Strategic Framework Towards a Revised Resource Allocation Model for the NRF

Enhancing Research Excellence, Innovation and Knowledge

Production

Dr Molapo Qhobela CEO

5th September 2016

1

PURPOSE OF HIGHER EDUCATION • For the individual, it provides social mobility, develops

a critical, tolerant and responsible citizenry. • For society, it contributes to social, economic and

cultural vitality; and determinants of health and well-being of nations through research and innovation,

• National Development Plan has identified Research and Innovation as one of the key components of building a knowledge economy

• Hence, universities are crucial national assets for addressing many national priorities.

2 1

SOCIAL VALUE OF HIGHER EDUCATION

• One of the goals of higher education is to help build a fairer, more just society

• The Higher Education Act 101 of 1997 emphasized some desirable core components to achieving transformation as follows: programmes and institutions to respond better to the

human resource, economic and development needs of South Africa, redressing past discrimination in HE ensuring representivity and equity of access and success contributing to the advancement of excellence in all forms

of knowledge and scholarship.

3 2

THE NRF MANDATE Amended NRF Act: - The object of the Foundation is to contribute to national development by:

(a) supporting and promoting research through funding, representative human capital development and the provision of the necessary research infrastructure in order to facilitate the creation of knowledge, innovation & development in all fields of science and technology, including humanities, social sciences and indigenous knowledge;

(b) supporting and maintaining national facilities; (c) supporting and promoting public awareness of & engagement with

science; (d) promoting the development and maintenance of the national science

system and support of Government priorities. In the context of our mandate, we support the researchers, increase postgraduate students especially those that come through NSFAS to become future researchers

4 3

5

NSFAS

NRF funds 10% all postgraduate students NSFAS funds 25% of all undergraduate students

THE NRF IN THE SCIENCE LANSDSCAPE

4

A SUBSYSTEM WITHIN A BROADER SYSTEM • The funding of Higher Education is more than just about funding undergraduate

students. It is about creating a knowledge driven economy which requires sustainable universities, the produce quality trainees who in turn produce knowledge to create sustainable solutions for the nation’s problem

• There is need to provide adequate funding for postgraduate students, researchers, research infrastructure as enablers for generating new knowledge and enhancing our research and innovation

• The higher education sector has dual funding streams the National Research Foundation an agency of the Department of Science and Technology and National Student Financial Aid Scheme as an agency the Department of Higher Education and Training

• The NRF funds 10% of all postgraduate students in the country while NSFAS funds 25% of all undergraduate students in the country.

• The funding of researchers at universities comes in the form of NRF research grants, student bursaries and scholarships, large infrastructure equipment grants which cannot be based at one single university

6 5

GROSS FUNDING OF UNIVERSITIES - 2000 TO 2014

7

Source: Audited financial statements of the universities for the period 2000/01 to 2014/15. Pretoria: DHET

6

DIRECTED FUNDING FOR RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

8

Actual2012/13

Actual2013/14

Actual2014/15

Projected2015/16

Budget2016/17

Budget2017/18

Budget2018/19

Other Income 124 154 182 150 138 142 143NRF Contract 1270 1594 1352 1337 1107 895 914NRF MTEF Allocation-Ring fenced 153 597 718 2054 2315 2126 2206NRF MTEF Allocation- Baseline 765 816 851 878 883 926 980Total 2312 3161 3103 4419 4443 4089 4243

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

R' m

illio

n

Income trends over MTEF period

7

2012 2013 2014 2015All 2.8 -7.5 2.6 -1.1

RatedResearchers -0.5 -1.7 2.8 -2.5

IncentiveFunding -7.6 -5.0 -7.7 -5.1

-10.0

-8.0

-6.0

-4.0

-2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

Perc

ent I

ncre

ase

Rate of growth of NRF grants, corrected for CPI

DIRECTED FUNDING UNDER PRESSURE

1994 2004 2016NRF R Value 6 000 8 000 20 000NRF Projected Value

Incl. CPI 6 000 11 042 19 828

University Average Fee 5 723 11 540 28 491

-

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

Rand

Honours

NRF bursary values vs inflation vs actual fees

8

DIRECTED FUNDING UNDER PRESSURE

NRF bursary values vs inflation vs actual fees Average fees does not include living expenses such as food and accommodation

1994 2004 2016NRF R Value 8 000 33 000 40 000NRF Projected Value Incl. CPI 8 000 26 437 59 260University Average Fee 5 057 9 973 21 073

- 10 000 20 000 30 000 40 000 50 000 60 000 70 000

Rand

Masters

1994 2004 2016NRF R Value 13 000 50 000 60 000NRF Projected Value Incl. CPI 13 000 42 961 89 788University Average Fee 5 575 10 973 24 215

- 10 000 20 000 30 000 40 000 50 000 60 000 70 000 80 000 90 000

100 000

Rand

Doctoral

9

The NSFAS undergraduate bursary amount is R71 000

REALIZING THE GOALS OF THE NDP • The NDP proposes increased postgraduate registrations leading to

over 5000 doctoral graduates per annum by 2030 . Currently producing approximately 2000 per annum.

• Most of these doctorates should be in SET (current <50%) • Over 25% of university enrolments should be postgraduate (current

16%) • Increase percentage of academic staff with PhD from 43% to 75% These projection imply that: • There will be significant growth and graduate output by universities. • There is significant investment in universities to support research

performance, capacity development, knowledge production and postgraduate students

11 10

CURRENT FUNDING LEVELS

12

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016NRF Funding 2312 3161 2014 4419 4443NSFAS Funding 4324 5174 4028 6434 6459

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

R' m

illio

n

NRF Funding vs NSFAS Funding

11

BTECH/HONOURS STUDENT GRADUATION RATES

13

NRF average performance is 100% vs benchmark of 60%

2009 2010 2012 2013 2014Funded 1696 2718 2951 3149 3448Graduated 1584 2212 2498 2883 2978

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

12

MASTERS STUDENT GRADUATION RATES

14

NRF average performance is 46% vs Benchmark of 33%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014Funded 2475 2718 3566 3564 3397 3703 4263Graduated 1140 1143 1297 1502 1683 1806 2162

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

NRF Masters Students Funded vs Graduated per year

13

15

NRF average performance of 26% vs benchmarks of 20%

DOCTORAL STUDENT GRADUATION RATES

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014Funded 1370 1723 1937 1979 2031 2265 2845Graduated 341 409 440 509 610 656 793

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

14

ISSUES FOR THE COMMISSION • Any policy, planning or funding decisions that

respond to the challenges of HE must enhance research excellence innovation and knowledge production.

• Any funding decisions for students must include appropriate resourcing for postgraduate studies (number and value of bursaries and scholarships)

16 15

ISSUES FOR THE COMMISSION • Any funding decisions for students must consider different

socio-economic circumstances Differentiation which categorises students for full, partial

or no funding depending on SEC. Pro-poor free higher education for the poor at

undergraduate and or postgraduate (free for all/some?) • Any funding model must be scalable and support sustainable

growth of HE Current participation rate 18% (African 14, Coloured 13,

Indian 45 and White 60) Other middle income countries 30% and higher

17 16

ISSUES FOR THE COMMISSION • Equally, funding decisions must include appropriate

resourcing for research performance, capacity development and training

• Any policy, planning or funding decisions must consider both public and private investment in higher education , including research, innovation and knowledge production.

• Any funding decisions must assure the continued sustainability of universities to fulfil their mandate.

18 17

Thank you

18