Search Climate Insights Directory

The North Gauteng High Court ruled in favor of the Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and #PayTheGrants, finding that the South African government's administration of the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant was unconstitutional. The court determined that the grant is not a temporary measure and that the government used 'ulterior' motives to exclude eligible applicants through restrictive regulations, such as a solely online application process and inaccurate database checks. The judgment requires the government to allow in-person applications, redefine 'insufficient means' to exclude irregular monetary inflows, and develop a plan within four months to increase the grant's value and means-test threshold in line with the cost of living. Additionally, the court struck down budget caps that limited the number of beneficiaries and ordered SASSA to rectify payment delays affecting 10-15% of successful applicants.

The research analyzes the influence of international programs and the content of national policies on the environment-poverty nexus in the Brazilian Amazon, finding a historical dichotomy between environmental and developmental agendas.

The report argues that the traditional Official Development Assistance (ODA) model is outdated and failing to meet 21st-century challenges. It identifies six key pressures: shifting poverty geographies, rising demands for climate and health financing, fragmentation from new actors, changing flow natures, geopolitical rivalries, and declining public trust. The author contends that incremental tweaks are insufficient and proposes a 'reset' that integrates ODA into a broader Global Public Investment (GPI) framework. This new architecture would distinguish core poverty reduction from global public goods financing, reform governance to include the Global South, and shift the narrative from donor-driven charity to mutual interest. The report outlines five future scenarios for 2040, ranging from 'Incremental Change' to a 'Managed Handover' to non-governmental actors, urging policymakers to proactively shape a transition to avoid a fragmented 'Wild West' of bilateralism.

The document assesses the pervasive role of the informal economy in Ethiopia, noting that it accounts for 80-90% of national employment and approximately one-third of GDP. It highlights a disconnect between official national surveys, which show a decline in informality, and international estimates that suggest the sector remains dominant. The analysis focuses on the drivers of informality—including rural-to-urban migration and structural exclusion—and the challenges of formalization, such as bureaucratic burdens and limited financial access. In Addis Ababa, the city administration has shifted from viewing informal trade as 'illegal' to implementing regulations (such as Regulation No. 184/2025) to recognize and gradually integrate street vendors into the formal economy.

The document examines fraud within South Africa's social grant system, asserting that while the government focuses on policing beneficiaries, the majority of significant fraud is perpetrated by state officials and contractors. It details various types of fraud, including the theft of funds by SASSA and Post Office employees, and criticizes the government's current verification tools—such as automated computer systems, bank statement checks, and biometric verification—for erroneously flagging eligible poor people as fraudsters. The report concludes that these measures create barriers for the elderly and disabled, effectively 'robbing' them of their rights to social assistance.

The document argues that the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) is essential for reversing the marginalisation of African countries in global trade, with the potential to generate $450 billion in additional income by 2035 and lift 30 million people out of absolute poverty. However, full implementation has been delayed since January 2021 due to resource constraints, debt distress in over 50% of African countries, and fears of tariff revenue losses. To address this, the AfCFTA Secretariat introduced the AfCFTA Implementation Review Mechanism (AFIRM) in July 2024. The author suggests that AFIRM should move away from a narrow focus on compliance and instead adopt the broader, transparency-based approach of the WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). The TPRM is credited with enhancing adherence through peer pressure and factual reporting without being a tool for dispute settlement, a model that could reduce resistance among AfCFTA state parties.

The report critiques the current South African social assistance framework, specifically the SRD grant, as inadequate due to its low value and restrictive digital means testing. It contrasts a 'fiscal consolidation' approach favored by the National Treasury and international financial institutions with a rights-based approach advocated by civil society and the Department of Social Development. The authors recommend transitioning the SRD grant into a permanent basic income grant pegged to national poverty lines, funded through non-regressive measures like wealth taxes, and supported by inclusive consultative structures and secure digital systems.

The IEJ argues that South Africa's Revised Fiscal Framework fails to support inclusive growth and socioeconomic transformation due to a persistent focus on debt stabilisation and austerity. The submission warns that insufficient spending growth relative to inflation and population leads to reduced per-citizen spending, stifling job creation. To address revenue shortfalls, the IEJ proposes removing tax benefits for high earners, introducing a wealth tax, and reviewing the Corporate Income Tax rate.

The document is an open letter from South African civil society, labour organisations, and policy experts arguing that the National Treasury exercises disproportionate influence over government policy, often obstructing the progressive realisation of socio-economic rights. The authors specifically highlight the failure to transition the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant into a permanent basic income system, alleging that Treasury's adherence to an 'austerity' paradigm undermines constitutional mandates and inclusive economic growth.

The Universal Basic Income Coalition (UBIC) disputes SASSA's claims that a 'spike' in SRD grant applications is driven by fraud. The document asserts that the 17.2 million applications in September 2024 are cumulative and align with eligibility estimates of approximately 17 million people. It argues that SASSA uses fraud narratives to justify an arbitrary budget cap from the National Treasury that only allows payments to 8.5 million people, while internal data shows very few actual fraud cases.

