international research forum, cape town, south africa

8/10/2019 International Research Forum, Cape Town, South Africa

1/28

August 2 12August 2012


2/28


3/28

International Research Forum Economic Impact of the South African International Research Partnerships

1

Table of Contents

1. Introducon ....................................................................................... .................................... ......................................... 2

1.1 Objecves ........................................................................................... ............................... ...................................... 2

1.2 Expected outcomes .......................................................................................... ............... ........................................ 2

1.3 Target parcipants ........................................................................................ .............................. ............................. 2

2. Presentaons .................................................................................. ........................................ ........................................ 2

2.1 Keynote presentaons ....................................................................................... ................................... ................... 2

a) Deputy Minister Derek Hanekom, Deputy Minister of Science and Technology .............................................. 2

b) Mr Ken Okaniwa (Minister, Embassy of Japan) who spoke on behalf of Ambassador Yutaka Yoshizawa,

Ambassador of Japan to South Africa ............................................................................ .............. .................... 5

c) Chose Choeu, President, South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry................................................. 5

d) Prof Loyiso Nongxa, Vice-Chancellor, University of the Witwatersrand ....................................................... .... 5e) Dr Albert van Jaarsveld, CEO, Naonal Research Foundaon .......................................................................... 5

f) Adv Jusce Bekebeke, Director-General, Northern Cape Provincial Government ........................................... 5

2.2 Session presenters ...................................................................................... .................. ........................................... 5

2.3 Session facilitators ............................................................................................. ......... ............................................. 6

2.4 Summary presentaons ................................................................................. ......................................... ................. 6

a) Prof Karen Theron, Stellenbosch University (Post-Harvest Technologies) ..................................................... ... 6

b) Prof Thokozani Majozi, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Pretoria (Water Management

Technologies) ......................................................................................... ........................ ................................... 8

c) Prof Laurent Dala, University of the Witwatersrand (Aerospace and Satellite Applicaon Technologies) ....... 8

d) Prof Gary Maartens, Head of Pharmacology, University of Cape Town (Pharmaceucal Technologies) .......... 9

e) Prof Xiaohua Xia, Centre of New Energy Systems, University of Pretoria (Energy Eciency and Renewable

Energy Technologies) ...................................................................................... ................... ............................. 10

f) Prof Leslie Petrik, Group leader: Environmental and Nano Sciences, University of the Western Cape (Waste

Management Technologies) ................................................................................ ...................... ..................... 13

3. Sasfacon survey ............................................................................................ ........................ .................................... 17

3.1 Level of parcipaon ...................................................................................... ..................................... .................. 17

3.2 Comments by parcipants and presenters ......................................................................................... .............. ..... 18

3.3 Recommendaons ............................................................................................. ............................. ....................... 22

4. Conclusions......................................................................................................... ........ .................................................. 23

5. Contact ................................................................................................ .................... ..................................................... 24


4/28International Research Forum Economic Impact of the South African International Research Partnerships

2

1. Introducon

The Department of Science and Technology organised the

Interna

onal Research Forum, during which leaders in business,research and government shared best examples of internaonal

technology partnerships that have made a signicant social and

economic impact.

The objecves of the forum and its expected outcomes are

stated below.

1.1 Objecves

a) To promote informaon exchange on exisng opportunies

for internaonal research partnerships that will contribute

to naonal economic development.

b) To showcase the economic impact of internaonalscienc research partnerships between South African

industry, research organisaons, higher educaon and

their internaonal partners.

c) To enhance networking opportunies among industry

leaders, research leaders and government leaders in

support of the development of new internaonal research

and development (R&D) partnerships.

1.2 Expected outcomes

a) The creaon of a plaorm for industry leaders, research

leaders, government leaders and polical leaders toshare more broadly the outputs, outcomes and impact

of the internaonal research partnerships that they are

supporng.

b) A deeper understanding of the impact of public-private

sector internaonal research partnerships on economic

development.

c) An analysis of the role of public-private partnerships in

internaonal research cooperaon.

d) The establishment of new internaonal research

partnerships.

1.3 Target parcipants

The parcipants at the Internaonal Research Forum included

the following:

a) Execuve and senior managers of naonal and internaonal

companies that do R&D.

b) The diplomac community and representaves of

internaonal organisaons promong science and

economic development in South Africa.

c) Heads and senior managers of research organisaons and

higher educaon instuons.

d) Researchers acve in applied or industrial research.

e) Execuve and senior government ocials.

2. Presentaons

2.1 Keynote presentaons

The speeches that were delivered by some of the keynote

speakers are presented below:

a) Deputy Minister Derek Hanekom, Deputy Minister of

Science and Technology

Execuves and senior managers of local and internaonalresearch companies, research organisaons and higher

educaon organisaons, researchers, government

colleagues, ladies and gentlemen:

May I start by saying what an honour and privilege it is

for me to address such an esteemed gathering. It is my

pleasure to extend a warm Cape Town welcome to you all,

especially to those of you who have travelled from abroad

to aend this very important forum. I sincerely hope that

the early spring sunshine is a good omen for this event.

The Department of Science and Technology is proud to hostthis important event, as we endeavour to debate issues,

exchange ideas and arrive at posive conclusions that will

ulmately lead to signicant improvement in the quality of

life of millions of people, and at the same me promote

strategic internaonal relaons.

Some of you at this forum may have aended last weeks

Internaonal Research Conference at the Walter Sisulu

University in East London. Mr Tjama Tjivikua of Namibias

University of Science and Technology said at the conference

that research was about connecng ideas to reality,

and people to people. He also said that the relevance of

research lies in the fact that it brings soluons to problems

beseng people. I agree wholeheartedly with these

senments. Research would, aer all, remain a purely


5/28


academic exercise if it did not lead to soluons to problems

and to an improvement in peoples lives.

Ladies and gentlemen, this forum has three objecves:

rstly, to facilitate an exchange of informaon regarding

exisng internaonal research opportunies; secondly,

to showcase the economic impact of internaonal

research partnerships and, thirdly, to enhance networkingopportunies among leaders in industry, academia and

government in support of the development of new

internaonal research and development partnerships.

So: what do we hope to achieve over the next two days?

Well, rstly, our hope would be that delegates will share, in

an open, transparent and producve manner, the outcomes

and impacts of the research partnerships they are part of

or supporng. Secondly, we hope to arrive at a deeper

understanding of how public-private sector internaonal

research partnerships benet economic development

and social programmes.

This forum will also give us an opportunity to ponder

the role of these partnerships in internaonal research

cooperaon. The nal desired outcome of this event, ladies

and gentlemen, is that it will ulmately lead to the new

research partnerships being established.

Given the forums focus on important technologies

involving inter alia water management, aerospace and

satellite applicaons, as well as renewable energy and

waste management, I have every condence that delegates

will emerge from this gathering of movated, like-minded

individuals feeling energised and galvanised.

