RVR2 - Lesotho

Embedded Scribd iPaper - Requires Javascript and Flash Player
PURE Regional Visit Report 2 LESOTHO 3rd to 5th March 2010 CDG Review Team: Jarl Bengtsson (Leader), Alan Foster, Catherine Odora Hoppers, and P. G. Ntseane
A. Executive Summary The visit consisted of briefings from the RCG, meetings with the RCG, stakeholders within the National University of Lesotho (NUL) and from public bodies and NGOs in Maseru and Lesotho as a whole. The CDG team remarked on the progress made since 2009 in terms of the building of relationships within NUL, with local community groups in relation to specific projects and by the groundwork undertaken to pursue the areas of priority in regional engagement. The CDG felt that NUL now had a considerable body of research evidence in preparation with which to approach the policy makers in Lesotho as a whole and to use as a bridge to enhanced engagement. The CDG team also noted the practical fashion in which the RCG had recognised the difficulties faced, in general, in all PURE regions though there were specific difficulties – for example, difficulties in electronic communication and, more importantly, difficulties with economic infrastructure and the slow pace of policy change in this area, which were especially significant in Lesotho. Particular discussions and sessions centred on two projects: 1) Mahoma Temeng in Qacha’s Nek, which is doubling up as an action research project, and 2) African Core Values project, and on benchmarking. A small group session took place between the CDG and the RCG to discuss the way ahead in building engagement between NUL and its policy environment. The CDG recommendations are: 1. that the advances generated by the Action Plan in late 2009 should be supported by an amended Action Plan which specifies further engagement targets to be aimed at in collaboration with senior policy makers and policy making departments in Lesotho and assisted through the work within PURE 2. that, in particular, contact with a representative of the CDG team – in this case, Professor C. O. Hoppers – should be maintained in order to assist the RCG take forward the processes noted in point 4 below and to identify and develop relevant influential contacts within the policy and planning infrastructure in Lesotho 3. that the amendment of the benchmarking tool initiated by the Chair of the RCG, undertaken in order to make the tool more comprehensible in the local setting, should be finalised and should function – in its amended guise – as one of the ‘platforms for discussion’ between NUL and the Lesotho authorities 4. that, with PASCAL PURE assistance where necessary, the importance of the concept of engagement should be communicated as the key message to target departments within the policy making bodies and that the process of developing relationships should be centred on two trimodal approaches: the first being that of ‘benchmarking, target setting then ring-fencing of the necessary
resources’ (suggested by the RCG meetings); the second being that of ‘development goals, research evidence then adjusted development goals’ as suggested by the CDG team 5. that the RCG should consider collaborative discussions with colleagues in other Southern African institutions (and, in particular, the other HE institutions in Maseru - Lesotho College of Education and Lerotholi Polytechnic) to bring forward the concept of an 'African perspective on engagement' 6. that the RCG should proceed with their proposals to fund delegates to the PURE Conference in Gaborone, Botswana in December 2010 to inform PURE colleagues of their particular experience of and approach to implementing PURE objectives.
B. Regional (Country) Characteristics The Kingdom of Lesotho is a landlocked, mountainous country surrounded by South Africa, in the south east of the continent with a population of around 2m. The background description of the University and the country was set out comprehensively in the excellent briefing and background papers prepared by the Chair of the RCG and in the Regional Visit Report (RVR1) published after the first review visit in 2009. The substantive points made then still apply. Eighty six percent of the economy is subsistence agriculture and 14% industrial. Unemployment officially stands at 46%, with 35% identified as living on less than $1 a day. Lesotho suffers from one of the highest HIV prevalence’s in the world with official figures identifying the prevalence rate as 23.2% and a consequent life expectancy of only 34.5 years. Drought and unemployment have rendered more than half the population dependent on food assistance. Likewise, the points made in RVR1 about the Institute of Extra Mural Studies are central and worth repeating here. IEMS offers open and distance learning Diploma and Degree programmes in Adult Education (Diploma, Bachelors and Masters level), Business Entrepreneurship (Bachelor level) and Mass Communication (Diploma level). It also has a number of regional learning centres in the remote areas of Lesotho, and runs tailor made short courses and workshops on community development issues as requested by communities. IEMS’ overall aim is to widen participation in higher education and make learning accessible to those who would not otherwise be able to study at the main campus.