The document examines the contestation over the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant in South Africa, pitting austerity-driven fiscal consolidation supported by the National Treasury, IMF, and World Bank against civil society demands for a universal basic income. It highlights the SRD grant's inadequacy, as its value is only 46% of the food poverty line, and criticizes exclusionary digital verification systems and budget caps that limit access. The authors recommend transitioning the SRD into a permanent, unconditional basic income funded through progressive taxation and an expansionary macroeconomic framework.

The fact sheet examines the crisis of food insecurity in South Africa, asserting that while the country is food secure at a national level, millions of households suffer from hunger due to income poverty. It advocates for a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) as a direct mechanism to ensure all adults can afford basic nutrition, contrasting this with the limitations of current targeted grants and the paternalism of food vouchers. The document also highlights the long-term economic and health costs of malnutrition and argues that a UBIG should be part of a broader strategy including a 'just food transition' to address systemic agricultural issues and climate change risks.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that requiring social grant recipients in South Africa to prove active job-seeking is a flawed policy. It contends that unemployment is structural rather than a result of individual effort, and that conditionality would exclude millions of needy people, increase administrative costs, and potentially lead to labor exploitation and lower wages. The document advocates for an unconditional Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) as a more effective and just alternative.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) argues that requiring social grant recipients in South Africa to prove they are actively seeking work is a flawed policy. The document contends that unemployment in South Africa is structural rather than a result of individual effort, noting an expanded unemployment rate of 42.6% (12.38 million people). It asserts that job-seeking conditions create high administrative costs, penalize caregivers—particularly women—and may force workers into low-wage, exploitative employment. The IEJ advocates for an unconditional Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) as a constitutional right, contrasting this with proposals from the World Bank, National Treasury, and certain political parties to replace the COVID-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant with conditional job-seeker support.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) argues that imposing work-seeking conditions on social grants in South Africa is a flawed policy. It contends that unemployment is driven by structural economic failures rather than a lack of effort from job seekers. The document highlights that the costs of searching for work—estimated at R1,469 per month for youth—far exceed the R370 provided by the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant, making conditionality a barrier to survival. Furthermore, it argues that such requirements violate constitutional rights to social assistance and could lead to labor exploitation by forcing people into low-wage, poor-quality jobs.

The document contends that requiring social grant recipients in South Africa to prove they are actively seeking work is an ineffective policy that ignores the structural nature of the country's unemployment. It argues that such conditions would exclude millions in need, impose high administrative and compliance costs, and violate constitutional rights to social assistance. The author specifically critiques proposals from the World Bank, National Treasury, and political parties (DA and Rise Mzansi) to replace the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant with a conditional work-seekers' grant, noting that the cost of job searching (approximately R1469 for youth) far exceeds the grant value (R370).

The document analyzes South Africa's care regime, tracing the impact of the apartheid-era migrant labour system and post-apartheid neoliberal policies like GEAR on the distribution of care. It highlights the systemic undervaluation of both paid and unpaid care work, which predominantly falls on Black women and older persons. The paper critiques the 'familialist' approach of the White Paper on Social Welfare and the underfunding of social welfare services, leading to a bifurcated system where quality care is a private privilege. It concludes by advocating for a national care policy based on the '4R' framework (recognition, reduction, redistribution, and revaluation) to socialise care and dismantle intersectional inequalities.

Project Drawdown analyzed the NDCs of eight African countries—Congo, Ethiopia, Malawi, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda—to identify synergies between climate mitigation and socioeconomic development. While all eight countries acknowledge poverty and gender mainstreaming, only Congo, Malawi, and Rwanda explicitly link climate solutions to specific human well-being dimensions. The analysis identifies 14 frequently cited solutions, such as Clean Cooking and Distributed Solar Photovoltaics, but notes the omission of other high-impact 'double-duty' solutions like Reduced Food Waste and Family Planning and Education. The report argues for recognizing Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) actions as both mitigation and adaptation tools and diversifying decentralized renewable energy to combat energy poverty in rural communities.

The Institute for Economic Justice and the Universal Basic Income Coalition critique Sassa's implementation of biometric identity verification and algorithmic risk scoring for the Social Relief of Distress grant. They argue these measures exclude eligible recipients who lack smartphones, internet access, or smart ID cards, while raising concerns about data privacy and the lack of evidence for systematic fraud.

The document describes a project in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) where FSD Africa and Equity BCDC implemented an agency banking model to reach rural and peri-urban populations. By deploying over 5,000 agents and utilizing a 'Master Agency' strategy to overcome KYC documentation barriers, the initiative opened over 650,000 new accounts. The project also integrated renewable power and internet connectivity for rural agents and developed micro-loan scoring tools to facilitate capital access for previously excluded populations.