Ladies and gentlemen, by parcipang in internaonal

research partnerships, South Africa is able to both make

a signicant contribuon to global knowledge and, at the

same me, benet from internaonal research experse.

Our investment in research connues to reap rewards in

a number of elds, and the benets are passed on to our

countrys cizens. Allow me to cite a few examples.

A project was launched by the Department of Science and

Technology last year to provide clean drinking water in six

remote rural villages in the Eastern Cape, where peoplehad been collecng drinking water from polluted rivers

and streams. Partnering our science councils and the local

municipalies, and working closely with local communies,

we installed solar-powered water puricaon units and

provided local households with ceramic water lters.

More than 1 775 households in these villages now have

access to safe drinking water, showing how even relavely

simple innovave technologies can make a dierence in

the lives of ordinary people, parcularly those in poor and

vulnerable communies.

Another example of a posive outcome from aninternaonal partnership was very much in evidence

yesterday, when Minister Naledi Pandor announced the

idencaon of a possible single-dose, orally administered

malaria cure following extensive research undertaken by

the Medicines for Malaria Venture based in Switzerland,

and the Drug Discovery and Development Centre, led by

Prof. Kelly Chibale, at the University of Cape Town.

Prof. Chibale quite rightly called this a proud day for

African science and African sciensts. This possible cure,

ladies and gentlemen, represents an African soluon to

save African lives malaria accounts for 24% of total child

deaths in sub-Saharan Africa. What makes this recently

discovered compound so excing is that, apart from being

a potenal single-dose malaria cure, it shows potent

acvity against mulple points in the malaria parasites life-

cycle, and it might also be able to block transmission of the

parasite from person to person.

To quote Dr Tim Wells, the Chief Scienc Ocer of

Switzerlands Medicines for Malaria Venture, it is a great

achievement and an excellent example of the quality of

research that can be fostered in Africa. I would like to echo

the senments expressed by Minister Pandor yesterday

by congratulang this Swiss-SA partnership for developing

this drug and for providing world-class training for the next

generaon of African sciensts.

Ladies and gentlemen, these are indeed excing mes forresearch and science. Most of you will know that, at the

Internaonal Aids Conference in Washington DC towards

the end of July, Aids experts announced that signicant

progress had been made in the search for a cure for Aids.

Findings of several studies have shown that the HI virus

can be controlled and prevented from mulplying and be

completely eradicated in some cases through mechanisms

such as gene therapy.

On the subject of Aids, allow me to use this plaorm to

congratulate my colleagues at the Department of Health.

Over the course of only ve years, from 2005 to 2010, the

number of people receiving anretroviral treatment in our

country has increased tenfold: from 101 000 to well over a

million people.

a great achievement and an excellent

example of the quality of research that can

be fostered in Africa

Dr Tim Wells



There have also been breakthroughs in the treatment

of tuberculosis. According to the Global Alliance for TB

Drug Development, the results of a clinical trial on a new

combinaon of drugs to treat tuberculosis oers new hope

to TB paents, including those who are HIV-posive. The

new drug cocktail was found to kill 99% of TB bacteria

within two weeks. This is a phenomenal development,

especially given the fact that there have been no new drugs

to treat TB in the past 40 years.

Ladies and gentlemen, our government is the largest

funder of research and development in this country, with

the Department of Science and Technology priorising

research, development and innovaon in seeking to

provide policy leadership in areas such as Space Science

and Technology, Hydrogen and Energy, and Biotechnology

and Health Innovaon.

The recognion by our department of the importance

of research is further strengthened by the fact that just

over 1% of the worlds scienc researchers are from

Africa yet this connent accounts for more than 13% of

the worlds populaon. Responding to this and to other

challenges, the Department has developed the Research,

Development and Innovaon Infrastructure Funding

Framework, which will improve the research infrastructure

of South Africas higher educaon and research instuons

to make them more globally compeve and more

aracve to internaonal students and researchers. The

funding framework priorises four areas, namely scienc

equipment, specialised facilies, high-end infrastructure

and access to global infrastructure.

To be able to respond to some of the fundamental quesons

of science, we simply have to parcipate in research eortsusing that global infrastructure, as it provides capability

beyond the resources available at regional or naonal level.

One of the best examples of this sort of global infrastructure

is the Square Kilometre Array telescope, which will be

largely be located in South Africa and eight African partner

countries. Upon compleon it will be by far the most

sensive telescope in the world, and could shed light on

many of the as yet unanswered quesons about the origins

of our universe, and things like dark energy, that we know

about but which are lile understood.

Sharing infrastructure means sharing resources and skills,which in turn facilitates research, for example on aspects

of climate change and changes occurring in our oceans,

natural resources and the atmosphere. This is the kind of

research that individual countries would not be able to

undertake in isolaon. Allow me to give a short overview of

South Africas internaonal research cooperaon.

Today, our country has more than 30 binaonal science

and technology agreements, compared to a mere handful

in 1994. In 1996 we signed a science and technology

agreement with Germany, resulng in the establishment

of a joint research fund. To date, ladies and gentlemen,

this partnership has funded more than 400 research and

development projects.

At the end of March of this year, 67 students were involved


7/28


in the research projects under the Swiss/South African

Joint Research Programme. In 2011 and in the rst half of

this year, 22 young South African researchers aended a

summer school in Switzerland. Four of these entrepreneurs

have subsequently started their own companies.

We have also formed internaonal research partnerships on

this connent. To date, we have funded joint projects with

African partners to an esmated value of over R50 million,

helping to facilitate acve research networks betweenSouth African researchers and researchers from African

partners such as Algeria, Namibia, Kenya, Mozambique,

Zambia, Egypt and Angola.

Domescally, the South African government connues

to provide resources in support of scienc research

partnerships. Our eight science councils are all engaged

in technology transfer and capacity-building by

undertaking research for social, scienc and technological

development development that leads to an improvement

in living standards for all South Africans.

Ladies and gentlemen, as you draw from and contribute

to this Internaonal Research Forum over the next two

days, remember that scienc research leads to scienc

knowledge the key to developing soluons to the

challenges confronng us. This must be the ulmate goal

of research. The American author Bill Bryson once said:

Think of a single problem confronng the world today

disease, poverty, global warming. If the problem is going

to be solved, it is science that is going to solve it. If anyone

ever cures cancer, it will be a guy with a science degree. Or

a woman with a science degree.

To conclude, I wish you all a rewarding and producveforum. We must intensify our eorts to take science to

the people. Keep on with your research, because, as the

great astronomer Carl Sagan reminds us, Somewhere,

something incredible is waing to be known.

