Abstract
This paper explores the root causes of student unrest in South African universities and evaluates the institutional responses to these protests, otherwise regarded as social unrest. The study is lensed through social movement theory and institutional theory. The study adopted transformative paradigm under qualitative approach and participatory research design to analyze the experiences of universities in South Africa that have experienced significant social unrest in recent years. Focus group discussion was conducted with university management staff, student activists, and security officers of the selected universities. The findings showed that lack of access, socio-economic inequalities, ineffective communication, and open engagement are the primary causes of social unrest. In contrast, providing equitable access, economic liberation, effective communication, and open engagement is the possible institutional response that alleviates social unrest on university campuses. Hence, promoting equitable access and economic liberation coupled with effective communication and open engagement among stakeholders was recommended.
Plain Language Summary
This paper investigates why South African university students protest and how the institutions respond. Using social movement and institutional theories, the study talks to university managers, student activists, and security officers in universities with recent protests. The key issues identified are limited access, economic inequalities, poor communication, and exclusion from decision-making. The suggested solution is to focus on fair access, reducing economic disparities, improving communication, and involving everyone in decisions. The researcher recommends promoting equitable access and economic fairness, alongside better communication and inclusive decision-making, as a way to address and prevent social unrest on university campuses.
Keywords
Introduction
Social unrest and protests have become a common feature in South African universities in recent years. These protests are often sparked by issues related to access to higher education, student debt, racial and gender inequalities, and campus safety (Daniel, 2021; Hlatshwayo & Fomunyam, 2019; Ntombana et al., 2023). They have disrupted academic activities, led to clashes with law enforcement (Mbhele & Sibanyoni, 2022), and strained the relationship between students and university administrations. The issue of social unrest in universities is not unique to South Africa. Many students across the Africa continent have been voicing their concerns and grievances regarding access to education, funding, quality of education, and other socio-economic issues. The protests have taken various forms, from peaceful demonstrations to violent clashes with security forces. This study uses social unrest and student unrest interchangeably to mean the same thing.
In some African countries, such as Cameroon, Zimbabwe, and Ethiopia, student unrest has been met with brutal crackdowns by government security forces, leading to injuries and even deaths (Amutabi, 2002; Fomunyam, 2017; Robert, 2021). In other countries, such as Nigeria and Ghana, students have protested against tuition fees, accommodation, and general living conditions on campus (Boateng, 2016; Odebode, 2019). However, the context of South Africa makes the issue of student unrest an important topic for study. South Africa has a unique history of apartheid, which has led to deep-seated inequalities in access to education and economic opportunities (Sehoole & Adeyemo, 2016). These inequalities have contributed to ongoing social unrest, with students protesting against high tuition fees, lack of accommodation, and inadequate funding for historically disadvantaged universities, which have been plagued by violent protests, with students setting buildings on fire and clashing with police (Badat, 2016; Godsell et al., 2016). These protests may have been fueled by broader societal issues, such as the high levels of unemployment, poverty, and inequality that still persist in post-apartheid South Africa.
South African universities have historically played a key role in the struggle against apartheid and the fight for social justice. Today, universities are seen as important drivers of economic growth and development and are expected to play a key role in reducing poverty and inequality. However, despite the progress that has been made in recent years, many students in South Africa still face significant barriers to accessing higher education. This has led to a growing sense of frustration and disillusionment among students and contributed to social unrest and protests.
The response of universities to student unrest has varied across the continent, with some institutions choosing to use force to quell protests. In contrast, others have engaged in dialogue with students to address their grievances. Jacobs et al. (2019) South African universities have responded to student unrest with various measures such as fee reductions, debt relief, and increased financial aid. These solutions have not fully addressed the underlying issues of inequality and exclusion in higher education. Similarly, a study by Omodan (2019) on student protests in Nigerian universities found that the response of universities has been inadequate, with protests continuing despite efforts to address students’ concerns.
While universities across the continent have responded to student unrest in their own ways, evidence suggests that the solutions provided have not been adequate to address the root causes of the issue. More comprehensive and sustainable solutions are needed to address the systemic inequalities and exclusion in higher education that have led to the ongoing protests. This study aims to investigate the underlying reasons for the social turmoil that has occurred in universities across South Africa and assess how institutions have reacted to these protests. The study seeks to identify the root causes of the unrest, which may include issues such as systemic inequality, discrimination, and inadequate support for marginalized groups. By examining institutional responses to these protests, the study also evaluates current practices’ effectiveness in addressing students’ grievances and promoting a safe and inclusive learning environment. Hence, this research aims to contribute to a better understanding of the social, political, and institutional factors that shape university life in South Africa and offer recommendations for improving the situation for all stakeholders involved.
Research Questions
Based on the above problem, the following research questions were raised to guide the study:
RQ1: What are the root causes of social unrest in South African universities?
RQ2: What are the institutional responses to social unrest in South African universities?
Theoretical Framework
The study is lensed through social movement theory and institutional theory. Social movement theory was developed to explain the emergence and development of collective action among social groups (Jasper, 2010; Morris, 2000). The theory assumes that social movements are a product of societal and institutional factors that create grievances and opportunities for mobilization (McAdam, 2017; Schneiberg & Lounsbury, 2017). The theory posits that social movements arise when individuals or groups experience a sense of injustice or frustration with the status quo and mobilize to achieve social change (Wahlen & Laamanen, 2015). Understanding the assumptions of social movement theory, one can argue that political and social contexts shape social movements and that the collective action of individuals and groups is influenced by factors such as political opportunities, cultural frames, and social networks.
Therefore, this theory seeks to explain how social movements emerge, develop, and achieve their goals. It focuses on the collective action of individuals and groups who mobilize around shared grievances or goals and seek to challenge existing power structures or social norms. Social movement theory emphasizes the importance of various factors in shaping social movements, such as political opportunities, framing processes, and resource mobilization (McAdam, 2017). By analyzing the dynamics of social movements, this theory helps shed light on the root causes of social unrest in South African universities and the strategies and tactics used by student activists to achieve their goals.
The institutional theory emerged in the late 1970s and early 1980s as a way to explain how organizations and institutions operate within broader social and cultural contexts (Cai & Mehari, 2015). The theory assumes that organizations are shaped by the norms, values, and rules that define the institutional environment in which they operate (Peters, 2019). The institutional theory posits that organizations seek legitimacy by conforming to institutional norms and values and that the legitimacy of an organization depends on the degree to which it is seen as conforming to these norms. Institutional theory, on the other hand, examines how organizations and institutions operate within broader social and cultural contexts (Van Wijk et al., 2019). It emphasizes the role of norms, values, and rules in shaping organizational behavior and outcomes. That is, institutional theory highlights the importance of legitimacy, which refers to the degree to which organizations and institutions are seen as valid and appropriate by their stakeholders. By analyzing the institutional responses to social unrest in South African universities, this theory can help to identify the factors that contribute to or hinder the legitimacy of universities and their responses to student grievances.
The intersection of social movement theory and institutional theory provides a powerful framework for understanding and addressing the root causes of social unrest in South African universities. By examining the collective action of student activists within the broader institutional context of universities, this framework can help to identify the factors that contribute to or hinder the success of social movements. For example, social movement theory can shed light on the strategies and tactics used by student activists to mobilize support and challenge existing power structures, while institutional theory can highlight the importance of legitimacy in shaping the responses of universities to these protests. By integrating these two theories, researchers can develop a more nuanced understanding of the complex social, cultural, and institutional factors that contribute to social unrest in South African universities and develop more effective strategies for addressing these challenges.
Methodology
The study is lensed by transformative paradigm using qualitative approach. The transformative paradigm emphasizes the importance of understanding and addressing social inequalities and power dynamics in society and seeks to promote social justice and equity through research and action (Biddle & Schafft, 2015; Romm, 2018). Given this focus, a qualitative research approach is particularly well-suited to this paradigm. Qualitative research methods are well-known for their ability to capture the complexities and nuances of social phenomena and for providing in-depth and detailed insights into people’s experiences, perspectives, and behaviors (Merriam & Grenier, 2019). Dwelling in transformative paradigm, the researcher seeks to understand and challenge dominant narratives and power structures associated with causes of social unrest in the university system. On the other hand, qualitative research provides a powerful tool for doing so. For example, through methods such as focus group discussion as used in the study, the researcher can give voice to marginalized groups and document their experiences and perspectives (Carey & Asbury, 2016).
In the context of exploring the root causes of social unrest and institutional responses in South African universities, the transformative paradigm and the qualitative research approach are particularly relevant. This is because TP emphasizes understanding and addressing social inequalities and power dynamics, which are important factors contributing to social unrest in universities. And on the other hand, qualitative methods, such as focus groups, can capture the complexities and nuances of social phenomena in South African universities and provide in-depth insights into the experiences, perspectives, and behaviors of different groups. By documenting the experiences and perspectives of marginalized groups, researchers can identify the root causes of social unrest, shed light on institutional responses to social unrest and analyze how power and inequality operate in these institutions.
Research Design
Participatory research is an ideal research design for the study of exploring the root causes of social unrest and institutional responses in South African universities. This approach is characterized by collaboration and active participation among researchers and the community being studied (Higginbottom & Liamputtong, 2015). In participatory research, community members are actively involved in the research process (Wallerstein et al., 2017), from identifying research questions to collecting and analyzing data and disseminating research findings. The use of participatory research is particularly relevant to the study topic as it allows for a more in-depth and nuanced understanding of the experiences and perspectives of the university community. It also provides an opportunity for participants to voice their concerns and contribute to the research process, ensuring that their perspectives are not overlooked or misrepresented. This is especially important in the context of South African universities, where issues of power dynamics and inequality are prominent (Heleta, 2016).
Research Participants
The study participants consisted of ten key university stakeholders, including student leaders, university management staff, and campus security personnel, who were selected based on their significant knowledge and experience regarding issues of social unrest in the university context. Specifically, student leaders, who are often involved in initiating social unrest. Campus security personnel, who play a critical role in managing and curbing such unrest, and university staff responsible for managing and responding to the situation were chosen. These stakeholders were deemed highly relevant to the study, given their unique perspectives and experiences with the issue of social unrest in the university context.
Sample and Sampling Procedure
In this study, a purposive sampling technique was employed to select four South African universities with a significant record of social unrest, particularly student unrest. Subsequently, a total of 12 participants were selected for the study, with three participants selected from each of the four selected universities. Specifically, each university was represented by one student leader, one campus security personnel, and one management staff member. These participants were also selected using purposive sampling, as they were deemed to have significant knowledge and experience with regard to issues of social unrest in the university context. And it also allows for the selection of participants who are best suited to provide insight into the research questions being investigated.
The use of a purposive sampling technique to select both the universities and the participants in this study is particularly relevant given the research questions being investigated. It ensured that the study focused on universities with a significant history of social unrest and selected participants who could provide detailed insights into the issue of social unrest and its management within the university context. Therefore, this sampling technique was deemed the most appropriate method to achieve the research objectives.
Instrumentation
Focused Group Discussion (FGD) was employed as a data collection method in this study to elicit information from the 12 selected participants. FGD involves bringing together a group of individuals to discuss a specific topic of interest, with a trained moderator facilitating the discussion (Barbour, 2018). This method is particularly relevant to exploring the root causes of social unrest and institutional responses in South African universities, as it allows for collecting rich and diverse perspectives from different stakeholders.
Furthermore, FGD is consistent with the selected research design of participatory research, as it promotes collaboration and active participation among the participants. The use of FGD in this study allowed the participants to engage in a collaborative and open discussion, sharing their experiences and perspectives with one another. This approach facilitated the development of a shared understanding of the issue of social unrest and its management within the university context, with participants having the opportunity to challenge and build on each other’s perspectives. In addition, FGD as a data collection method can be used to identify common themes and patterns across different perspectives, which bring about the use of thematic analysis to analyze the data.
Data Analysis
Thematic analysis was adopted as the data analysis method in this study. Thematic analysis is a widely used qualitative method that involves identifying patterns and themes within the data to generate rich and meaningful insights (Braun et al., 2016). This method is particularly relevant to the study’s research questions, as it allows for the identification and exploration of key themes and patterns related to the root causes of social unrest and institutional responses in South African universities.
By employing thematic analysis, the researchers were able to identify and analyze key themes across the data obtained from the Focused Group Discussion. These themes were then organized into a coherent and meaningful framework, which allowed for the development of a comprehensive understanding of the research questions. This approach allowed the researchers to delve deeper into the participants’ experiences, perspectives, and opinions, highlighting the factors that contribute to social unrest in South African universities and the institutional responses that have been implemented to address these issues. Furthermore, the six steps of doing thematic analysis proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006) were utilized in this study, which ensured that the process of analysis was rigorous and systematic. These steps include familiarization with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing and refining themes, defining and naming themes, and producing the final report. The use of these steps ensured that the data analysis process was transparent, replicable, and reliable.
Ethical Considerations
This study obtained ethical approval from a designated ethics committee, with protocol number FEDREC 03-11-21. In addition, I sought the consent of the participants and ensured that they were provided with all necessary information about the study, including their right to withdraw from the study if they felt uncomfortable. Participants were informed that their participation was voluntary, and all provided their consent to participate. Importantly, to protect the identities of the participants, their names were replaced with pseudonyms such as SL1, SL2, SL3, and SL4 for student leaders, SP1, SP2, SP3, and SP4 for security personnel, and MS1, MS2, MS3, and MS4 for management staff. These pseudonyms were used as codes during the data analysis phase of the study.
Presentation of Results
The data analysis presented in this section adheres to the principles of thematic analysis outlined previously, with the data organized in accordance with the research questions. The two themes for each objective, which were derived from the participants’ statements, are displayed in Table 1.
Thematic Representation of Data.
Question 1, Theme 1: Lack of Access and Socio-Economic Inequalities
The data collected reveal that one significant factor contributing to social unrest within South African universities is the absence of equal access to education, coupled with the disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds of many students. This combination of factors serves to intensify disparities and dissatisfaction among the student population, culminating in unrest on university campuses. See the below statements from participants:
The participants in this discussion are analyzing the primary causes of social unrest in South African universities. SL1 believes that the lack of access to quality education resources is the primary cause of social unrest. The high cost of tuition fees and limited access to learning materials cause frustration and dissatisfaction among students. SL2 supports this point and adds that inequalities and socio-economic backgrounds contribute significantly to creating unrest among students. Students from financially stable backgrounds have better access to resources and opportunities, which can make other students feel left out and resentful.
SP1 builds on SL2’s point and adds that the financial burden on students and their families creates tension among the student body. When students are worried about affording their education, they are more likely to protest and demand change. SP2 agrees and adds that the growing disparity in terms of opportunities and support for students from different socio-economic backgrounds also contributes to social unrest on campuses. MS1 concurs with the points raised so far and believes that the lack of access to quality education resources and inequalities among students create an environment ripe for social unrest. MS2 agrees and suggests that universities need to provide affordable education and ensure that all students have equal access to resources and opportunities, regardless of their socio-economic background. In summary, the participants in this discussion agree that the lack of access to quality education resources and inequalities among students are primary causes of social unrest in South African universities.
Question 1, Theme 2: Lack of Effective Communication and Open Engagement
In addition to issues related to access to quality education resources and socio-economic inequalities, the lack of effective communication and open engagement has also been identified as a cause of student unrest in South African universities. The participants in the discussion alluded to this issue, highlighting how a lack of communication and engagement can exacerbate feelings of frustration and dissatisfaction among students.
The participants in this discussion highlight the importance of effective communication and inclusivity in decision-making to prevent social unrest in South African universities. SL3 believes that the lack of effective communication between students and university management is one of the primary factors contributing to social unrest. When students feel unheard or ignored, they are more likely to protest and demand change. MS3 supports this opinion and emphasizes that transparent communication and inclusive decision-making processes are crucial for maintaining a harmonious environment on campus. Students should be involved in discussions that directly affect their academic experience.
SP3 agrees with the points raised by SL3 and MS3 and adds that security personnel often find themselves caught in conflicts arising from communication breakdowns. Establishing proper communication channels between students and management can help prevent unrest. MS3 concurs with this point, stating that a lack of effective communication exacerbates tensions on campus, owing that University management should be responsive to students’ concerns and engage in open dialog to address their grievances. MS1 agrees with these views and suggests that involving students in the decision-making process can create a sense of ownership and shared responsibility, which can help alleviate social unrest. In summary, the participants in this discussion emphasize the importance of effective communication and inclusivity in decision-making to prevent social unrest in South African universities.
Question 2, Theme 1: Provision of Equitable Access and Economic Liberation
Referring to the principles of participatory research that participants should be made to jointly proffer solutions to their problems, the participants were equally engaged in suggesting possible institutional responses that could ameliorate the identified causes. Among these suggestions is the provision of equitable access and economic liberation. See the below statements:
The participants in this discussion are highlighting the importance of promoting equity and inclusivity in South African universities as a response to social unrest. SL1 believes that ensuring adequate access to quality educational resources for all students is an effective response to social unrest. This can help alleviate some of the disparities that contribute to social unrest. SL2 agrees with SL1 and suggests that promoting equal opportunities for all students, such as scholarships and financial aid, can help level the playing field and reduce tensions among the student body.
