Although Minister Blade Nzimande delivered his keynote address only later in the programme, his message felt like a powerful echo of the discussion that unfolded in the: Science Power and South African Good Systems Paradox session, co-hosted by the DSTI ( Department of Science Trade and Industry), The Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and the NRF (National Research Foundation) and PACE (Pan African Collective for Evidence) .
In many ways this significant panel prefigured the concerns he would articulate: that science must be “at the centre of society, government and industry,” that pathways for real social inclusion must underpin scientific work, and that science diplomacy, both nationally and internationally, must ensure that knowledge circulates beyond elite institutions and reaches the communities most affected by inequality. His insistence that the social sciences are “often not neutral,” shaped by ideology, positionality and power, resonated deeply with the panel’s exploration of the political economy of food. Minister Nzimande’s later reflection on Africa hosting the G20 on the continent for the first time – an opportunity, he argued, to reconfigure global scientific collaboration on more just and solidaristic terms amplified what panelists had already identified in this session: science cannot operate in abstraction from society, politics and lived realities.
The South African Food System Paradox
CoE-FS Co-Director Prof Julian May Photography by Aliastair Russell
Our Director Professor Julian May crystallised this tension most sharply through what he termed the South African food system paradox. As he explained:
“We have enough land, we have enough food. We have very efficient value chains. We have a globally competitive system. We have all the science that we need to be able to ensure that we are food secure.”
And yet:
“That’s the real paradox, we actually can do something about this, and yet we have not.”
Professor May noted that the paradox extends beyond hunger: it includes rising child wasting, persistent stunting and the rapid growth of non-communicable diseases linked to poor diets. Despite high national production and strong research capacity, millions remain unable to afford nutritious food.
Investment Gaps and Institutional Coordination
Drawing on work undertaken with UNU-WIDER and National Treasury, Prof May raised a sobering figure: South Africa spends approximately R4 billion a year on research and development across agriculture and food systems.
“It’s simply not enough,” he argued. “We are not doing enough about research and development, and worse, the coordination problems really do need to be addressed.”
He welcomed the Minister of Agriculture’s announcement earlier that morning of the intention to establish a Food and Nutrition Security Council, an idea first proposed in 2017 but never implemented. If properly funded and empowered, he argued, the Council could help align agricultural, health, economic and social protection policies in a more coherent food systems approach.
Yet institutional reform alone is not sufficient. Prof May stressed that the more difficult conversation concerns politics and power:
“Food security can be seen as a humanitarian question. Agriculture is the real stuff—that’s about land and money and power. And that’s where we are not doing particularly well.”
Professor Schonfeldt
Photo by Alaistar Russell
Nutrition, Indigenous Knowledge and the Food Environment
The breadth of the panel showcased how food security requires integrated perspectives.
Prof Hettie Schönfeld (SARChI Chair in Nutrition and Food Security) emphasised a strong food-based approach to nutrition, cautioning against an overreliance on medicalised or single-nutrient interventions. She pointed to indigenous leafy vegetables and biofortified crops such as orange-fleshed sweet potato as critical for addressing micronutrient deficiencies.
She warned, however, that national diets are increasingly out of alignment with local agro-biodiversity and made the following salient points:
– South Africa is exporting fruits and vegetables that domestic consumers cannot afford.
– Ultra-processed products—fortified yet unhealthy—are shaping children’s palates and contributing to rising NCDs.
– Industry self-regulation has repeatedly failed, necessitating mandatory measures like the sugar-sweetened beverage tax and salt reduction legislation.
Representatives from the Department of Science, Technology and Innovation described efforts to document indigenous food knowledge in rural communities, producing mother-tongue datasets that preserve nutritional practices and ensure benefit-sharing when such knowledge informs commercial innovation.
Agro-processing and Local Innovation
Prof Mposi, of the Limpopo Agri-Food Technology Station, emphasised the untapped potential of rural agro-processing entrepreneurs, many of whom are women producing value-added foods using indigenous ingredients.
Yet he identified two major barriers:
- Scientific information is not accessible to ordinary innovators because it is not translated, simplified or tailored to their contexts.
- Infrastructure support is fragmented, with government sometimes funding isolated processing plants that become “white elephants”.
He called for centralised hubs, shared manufacturing facilities and pathways that make scientific knowledge usable to non-academic communities.
Imports, Seed Sovereignty and Market Dualism
A robust exchange on grain imports highlighted the complexities of South Africa’s market structure. While the country is self-sufficient in maize and soybeans, it produces only 50% of its wheat needs, requiring regular imports. Climate constraints, high grain consumption patterns and global geopolitical tensions make this dependence increasingly risky.
Dr Marinda Visser raised an additional red flag: South Africa has become 110% dependent on imported seed technologies for many staple grain and oilseed crops. If multinational companies were to withdraw, the country would face immediate vulnerabilities in both production and sovereignty.
This dualism extends beyond inputs. High-value export crops are priced out of reach for local consumers, and black farmers often face structural discrimination in access to markets and silos.
Industry Transparency and Public Interest Science
Researcher Mark Baker highlighted the difficulty researchers face accessing basic information from large manufacturers and retail groups. Companies routinely refuse interviews or data-sharing that could support policy interventions.
This raised the question: if bread, maize and other staples are essential for public wellbeing, should these companies be compelled, through competition law or information access legislation, to share non-sensitive information in the public interest?
Panellists agreed that distinguishing between commodity organisations (which often collaborate) and large multinational corporations (which dominate value chains) is essential for designing effective governance and regulatory strategies.
Towards a People-Centred, Politically Honest Food System
Closing the session, Prof May returned to the heart of the paradox: South Africa’s abundance of science, expertise and agricultural capacity has not translated into universal access to nutritious food.
The path forward, he argued, requires:
– Institutional courage to confront political disagreements
– Coordinated, well-funded systems such as the proposed Food and Nutrition Security Council
– Safe, structured spaces for dialogue across government, researchers, industry and communities
– Stronger translation of science into societal impact, especially for those most marginalised
In this sense, this panel not only anticipated but illuminated Minister Nzimande’s later keynote: a call for science that is inclusive, diplomatic, aware of its own politics, and committed to transforming the lives of those who need it most.
