South Africa’s knowledge-development policy nexus: Implications for place-based development in the Eastern Cape Province

ABSTRACT

The contribution of universities, knowledge and innovation to development has moved to the foreground of national and regional policy and practice. More successful nations and regions show a close alignment between knowledge policy and socio-economic development. However, in peripheral regions, this link is less well articulated for place-based development. This paper interrogates this relationship within the South African and Eastern Cape regional context. Using core tenets from the learning region concept, I show how the role of knowledge has gained significant traction in the national knowledge and development policy landscape. Using evidence from the broader Amathole region in the Eastern Cape, I highlight some of the challenges within the knowledge-development policy nexus. In the main, weak knowledge and social capabilities undermine place-based innovation, interactive learning and ultimately development. The paper concludes that although the University of Fort Hare can serve as a development agent in the region, a continuously reflexive and engaged policy making process of learning, networking and institutional embeddedness is critical.

KEYWORDS:

• Knowledge
• universities
• learning regions
• development
• South Africa

1. Introduction

In the new economy knowledge and learning have become important resources in the development process (Lundvall & Johnson, 1994). The emergence of the knowledge economy and related notions such as knowledge capitalism (Burton-Jones, 1999), national and regional innovation systems (Freeman, 1987; Lundvall, 1995) and learning regions (Hassink, 2005) represents a shift in development planning. A key aspect of the knowledge economy is the significance of place-based policies. Nation states, regions and cities that have aligned knowledge and skills policies to their development objectives have achieved exponential advances (European Commission, 2012). Pillay (2010), using evidence across three continents, argues that integrated knowledge and development policy support place-based development at national or regional levels. Policy therefore becomes a critical lever of knowledge, innovation and application for development planning and practice. However, very few countries in Africa have attempted to align education, knowledge and innovation policies in development and poverty reduction planning (Bloom et al., 2006; Fongwa & Wangenge-Ouma, 2015).

South Africa is one of the few countries in sub-Saharan Africa to have established knowledge, science and innovation policies aimed at fostering a knowledge economy and achieving national socio-economic transformation (Kaplan, 2008). In this paper, I interrogate the links between knowledge and regional¹ or place-based development. To do so, I focus on three sets of South African policies, namely higher education, knowledge and innovation and national development policies. Six key policy documents are examined at national level:

• - The 1997 Higher Education White Paper

• - The 2013 Higher Education White Paper

• - The 1996 White Paper on Science and Technology (the 2017 Draft Paper)

• - The 2007 Ten-Year Innovation Plan

• - The 2002 National Research and Development Strategy

• - The National Development Plan: Vision 2030

The main documents representing this interface at the national level are the Eastern Cape Development Strategy and the University of Fort Hare (UFH) Strategic Plans. These will also be assessed along with the UFH’s community engagement strategy to determine their alignment to the national policies as well as to place-based development.

2. Learning regions: Theoretical application for policy analysis

With the growth in the knowledge economy discourse, the learning region concept has received popular acclaim for providing a key to place-based development. Central to the learning region analysis is the role of universities and post-secondary education in supporting human capital development and knowledge innovation. Florida (1995:528), writing in the US context, defines learning regions ‘as collectors and repositories of knowledge and ideas [that] provide an underlying environment or infrastructure which facilitates the flow of knowledge, ideas and learning’. The ability of such regions to generate knowledge, as well as attract and retain high-skilled workers, is critical to the success of these regions. For the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), learning regions provide a model for regional development as they transit to a learning economy. Such regions are ‘characterised by regional institutions which facilitate individual and organisational learning through the co-ordination of flexible networks of economic and political agents’ (OECD, 2001:23‒4). For Hassink (2005:523), a learning region is ‘a regional innovation strategy in which a broad set of innovation-related actors (politicians, policy-makers, chambers of commerce, trade unions, higher education institutions, public research establishments and companies) are strongly but flexibly connected with each other … ’.

From the above definitions, a number of conceptual indicators emerge. Five of these diagnostic characteristics are described in Table 1. The first characteristic is the presence of new knowledge generation and innovative activities (products, processes and organisational activities). Learning regions need to be characterised by strong higher education institutions that provide research and knowledge services, workforce skills, and a creative and conducive social environment to support further formal and informal engagements among stakeholders (OECD, 2007). Secondly, these regional players should function within healthy social network structures within which knowledge workers engage and collaborate both formally and informally in order to share tacit and codified knowledge. A third component of learning regions is the presence of venture capitalists. The development and application of new knowledge and technology requires strong venture capitalists, usually emanating from a strong private sector. This supports the development of an absorptive capacity or innovative culture in the region (see Feldman & Desrochers, 2004). Fourthly, learning regions are characterised by strong governance qualities and values for effective resource management and accountability through transparent structures (Braczyk, 1998). A strong governance system supports the attraction of knowledge workers into the region (Jucevičius, 2004). Lastly, knowledge institutions and workers need to be institutionally embedded in the local/national context to ensure that knowledge production is aligned with local/regional needs (Hsu, 2004). Coulson & Ferrario (2007) refer to this as institutional thickness.

Table 1. Learning region attributes.

	Characteristic aspect	Descriptive aspects
1	Knowledge infrastructure	- Universities and other post-school institutions - R&D institutions - Lifelong learning - Presence of reliable ICTs
2	Networks and knowledge collaborations	- Partnerships and collaborations - Double, triple and quartet helix partnerships - Social capital, tacit and codified knowledge exchange - Information-sharing ‘info-structure’ - Professional and social networks
3	Venture capital	- Presence of venture capitalists - Strong private sector - Entrepreneurial culture - Knowledge absorptive capacity
4	Local and regional governance	- Transparent governance - Stable political system - Decentralised governance system - Attractive lifestyle - Recreational amenities
5	Institutional thickness	- Institutional embeddedness - Local relevance - Cultural identity

Adapted from Toland (2010).

With advances in globalisation, ‘nation states have become unnatural and even dysfunctional units for organising human [knowledge] activity and managing economic endeavour … ’ (Florida, 1995:531). While most African countries remain less integrated into the global economy, South Africa’s education, knowledge and economic landscape is strongly integrated with global neo-liberal economic policies. From a learning region perspective, which emphasises place-specific resources, attributes and institutions deployed through conscious policies to meet the needs of local firms, place-based planning becomes critical (Christopherson & Clark, 2010:121). Nevertheless, this does not negate the influence of national and international policy and practice on the region. What is more important, however, is that policies and institutions are able to ensure investment, governance and resource allocation within a system of regional innovation which can directly and indirectly support entrepreneurship and enable firms to achieve place-based development (Manzini, 2012).

Unlike other theory-led development models that are characteristic of the more successful regions, the learning region concept ‘is not derived from any particular kind of region’ but can easily be applied in other regions, including those that are structurally weak (Hassink, 2005:526). Analysis of the knowledge economy indicators across provinces shows that the Eastern Cape is relatively weak compared to most provinces, making the application of the learning region concept relevant as a framework for analysis (See Table 2).

Table 2. Comparative analysis of South Africa’s knowledge economy by selected provinces.

	HE enrolments (head count)	Graduates (head count)	Graduate rate (%)	Permanent staff (academic/research	% of total South African university research and development funding	Regional contribution to national GDP (%)
Eastern Cape	71 038	19 696	27.7	1 814	6.45	7.7
Free State	45 384	10 090	22.2	1 026	4.67	5.5
Gauteng *	214 990	64 552	30.0	4 267	33.55	33.7
KwaZulu-Natal	99 971	28 718	28.7	2 392	14.48	15.8
Western Cape	96 231	31 166	32.4	3 077	29.42	14.1

Source: HEMIS 2014; Statistics South Africa 2014.

*Data exclude students from the University of South Africa, most of whom are not based in Gauteng Province.

3. An ontological analysis of the South African policy environment

Following the demise of apartheid, the enactment of policies across the system was a major instrument for consolidating the gains of the new era. In the education sector, universities and other knowledge-producing institutions were faced with the responsibility for addressing the inequalities of the past while other research institutions had to respond to a growing knowledge economy discourse (Muller et al., 2001). In this section, I interrogate the salient features of some of these policies, informed by key concepts from the learning region concept as discussed above.

3.1. The higher education white papers – 1997 and 2013

The aim of the 1997 Higher Education White Paper 3: A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education was ‘to redress past inequalities, to serve a new social [and economic] order, to meet pressing national needs and to respond to new realities and opportunities’ (Department of Education [DoE], 1997:1.1). Three key priority areas for higher education in South Africa are identified: increased participation; greater responsiveness; increased cooperation and partnership in university governance (DoE, 1997:1.12). The 2013 White Paper highlights the need for a differentiated university system and a more development-oriented research and development ethos based on the earlier emphasis on redress. From a place-based approach, the White Paper calls on universities to identify their areas of strength and speciality. However, the current funding system suggests convergence rather than differentiation; it is characterised by lack of a steering framework as more universities seek to become more research-intensive with a national and international footprint (Centre for Higher Education Trust [CHET], 2008).