I thank you.

b) Mr Ken Okaniwa (Minister, Embassy of Japan), who spoke

on behalf of Ambassador Yutaka Yoshizawa, Ambassador

of Japan to South Africa

Please see the video and PowerPoint slides at hp://www.

dst.gov.za/forum2012.

c) Mr Chose Choeu, President: South African Chamber of

Commerce and Industry

Please see the video at hp://www.dst.gov.za/forum2012.

d) Prof. Loyiso Nongxa, Vice-Chancellor: University of the

Witwatersrand


e) Dr Albert van Jaarsveld, CEO: Naonal Research

Foundaon

Please see the video and PowerPoint slides at hp://www.

dst.gov.za/forum2012.

f) Adv. Jus

ce Bekebeke, Director-General: Northern CapeProvincial Government


2.2 Session presenters

Some of the presentaons delivered by the presenters below

can be accessed at hp://www.dst.gov.za/forum2012.

1) Postharvest Technologies

a) Brenda Koornneef, Business Execuve, Group

Markeng and Corporate Strategy, Tiger Brands

b) Jan Lievens, Senior Consultant, Umhwebo Trading

Enterprise Miatech Post Harvest South Africa

c) Stuart Symington, CEO, Perishable Products Export

Control Board

d) Prof. Linus Opara, DST-NRF South African Research

Chair in Postharvest Technology, Stellenbosch

University

2) Water Management Technologies

a) Graham Trusler, CEO, Digby Wells Environmental

b) Marn Pryor, General Manager: Process & Technology,

Aveng Water

c) Don Hunter, Managing Director, FFS Renersd) Dr Henk Vasmel, Vice President: Wells and Facilies,

Shell



3) Aerospace and Satellite Applicaon Technologies

a) Shaun Hendricks, Managing Execuve: Strategic

Projects Group, Tellumat

b) Beeuwen Gerryts, Naonal Contact Point, Aeronaucs

c) Dr Paul Potgieter, Group Managing Director, Aerosud

d) Dale King, Senior Manager: Internaonal R and T

Partnerships, Airbus

e) Thierry Leveugle, Vice President, Research and

Technology, Astrium Space Transportaon

4) Pharmaceucal Technologies

a) Dr Morena Makhoana, CEO, Biovac Instuteb) Dr Stephan Haitz, Head of Business Development,

Lonza AG.

c) Dr Colin Pillai, Global Head of D and I, Development,

Novars Pharma AG

d) Val Beaumont, Execuve Director, Innovave Medicine

South Africa

5) Energy Eciency and Renewable Energy Technologies

a) Ute Menikheim, Head of Energy, Siemens

b) Carl Kleynhans, Country President, Schneider Electric

Southern Africa

c) Dr Steve Lennon, Divisional Execuve, Eskom

d) Chris Willis, Analyst, Bloomberg New Energy Finance,

Cape Town

e) Dr Paul Kim, Vice President, Lighng and Building

Management Systems Soluons, LG Electronics

6) Waste Management Technologies

a) Dr Thulani Dlamini, Execuve Manager: Global

Research and Development, Sasol

b) Dr Johan Schoonraad, Treatment and Disposal

Soluons, Enviroserv

c) Mike Nicholls, Divisional Director: Technical Services,

Interwaste

d) Abrie Wessels, Regional General Manager: Cape,Veolia Water

e) Prof. Leslie Petrik, Environmental and Nano Sciences,

University of the Western Cape

2.3 Session facilitators

The six sessions in 2.2 were facilitated by the following:

a) Blanche Ting, Specialist: Biotechnology and Health,

Department of Science and Technology

b) Dr Jon Burns, Chief Technical Adviser, The Dialogue

Facility

c) Dr Jones Papo, Manager: Physical Metallurgy, Mintekd) Dr Zeblon Vilakazi, Director, iThemba LABS

e) Glaudina Loots, Director: Health Innovaon,


f) Jazze Mokoena, Acng Execuve Director, Energy and

Sustainable Economic Development

g) Khalid Manjoo, Head of Satellite AIT, SunSpace

h) Mapula Tshangela, Director: Sustainable Development,

Department of Environmental Aairs

i) Mlungisi Cele, Director: Strategy and Planning,


j) Naim Rassool, General Manager: Business

Development, Technology Innovaon Agency

k) Ramona Towell, Chief of Sta, Private O ce of the

Premier (Northern Cape)

2.4 Summary of presentaons

Summaries of all the presentaons delivered during the six

sessions in 2.2 are presented below.

a) Prof. Karen Theron, Stellenbosch University (Post-Harvest

Technologies)

Four speakers made presentaons under this theme. The

rst was Brenda Koornneef, business execuve from Tiger

Brands, followed by Jan Lievens, senior consultant from


9/28


Miatech Post Harvest South Africa, then Stuart Symington,

CEO of Perishable Products Export Control Board, and

nally Prof. Linus Opara, South African Research Chair

in Postharvest Technology, Department of Horcultural

Science, Stellenbosch University.

The rst presentaon by Ms Koornneef presented the

posion of postharvest technology from the perspecve

of a large company and their strategy for innovaon. They

have a strategy to diversify and grow their business byrstly using in-house research and development (R&D) and

technology which is largely planned around their strategy.

Aer determining what can be done in-house, they develop

regional and internaonal partnerships by open-source

networking to develop other innovave ideas.

Jan Lievens, an engineer, discussed the dierence

between research, the search for knowledge or, in

general, any systemic invesgaon to establish facts, as

well as the scienst who engages in systemic acvity to

acquire knowledge. Sciensts perform research for a

more comprehensive understanding of nature, including

physical, mathemacal and social realms. He then

stressed the importance of nding ways to transfer the

excellent research done by sciensts to technology to be

used in industry by the consumer. In the case of certain

postharvest technology aspects, e.g. relave humidity

control in cold stores, this transfer should be done by

engineers. In the case of other postharvest aspects this role

will fall to so-called agricultural engineers, e.g. postharvest

horculturists.

Stuart Symington looked at the changing world within

which the fruit industries have to operate and where they

have to innovate to stay ahead. Examples of global risks thatthreaten the compeveness of fruit industries are the lack

of crical informaon infrastructure, general infrastructure

fragility and extreme energy price volality. He discussed

the Post Harvest Innovaon (PHI) fund, funded by the

DST, which aims to try to retain or maintain the situaon

in the fruit industries, as well as global compeveness

by facilitang or supporng research and maintaining or

growing capacity. He alluded to the successes of the PHI

programme, but also the challenge of the connuity of

funding.

Linus Opara discussed the growing problems internaonally

in terms of food security. These include a growingworld populaon, limited resources and the populaon

becoming more discerning and wanng more choices. We

therefore have to conserve what we produce. Currently

about a third of food produced is lost and not consumed.

Improved postharvest technologies can address some of

these losses. We therefore need to invest in educaon and

R&D. He showed data that indicated that in 2009 one of

the disappearing jobs was that of the agricultural engineer,

while the needed jobs listed for 2022 had agricultural

engineer third on the list, aer mathemacs and robocs.

This es in well with what was said by Jan Lievens.

