Search

Health claims are considered a means to add value to food and beverages; however, it is not always evident which stakeholders benefit and to what extent they benefit. In this paper, we extend the investigation of value creation and appropriation into the domain of food, specifically food labels. Using a qualitative approach, we aimed to elucidate which forms of value can be created by legislating health claims (including those for bioactive compounds found in South African indigenous plants) on food labels. The findings reveal that health claims have the potential to advance the sustainable development agenda in South Africa, but only if structures can be put in place to appropriate human and intellectual (HI) value, as well as environmental value. Currently, there is strong evidence for economic value creation and appropriation potential, but little clear evidence that HI or environmental value will be appropriated from health claims, especially if these health claims exclude benefits from bioactive compounds found in indigenous South African plants. If we could find a means to measure the HI and environmental value creation potential of health claims, using metrics that people understand, we may be able to develop strategies to ensure that such products can benefit stakeholders beyond economic value alone (i.e. more sustainable value creation). The findings could directly impact food labelling policy formulation, considering current draft regulations to implement health claims in South Africa. Significance: The medicinal plant biodiversity of South Africa offers opportunities for economic, human and intellectual (HI), and environmental value creation through legislated health claims. Without clear metrics for the HI and environmental components, economic value creation may dominate, but the value created might not be sustainable or appropriated by the desired stakeholders. Furthermore, because the current draft legislation for health claims excludes any bioactives from indigenous South African plants, much of the economic, HI and environmental value creation potential reported as potential outcomes for this research (e.g. funds to communities, knowledge preservation or biodiversity conservation) will not materialise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Co-authorship networks are graphs in which the nodes of the graph represent authors and two authors are connected by an edge if they have written one or more papers together. When applied to the authorship of scholarly papers, analysing the structure of a co-authorship network can provide useful insights into the way in which research is carried out in a particular field. We examine two co-authorship networks in our article, constructed from papers written on the subjects of chemistry and mathematics during the period 1990 to 2005, in which at least one of the authors was South African. Local results are compared with other studies conducted in much larger discipline-wide networks. We find that many of the same patterns exist locally, with the main difference being a far more fragmented South African mathematics network. We discuss some tentative implications of these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

in the field of risk management, there is growing recognition that traditional tools of analysis may be limited in their ability to arrive at a textured understanding of risk as it is actually experienced by communities. This paper begins with the premise that risk is socially constructed by lay people, as well as by scientists, and that this recognition has important implications for the development of risk management approaches. Technical risk assessments can be complemented b) qualitative methodologies that are designed to reveal lay or local knowledge of risk Such research tools were employed in working with respondents from residential communities in the highly industrialised South Durban Basin in KwaZulu-Natal. Here, as in other urban industrial contexts, risk is constructed by residents through their own experience and histories, their understanding of science, and their response to technical management tools. The qualitative approach adopted in this research provided new insight into residents' responses to chronic and acute risk, drew attention to a widening gap between people's actual experiences and the claims of science and risk management experts and exposed currently hidden, everyday risk narratives that are not directly related to the dominant environmental hazards connected with industry, but which significantly impact people's living environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]