’s announcement this week that it intends to halt funding of several units under the school of geosciences.
In a presentation to staff representing various research entities, Professor Belinda Bozzoli, the acting deputy vice-chancellor at Wits, announced the intention to close some of the geosciences units that did not meet the university’s criteria.
The move forms part of the restructuring process introduced by former vice-chancellor Professor Colin Bundy.
The announcement came after a council-senate review committee was formed in March to examine research groups within the schools of geosciences, geography and physics.
The school of geosciences at Wits is the oldest, largest and most diverse academic earth-science institution
in Africa.
Formed in 1904, the school offers research expertise, facilities and training programmes in geology, palaeontology, palaeoanthropology, geophysics, geochemistry, geochronology, environmental science, atmospheric science, and economic and mining geology. It enrols 312 undergraduate, 28 honours, 45 MSc and 30 PhD students, and has a range of analytical facilities including three thermal ionisation mass spectrometers, an electron microprobe, two X-ray fluorescence spectrometers, an X-ray diffractometer, cathodoluminescence and fluid inclusion facilities.
The restructuring process will see the university’s faculties reduced from eight to five.
The committee has recommended that, by the end of next year, some of the research entities — such as BPI Geophysics, BPI Palaeontology, the Economic Geology Research Institute, Hugh Allsopp Lab and the Atmosphere and Energy Research Group — should find a way to generate funds to keep their own units running.
”It is expected at any university that researchers would raise funds from outside because no university can afford to fund research activities,” said Professor Loyiso Nongxa, Wits’s newly appointed vice-chancellor.
He said allocations for university research funds should be based on five criteria: productivity, need, priority, transparency and accountability.
”Our allocation formula is very similar to the new framework introduced
by the Department of Education.”
The announcement has enraged a number of academics who have opposed the restructuring process.
”This process has been enormously harmful to the institution and the morale of academics. Our ability to teach, research and raise funds has been severely compromised,” said Harold Annegarn, a representative for the concerned academics.
Annegarn said the trigger for the review was the real or perceived financial crisis following directly from the restructuring decision to redistribute the research allocation of the university’s budget equally among the five new faculties.
”The criteria set out as the basis of review were several, but the first and last related to financial viability. Financial viability was to be based on attributable income as determined by the dean of science, which amounted to a minor fraction of the total revenue stream generated by student fees and subsidies, a research subsidy, and earned income.
”We object to the nature of the review and challenge the administration to investigate rather the cost and efficiency of the administration, which has failed in many ways to provide the needed support of the academic function,” said Annegarn.