The White Paper fails to incentivise academics adequately to engage with immediate external actors. While the recent White Paper emphasises community engagement (CE) in various forms, including socially responsive research and links to industry as part of the formal curriculum (Department of Higher Education and Training [DHET], 2013:39), the institutionalisation of CE in the academic project has been limited. Academic promotion and financial incentives still emphasise teaching and research publication, with CE accounting for less. Yusuf (2007:15) holds that ‘national and sub-national governments are the principal architects of the national innovation strategy because they set the parameters for higher education and craft the incentive mechanisms as well as the institutions that influence decisions regarding where to locate, what to produce and how much to spend on research, and the degree to which firms link up with universities … ’. Besides a few cases in point, most universities continue to negotiate with their historic past, which has undermined their place-based development impacts (Bozalek & Boughey, 2012).

3.2. The white paper on science and technology, 1996: ‘Preparing for the twenty-first century’

In preparing for the knowledge economy, the White Paper identifies innovation and the role of the National System of Innovation as the key concept for economic take-off in the twenty-first century. According to the White Paper, innovation is an encompassing notion that is based on the continuous production of new knowledge and its creative applications in a number of spheres. Therefore, ‘[i]nnovation has become a crucial survival issue. A society that pursues wellbeing and prosperity for its members can no longer treat it as an option’ (DACST, 1996:8).²

To integrate knowledge and innovation in national development planning, the White Paper proposes collaboration, linking science and technology development with imperatives for national growth and ensuring venture capital for innovation. The ‘DACST³ aims to work with [the] Department of Trade and Industry on a range of relevant issues related to technology diffusion in Small, medium and micro enterprises (SMMEs) and that of particular importance in this collaborative activity is the need to define the best available means of financing technology development for SMMEs’ (DACST, 1996:8).

In relation to governance, the paper is silent on how to address institutional factors such as government appointments, which seem to be continuously aligned to political allegiance rather than being a facilitator of human transformation and socio-economic development. The recently drafted White Paper (DST, 2017) while aligning with the success of the previous policy, seeks to address some identified challenges. Four factors are identified as impediments to the effectiveness of the 1996 White Paper. These include the need to ‘improve governance systems and allow for more interaction within the national innovation system’ (DST, 2017:2).

3.3. The national research and development strategy (NRDS) of 2002

The NRDS (Republic of South Africa [RSA], 2002) identifies six key deficiencies related to knowledge production and application: too little spending on R&D as a percentage of GDP; declining scientific population; weak R&D in the private sector; limited policy framework for intellectual property; fragmented government stance on science and technology; security risk in the sector. The NRDS identified three principal means of addressing these challenges, namely innovation, progress in science, engineering and technology (SET) and the establishment of an effective science and technology governance system. Regarding innovation, the NRDS identified what was referred to as the ‘innovation chasm’. According to the NRDS, ‘tactical attempts to close the innovation chasm focus mainly on connecting the human capital function more and more closely with the market’ (RSA, 2002:35). The emphasis placed on SET is seen to go beyond racial and gender barriers and is aimed at breaking apartheid trends that have not succeeded in responding to current development needs.

Finally, from a place-based perspective, the policy fails to sufficiently address the need for regional and local firms to develop adequate absorptive capacity. The plan seems to emphasise R&D governance at the national, centralised level across a wide range of priorities with less focus on the regional (provincial) governance structures. This resonates with the concerns of other scholars (Kaplan, 2004), who argue that government over-steering could, in the long term, hamper adequate R&D and the role of knowledge for local development.

3.4. The ten-year innovation plan (2008–18)

The 2008‒18 Innovation Plan is described as ‘a high-level presentation of the principal challenges identified by the DST’. With a focus on innovation and knowledge in developing and sustaining the knowledge economy, the plan ‘is to help drive South Africa’s transformation towards a knowledge economy, in which the production and dissemination of knowledge lead to economic benefits and enrich all fields of human endeavour’ (DST, 2007:iv).