In conclusion, it can be said that strategies are needed to

idenfy key themes that are important. Thereaer sustained

support, both nancial and in terms of capacity, needs

to be found to support these themes. The presentaon

earlier in the day by the Japanese Embassy was a case in

point: it was explained how the Japanese idenfy key areas

that need research and then develop a long-term vision to

support these themes by funding and capacity-building in

those areas, in order for their economy to be successful.



g) Prof. Thokozani Majozi, Department of Chemical

Engineering, University of Pretoria (Water Management

Technologies)

Abstract

The session on water management technologies involved

four speakers from diverse backgrounds, albeit within

the water management sector. The rst presenter was

Graham Trusler from Digby Wells Environmental, whopresented on water research needs in South Africa. The

second presenter was Marn Pryor from Aveng Water,

who gave the perspecve of the infrastructure company on

the value of research, development an innovaon. He was

followed by Donald Hunter from FFS Reneries, who gave

an overview of technology in the waste oil industry. The

last presenter was Henk Vasmel from Wells and Facilies

in Shells Global Innovaon and R&D Organizaon, whose

presentaon was on water management in energy. The key

message from all presenters was that there was a need for

signicant investment in skills, research and technology

development within the water and energy sectors to bringabout meaningful and posive change. The inextricable

link between water and energy was strongly emphasised.

Discussion on water management technologies

In highlighng research needs in South Africa, acid mine

drainage, fracking and sewage spillage emerged as the main

threats to available water resources. The soluon to these

immediate threats will require an integrated water resource

management approach. The laer should be founded on

reducon of waste at source, instead of tradional end-

of-pipe treatment methods. Waterless sanitaon systems

were also cited as a viable candidate soluon to water

conservaon. However, the design and implementaon of

these systems will require a signicant number of highly

trained people, which South Africa currently does not have.

The agricultural and urban sectors were idened as key to

water conservaon, since they collecvely consume more

than 85% of available water, compared to industry and

power generaon that consume 3% and 2%, respecvely.

Most of the technologies for water recovery have proven

to be a great success in various industries, including

petrochemicals and power generaon. In parcular,

membrane systems, like reverse osmosis and ultraltraon,have demonstrated water recovery in excess of 90%, which

renders membrane technology an aracve opon. The

use of membrane technology in desalinaon of seawater is

well established in most parts of the world where water is

scarce. Unfortunately, these systems also require signicant

amounts of energy, hence the water-energy nexus. Given

South Africas energy constraints, this might prove not to

be a viable opon, at least for the foreseeable future.

The solid link between water and energy was emphasised

in the presentaon on research iniaves at Shells Global

Innova

on and R&D Organiza

on. In essence, their holis

cand comprehensive approach to water management

involves energy as well as food. The raonale is that

one needs water to grow crops that ulmately provide

food. On the other hand, the ow of water from source

to plantaons requires energy. As a result, any water

management strategy that excludes food and energy is

bound to be largely unsuccessful. It is imperave to address

the water-energy-food nexus within the context a growing

world populaon. The current world populaon is 7 billion

and is predicted to peak at 9 billion around 2050. Over the

last few years, Shell has invested more than US$1 bill ion in

coming up with integrated water management soluons.

Some of the successes that are worthy of menon include

the use of domesc euent as makeup for cooling towers

at the Sapref facility a joint venture between Shell and

BP in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, as well as the largest zero-

liquid discharge GTL facility in the world in Qatar and a

45 000 m3/day reed bed water treatment plant in Oman.

The issue of fracking was also discussed at length and it was

highlighted that fracking remains a viable opon for cheap

energy, parcularly if opportunies for water recovery are

fully exhausted. Where possible, water could be imported

instead of using local water resources, which has always

been a bone of contenon.

Some crical observaons

There was consensus that a working soluon to water

management would invariably require a comprehensive

and an integrated approach. Consequently, all intervenons

should seek to achieve this fundamental goal, which

mandates a greater eort towards developing new

technologies.

h) Prof. Laurent Dala, University of the Witwatersrand

(Aerospace and Satellite Applicaon Technologies)

There were ve speakers in the session: Mr ShaunHendricks, Managing Execuve: Strategic Project Group,

spoke about the Tellumat experience in the Aviaon


11/28


Sector; Mr Beeuwen Gerryts, Chief Director: Localisaon

and Advanced Manufacturing, Department of Science and

Technology, discussed the strategic drivers for aeronaucs

R&D in South Africa. An overview of the Joint Aerospace

Steering Commiee put in place by the Department of

Science of Technology was given; Dr Paul Potgieter, Group

Managing Director, Aerosud, presented the success stories

in manufacturing as a supplier for Boeing and Airbus and

the role of an R&D strategy for the aerospace industry and

South Africa; Mr Dale King, Senior Manager: Internaonal

Research and Technology (R&T) Partnership, Airbus,spoke about the importance of the Internaonal Research

Cooperaon in Aeronaucs; and Mr Thierry Leveugle,

Vice-president: Research and Technology, Astrium Space

Transportaon, discussed the success factors and challenges

for Space Transportaon Research and Technology.

The main themes of these talks were A Common

Understanding of the Aerospace Marketand Convergence

in the Proposed Soluons.

The South African Aerospace Industry is part of a global

market. Its role within the local market is not only economic,but also a social driver for the country. The South African

Aerospace Community must redene its posion within

the global market by having the right a tude and by

carefully choosing the industry drivers. The success stories,

not only in manufacturing, but also in system integraons,

for instance, must be marketed to local and internaonal

partners.

A new model is required to link the aerospace industry,

the Council for Scienc and Industrial Research (CSIR)

and the universies. The aerospace industry must drive

the applied research, and there must be connuity in the

aerospace R&D programmes to enhance knowledge, localand internaonal collaboraons and skills development.

The South African Aerospace Sector Development plan

is key to dening the cross-cu ng themes. A process

must be dened between industry, research centres and

universies based on clear objecves, clear milestones,

clear deliverables, evaluaon of the projects, a return on

investment and clear instruments to measure maturity

(technology-readiness level) of technology.

Internaonal companies face many technical and

human challenges. They are increasingly looking for new

internaonal opportunies to source soluons directly.

They are looking for opportunies to share the technical,

human and nancial challenges with new partners, becausethe market, customers and suppliers are increasingly global.

i) Prof. Gary Maartens, Head of Pharmacology, University of

Cape Town (Pharmaceucal Technologies)

There were four speakers in this session: Dr Morena

Makhoana spoke about South Africa rebuilding its

manufacturing capacity for vaccines; Dr Stephan Haitz

discussed technology transfer to improve South Africas

pharmaceucal manufacturing capacity; Dr Colin Pillai

discussed the role that global pharmaceucal industriescould play in training researchers from South Africa; and

Val Beaumont discussed clinical research. There were many

shared themes in these four talks and in the discussions

which followed.

Five main themes were idened:

First, the global disease burden is disproporonately

high in low and middle-income countries, but nearly all

the research and development occurs in high-income

countries. Manufacturing is also disproporonately higher

in high-income countries. This is of parcular concern in

respect of vaccines, which are crucially important to public

health. It is grafying that South Africa is rebuilding its

vaccine manufacturing capacity, which will serve a large



region of Africa.

Second, research capacity in this eld is limited in South

Africa. There is insucient postgraduate research training.

Capacity is further hampered by the brain drain. An excellent

example of private sector research training by internaonal

pharmaceucal industry was provided by Novars. Other

companies that also provide training include Sano-Avens. More funding for research is essenal if South

Africa is going to develop capacity for drug discovery. Long-

term funding was idened as a key issue. Basic research

into drug discovery is high-risk and funders should not

expect direct nancial returns.

Third, there is a need for public-private partnerships.

Drug development is extremely expensive. It is realisc

for South African researchers to develop novel chemical

enes, illustrated by the recent announcement of

a novel anmalarial drug developed here, but it is

unrealisc for all phases of drug development to be donewithout internaonal private sector involvement. Drug

manufacture, especially vaccine manufacture, is complex

and expensive, and requires experse and co-funding from

the private sector.

Fourth, will the increased state investment in

pharmaceucal manufacturing result in increased research

and development? There is no doubt that pharmaceucal

and vaccine manufacture requires the skills of people

who have had postgraduate research training. However,

in general, basic research and development occurs in

academia, research instutes and small biotechnology

companies rather than in manufacturing plants. Increased

investment in manufacturing should be accompanied

by increased investment in research and development,

perhaps funded in part by prots from manufacturing.

Fih, clinical research creates many jobs and brings in

funding (an esmated R1,75 billion in 2009). Most clinical

research done in South Africa is funded and iniated by the

internaonal pharmaceucal industry. Although industry

research does not usually involve innovaon from South

African researchers, it does provide clinical research training

and allows research groups to develop infrastructure and

crical mass. This then improves their capacity to conduct

invesgator-iniated research. Delays in geng clinicalresearch protocols approved was idened as a barrier to

clinical research, but there has been improvement recently

with the turnaround mes by the regulatory authority, the

Medicines Control Council. Clinical researchers working in

the state sector also face barriers due to the compeng

interests of providers and researchers.

j) Prof. Xiaohua Xia, Centre of New Energy Systems,

University of Pretoria (Energy E ciency and Renewable

Energy Technologies)

This session had ve presenters. They are Ute Menikheim,

Head of Energy, Siemens; Carl Kleynhans, Country

President, Schneider Electric, Southern Africa; Dr

Steve Lennon, Divisional Execuve, Eskom; Chris Willis,

Bloomberg; and Dr Paul Kim, Vice President, Lighng and

Building Management Systems Soluons, LG Electonics,

South Korea.

In her presentaon entled Siemens - Global leaders

in innovave technology soluons, Ute Menikheim

introduced Siemens, Siemens research and development

programmes and how Siemens strives to enhance the

quality of life through R&D. She listed and described

Siemens energy soluons, such as wind power with

Siemens rotor blades the longest in the world smart-grid

soluons, their fossil division, and clean coal electricaon.

She elaborated on Siemens R&D in South Africa, namely

partnering with the University of Johannesburg in the Solar

Challenge race, with the Technology Innovaon Agency

(TIA) in managing R&D, in the Ambassadors Programme

to strengthen collaboraon with universies, in the Cyber

Junkyard project in fostering relaonships between industry

and universies, and in skills development in empowering

people to develop the country.

Carl Kleynhans made a presentaon on Make the most

of your energy. He introduced Schneiders electric energy

(EE) management soluon the EcoStructure Integrated

EE architecture, and Schneider Electrics energy eciency

philosophy of metering, LHF, automang and monitoring,

and tested-validated documentaon. He described in

detail their range of products: healthcare power soluons,

data centre power soluons, building power soluons,

industry power soluons, marine power soluons, smart

grid and vehicle charging, as well as their renewable energy

soluons ranging from wind, solar to backup power, with

both residen

al and commercial applica

ons.

The tle of Dr Steve Lennons presentaon was What does

Eskom seek in an R&D partnership? In this presentaon,


13/28




2

Eskoms exisng memberships and associaons (147

partners, R26 million/year, R22 million for the Electric

Power Research Insitute (EPRI), in parcular, as well

as Eskoms research partnerships and networks

(internaonal, local and in Africa) were reviewed. Eskoms

10 principles for a good partnership were introduced,

and the benets of partnerships and factors hindering

success analysed. Examples were given to show how

Eskom decides whether to engage or not in partnerships

with EPRI, Enel and Nissan by invoking the 10 principles.In concluding his presentaon, Dr Lennon listed Eskoms

future needs in internaonal partnerships in areas of

energy eciency, smart-grid technology and resource

management. He indicated that Eskom had many exisng

research agreements, some of which could be leveraged

for the good of the country. From an Eskom perspecve,

South Africa should be seeking partnerships in the

following areas: energy e ciency, renewables, nuclear

energy, water, clean coal and asset management. In

summary, not all partnerships work. There are several

factors that dene a good relaonship and some potenal

pialls. Partnerships require a fair contribuon, dedicated

resources, contribuons and commitment.

Chris Willis, in his presentaon, Trends in Clean

Technology R&D Investment, introduced the Bloomberg

New Energy Finance concept to the audience. He gave

a detailed analysis of the global investment landscape

($263 billion in 2011) by sector, namely solar, wind, bio-

and smart technologies, as well as of new investment by

region, with parcular emphasis on sub-Saharan clean

energy development in recent years. One interesng point

was that Kenya made the largest investment from 2009-

2011 as a country in the region. Lastly, he described four

factors aecng investment in energy security: the cost ofhydrocarbons, the trend to move away from diesel, the

global solar photovoltaic (PV)/wind tarimovements, and

the development benets. On the last issue, he predicted

that most jobs will be created in PV by 2020, and that for

projects greater than 1 MW, 30 jobs will be created per

MW.

The last presentaon by Dr Paul Kim was entled LG Smart

Energy Soluons. One of the four product pillars of the LG

Corporaon, which has over 200 000 employees, is the air-

condioning and energy secon. This secon specically

targets residenal and commercial applicaons andsoluons, because LG esmates that 25% of total energy

consumpon comes from these two sectors, and 80% of the

total consumpon of these two sectors comes from lighng

and HVAC (heang, venlaon and air condioning). LGs

total HVAC and energy soluons consist of the mul-V

(VRF variable refrigerant ow) system (energy saving,

inverter, intelligent control and communicaon); the chiller

(centrifugal, absorpon, 2-stage centrifugal and screw

types); LED lighng; plasma lighng technology (indoor,

ood/sports lights longer life, 30% saving); and LGs BMS

and BeMS (building management system/building energy

management system). These soluons are demonstrated

by vercal applicaons in LGs headquarters (HVAC (28%

saving), BMS, lighng (13,8% saving)), and the retail chain

stores (RE (renewable energy), LED lighng, smart HVAC,

30% saving), to be deployed naonally.


