Building Anticipatory Governance in SADC: Post-COVID-19 Conflict and Defence Outlook

The report argues that SADC's current reactive, bureaucratic, and state-centric approach to security is insufficient for the region's complex threat landscape. It proposes the adoption of anticipatory governance—a non-predictive approach using foresight and multi-stakeholder engagement—to move from reactive crisis management to proactive strategic planning. The author highlights the Cabo Delgado insurgency as a primary example of SADC's failure to act timeously and recommends a comprehensive regional security sector review and the establishment of a P/CVE unit to build adaptive capacities.

• SADC struggles to coordinate a collective response to regional threats due to a political culture dominated by a 'liberation movement ethos' and a strict principle of non-interference in member states' domestic affairs.
• The region's defence capabilities are highly uneven, with only Angola and South Africa maintaining significant budgets and forces, while others rely on bilateral arrangements with partners like India or NATO countries.
• SADC's ability to respond to large-scale crises, including natural disasters, pandemics, or cross-border violent extremism, is currently limited.
• The response to the insurgency in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique, demonstrates a decision-making pace that is too slow for the rapidly evolving nature of the crisis.
• The COVID-19 pandemic acted as a 'black swan' event that exposed SADC's inability to anticipate negative socio-economic and political consequences despite previous scenario exercises on health crises.
• The author recommends that SADC member states undertake a deep security sector review every 10 years, following African Union guidelines, to make institutions more responsive to democratic control.
• To implement anticipatory governance, the report suggests SADC establish a P/CVE (preventing and countering violent extremism) unit at the Secretariat to replace traditional counter-terrorism units.
• SADC's current decision-making architecture is hindered by executive decision-making, a bureaucratic substructure of seconded officials, and weak oversight mechanisms.

APA

van Nieuwerkerk, A. (2021). Building Anticipatory Governance in SADC: Post-COVID-19 Conflict and Defence Outlook. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Occasional-Paper-323-van-Nieuwkerk.pdf

Chicago

van Nieuwerkerk, Anthoni. Building Anticipatory Governance in SADC: Post-COVID-19 Conflict and Defence Outlook. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2021. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Occasional-Paper-323-van-Nieuwkerk.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=van Nieuwerkerk |first1=Anthoni |title=Building Anticipatory Governance in SADC: Post-COVID-19 Conflict and Defence Outlook |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=May 2021 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Occasional-Paper-323-van-Nieuwkerk.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{vannieuwerkerk2021building, author = {van Nieuwerkerk, Anthoni}, title = {{Building Anticipatory Governance in SADC: Post-COVID-19 Conflict and Defence Outlook}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2021}, month = may, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Occasional-Paper-323-van-Nieuwkerk.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }