A JUST DISTRIBUTION

The document identifies a critical gap in South Africa's 'just transition' framework, which the author describes as 'reactive' because it primarily addresses future losses in the coal sector. The paper proposes a 'proactive' approach termed 'just distribution,' focusing on the electricity distribution landscape. It argues that the current system—characterized by complex governance shared between Eskom and local municipalities—undermines poverty reduction goals. The author introduces a preliminary 'energy-society model' to map how drivers like local government fiscal models and governance gaps lead to adverse socioeconomic outcomes, such as energy poverty and the forced use of polluting substitutes, which are often more significant than the expected impacts of the low-carbon transition itself.

• The current 'just transition' narrative in South Africa is primarily 'reactive,' focusing on mitigating losses for coal-industry stakeholders rather than addressing existing systemic inequalities.
• Energy distribution is a neglected component of the transition debate, which focuses heavily on generation, despite distribution's significant impact on socioeconomic development.
• The electricity distribution system in South Africa is a shared function between Eskom and local government, creating complexities in service delivery and the administration of programs like Free Basic Electricity.
• There is a fundamental contradiction between the 1998 White Paper on Energy and the 1998 White Paper on Local Government regarding the financial viability of electricity distribution for municipalities.
• Local governments rely on electricity sales to fund other essential services, which may incentivize keeping end-user tariffs high even if generation costs decrease.
• The current distribution system contributes to poverty and inequality through complex pricing and a lack of oversight over municipal charges.
• High levels of physical grid access in South Africa coexist with 'energy poverty,' where households cannot afford to use electricity and instead rely on dangerous or polluting substitutes.
• The author's preliminary 'energy-society model' identifies that system outputs (cost, access, reliability) are filtered through exogenous macro factors like user income and food security to produce direct and indirect socioeconomic outcomes.
• Electricity distribution losses are substantial, driven by illegal connections, theft, and deteriorating infrastructure, with metropolitan municipalities alone losing R7.3 billion in 2018/19.

APA

LEDGER, T. (2020). A JUST DISTRIBUTION. Public Affairs Research Institute. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/20210128_AJustDistribution_EnergySociety_Ledger.pdf

Chicago

LEDGER, TRACY. A JUST DISTRIBUTION. Public Affairs Research Institute, 2020. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/20210128_AJustDistribution_EnergySociety_Ledger.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=LEDGER |first1=TRACY |title=A JUST DISTRIBUTION |publisher=Public Affairs Research Institute |date=December 2020 |url=https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/20210128_AJustDistribution_EnergySociety_Ledger.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{ledger2020just, author = {LEDGER, TRACY}, title = {{A JUST DISTRIBUTION}}, institution = {Public Affairs Research Institute}, year = {2020}, month = dec, url = {https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/20210128_AJustDistribution_EnergySociety_Ledger.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }