Address by the Minister of Science and Technology, Naledi Pandor MP, at
the 2nd annual conference of the South African Technology Network, Cape
Peninsula University of Technology, Bellville, 16 July 2009
Programme Director
Vice Chancellors of Universities of Technology and other Universities
President and CEO of the National Research Foundation, Dr Albert van
Jaarsveld
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen
The key to our success in science and technology lies in our ability to achieve
success in promoting a vibrant, productive national system of innovation.
We have recently reviewed our national innovation strategy
Several of our national strategies, including the National Research and
Development Strategy, the Advanced Manufacturing and Technology Strategy,
and the Human Capital Development Strategy, are relevant to the theme of this
conference.
However, the Department of Science and Technology’s Ten-Year Innovation
Plan for South Africa for 2008 to 2018, and the Technology Innovation Agency
(TIA), are especially relevant to this gathering.
The Plan and the Agency were the outcome of the Department of Science and
Technology’s review of our national system of innovation. The 2007 Organisation
for Economic Cooperation and Development policy review was also part of this
task.

Our country’s national system of innovation has evolved significantly over the
years, but five years of careful monitoring of its outputs has provided evidence
that the system is not operating as well as it could.
We have launched the Technology Innovation Agency (TIA)
The DST recently established the Technology Innovation Agency as a vehicle for
supporting and promoting innovation.
The Technology Innovation Agency is part of our effort to address the challenges
presented by the “innovation chasm” or the gap between the local knowledge
base and the productive economy.
Our innovation system is a repository of local knowledge, which could have a
more sustained impact on the real economy. Due to various impediments to
productivity and technological innovation, progress has been slow. Market
inefficiencies, a lack of access to adequate financing (specifically for seed and
first-stage financing for technology development), and a relatively weak and
uncoordinated intellectual property rights management framework have led to
inadequate levels of support for innovation.
This has contributed to the loss of a number of valuable South African
technologies to the developed world.
One example is the South African developed lithium-battery technology that is
used in the electric vehicle. We lost it to the United States of America two
decades ago. Also, as recently as two years ago, we lost our thin-film solar-cell
technology to Germany.
Clearly, then, innovation in our business incubators and universities is not going
to benefit our country, unless we take a greater interest not only in the production

of these ideas but also their subsequent exploitation, commercialization and
management.
Universities of technology are set to benefit from the TIA and IP acts
Universities of technology must ensure that they capitalize on the TIA initiative,
and keep track of TIA programmes so that they are at the forefront of
development.
The Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research and
Development Act of 2008 is another critical piece of legislation. It provides for the
more efficient use of intellectual property emanating from publicly financed
research and development, as well as the establishment of the National
Intellectual Property Management Office, NIPMO, to be temporarily housed at
the DST.
NIPMO will be responsible for the establishment of offices of technology transfer
in higher education institutions, which will have to be staffed with people who
have the requisite mix of skills and interdisciplinary knowledge, and expertise in
intellectual property protection, commercialization and entrepreneurship.
Universities of technology must develop research niches
It’s imperative that universities of technology develop research profiles and
research capacity, while also training higher levels of qualified technologists.
The national plan for higher education (2001) rejected the structural
differentiation of universities into teaching universities here and research-
intensive universities there.

However, it accepted the principle of differentiation. By that is meant: each
university should set itself a mission that suits the region in which it is situated
and is aligned to national development targets. Most technology universities have
done this and yet the debate goes on. It’s useful to remember that in the US and
the UK less than 5% of universities are research-intensive, but that does not
mean that all the other universities do not undertake research. They have all
worked out what is good for them, what they can achieve, and they have focused
clearly on those niche areas.
For example, Glenda Kruss’s work on partnerships in universities indicates that
there are technology universities that have built partnerships in high technology
areas, others that are focusing on excellence in teaching, and yet others that are
concerned with sustainable rural or regional development.
You know which sort of technology university you work in and its strengths. The
government has invested large sums of money in upgrading infrastructure since
2007 and proportionately more has been earmarked for those institutions that
have not had a research legacy.
We need to review the impact of this investment and its support for innovation.
Upgrading university infrastructure is not the only component of improving
research capacity. The linkages between universities and business and
improving the qualifications of staff at technology universities are critical. The low
numbers of staff with PhD qualifications is a concern in our country’s higher
education institutions in general. However, it’s a major concern for universities of
technologies, especially because of their newly attained status as universities
and the concurrent expectations in terms of research development and
innovation.

Universities of technology have to make sure that they take advantage of the
DST’s initiatives, like the South African Research Chairs Initiative and the
Centres of Competence programme, to develop their human capital and research
capacity.
In closing I hope that in the next few days the South African Technology Network
will articulate its views on ways in which to work with government, both the
Department of Higher Education and the Department of Science and
Technology, in using all our energy and expertise towards making South Africa a
more innovative country.
I wish you every success in your endeavours.
Thank you.