A critical review of social sciences and humanities R&D expenditure in South Africa, 2005–2014

Abstract

Expenditure on research and experimental development in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in South Africa has almost doubled over the past decade. However, fine-grained analysis of patterns of Research and Development expenditure in SSH research fields over the period 2005/2006–2014/2015 reveals a number of critical issues for both institutional planning and national policymaking. We demonstrate that most SSH Research and Development expenditure in the 10-year reference period was targeted predominantly within just a few research fields: finance, economics, education, accounting and political science and public policy. By contrast, investment in SSH research fields such as architecture and habitat, media and communication studies, psychology, and transportation studies was strikingly low in the same period, with some research fields, such as dance or tourism, appearing to be at risk of decline. Using these Research and Development data as a proxy, we argue, principally, that institutional Research and Development planners and national policymakers need to find a greater balance between current priorities and future needs, if SSH Research and Development is to be ‘leveraged’ for larger socio-economic impacts, as is being envisaged in a new draft White Paper on Science, Technology and Innovation. Significance: • Research and Development expenditure in the social sciences and humanities between 2005 and 2014 was concentrated in just a few research fields, such as finance, economics and education. By contrast, Research and Development expenditure was comparatively low in research fields such as media and communication studies, technology management, architecture and habitat, and dance. • In an era of rapid global technological change, but also deepening local societal challenges, South Africa’s national and institutional policymakers face strategic Research and Development choices. This article contributes to national debate about the status and perceived role(s) of the social sciences and humanities in this context.

Gender Justice, Social Cohesion, The Social Sciences and Covid-19: Opportunities and Challenges for Higher Education

“…The dominance of types of research outputs where science contributions are more discernible is evident. While the report does not disaggregate data specifically in relation to the social sciences, it is important to note that social sciences generally include education and psychology (Molotja & Ralphs, 2018).…”

“…Specifically, Molotja and Ralphs (2018) state that the social sciences include accounting; anthropology, archaeology, and history; architecture and habitat; economics; education; emerging issues; finance; geography; law; management studies; media and communication studies; political sciences and public policy; population studies; psychology; sociology; technology management; tourism and transportation studies. They further indicate that the humanities encompass arts and culture; dances; historical and civilisation studies; languages and literature; music; philosophy and religious studies.…”

“…Certain disciplines have more funding than others. Fields such as education, political science, public police and accounting receive much more funding than media studies, psychology, architecture and transportation studies (Molotja & Ralphs, 2018).…”

Humanities, Citations and Currency: Hierarchies of Value and Enabled Recolonisation

“…The ASSAf (2011,105) does observe that social scientists are increasingly publishing in Clarivateindexed journals and that the inclusion of both social science and humanities journals is growing within this index. The ASSAf Panel also acknowledges the chronic under-funding of the humanities in relation to the STEM disciplines (see also Molotja and Ralphs 2018).…”

Menggunakan 'Penta-Helix' untuk Menjembatani Reaksi Masyarakat Terhadap Vaksin Covid-19

“…Menurut Molotja & Ralphs (2018) dan Namdarian & Seghatoleslami (2021), metode ini merupakan penjabaran antar penulis yang relevan melalui fenomena dan ide konseptual yang relevan secara faktual. Tujuannya untuk menjawab dan mencoba mengatasi masalah sentimen publik terhadap kebijakan vaksin, dimana gejolak Covid-19 telah memicu krisis komunikasi (Pang, 2021).…”