The Ten-Year Innovation Plan highlights five major challenges covering an array of social, economic, political, scientific and technological benefits. The first challenge concerns the ‘Farmer to Pharma’ shift. The second challenge relates to expanding the limits of space science and technology so as to address environmental, security and economic growth needs. Thirdly, the plan emphasises the search for new and renewable energy sources able to guarantee a secure and environmentally friendly energy supply. The fourth challenge relates to addressing global climate change and its impact both nationally and globally. The fifth and final challenge goes beyond the natural science umbrella to address social issues related to poverty, sustainable sources of livelihood and the socio-cultural needs of South African society (DST, 2007:11–24).

With adequate knowledge production and innovation a key prerequisite of knowledge transfer, the quantity and quality of doctoral graduates currently produced in South Africa lag significantly behind the proposed target. While the plan aimed to achieve a five-fold increase in doctoral graduates from about 1240 in 2010 to 5000 by 2030, current figures indicate that less than 2500 doctoral graduates are being produced (Higher Education Management Information System [HEMIS], 2014). This significantly limits the development of a learning region (Christopherson & Clark, 2010:120‒1).

The plan does not adequately articulate how the big science projects such as the space projects will be translated into local and regional development of weaker regions such as the Eastern Cape. How high-level knowledge projects such as the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) project will contribute to the development of small towns and communities in a sustainable manner is one of the critical aspects the plan fails to articulate clearly.

3.5. National development plan (NDP): Vision 2030

In 2012, the NDP: Vision 2030 was adopted by government as the main development road map. Unlike previous development policy documents, which were largely disjointed, the NDP aims to consolidate government’s priorities for the next two decades in a single document. The 15 chapters of the NDP each address one key development priority area. From a knowledge and development perspective the plan starts by emphasising the imperative to improve the poor quality of basic education. Specific targets are set for school participation and school retention rates. An increase in education participation rates from 17% to 30% by 2030 is envisaged, with a specific emphasis on an increase in both the percentage of students studying mathematics and science and the percentage of the population holding doctorates.

The NDP further emphasises that ‘Higher education is the major driver of information and knowledge systems that contribute to economic development’ (RSA, 2011:317). It suggests that ‘good science and technology education is crucial for South Africa’s future innovation’ (317). In this plan, the role of universities lies in developing the skills linked to employment and in their being the dominant sources of new knowledge. The NDP summarises the role of universities as follows: ‘In today’s knowledge society, higher education underpinned by a strong science and innovation system is increasingly important to open up people’s opportunities’ (318).

The NDP therefore positions knowledge production, application and utilisation at the centre of the national development strategy. However, some inherent and practical challenges persist. Some of these issues are listed below: (a) there seems to have been neglect of the humanities and of the issues around which the social fabric of the country has developed over the years. (b) The lack of good governance remains a critical challenge at both national and regional levels which the NDP does not adequately engage with. The increase in cronyism at national and provincial or regional level, poor government audits and weak accountability have been severely criticised as major development impediments (Anis et al., 2014). (c) Thirdly, higher education spending as a percentage of GDP needs to start increasing from previous declining trends. World Bank (2014) data show that South Africa spends less on research (0.8% of its GDP) than other BRICS countries (Brazil and India each spend 0.9%, Russia 1% and China 1.84%). This demands more external funding for higher education and research. The government will have to attain the elusive 1% GDP target for higher education spending on research.

4. Towards a place-based approach: The development policy framework of the Eastern Cape

The Eastern Cape Development Plan: Vision 2030, University of Fort Hare Strategic Plan (2009–16) and the UFH Community Engagement policy are reviewed.

4.1. Development plan: vision 2030

Of particular interest is the role of the Eastern Cape Development Plan (ECDP) in enhancing the role of knowledge in promoting development. The presence of key learning region aspects is interrogated. To this end the ECDP is briefly but critically analysed in terms of three broad issues: the links to national knowledge and development policies, the role of knowledge in developing the province, and thirdly the presence of key learning region aspects as discussed in section 2 (see Table 1).

The ECDP is closely related to previous knowledge and development policies. Firstly, the Plan is closely linked to the NDP’s priority of achieving a prosperous South Africa with no poverty and inequality. The Plan aligns its core mission, vision and goals to those of the NDP. Furthermore, if the ECDP is juxtaposed with the knowledge policies reviewed, there is a close alignment in the emphasis on universities, knowledge and innovation for development. However, while the NRDS (RSA, 2002) emphasises the need for advances in science, engineering and technology, the ECDP remains largely silent on the need for SET skills, especially in a province where mathematics and science skills continue to be a challenge. While the need for mathematics and science skills is mentioned, SET skills as a concept, as emphasised by the NRDS, are not adequately engaged with in the ECDP.

