To Liberalise or Not to Liberalise?

The report argues that while South Africa has undergone significant trade liberalisation since 1994, further openness is necessary to enhance global competitiveness, provided it is co-operatively managed to maintain social stability. It examines the shift from import-substitution to a multi-faceted industrial strategy, the impact of tariff reforms, and South Africa's engagement with the WTO and regional partners like the EU and SADC.

• The author concludes that trade liberalisation generally promotes competitiveness, which is essential in a globalising world, though limited time-bound protection may be necessary for social harmony.
• Since 1994, South Africa has significantly reorganised its tariff structure, reducing the number of tariff lines from over 12,000 to approximately 7,800 and lowering overall protection levels.
• Despite general liberalisation, some analysts argue the tariff regime remains complex and protectionist, noting that the average tariff for non-zero-rated lines is relatively high at 17%.
• South Africa's industrial policy has transitioned from an apartheid-era import-substitution regime to the Integrated Manufacturing Strategy (IMS), which uses a value-chain methodology to target 10 specific sectors.
• The automotive industry is cited as a primary success of sectoral strategy due to the motor industry development plan (MIDP), though its WTO-compatibility is questioned.
• South Africa's trade agreement with the EU (the TDCA) is asymmetric, with the EU liberalising 95% of imports from South Africa over 10 years, while South Africa liberalises 86% of EU imports over 12 years.
• The report identifies a risk of 'industrial relocation' and concerns that multinational corporations (MNCs) are unlikely to invest in South Africa specifically to access markets in China or India.
• Africa is increasingly marginalised from the global economy, and the report suggests a 'project-approach'—promoting investment in infrastructure and industrial projects—as the most effective way for South Africa to support the continent's development.
• The new SACU agreement is historically significant because it requires South Africa to cede sovereignty over trade policy formulation to new supra-national institutions.

APA

South African Institute of International Affairs (2003). To Liberalise or Not to Liberalise? https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/1-tr1.pdf

Chicago

South African Institute of International Affairs. To Liberalise or Not to Liberalise? 2003. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/1-tr1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=South African Institute of International Affairs |title=To Liberalise or Not to Liberalise? |date=July 2003 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/1-tr1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{southafricaninstituteofinternationalaffairs2003liberalise, author = {{South African Institute of International Affairs}}, title = {{To Liberalise or Not to Liberalise?}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2003}, month = jul, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/1-tr1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }