Search Climate Insights Directory

The document criticises the National Treasury for underfunding the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant and implementing exclusionary regulations. It highlights a significant drop in approved applications from 10.9 million in March 2022 to 7.5 million in January 2023, attributing this to a low means-test threshold of R624 and complex application processes. The IEJ calls for the grant to be increased to the Food Poverty Line of R663 and for the government to honour the President's commitment to protect grants from inflation.

The analysis finds that interactions between key SDG targets are generally synergetic at a global level under a 1.5°C warming limit, with climate finance and policy mainstreaming acting as primary accelerators for other goals.

Ethiopia is not on track to meet the UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, with poverty and hunger projected to increase due to conflict, pests, economic slowdown, and climate change. The report argues that sustainable food system transformation is possible within a decade if public investment is increased by USD 4.6 billion and targeted toward interventions that provide multiple development outcomes. It highlights a critical funding gap where long-term investments for Sustainable Development Goal 2 are significantly underfunded compared to short-term emergency food assistance, which increases the country's vulnerability to future shocks.

The document examines the clash between the rural African donkey market, where the animal is a vital workhorse for the poor, and the lucrative Chinese market for ejiao (donkey-hide glue). It highlights how explosive demand in China has led to donkey shortages, illicit smuggling, and severe welfare abuses, which in turn diminish the socio-economic mobility of rural Africans, particularly women and girls. The author argues that the current unregulated trade risks damaging China-Africa relations and suggests implementing sustainability certifications, breeding programs, and a distinction between medicinal and wellness-based ejiao consumption to ensure a sustainable supply chain.

The document argues that a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) for South Africans aged 18 to 59 is fiscally viable and would stimulate economic growth while reducing poverty. Based on research with Applied Development Research Solutions (ADRS), it proposes three implementation pathways (low, medium, and high speed) from 2023 to 2030. The analysis suggests that UBIG would increase GDP growth to between 2.8% and 3.5% by 2030 and reduce poverty by 67% over the next two decades. Financing options include a wealth tax on the top 1% of the population, a Social Security Tax (SST), and VAT returns, as low-income recipients tend to spend their grants on VAT-rated basic goods, returning approximately 12% to the government.

The document advocates for a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG), defined as a government commitment to ensure all adults receive a regular payment sufficient to meet basic needs. It argues that UBIG is not merely a safety net but a tool for economic empowerment and growth. Evidence from Kenya, Zambia, Mexico, and Namibia is cited to show that guaranteed income allows people to invest in education, start small businesses, and increase agricultural production. Furthermore, the text highlights a 'multiplier effect' where cash transfers stimulate local economies, citing examples from Ghana and Zambia where spending by low-income recipients boosted local business activity and overall national income.

The document examines how a universal basic income guarantee (UBIG) can address structural gender inequalities and social instability in South Africa. It argues that by decoupling income from waged labour, a UBIG empowers women who are disproportionately affected by unemployment and unpaid care work. The text cites international evidence to suggest that unconditional cash transfers reduce intimate partner violence, increase school attendance for girls, and lower crime rates. It emphasizes that universality is essential to avoid social stigma and ensure women's agency.

The document advocates for a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, defining it as a regular cash transfer provided as a right to all adults to cover basic necessities. It argues that a UBIG is superior to targeted grants, which often suffer from high exclusion errors and administrative complexity. The series presents evidence that basic income support improves health, education, and mental well-being, particularly for children, and empowers women by reducing their economic dependence on men and vulnerability to intimate partner violence. Economically, it contends that UBIGs do not create dependency or discourage work; instead, they can stimulate local economies through a multiplier effect and provide workers with an 'exit option' from exploitative labor. The document proposes financing the UBIG through progressive taxation, including a social security tax, wealth taxes, and the removal of subsidies for the wealthy, estimating a gross annual cost of R255 billion if set at the Food Poverty Line, which would be significantly offset by VAT recoupment and economic growth.

The Institute for Economic Justice advocates for a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, defining it as a government commitment to ensure all adults have a regular cash benefit to meet basic needs as a right. The document highlights that while social grants have been effective, gaps remain for able-bodied adults aged 18-59, and the current Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant is temporary and limited. It asserts that a UBIG, supported by complementary policies like a just energy transition and industrial policy, could eliminate poverty for the 18.3 million people unable to meet basic food needs, improve health and education, and reduce gender inequality.

The fact sheet compares universal and targeted basic income systems, arguing that targeting often fails due to high exclusion errors and administrative complexity. It posits that a UBIG ensures no one is left behind, reduces state administrative burdens, and provides greater poverty impact through household income pooling, particularly in South Africa.