15/28


k) Prof. Leslie Petrik, Group Leader: Environmental and

Nano Sciences, University of the Western Cape (Waste

Management Technologies)

In the context of the workshop and the problems highlighted

in respect of waste management, the following remarks

were made by Prof. Petrik:

Prof. Loyiso said that sustainability and climate change

were global challenges that should be addressed as part of

the global community; the naonal system of innovaon

should not be isolated. Prof. Van Jaarsveld pointed out

that there were several dierent types of economies

and that a knowledge-based economy meant that a

compeve advantage had to be retained, which would

require a perpetual cycle of innovaon. He also menoned

that technology development outpaced the take-up of

innovaon. Adv. Jusce Bekebeke noted that the advantages

of the natural environment should be protected with

diligence. Many growth indicators were discussed over the

two days of the workshop, but no indicators of the health

system or sustainability were considered unl the waste

management sessions.

It was noted by one speaker that the Bill of Rights and the

Constuon stated that each cizen had the right to an

environment that was not harmful to health, as well as the

right to have the environment protected for the benet of

present and future generaons.

In general it could be understood that companies were

externalising costs as far as possible, since their business

models were to maximise shareholder prot in the short to

medium term by maximising margins and minimising costs.

Industry could not be a social change agent by itself withinthe current economic model. It was made clear by the

speakers that companies would respond to the law and that

external regulaon, policing and compliance monitoring

was required to prevent inappropriate and unsustainable

waste management pracces by business. Businesses would

adapt and innovate accordingly.

It was not sustainable to maximise extracon and growth at

all costs. We live in a closed, limited system, as has become

abundantly clear from the water scarcity and waste/

polluon issues. It is not wise to proliferate without restraint

or consume and degrade resources ad innitum. The

current modus operandi is creang a very uncertain future.

Some objecves being considered (for instance the SKArequirements for clear, unpolluted skies vs. the outcomes of

air and water polluon from developments that would arise

around gas fracking) were mutually exclusive, and long-term

sustainability was preferable to short-term, short-sighted

growth strategies or exploitaon. Our fragile ecosystem was

inherited from our predecessors and we should not be known

as the generaon that irreversibly despoiled it through our

greed and lack of prudence. The growth model was touted

as the route to poverty alleviaon without consideraon of

the undermining eect of rampant populaon growth and

the aendant pressure on resources over consumpon,

polluon and environmental degradaon.

Thulani Dlamini, Execuve Manager: Global Research and

Development, Sasol, highlighted the footprint of each process

of their hydrocarbon processing facilies that required

suitable pracces for waste management. He menoned

the increasingly stringent legislave environment which

required research in waste management. Sasols wastes

were derived from the coal gasicaon and Fischer-Tropsch

processes, the renery operaons, as well as from the

ulies. Gasicaon resulted in coarse and ne ash, which

was their largest waste stream requiring beneciaon. Tar

and waste oils also resulted from this process. The Fischer-

Tropsch process resulted in spent catalysts and hydrocarbon-

contaminated waste water. The renery process resulted in

hydrocarbon waste, sludge, gunk, waste oil, waste water


17/28




and spent catalysts. Ulies such as steam cooling and

power generaon resulted in ne ash, bio-sludge, brines,

hydrocarbon sludge and inorganic sludge. Ash presented

85% of the waste, and 9 100 kilotons/annum were produced.

Currently, aer 30 years of producon, Sasol had 300 million

tons of ash stored on site. Hazardous waste amounted to 84

kilotons/annum, recycle waste amounted to 1 208 kilotons/

annum and non-hazardous wastes such as waste water and

biosludge amounted to 409 kilotons/annum.

The waste management philosophy at Sasol encompassed

the cradle to cradle approach and took due cognisance of

the duty of care to the environment and people. Waste

was currently managed by integrated waste procedures

and hazardous waste was disposed of in licensed hazardous

waste sites or incinerated. Non-hazardous waste was

landlled or recycled. Coal combuson residues were

stored on site and various opons for value addions were

menoned. Since 2008 waste avoidance had become the

operaonal philosophy. The most preferable opon was toavoid, reduce or reuse the waste. If this was not possible,

it was necessary to recycle, recover and treat the waste.

The least preferable opon was to dispose of the waste.

The transion to this new waste hierarchy was dicult to

implement and required monitoring and adequate record-

keeping. Currently Sasol was invesng between R10-15

million in R&D in collaborave research partnerships.

Coal combuson residues, namely ash (both coarse and

ne), was being reused as a cement addive, an aggregate

in concrete, road construcon, alternave building materials

and, more controversially, as salt sink, a prac

ce which hadbeen shown to be unsustainable. It was menoned that

4,2 billion cement bricks were produced for the period

from 2004 to 2009, creang many jobs. Through the brick

manufacturing, the esmated capping and closure costs for

the coal combuson residues, which was esmated to be

R60 million, was externalised. Cement brick manufacture

also reduced the amount of CO2released, as the CO

2intensity

of ash brick manufacture was much lower than tradional

brickmaking. In road construcon the ash is stabilised with

a bitumen emulsion and its leaching and toxicity was being

studied. Weathered ne ash was being considered for

geopolymer materials as alternave building materials, and

the density of cured foam panels allowed a weight-saving of72%. The extracon of aluminium from ash was not found to

be viable because of the high energy input required. It was

noted that CO2capture and migaon costs will have a huge

impact on operaons that sll need to be resolved.

The next speaker was Dr Johan Schoonraad from Enviroserv,

who was in charge of their treatment and disposal soluons.

Dr Schoonraad reviewed the companys prole and made

the audience aware of the current and impending legislave

burden that companies faced. He reminded us of the

entrenched rights of each cizen, present and future,

to an environment not harmful to health. There weremany prohibions in the legislave pipeline that would

limit companies disposal pracces, such as landlling,

and he noted the impact of several new Acts such as the

Constuon (Act 108 of 1996). Dr Schoonraad menoned

several ways to reduce and remediate waste used by

Enviroserv to address the needs of their clients. These were

mechanochemical technologies that were used to treat

contaminated soils, vibratory shear-enhanced membrane

processes that minimised fouling of membranes that were

used to deal with high-salt e uents, and the hydroclave

that was used for incineraon of medical waste. He noted

that organics such as halogenated hydrocarbons, DDT, PCB,

petroleum hydrocarbons, pescides, endocrine disruptors,

etc., were becoming an increasing polluon problem and

incineraon costs were too high. New, low-cost ways to

reduce waste were required.

