RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE FUTURE FOCUS AND SCOPE OF THE marine and coastal science research PROGRAMME

P. Freon, O.A. van der Westhuyzen and D. Mather

 

I

" To achieve the goals of a future programme it is imperative to involve all participants from the beginning. Opportunities for human scientists to meet their own scientific goals and to publish their work in appropriate, and preferably multidisciplinary, journals, is essential."

Frequency of the main publications in 1997-98 and impact factor in 1996 (note: its is acknowledged that the impact factor must not be the only criterion for deciding the relevance of a journal) Source: The Evaluation of the Sea and the Coast Programme Report by P. Freon, O.A. van der Westhuyzen and D. Mather (unpublished)

* Note that for this journal such high rank occurs only when a symposium is edited by the journal. Impact factors are produced by the Institute for Scientific Information (http://alerting.isinet.com/products/citation/) and measure the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year

If not, human scientists would perceive their contribution to the Sea and the Coast Programme as needed only to enhance the value of natural scientists' findings, with no real possibilities for them. Something never mentioned but which surely also must play a role was the effect of the diminishing budget for marine research in South Africa and the very understandable possible feeling among natural scientists that they 'cannot afford' to bring in too many human scientists. These insights come at an opportune time. The NRF has just taken on board human science together with natural science and thus have the same issue on their table at the national scale. SANCOR should share its experience with the NRF and could hopefully assist it in coming to grips with these very difficult issues. In this way it could be anticipated that the NRF in turn will be able to assist SANCOR in developing strategies to address in a cross-disciplinary way the very real social and economic research needs associated with the management and use of marine and coastal resources.

 

Specifically, the Coast as a Resource Thrust took a long time to establish itself. An important reason was probably that it was very difficult, encompassing issues that reach across many disciplines well beyond those traditionally in the purview of marine scientists. Another reason was that the programme has apparently not been successful in getting the financial commitment and close interaction with the coastal interests in M&CM that were so obvious as far as their offshore counterparts were concerned. Neither were there many research groups active in the area. It was interesting and possibly helpful to note that the exact opposite applied in pre-Benguela Ecology Programme (BEP) days when none of the substantial research support coming to the 'SANCOR programme' from government departments was intended for offshore work. Perhaps in the future programme this hiatus can be put right.

Further on – the joint venture model, which is now formally in place between DEA&T and NRF including provision by DEA&T of substantial funds to cover mainly offshore interests, from all reports was working well. But, the numerous and grave problems associated with M&CM's responsibilities for the coast would not go away and in addition huge opportunities have opened up due to the increased emphasis on and successes of tourism associated with the coast. Extending the joint venture to include active support for the requisite coastal research seems very desirable.

 

 

The Sea and the Coast Programme has succeeded admirably in attracting and retaining good quality students. The corrective action efforts were exemplary. Post-graduate students perform much of the research. But, all these students need leadership and guidance and there was deep concern about the demands on the time of the people available to provide it. In addition and perhaps also important although not everyone might agree, many students at SAMSS 2000 were unaware of their affiliation to SANCOR, the Sea and the Coast Programme or the appropriate thrust to which their work contributed. Supervision in many cases could be more effective, that is less diluted amongst too many students. Supervision of students was a key component of the programme and has to be an essential element of all decision making regarding the planning of projects and the allocation of financial resources to them.

Possible solutions

Senior marine scientists have too much on their plates simply because there are so few of them and their inputs were sought by so many. The cohort of people who should replace them has been severely depleted with many experienced scientists now in their 40s having moved abroad or to the private sector. SANCOR must address the issue. The senior scientists involved can be encouraged to delegate more tasks to more junior people – an example may be participation in the many foreign cruises that placed a heavy burden on their time.

Another partial interim solution may be 'targeted sabbaticals' – South African marine science phenomena are so interesting and the available data are so numerous that it has never been difficult to attract good people to sabbaticals here. Such people can assist with the supervision of the excellent students available (and get them to read the literature).

The number of students per supervisor should be managed to realistic levels. A 'one size fits all’ approach is not satisfactory as some supervisors have the ability to deal very effectively with a large number of post graduate students whereas others might not be able to effectively deal with one.Supervisory duties should include the very important aspect of placing individual student projects into the broader research program.

 

To facilitate effective mentoring and corrective action programmes, it would be useful if NRF grants could be extended in the case of students coming from, and researching at, historically black universities (HBUs). In order to attract more students to marine science, efforts for awareness campaigns at primary and secondary school level should be increased, and more exposure to marine science in general should be provided.

 

The marine science engineering and technology community is well informed so it can be expected that not many serious gaps will be left, even though in the programme not all the needs identified have been addressed equally successfully. Perhaps a few issues could be brought to the table again and a few new ones considered.

 

 

It was somehow surprising to find that anchovy was still being ground into fishmeal to be fed to chickens (or even used as fertiliser). It was equally surprising to learn that there was no great excitement that apparently the sardine was returning on the west coast as part of a pattern that is now much better understood. The lack of excitement stems from the sharply decreasing market for the traditional canned pilchards (and tomato) because the traditional consumers' tastes have moved on. Surely great challenges existed to develop new value added products.

 

We found an ongoing dearth of competent numerical modellers in the field. There is also the continuing need for cross-fertilisation between those operating in stock assessment and ecosystem modelling and people operating in economics and social science.

 

There was still not a thorough understanding of the sediment budget of the South African coast. Sediment moves up the east coast and up the west coast but the detail of where it came from is not very clear. Global warming considerations and coastal zone management imperatives dictate the need for a better understanding.

 

The traditional 'biological oceanography' discipline seemed to have been given inadequate attention in recent years with new students not being drawn in. Co-ordination of ocean remote sensing activities can be improved.

 

When this was addressed in the 1970s and 1980s oil pollution and localised pollution were eventually identified as the priorities and plans were developed and implemented to deal with them. It was accepted at the time that the broader issues would have to be returned to from time to time – something, which should not be lost sight of. The ecosystem approach in stock fishery management and the possibility of using marine protected areas as alternative or additional management tools were already being considered by M&CM. It was suggested that studies on these innovative and promising research topics be reinforced."