SP1 adds that institutions that invest in creating a more equitable environment tend to experience less unrest. Providing resources such as tutoring, mentoring, and career counseling to all students can contribute to this. SP2 agrees and suggests that ensuring equal representation in student organizations and leadership positions is another way to foster a sense of belonging and equity, which can help prevent social unrest. MS1 recognizes the importance of investing in infrastructure and facilities that cater to the diverse needs of the student population, such as accessible classrooms, libraries, and study spaces. MS2 suggests that implementing inclusive policies and practices, such as revising admission criteria and promoting diversity among faculty and staff, can also contribute to a more inclusive environment and mitigate social unrest. In summary, the participants in this discussion suggest that promoting equity and inclusivity in South African universities is a response to social unrest.
Question 2, Theme 2: Provision of Effective Communication and Open Engagement
Another possible institutional response provided by the participants in the provision of effective communication and open engagement, as indicated in the below statements. The participants in this discussion also suggest that effective communication and open engagement can be another institutional response to social unrest in South African universities. By establishing proper communication channels and engaging in open dialog with students, university management can address students’ concerns and build trust between university management and students.
The participants in this discussion highlight the importance of effective communication and transparency in addressing social unrest in South African universities. SL3 believes that establishing effective communication channels between students and university management is crucial in addressing social unrest. By creating platforms where students can voice their concerns, we can identify and address the issues that lead to unrest. SL4 supports this point and adds that involving students in the decision-making process and ensuring that their voices are heard can foster a sense of ownership and shared responsibility.
SP3 and SP4 emphasize the importance of communication and transparency in promoting trust and cooperation between students and management. They suggest that regular town hall meetings and open forums where students can engage with management and voice their opinions can contribute to a more harmonious campus environment. MS3 recognizes that providing a platform for open dialog is essential in addressing social unrest. We can foster a more inclusive and peaceful campus by being responsive to student concerns and willing to make changes when necessary. MS4 agrees with these views and adds that as management, we must also proactively identify and address potential issues before they escalate. Monitoring campus climate, gathering student feedback, and conducting regular assessments of policies and practices can help us stay ahead of potential unrest. In summary, the participants in this discussion suggest that effective communication and transparency are crucial in addressing social unrest in South African universities.
Discussion of Findings
Conclusion and Recommendations
In conclusion, the participants in the discussion have highlighted that lack of access to quality education, resources and inequalities, and lack of effective communication and open engagement among students are primary causes of social unrest and that key institutional responses to social unrest in South African universities include promoting equity and inclusivity, effective communication and open engagement, involving students in decision-making, and being proactive in identifying potential issues. These responses align with the empirical findings of previous research, which have identified these factors as crucial for maintaining a positive campus environment and reducing the likelihood of student protests.
To effectively respond to social unrest, South African universities should prioritize promoting equity and inclusivity by ensuring adequate access to quality education resources, promoting equal opportunities for all students, providing resources such as tutoring and career counseling, and ensuring equal representation in student organizations and leadership positions. Additionally, universities should establish effective communication channels between students and management and engage in open dialog to address students’ concerns and build trust. Involving students in decision-making and proactively identifying potential issues can also help prevent social unrest and promote a more inclusive and peaceful campus.
Implications for Theoretical Frameworks
The conclusion of this discussion has several implications for the social movement theory and the institutional theory. The social movement theory emphasizes the role of collective action in addressing social inequalities and promoting social change. The participants in the discussion highlighted the importance of promoting equity and inclusivity to address social inequalities that lead to social unrest. By prioritizing access to quality education resources, promoting equal opportunities for all students, and involving students in decision-making processes, universities can foster a sense of collective action and empower students to advocate for their rights and promote social change. This aligns with the social movement theory, which suggests that collective action is crucial for addressing social inequalities and promoting social change.
On the other hand, the institutional theory emphasizes the importance of organizational practices and norms in shaping institutional behavior. The participants in the discussion suggest that effective communication and open engagement, proactive identification of potential issues, and involving students in decision-making can help universities to create a positive campus environment that reduces the likelihood of social unrest. This aligns with the institutional theory, which suggests that institutions can shape their behavior by adopting certain practices and norms. By prioritizing effective communication and engagement with students, universities can create a positive campus environment and reduce the likelihood of social unrest.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting this research’s findings are available on request from the corresponding author. Although said data is included within the article, the ethical guidelines that were obtained for the study disallow it from being made publicly accessible in an effort to maintain confidentiality between author and participant alike. This ensures that all communication throughout the study is protected and in compliance with any rules of engagement established between the two parties.