Towards Understanding South Africa’s Differing Attitudes to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Open Governance Partnership

The research investigates why South Africa is a founding member of the Open Government Partnership (OGP) but remains absent from the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). It argues that the South African government's justifications—namely the existence of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) and the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA)—are insufficient because these frameworks do not provide the specific, multi-stakeholder corporate-state payment reconciliation that the EITI requires. The author suggests that South Africa's reluctance is partly ideological, tied to perceived double standards in the global North, and that the country may only join the EITI if it sees it as a means to bolster its status as an emerging global power.

• South Africa exhibits a contradiction in its transparency commitments, being one of eight founding members of the Open Government Partnership (OGP) launched on 20 September 2011, while remaining a non-signatory to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
• The South African government justifies its absence from the EITI by claiming that existing domestic measures are sufficient for accounting for mineral resource revenues.
• The Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) of 2000 is an inadequate alternative to the EITI because it does not allow the public to access information held directly by corporations, preventing the verification of state revenue against company payments.
• The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) of 2002 fails as an EITI alternative because it focuses on state regulation of corporations without providing civil society or the public with means to access information on corporate-state activities.
• There is a lack of a unified government position or policy priority regarding the EITI in South Africa, with confusion over whether leadership belongs to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), the National Treasury, or the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO).
• South Africa's reluctance to join the EITI is influenced by perceived double standards, as several resource-rich countries in the global North have historically avoided implementing the initiative despite promoting it in the global South.

APA

Comparé, N. (2013). Towards Understanding South Africa’s Differing Attitudes to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Open Governance Partnership. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Occasional-Paper-146.pdf

Chicago

Comparé, Nadège. Towards Understanding South Africa’s Differing Attitudes to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Open Governance Partnership. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2013. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Occasional-Paper-146.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Comparé |first1=Nadège |title=Towards Understanding South Africa’s Differing Attitudes to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Open Governance Partnership |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=May 2013 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Occasional-Paper-146.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{compar2013towards, author = {Comparé, Nadège}, title = {{Towards Understanding South Africa’s Differing Attitudes to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Open Governance Partnership}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2013}, month = may, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Occasional-Paper-146.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }