In the period under review the extended term of office of the Council appointed in 1999 finally came to an end. Council is appointed for a four-year period but as our Institutional Review took place just as the Council?s term of office was approaching its end, it was requested to remain in office until after the Review and then for a further period following the appointment of a new Minister. In October 2004 the Minister appointed a new Council, which in its composition again reflected the balance between renewal and consolidation that had characterised the thrust of the HSRC?s work in the period since 1999. Of the ten appointees, five, including the Chair, were members of the outgoing Council and the other five were new additions. In the short period that it has been working together, the new Council has proved the value of this combination of constantly seeking to innovate and renew with the obligation to consolidate and build on positive gains.  |
Our Council?s appointment in 1999 occurred at a time when, on the broader national stage, we were in the process of stocktaking, assessment and replanning after the first five years of democracy. Those first five years were of necessity largely spent on acquainting ourselves with the legacy of apartheid and the social architecture it left behind, initiating the process of undoing and abolishing the restrictive structures and practices of that legacy, and exploring the means and mechanisms for rebuilding. The explicit mandate to the bodies appointed after those first five years of reconnoitring was assertively to get down to work and start delivering. If as the governing council of the HSRC we now look back over these six years post-1999, we can report with a fair measure of satisfaction about the manner and extent to which the science council under our jurisdiction had responded to that mandate. The product that science councils are expected to deliver is quality research in their specific fields of enquiry. In the case of the HSRC it was considered that a primary aspect or dimension of quality would be that the research done and delivered be ?social science that makes a difference?, as our motto now reads. The structure of our research body was accordingly altered radically. The then newly appointed CEO and the senior research team he assembled developed a structure that departed totally from the more formalistic discipline-based organisation towards one that could respond to newly defined national needs and priorities. These New Priority Areas, as the research divisions are now called, are multi- and cross-disciplinary and because of this flexibility are able to respond to emerging needs and priorities. A major focus of change was the emphasis on substantially supplementing the basic Parliamentary grant with income from commissioned research. |
The task of realigning the HSRC to the priorities and imperatives of a non-racial, non-sexist democratic South Africa called for and necessitated restructuring and rationalisation at various levels. The reconfiguration of the science structures has already been referred to. The ratio between administrative and research personnel had to be significantly altered. Offices were opened in a number of centres other than Pretoria, again as a response to the geographically diverse needs of the country. And, importantly, the entrance of women and black researchers into the organisation had to receive priority attention. A major focus of change, and one which impacted on almost all other areas and levels of operation, was the emphasis on substantially supplementing the basic Parliamentary grant with income from commissioned research. The success achieved in this regard enabled the organisation to grow and expand its research corps also in the important area of recruiting, nurturing and developing black and women researchers. The expansion into commissioned research broadened the base of work with which the HSRC engaged, adding to its scientific interest and reach. On the other hand, it raised interesting debates within and about the organisation, touching on questions such as the relationship between so-called pure enquiry and applied research. It is to the credit of the organisation, its management and staff that it could at the same time fundamentally change and renew as it continued operating efficiently and consolidating the gains of its renewal. |
Amidst all these processes of change, renewal and sometimes upheaval the basic work of research had to continue. It is to the credit of the organisation, its management and staff that it could at the same time fundamentally change and renew as it continued operating efficiently and consolidating the gains of its renewal. There are many respects in which we, the Council, could recommend the HSRC as an exemplary instance of a South African institution in transition and transformation. In the year under review the process of selecting and appointing a successor to Dr Mark Orkin as CEO got underway. Dr Orkin?s contract, of which he chose not to seek an extension, terminates at the end of July 2005. We need to pay him the highest tribute for having led the transformation of the HSRC in the manner and to the extent that he did. I shall personally treasure the memory of working with him and I know that members of Council, particularly those from the Council of 1999, share that sentiment. We wish him well for the future. He has contributed to South African science, scholarship, research and enquiry in different ways and capacities over the span of his career. The Minister and his department were always sources of great support, for which we thank them. We must, in particular, acknowledge Minister Mangena and Director-General Adam for the emphasis they put on quality scientific enquiry as integral to national growth and development. A final word of thanks and appreciation must go to my fellow members of Council, both those retired and those on the new board. It has been a privilege working with all of them in this nationally important process of renewal and consolidation. Professor G.J. Gerwel, Chair |