The following speaker was Mr Mike Nicholls, Divisional

Director of Technical Services at Interwaste. Mr Nicholls

presented a company prole of Interwaste. The operaonal

philosophy of their company was that they consider waste

residues of value. Disposal of waste was a waste of waste.

Their companys general approach to waste was to try to

prevent or reduce its producon in the rst place or, if that

could not be done, to change the hazard prole by reducingthe hazards posed by the waste. The company unl recently

did not own a landll site and, for instance, reused a million

cubic metres of waste per annum, as can be seen in their

World Island project in Dubai. The company trades in waste

commodies. The drivers for technological improvement are

cost and legislaon. Waste has an inherent value and industry

should not sterilise the value by wasng waste, such as is

done when co-disposal is pracced diluon of polluon

is no soluon. He noted that disposal to landll became

more costly and was not linear over me, and disposal costs

increased unl a point where it made economic sense for

the industry to invest in prevenng, reducing, reusing andrecycling, rather than disposal. Innovaon oen solved the

cost issue and he menoned that the legislave banning of

a pracce oen acted as an incenve to consider alternave

routes, for example hydrocarbon waste at Sasol was now

used as alternave fuel in cement kilns.

The industry had to consider the opportunity costs of not

beneciang the waste versus the overall costs of disposal.

The costs of compliance were signicant and had to include

the costs of regular audits. It was also necessary to take into

account the price uctuaon in the value of the resources

held in the waste, which could aect the beneciaon

process. In some cases it was necessary to store the waste

unl such me as the future value held in the waste could

be realised. It was necessary to choose the value drivers,


19/28



18

3.2 Comments by parcipants and presenters

All the comments that were included in the evaluaon form are

presented below.

1) Very well organised. Good Speakers. Unfortunately had to

miss dinner, maybe next me!

2) Thanks for a wonderfully planned and executed event

last week. It was a pleasure to parcipate in such a forum

and I have certainly come away with new friendships and

business partnerships. Was slightly disappointed that the

aerospace sessions leaned heavily towards aeronaucsand avionics and lacked balance. Would have wanted to see

more parcipaon from our space agency (SANSA) and the

DST Space Porolio on their plans for space in SA. Spoke to

Beeuwen Gerryts about this and I hope that future forums

(including the Aerospace Steering Commiee iniave)

would include this, as well as key industry players like

DSTs Naonal Strategic Asset SunSpace.

3) Its such a pity that the keynote speakers leimmediately

aer their presentaons and did not stay to interact with

the audience and also to hear the points of view of the other

speakers. This is crically important given that they are the

decision-makers relave to the goals of the programme.

I spoke at the session on Pharma Technologies, and was

able to move some implementaon ideas forward, e.g.

the low representaon of clinical sciensts in the Novars

Next Generaon Scienst programme.

4) It was excellent. Please keep it up. Would you please cater

for parking in the venue secured?

5) I only rated the sessions I aended; however, the overall

summaries of the ones I missed were also very posive

Figure 2: Overall level of sasfacon per parcipant

Very Satisfied52%Satisfied

40%

Not Satisfied7%

Very dissatisfied1%


21/28


19

as per the people who were required to make such

summaries on Day 1. It was indeed a well-organised

gathering; I do believe that with me and commitment to

have these gatherings on a regular basis, they could prove

very benecial for our beloved country. If possible, hold

them outside Cape Towns wet and cold winter season.

6) Commenng on other sessions is not possible as parallel

sessions prevented one from learning as much as possible.

The waste session on the second day was very poorly

aended by delegates, even though this is a crucial topic

for future sustainability. It is a pity that only selected

companies had the opportunity to prole their work

and innovaons. Most internaonal business delegates/

speakers were not really clear about their need or desire

for possible research and innovaon partners in SA, or

the route to potenal opportunies in collaboraon.

It was also di cult to convey innovaon from the SA

academic side to the companies many of the companies

or internaonal delegates seem not to have stayed for

the full period of the forum so were not available forinteracon or group discussions. Few of the internaonal

delegates aended the dinner and even fewer visited the

exhibions. The exhibit hall was not well visited due to its

locaon, with low visibility and few exhibitors. Overall it

was not made clear what the economic impact or benet

of the SA Internaonal Research partnerships was to SA,

except for the few gures presented by Dr Van Jaarsveld

relang to joint publicaons. A lot of NRF funding goes

to internaonal bilateral partnership arrangements, yet

this funding never includes actual research funding. From

an academic point of view this makes it very dicult to

achieve real research goals between collaborators, unless

suitable and sucient research funds are found fromother sources, which is generally not easy. Internaonal

bilateral partners also complain about this maer.

7) Presenters should please provide handouts of their

presentaons. Could we be updated by handouts of the

presentaons not aended?

8) The forum was good and well-organised. Parcipaon was

highly interacve and lots of learning achieved. However,

I would like to recommend that in future the forum is also

used to showcase local talent by allowing postgraduate

students to give talks on their research work.

9) We truly commend the DST, in parcular Mr V Lingela,

for their leadership and vision in hosng such a milestone

event in internaonal research. We look forward to

parcipang in the next event.

10) It helped in terms of understanding the latest technology

in the eld.

11) I aended the second day. I found the morning session

to be good, but the aernoon very good. Great open

discussion.

12) Unfortunately, I couldnt aend the dinner and therefore

cannot express an opinion. Overall, the Internaonal

Research Forum was very insighul and valuable and a

wonderful plaorm to start and engage on many dierent

important research maers.

13) In the aerospace sector the audience was very limited. As

far as I could tell, the event did not seem to have been

well publicised. I did not, of course, know everyone in the

audience, but there seemed to be limited aendance from

any SA space or academic instuon, or Denel or SASOL

or SAA actors. No speaker from the CSIR. I was happy toaend since it gave me some opportunies to network,

but there could have been a lot more. Also, given the

upcoming AAD and IASSA events, the ming could have

been beer. In the feedback session at the end of day

one, there was lile menon of means, movaons and

opportunies for internaonal cooperaon, which was

surprising given the forum theme. I think you are trying

to do a good thing, but did the sectors really learn much

from each other? Basically a good idea but scope for

improvement.

14) Perhaps you could consider fewer carefully selected

breakaway themes and a one-day forum to ensure that

the crowd is not lost between the two days and breakaway

sessions



20


23/28


21

15) Adversing/promoon/announcements for this pro-

gramme should be circulated earlier. Department of Sci-

ence and Technology forums are excellent usually this

one seemed well planned yet again. Well done.

16) This was a very valuable session for me to get a beer

understanding of the core business of the DST.

17) I thought the breakaway sessions were good and the forum

was a good networking opportunity. I found the feedbacksessions boring.

18) A good iniave, but as a delegate it was dicult to see

any realisaon of the objecves and desired outcomes of

the event. The organisers must be disappointed at the level

of aendance a symptom of an event where no nancial

commitment is aached (conference fee). I understand

that the DST did not want cost to be a disincenve. We were

pleased to see postharvest as one of the themes, but there

were too few delegates and no internaonal delegates to

really create a meaningful discussion. I do not believe that

the presenters or the parcipants really knew what they

were meant to be doing, so the discussions were fairly

undirected. The designated facilitator was not present and

the ll-in facilitators had no knowledge or understanding

of the theme and were therefore reliant on the speakers.

Two of the four speakers were not present during the

discussion, so one had a fairly unbalanced discussion

based on the percepons of the speakers. The chairperson

or facilitator is the key driver of the process. This person

should know what the speakers are going to be talking

about and should be well-prepared with worked-out

quesons that will lead a discussion. The quesons should

be closely related to achieving the desired outcomes. You

had some very senior people on the delegates list it willbe a challenge geng them back to a similar event unless

the event is well-structured.

19) Please note that I only aended Day 1 of the two-day

forum. I was pleased with the ow of the programme on

that day and the people I met. I am already in contact with

them and discussing further collaboraons. Many thanks

for the opportunity.

20) These are the sessions that I aended. I have managed

to iniate talks about collaboraon with Novars in

Switzerland. This was as a direct result of aending theresearch forum.

21) As a speaker, the screen and the LCD were not visible from

the podium. Speakers should have been given a more

detailed brief.

22) This was an excellent opportunity to meet role-players in

similar areas of experse and to inform oneself of R&D

and commercial opportunies. This was a bold step by the

DST, a step into the unknown, but one that turned out to

be a success. We certainly hope the DST will turn this into

an annual event and that the next one will be even beer!

There could have been a few more exhibits or poster

displays there certainly was sucient space available to

the sides of the main open area.



22

23) I suggest the inclusion of rail transport systems and

technology innovaon from which lessons could be learnt

from the globe. The green technology in the current global

dialogue is a discussion at hand which draws serious

aenon to world leaders in climate change. Transport

is therefore necessary in all of these discussions. It wouldalso add more value to exchange informaon with your

Department with regard to the internaonal agreements

entered into with all the countries listed in your data

base, so that we can scan through them to select areas

of interest. It will add more value if we can be specic in

our interacon and engagement with those countries and

your Department. Last but not least, the funding opon

of research should be transparent. If di cult to open it

up, why not put it as a challenge and form part of agenda

items in your future forums so that those who have

soluons could provide such soluons?

24) This was the rst of its kind in our country. However, it

was well-organised and the speakers presentaons were

amazing. I think it would be beer the RSA organised its

own DST forum to encourage the young generaon to

enrol in science. We also want to read about the success

stories of young people through the DST.

25) All of us at the Fresh Produce Exporters Forum (FPEF)

were impressed with the IRF conference as a whole. It was

professionally organised and everything seemed to run

smoothly. The sessions were interesng and informave

and the coee/tea/snacks and lunch were lovely and well-

catered for. Perhaps there could have been more exhibits?

There is such a posive energy about the Department of

Science and Technology I was looking forward to hear

Minister Naledi Pandor speak pity it could not happen in

the end. Well done to the organisers, the NRF and the DST

for a wonderful two days!

26) Exhibitors could have been more acve and approachable.

The dinner was not properly organised. The venue was not

suitable. It also felt like we were under a strict budget not

to loosen up and enjoy ourselves aer the long hours.

27) Thank you for hosng this event! I did aend (as indicatedcorrectly in your aachment), but if I remember correctly,

there was no conrmaon email aer registering on

the website. This might have created the impression for

some people that the registraon might not have been

successful or that it was not taken seriously.

28) Excellent job well done.

29) Thank you so much for the opportunity to aend this event.

Learnt a lot and look forward to a next opportunity. As a

Management of Technology and Innovaon professional

I had the opportunity to take a look from outside into

the innovaon community, and I thought at least one

improvement may be a generic session on innovaon as

acvity; technological progress and associated trends;

technological literacy; technological governance in terms

of King III, etc. Not incidentally, I happen to have a view on

all of these and would not mind presenng at a next event

if arranged in good me. This oer as an aside, however,

and sll very thankful for the opportunity! Well done!

30) Many thanks for the invitaon to the IRF; it was a well-

organised conference. The discussion sessions were

thought-provoking, while integrang diverse intellectual

ideas and vital soluons to prevailing socio-economic,technological and industrial problems facing SA. Kindly

accept my hearest congratulaons for a sterling

performance as the coordinator and being a trailblazer

as the iniator of such a remarkable conference. Looking

forward to more IRF conferences in future.

3.3 Recommendaons

Summary of recommendaons by parcipants are presented

below:

a) The Department of Science and Technology shouldturn the forum into an annual event. It could prove

very benecial for the country.

b) More parcipaon from the South African Naonal

Space Agency (SANSA) and the DST Space Porolio

on their plans for space in South Africa should be

considered.

c) Keynote speakers and presenters should stay aer their

presentaons to interact with the parcipants and also

to hear the points of view of the other speakers. This

is crically important given that they are the decision-

makers relave to the goals of the programme.


25/28


23

d) In the future the forum could be used to showcase

local talent by allowing postgraduate students to give

presentaons on their research work.

e) Fewer carefully selected breakaway themes and aone-day forum should be considered, ensuring that

parcipants are not lost between the two days and

breakaway sessions.

f) Adversing/promoon/announcements for the forum

should be circulated earlier.

g) The inclusion of rail transport systems and technology

innovaon should be considered, from which lessons

could be learnt. The green technology in the current

global dialogue is a discussion at hand which draws

serious aenon to world leaders in climate change.

The role of transport therefore is necessary in all ofthese discussions.

h) The Department should make informaon available

about the exisng science and technology internaonal

agreements to promote internaonal partnerships.

i) The forum could arrange more visible exhibits and

poster presentaons in the future.

j) Research funding opons should form part of agenda

items in the future forums.

4. Conclusions

The Internaonal Research Forum was a valuable plaorm

for parcipants to start to engage on important research

collaboraons and other research maers. The forum managedto meet its objecves, as some parcipants are iniang

new partnerships, while other parcipants have managed to

iniate talks about collaboraon with internaonal companies

such as Novars in Switzerland. The forum also created

several networking opportunies for parcipants. Overall,

the parcipants felt that the forum was very insighul and

successful.



24

5. Contacts

Vuyani Lingela

Chief Director: Internaonal Research

Tel: +27 12 843 6517

Cell: +27 82 600 4722

Fax: +27 86 681 0051

Email: [email protected]

Mapule Degama

Intern: Internaonal Research

Tel: +27 12 843 6343

Email: [email protected]


Postal Address: Private Bag X 894, Pretoria 0001, South Africa

Physical Address: Building 53, Meiring Naude Road, CSIR

Campus, Pretoria 0184, South Africa


27/28


28/28

international research forum, cape town, south africa

Documents