The document contends that social grants do not cause labour market withdrawal but instead increase agency and the ability to search for work. It provides evidence from South Africa and other low-and middle-income countries showing that cash transfers can stimulate local economic growth, increase self-employment, and improve human capital. The text argues that a universal basic income guarantee (UBIG) is necessary to address immediate hunger and gender injustice, as it supports unpaid care work and provides workers with an 'exit option' from exploitative employment.

The document argues that a UBIG in South Africa is fiscally feasible through progressive taxation and economic stimulus effects. It estimates the gross annual cost of a grant set at the Food Poverty Line (R624/month) at R255 billion, though actual costs would be lower based on uptake rates (R153 billion at 60% and R204 billion at 80%). The net cost is further reduced by a 'multiplier effect' and VAT recoupment, with the document suggesting that the net cost could be as low as 50% of the gross cost. Proposed funding sources include a social security tax, a wealth tax on the top 1% (potentially raising R143 billion), luxury VAT, and the reduction of retirement fund subsidies.

The document critiques the administrative barriers and restrictive eligibility of the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant, arguing that a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) would more effectively reduce poverty and strengthen household resilience. It advocates for financing this system through wealth taxes and progressive reforms rather than regressive taxation like VAT increases.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) criticizes proposals by South Africa's National Treasury and Presidency to replace the R350 Covid-19 SRD grant. The IEJ argues that Treasury's plan is designed to maximize exclusion through complex categorizations and conditionalities, such as job-seeking requirements, which ignore structural unemployment. The statement warns that these changes could reduce the number of beneficiaries from the current level to approximately 5.5 million, effectively removing support for millions of poor citizens. The IEJ also condemns the government's failure to engage with civil society coalitions in the development of these policies.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) argues that proposals by the National Treasury (NT) and the Presidency to replace the R350 SRD grant with targeted grants are regressive, unconstitutional, and administratively unworkable. The IEJ contends that these proposals prioritize cost-cutting and the exclusion of poor citizens over the primary goal of combating hunger and poverty. Specifically, the IEJ critiques the 'jobseekers grant' for relying on the false premise that structural unemployment can be solved through job-search facilitation, and the 'household grant' for potentially deepening gender power imbalances and reducing the number of beneficiaries. The memo further challenges the National Treasury's claims of unaffordability, asserting that NT ignores the net cost of grants, available tax surpluses, and progressive financing options like a wealth tax or Social Security Tax. The IEJ advocates for a universal basic income indexed to the Food Poverty Line, arguing that income support should be a survivalist tool rather than a lever for labor market activation.

The document serves as a consolidation of a flagship report examining how intersecting forms of discrimination create differentiated vulnerabilities to climate change across 10 ASEAN Member States. It focuses on integrating gender equality and social inclusion into three key sectors: renewable energy, disaster risk reduction, and agriculture, with detailed policy reviews for Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Viet Nam.

The document challenges the belief that social grants create a 'culture of dependency' or discourage labour market participation in South Africa. By reviewing international and local evidence, it argues that cash transfers often facilitate job searches, stimulate local economies, and empower women. The authors advocate for a UBIG indexed to the upper-bound poverty line, funded through progressive taxation, as a means to eliminate poverty while supporting inclusive economic growth.

The document examines Algeria's struggle to attract foreign direct investment compared to other middle-income countries, citing regulatory hurdles and the dominance of state-owned enterprises. It notes a shift in investment sources from Europe toward China and Gulf investors, while highlighting the positive impact of remittances on poverty and inequality reduction.

The document introduces a study on the development prospects of the Horn of Africa (Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, and South Sudan) up to 2040. It highlights the region's challenges, including high poverty, poor state capacity, and a heavy reliance on rain-fed agriculture in an area where 70% of the land is arid or semi-arid. The report aims to establish a 'Current Path' forecast and develop scenarios for a sustainable and peaceful development trajectory.

Civil society is challenging the South African government in the High Court in Pretoria over the social relief of distress (SRD) grant regulations. The litigation targets the R350 monthly means test, which the authors argue is below the food poverty line of R624 and excludes millions of needy citizens. The statement highlights systemic failures, including the non-payment of April and May 2022 grants due to delayed bank verification systems and an online-only application process that creates barriers for the poor. The authors advocate for the replacement of the SRD grant with a permanent universal basic income grant (UBIG) by March 2023 to eliminate poverty and stimulate the economy.