C. The Elements of the CDG Visit DAY ONE: The visit began with a briefing from Professor Preece, Link Partner for Lesotho PURE, with IEMS and NUL staff in attendance, on the afternoon of Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010 in the Media Hall, IEMS, Maseru Campus. The CDG team were provided with a very comprehensive picture of the linkage between PURE and the ITMUA research project (‘Implementing the Third Mission of Universities in Africa’). DAY TWO: At 9am the following day the CDG team met with members of the RCG, with NUL and IEMS staff, including stakeholder representatives related to the Mahoma Temeng project in, Qacha’s Nek and its linkage to similar work within PURE. This project is now located within NUL’s ITMUA research project. There was specific discussion of the objectives identified for NUL as a whole in terms of social and civic engagement – in particular, poverty reduction, health, civil society and older adults – and how these themes, identified in the ongoing research work initiated by the Chair of the RCG, could be made core and used as a bridge to PASCAL PURE and to the operational work of public bodies. Two additional, informative presentations, describing other NUL engagement work, were organised – one on the role of the Health Sciences departments in the project and a second on initiatives for the elderly.
Lunch provided the opportunity for continuing informal discussion and this developed into further informal discussions on the Cluster Forums, benchmarking and its role in engagement and on the Gaborone Conference. DAY THREE: At 9am the CDG, the RCG, the Core Values stakeholders, IEMS and NUL staff met to discuss the African Core Values project and its applicability to the context of PASCAL PURE. A presentation on the project was followed by lively discussion and a re-affirmation, by the CDG, of the importance of an African perspective on engagement. After lunch, the CDG and RCG met at the CDG team’s hotel to discuss suggestions for the way ahead. Overall, the discussions were extremely well framed and organised by the RCG. There was much to debate and discuss and the seminal research work proposed for the immediate future was recognised as an essential constituent of the central PURE purpose – the integration of the research work of the University with the evidence-led requirements of the policy and planning bodies. The CDG team was able to provide practical advice and continued support for the synthesis of these elements into an effective manifestation of the ‘Third Mission’ for NUL. The CDG team was well accommodated and supported. All enquiries and questions posed by the Review team were answered with courtesy and candour – to the mutual understanding of both the CDG and RCG teams.
D. Discussions, Conclusions and Recommendations
1. The relationship between NUL research and PASCAL PURE objectives This aspect was the underlying theme of the discussions during the CDG visit. The CDG team were impressed by the actions taken, since the last Review visit in 2009, to engage with other Departments in NUL and with community and civil society groups outside the University. The difficulties in doing so were not underestimated by the team – nor were the further difficulties involved in taking forward the necessary engagement with policy makers in the country as a whole. A very comprehensive and informative set of presentations was given by Professor Preece to illustrate the achievements to date, the proposals for action research and how this action research would be co-extensive with PURE’s objectives for engagement. At the same time, the presentations recognised the need for further engagement and the importance of developing support further within NUL in order to achieve this. There has been widespread consultation with Heads of Departments in NUL and most of these have assisted with particular elements of the projects undertaken. Direct support has been provided by the Director of IEMS and by the Head of the Department of Adult Education. While the various projects developed have involved a wide range of stakeholders, it was recognised that the aims and objectives of PURE necessitated the development of direct working relationships between the University, other institutions in educational and community fields and, most significantly, departments and individuals in the local and national authorities. The RCG recognised this and saw the CDG visit as an ideal opportunity to review the position and for NUL to solicit CDG assistance and advice on taking the next steps to full implementation of the ‘Third Mission’. The RCG saw the key initiative as ITMUA – ‘Implementing the Third Mission of Universities in Africa’. Funding for this initiative was confirmed by the Association of African Universities and the UK Department for International Development soon after the CDG visit ended. The RCG are to be congratulated on their industry and commitment in taking this work forward. Although not aware, at the time of the visit, of the outcome of the application for funding, the CDG agreed with the RCG that the relationship between ITMUA and PURE needed to be clarified and that it was the fundamental underpinning to engagement work in Lesotho PURE.
Professor Preece illustrated how the relationship might be described by use of a diagram (Appendix 2). The CDG team found this most useful: they stressed the importance of moving from the present position – where there were a number of stakeholders at operational levels – to the position required for influence at HEI and Government levels. This would require the enlisting and involvement of a greater and more varied number of stakeholders at strategic levels. The CDG team echoed their wholehearted support for this measure and committed direct assistance to the RCG through regular contact with a nominated team member. The ITMUA work also involves the University of Botswana, the University of Malawi and the University of Calabar in Nigeria.
2. Benchmarking Although this issue occupied a relatively small proportion of the time spent in Lesotho, it is an important one. The CDG team agreed with the wisdom of the adaptation of the generic benchmarking tool by colleagues in NUL. This was required to focus consideration on the African perspective in PURE work (a process taken independently and in parallel, for example, at the University of Botswana as part of its contribution to PURE) and to focus consideration on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which are a significant keystone for funding from the UK Department for International Development. The CDG team was able to emphasise that the purpose of the benchmarking tool was not to provide and index of comparison across institutions or between one PURE ‘region’ and another; its purpose was to provide a platform and a lexicon for discussion between HEIs and institutions and departments in their policy environment. The CDG team urged the RCG to open negotiations with appropriate departments on this head and to continue the process of bridge-building to the policy drivers. It was recognised, however, that it had been a difficult task to enlist the support of the other HEIs in Maseru. Too early an introduction of the benchmarking tool into the discussion might give the wrong impression (as indicated above). It was suggested, therefore, that a necessary precursor would be continued discussion – on the PURE agenda – at high strategic level between and amongst the HEIs.
3. Qacha’s Nek This was the first of the two specific projects to be discussed which were jointly ‘owned’ by the PURE and ITMUA initiatives, the latter being seen as the active research arm and the former as the active engagement arm. Both the RCG and CDG teams recognise that the latter arm needs to be sufficiently exercised in order to gain equal muscle to the former. Only if both arms lift the enterprise together will the weighty objectives be shifted. The area in which the project operates is the home town of Lesotho’s Prime Minister. In collaboration with the local community, the objectives of the project are to provide training and support to improve and establish the skills of the community in agriculture and animal husbandry, to contribute to better understanding of the health issues involved in such areas as HIV/AIDS and sanitation and to forward basic community and economic development initiatives such as group activity and conflict resolution and small business management and financing. Stakeholders in the project are NUL staff (from humanities, agriculture and health science departments as well as IEMS), local community groups and NUL Masters Students sponsored by government departments, employers and civil society organisations. Two presentations were given to illustrate certain facets of the Qacha’s Nek project:
4. Health Sciences perspective (Ms Mpemi, lecturer in Faculty of Health Sciences) This fascinating short presentation emphasised three points: the direct engagement of the University with the community at ‘grass roots’ level; the direct involvement of NUL staff from Nursing, Environmental Health, Pharmacy and Nutrition departments; and the significance of the issues (which involve all of the above stakeholders) centred on HIV/AIDS and on Waste Management. 4.1. Elderly perspective (David Croome – Dept of Business Management and Development, IEMS) This, equally fascinating, presentation underlined the necessity of imaginative approaches to traditional problems. Lesotho provides pension payments to all citizens over the age of 70. Relative to GDP, this pension is the most generous universal pension scheme in the world. Elderly people are, therefore, seen as a financial asset and may be the only source of income for particular families. Lesotho also has a very well established network of Post Offices and, as pensioners attend these Post Offices regularly in order to collect their pension payments, so other services such as, in this case, basic health checks or a wellness programme can be delivered in a planned and predictable way. The speaker suggested that this kind of ‘added value’ was exactly the sort of initiative that, it was hoped, PURE could sponsor. Further the elderly as described by one participant are the ‘working libraries’ of Africa, and there was discussion of how pensioner knowledge/wisdom be incorporated into NUL programmes without exploitation. The CDG team agreed wholeheartedly with these last sentiments though again, in relation to the subjects of both presentations, it was pointed out that – while highly laudable – the engagement demonstrated was at the operational level. While necessary for the pursuit of PURE objectives this was, by itself, not sufficient for the attaining of these objectives. To be both necessary and sufficient, engagement must occur at the strategic level as well as the operational – at the policy level as well as the community level. As both the RCG and CDG teams recognised, the objectives pursued had to be a synthesis of the research and policy objectives.
5. African Values Project This was the second of the two projects specifically labelled as PURE/ITMUA. Again several NUL Departments were involved (Philosophy, Theology, English, African Languages) as well as staff from IEMS. Further stakeholders included teaching unions, church umbrella organisations, representatives from Media Institute of Southern Africa, Traditional healers association, and association of Chiefs (An original paper on the African Values Project can be found on the PURE website (www.purepascal.com)). Dr. Paul Omoyefa of the Department of Philosophy gave a fascinating presentation which focussed on the discussions and workshops which had taken place, on the recognition that the spirit of traditional values must be maintained but that the exposition of these values should be open to innovation and adaptation and on the proposals for future projects. The CDG team expressed real gratitude to Dr. Omoyefa for the insights contained in his presentation. Again, this was an issue about which the CDG team members were unequivocal: PASCAL PURE as an organisation - and the members of the ‘PURE family’ of regions and institutions across the world – can learn much from the way in which our colleagues in Africa use and adapt PURE methodologies to suit their particular environments. Thus, the concept of ‘African Values’ has significant resonance within PURE (one example, mentioned above, being the pension scheme for elderly people in Lesotho). The CDG team members were also unequivocal on the issue of engagement. With the concept of African Values, the discussion within NUL has the essential tool for seizing the attention of policy makers and the politicians who decide on that policy. The African Values project is an intentional long term project for this reason and is not in itself a research project.
The CDG team also recognised that ethnicity is an important question worthy of recognition in Southern Africa. Where expertise and evidence can be sourced locally – as opposed to ‘not quite so locally’ – this will have resonance for policy makers. This is a resonance which individuals may disagree with but, as a point of view, it is worthy of both respect and of pragmatic consideration. On behalf of the CDG team, Professor Hoppers provided illustration from her own experience on how this could be taken forward. The tri-modal approach of ‘DRD’ (Development, Research, Development) illustrated how strategic and operational pieces should be moved together, and within the same planned process, in order to ensure that engagement occurred. The first stage of ‘Development’ involved internal mobilisation within initiating bodies – in order to recruit and enlist the appropriate practitioners and strategists to move the enterprise forward. At the same time, external outreach should be initiated to enlist the support of community groups and other institutions. Particular individuals and departments involved in the matter at hand and/or known to be sympathetic to the proposals being firmed up should also be identified and contacted. Secondly, the stage of ‘Research’. This research, being second stage in the process, is then informed by the development discussions already occurring. It is not driven by the academic requirements of publication and response; it is driven by the dynamic focus provided in the first phase. Thirdly, the next ‘Development’ stage is that of External Marketing, Evaluation and Implementation. In other words, the interim research evidence provides drive for the engagement of all the required parties, for the development of evaluation schemes which will satisfy their particular organisational requirements and for the implementation of the actual work with the partnership of these agencies. Overall, this is an iterative process and the momentum is maintained in order to achieve the objectives at both operational and strategic levels. If this view, or something similar, is taken as the key approach to the NUL projects generally then the requirements of PURE’s objectives in engagement are likely to be met. The CDG team stressed that they would be happy to assist in developing the work in this way, should the RCG wish.
5. Summary Discussion Following the presentations and discussions, the CDG team felt that it would be useful for them to meet with representatives of the RCG for summary discussions and to agree an overview of the conclusions emerging from what had been a stimulating and challenging review visit. The CDG team expressed their thanks to Professor Preece for the comprehensive and detailed introduction to the many levels of the Lesotho PURE work, to Drs Lephoto and Mohasi for their support and encouragement in the complexity of the discussions and to Dr. Setoi for the additional support and insight he had provided through his work in Lesotho and in his membership of the PURE CDG team in Botswana. Specifically, the CDG team wished to address the question, raised in all of the discussions and raised in the presentations, namely; ‘How can PURE provide advice and guidance on how we influence policy?’ First of all, the CDG team wished to stress that all PURE ‘regions’ ask this question – in different ways and for different periods of time – and Lesotho PURE was not alone in raising this. Secondly, the basic ‘influence’ pattern – determine the strategic plans of the relevant bodies and look for congruence determine the ambitions and interests of the key players and look for congruence exploit opportunities for the dissemination of NUL’s PURE objectives exploit publicity for NUL PURE activities gauge the policy/practice actions/reactions of the key players and agencies and make oneself recognisable in these areas
-
use evidence and outcomes
can be adapted to suit – together with the opportunity to produce the ‘PURE’ card in order to emphasise profile, internationalisation, sources of funds and so forth. The CDG team recognised that a number of these approaches had been tried but indicated that experience from other PURE ‘regions’ had shown that this should be anticipated as a concerted campaign rather than as a single attempt or two. Third, the RCG recognised that a ‘paradigm shift’ was required – away from research justification in the traditional mode and towards the development modes emphasised by Professor Hoppers’ schema. It was also recognised that strategic involvement at the highest levels within NUL was required in order to engage with the strategic levels in the policy and planning agencies of government. Leadership had to be shared in order for the initiative to progress across a wider front. In relation to this it was suggested that an ‘audit’ of engagement activities might be a first step towards producing a document of experience and intent with regard to Third Mission activities. If NUL could be encouraged to produce such a statement of intent then this might be useful – particularly if local and national government agencies were made aware of this intent and asked to participate. Fourth, it was agreed that Professor Hoppers would act as intermediary and support between the CDG and the RCG. She would be available for discussions on progress and would be in contact on a regular basis to provide assistance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX 1: CDG REVIEW ATTENDANCE LIST
PURE MEETING AT IEMS 2010 THURSDAY 4TH MARCH No Name Organization Cellphone e-mail 1 M Sebajoa Roads 58818859 Directorate 2 L Macheli Independent 58962746 [email protected] Electoral Commission 3 N Student 58962746 [email protected] Ngozwana 4 M M Ntene Student 58863787 5 R M Mpemi NUL Fac of 58882009 [email protected] Health Sciences 6 DM IEMS 63137240 [email protected] Lephoto 7 MW IEMS ADE 58928271 [email protected] Matsepe 8 B IEMS ADE 58849379 [email protected] Makhakhane 9 Alan Foster PASCAL +447946302262 [email protected] 10 CA Odora PASCAL PURE +27726288007 [email protected] Hoppers (UNISA) 11 G Ntseane PASCAL PURE +2673552266 [email protected] (Botswana) 12 Jarl PASCAL +33139509868 [email protected] Bengtsson 13 M. IEMS -BMD 58841600 [email protected] Ntoanyane 14 S M Thorela Student/Law 58858351 [email protected] office 15 D Croome IEMS BMD 58121451 [email protected] 16 T Saka IEMS REM 58064119 [email protected] 17 K W Lofafa IEMS BMD 58859037 [email protected];[email protected] 18 R Matoane IEMS – BMD 58475497 [email protected] 19 P Mokenela IEMS ADE 58864737 [email protected] 20 V M Mohasi IEMS – ADE 58731975 [email protected] 21 S M Setoi IEMS – NFCE 63016566 [email protected] 22 M V Lesotho Smart 58703839 [email protected] Makhetha P’shhip Hub Prime Minister’s Office 23 M Khang Student/Ministry 58867522 [email protected] of Health 24 L Student UNDP 58878686 [email protected] Ramokhoro 25 H M IEMS Director 58868665 [email protected] Lephoto 26 J Preece IEMS ADE 58566985 [email protected]
PURE MEETING AT IEMS 2010 FRIDAY 5TH MARCH No Name Organization Celphone 1 M Mashologu Baha’i 58719007 2 Jeremiah Traditional 59038335 healer 3 D M Lephoto IEMS 63137240 4 C Odora Hoppers PASCAL +27 726288007 5 L Ntsibulane PALT (Teachers 6309854 union) 6 L Molapo NUL 62601943 7 M Ntoanyane IEMS 58841600 8 M Matsepe IEMS 58928271 9 M T Piet IEMS 58714513 10 T Saka IEMS 58064119 11 L A Sebatane IEMS 58923881 12 M I Sebajoa Roads directorate 58818859 13 K W Lofafa IEMS 58859037 14 P. Mokenela IEMS 15 R Matoane IEMS 16 V M Mohasi IEMS 17 D Croom IEMS 18 F Lekhera LTTU (teachers 63082788 union) 19 A Foster PASCAL 20 Tsebo Matsasa MISA Lesotho 58772207 (Media Institute of Southern Africa) 21 Tankiso Motjope NUL African 59029094 Languages 22 PG Ntseane PASCAL 23 J Bengtsson PASCAL 24 P S Omoyefa NUL Philosophy 58514895 25 J Preece IEMS ADE
e-mail [email protected]
[email protected] [email protected]
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected];
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
APPENDIX 2: (DIAGRAM ILLUSTRATING ITMUA's POSITION WITHIN LESOTHO PURE (tabled for the Review Team at the Review Meetings))
PURE Organisers: PASCAL Monitors: PURE consultants Thematic focus: broad
ITMUA Funding via AAU/DFID Research project Thematic focus: MDGs, poverty
Mapping CS activities in the HEI Benchmarking how things are now
STAKEHOLDERS
……………..
research questions
10 NUL staff; 10 employers/CSOs; 5 postgraduates; 5 ministries
CASE STUDIES
…………...
research questions
African values project [also has own stakeholder group]
Qacha’s Nek project [has own community stakeholders]
Maseru project [to be set up]
POLICY INFLUENCE AT HEI & GOVT LEVELS PURE focus (led by consultants) ITMUA focus (policy briefs, benchmarking tools)