Regarding the role of knowledge in the ECDP, the Plan identifies five goals through which the development of the province will be achieved (ECDP, 2014). One of these is the ‘development of an educated, innovative and empowered citizenry’. Furthermore, four flagship programmes are identified for achieving these goals, namely the Llima Labantu, Emmatholen, infrastructure development and the development of human and institutional capabilities. The first two emphasise the role of knowledge in development while the last two relate to the presence of some learning region aspects. Within Llima Labantu, the plan highlights the role of research and development institutions as well as the need for education and training institutions in the province. It states that ‘R&D should be encouraged and incentivised in order to develop technology and multi-commodity agricultural products, from homestead-level to large-scale enterprises’ (ECDP, 2014:25). To achieve this, the Plan points to the responsibility of universities to ‘build strong collaborative programmes in rural development and agricultural sciences, as well as establish a faculty of agriculture at the Walter Sisulu University along with relevant programmes at the other three universities’. However, its implementation has not been significantly realised as the Plan recognises the challenge of engagement with local universities.

In the context of conditions in the province, developing an absorptive capacity and developing and sustaining an entrepreneurial culture among local firms remain a challenge. Venture capital seems to be largely dependent on public institutions such as the Department of Trade and Industry as well as small enterprise financing agencies.

4.2. University of Fort Hare policy environment

Two policy documents are examined here: the two strategic plans (2009–16 and 2017–21) and the Community Engagement policy.

4.2.1. UFH strategic plans

Like most universities, the UFH sees its role as playing out mainly in a wider national and international context (see Wangenge-Ouma & Fongwa, 2012). The UFH positions itself to become a ‘vibrant, equitable and sustainable African university excellent in teaching, research and community engagement’ (UFH, 2009:13). As is evident from the mission statement in the recent strategic plan (UFH, 2017–2021:7), the UFH aims to apply its knowledge and resources for ‘scientific, technological and socio-economic development of our nation and the wider world’. This mission seems to omit a place-based approach to what the university can contribute within its immediate region. However, the UFH has been recognised for providing training and certification opportunities to young South Africans in the region who would otherwise not have access to any kind of higher education (CHET, 2010). The 2017 Strategic Plan cautions against ignoring the local context, stating that the UFH can respond to local needs if it is ‘dynamic and sensitive to its unique location in both rural and urban geographic spaces’ (UFH, 2017:7).

A fundamental aspect of the learning region concept in universities in regional or city development is the presence of strong interdependence between local institutions based on qualities of trustful partnerships and networks (Wolfe, 2002; Wolfe et al., 2011). There is no active recognition of collaboration and engagement from its four transformative values (integrity, excellence, ethics and innovation). There is arguably an overtone of the national and wider dimension with less emphasis on the local or city dimension. While the Strategic Plan mentions addressing challenges such as ‘mistrust and sometimes hostility among some members of the community’ (UFH Strategic Plan 2009:42), there is little evidence of how such challenges have been addressed.

4.2.2. UFH community engagement policy (2007)

The CE policy aims to build on the university’s unique historical leadership role and rural location along with the urban component of the East London campus ‘to provide an attractive and enriching educational service to its graduates and scholars to become critical participants in the social, economic and political development of society’ (UFH, 2007:3). Two issues emerge from this mission statement. Firstly, the university continues to perceive CE as a service, a ‘do good’ or philanthropic activity which the university renders to the community or region, as opposed to an engaged academic endeavour informed by the community itself.

Secondly, while graduates and academics form key agents of any university’s CE policy, most universities get caught up in an ‘ambiguity of intention’ (Pinheiro et al., 2012:13) which ultimately hampers their regional or community footprint and results in the education of students as the dominant form of knowledge engagement (O’Mara, 2012). The policy provides three key objectives aimed at integrating CE into other functions of teaching and research. However, as with most universities, there are no clearly established outcomes. ‘Indicators of effectiveness are not obvious, … no standards exist against which to judge effectiveness and ambiguity persists regarding the meaning of [CE] and its relationship to other concepts’ (Birnbaum, 1988:63).

5. Implications of policies on institutional practices for place-based development

From the policy analysis above, a number of general implications can be inferred relating to institutional practices in the development of a learning region. The first is the conceptualisation of a CE policy which is currently perceived as a ‘do good’ or philanthropic activity. Kruss et al. (2012) observe a similar conceptualisation of CE at South African universities. Successful engagement is formally recognised and articulated within mainstream teaching and research institutional plans, and is not just seen as an add-on (Chatterton & Goddard, 2000:475). Cloete et al. (2011) refer to the need for a ‘pact’ where the university’s engagement is not a separate, ad hoc, ‘feel good’ activity but ‘a fairly long-term cultural commitment to and from the university, as an institution with its own foundational rules of appropriate practices, causal and normative beliefs, and resources, yet validated by the political and social system in which the university is embedded’ (Gornitzka et al. 2007:184).

Although the ECDP makes specific reference to the role agriculture plays in economic growth and development, the CE policy is silent on the potential of agriculture in enhancing teaching, research output and contribution to development. For a university with a well-established agricultural faculty within a largely rural agricultural base, the absence of the word ‘agriculture’ within the CE policy suggests a misalignment between the development imperatives of the province and the strategic direction of the university.

While the CE objectives are, inter alia, to integrate CE into teaching, learning and research, the activities linked to CE are limited to teaching and student skills development, which from a learning region perspective, does not adequately describe the knowledge production or research activities the university aims to achieve. Secondly, the knowledge-generating capacity of the province remains weak. However, the challenge is to establish whether the weak knowledge-generating capacity is a result of the absence of a clear-cut knowledge and development policy for place-based development or the historical education system within a context which historically was largely excluded from the knowledge generating process. As observed in Table 2, analysis of a number of knowledge indicators shows the need for support within the province in general and UFH in particular.

The table displays weakness in the student enrolment at the EC based universities compared to the other provinces with a similar number of universities. Furthermore, leaving the Free State out of account, investment in research as observed in the number of permanent staff and R&D funding received remains low, while graduation rates are also much lower than in other provinces. Notably, unemployment figures for the second quarter of 2016 reveal that out of the eight metros only Ekurhuleni suffers more unemployment (34.6%) than the EC metros (Statistics South Africa, 2014). Unemployment for the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro stands at 32%, closely followed by Buffalo City at 30%. In terms of education, within the 25–64 age group, Buffalo City (15.7%), along with the City of Tshwane and the City of Johannesburg, has the highest percentages of individuals with a post-school education (22.1% and 16.2% respectively). However, the educational attainment of those aged 20 years and above is lowest in the province. The Buffalo City Metro where the UFH is located has one of the lowest literacy rates (94.8%) compared to most provincial metros while the national average stands at 98.0%.

Thirdly, while there is emphasis on cooperation and partnership in policy, there is no strong mechanism for achieving this. There is therefore very little evidence of a strong network relationship among the different stakeholders in the immediate location of the UFH and the province. This lack of networks can be related to the complexities linked to the racial history of the region, as well as the growing international community (of academics) within the university and inequalities in terms of social and economic opportunities (Bank, 2014). The ECDP seeks to address the challenge of bringing together various stakeholders in a coordinated effort. Regarding skills development, Walker & Fongwa, (2017) show that a distant relationship between employers, industry and universities reduces the employability of graduates as they are less exposed to work readiness programmes. Earlier research by the OECD in a similar South African context (Puukka et al., 2012:160) revealed that ‘ … [the] South African higher education sector is poorly connected to the business sector and the government’. Progress is, however, being made in this domain, as was observed in the recently completed Labour Market Intelligence Partnership research project (www.lmip.org.za) where business and training institutions are engaging more.

Addressing the challenge of innovation chasms in Eastern Europe, Balázs (1997) recommends more academic entrepreneurs as champions in the triple [quadruple] helix partnerships. These are academics that are able and willing to engage more actively with industry and government in innovation application and commercialisation. This, inter alia, requires a university … restructured so that it becomes entrepreneurial, its management coming to resemble and to behave like that of a profit-making corporation directed at finding the best (business) opportunities, one not hamstrung by the perceived operational inefficiencies of traditional collegiality (Juma & Agwara, 2006). The South African minister of higher education and training urged academics to break the attitude which reveres traditional knowledge and shift towards a more engaged scholarship cautioning that academe has in many ways been hamstrung by operational inefficiencies of traditional collegiality (Dell, 2011). Such a call demands deliberate strategic and operational shifts.

At the UFH supporting institutional thickness in relation to knowledge and development within the region has been acknowledged in the recent strategic plan. The last section of the Strategic Plan (UFH, 2017–2021) accepts DHET’s calls for the university to engage more with its immediate communities, stating that ‘transformation … must ensure that the institution is dynamic and sensitive to its unique location in both rural and urban geographic spaces and can, through its intellectual and technical competencies, respond to community needs’ (7). However, achieving institutional embeddedness demands ‘an enabling environment’ defined as ‘institutions, relationships and norms that shape the quality of a society’s social interactions’ (World Bank, 1999). This demands cordial and complementing relationship between the university, government and external stakeholders for better institutions and collaboration.

Fourthly, and from a regional governance perspective, evidence from financial institutional audits within the province shows a number of governance challenges towards developing the core attributes for place-based development within a learning region framework. Eight of the worst performing municipalities in South Africa have been located in the Eastern Cape Province. These include the Amathole district, where the main UFH campus is located (South African Year Book, 2011–2013). In more successful regions, regional governance has been identified as playing a key role in animating regional innovation systems and attracting knowledge workers into a region. Several authors hold that the ‘learning region’ paradigm represents a ‘radical democratic agenda’ to enhance transparent governance (Amin & Thrift, 1995:60) and ultimately place-based development.

6. Conclusion

From a policy point of view South Africa places significant emphasis on the role of knowledge and innovation in national and regional development. While some of these policies are more than a decade old and need to be updated, they nevertheless highlight the role of knowledge and related institutions as keys agents for socio-economic transformation and pathways into a knowledge economy. However, these policies have been somewhat uncoordinated and fragmented. While the NDP is an attempt to work towards a coordinated effort, it fails to provide a place-based emphasis on development planning. The emphasis on national priorities has somewhat usurped a place-based approach to development. Furthermore, the universities continue to be perceived mainly as national assets with national and international mandates.

Mudefi (2011:99) confirms that university-community engagement policy and practice at the UFH has been largely one-sided with limited engagement. It has been dominated by the university’s ‘quest for appropriate research sites and financial rewards, imposing its dominance on the communities in the form of projects that hardly take into account beneficiary preferences and interest’. While the university’s potential to contribute to the knowledge development and socio-economic transformation of its immediate region is acknowledged, levels of collaboration, networks and venture capital need to be further supported.

While the learning region concept has been applied in developing knowledge bases, addressing path dependencies and overcoming institutional lock-ins (Brekker, 2012), there are historic and contemporary challenges within the case study region that appear to hamper the development of a learning region. As previously mentioned, these include poor governance, low knowledge capabilities and weak absorptive capacity. Similarly, at the regional level the ECDP identifies the role of knowledge, universities and development skills. However, translating this into practical application and implementation has not been adequately articulated. Channels, incentives and patterns of engagement with knowledge-producing institutions such as universities have remained largely absent. The UFH Strategic Plan (2009–16) focuses more on its national and African mandate than on its local and regional mandate. Excellence in teaching, research and engagement fails to clearly articulate a regional, local or city mandate.

In conclusion, addressing the role of knowledge for place-based development, especially in lagging continues to be of paramount importance (Tödtling & Trippl, 2005). Firstly, policy measures are needed to improve the network dimensions and enhance the social capital central in supporting relationship building between universities and other development players. Such policies should address the weak knowledge capabilities in the region, increase the knowledge and skills base, and support interactive learning through local partnerships across all stakeholders. In so doing, policy makers need to induce and support the transformation of the network structures from historic and traditional patterns while responding to current contextual development challenges.

Acknowledgement

I wish to appreciate Prof Lochner Marais for provoking the discussions leading to this review during my doctoral studies. I further acknowledge the support from the Centre for Higher Education Trust (CHET) Cape Town, for facilitating intellectual engagements and feedback on the initial manuscript. I am further grateful to my fellow colleagues at the Human Sciences Research Council who made constructive comments and to the two anonymous reviewers who provided critical reflections and suggestions on the paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Funding

The project under which this paper was developed received financial support through the Ford Foundation’s City-Campus-Region Project number, 0155_0533.

Notes

1 For Cooke & Leydesdorff (2006:6), the concept of region as administratively defined is of primary importance … leading to the definition of region as ‘an administrative division of a country’.

2 As of 1 August 2002, DACST split into the Department of Arts and Culture and the Department of Science and Technology (DST).

3 Department of Arts, Culture Science and Technology.