Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that South Africa is not in an acute fiscal crisis, as current revenue shortfalls and expenditure overruns are within historical norms. It criticizes the National Treasury's commitment to austerity and poor planning, particularly regarding the public sector wage bill. The authors suggest that the real issue is a 'growth crisis' rather than a debt crisis, noting that the debt-to-GDP ratio is comparable to other emerging markets. To resolve budget gaps, the brief recommends utilizing the SARB's Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account, increasing borrowing, restoring the corporate income tax rate to 28%, and introducing wealth taxes, while cautioning against VAT increases.

The document argues that South Africa's current budget mismatch is within historical norms and does not constitute an acute fiscal crisis. It identifies a projected revenue shortfall of R67.2 billion and an expenditure overspend of R67.9 billion, attributing the latter largely to poor planning by the National Treasury. While the debt-to-GDP ratio (71.4% in 2022/23) is comparable to emerging market averages, the authors warn that the rising cost of debt and lack of economic growth create a medium-term sustainability risk. To resolve the mismatch without cutting public services, the brief recommends utilizing the R459 billion in the SARB's Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account, restoring the corporate income tax rate to 28%, removing tax breaks for high-income earners, and implementing a progressive wealth tax.

The submission argues that the draft SAREM over-relies on private investment and fails to sufficiently address the impact of the global supply chain crisis on renewable energy costs. It advocates for a state-led industrial policy, including the use of import tariffs and the central role of Eskom in renewable generation, to avoid 'boom-bust' cycles and ensure a just transition for workers. Key recommendations include establishing a 'decent work' framework, implementing aggressive local content requirements (suggesting 50% for future RFPs), and creating a technology transfer system to support local manufacturing.

The document reviews seven major proposals for basic income in South Africa, including those from the ANC, the Department of Social Development, and the Institute for Economic Justice. It argues that while there is a strong consensus on the need to close the social protection gap for adults aged 18-59, the specific design, financing, and implementation of such a system will determine whether it achieves progressive outcomes or reinforces austerity. The authors advocate for an unconditional grant linked to national poverty lines, funded through progressive taxation, and complemented by universal public services.

The briefing critiques the World Bank's Evolution Roadmap, arguing that its reliance on the 'Cascade' approach—which prioritizes private sector investment—perpetuates structural inequalities and debt in the Global South. It calls for a paradigm shift toward 'public sector solutionism,' including the adoption of a human rights policy, the end of fossil fuel financing, and the creation of an independent UN-based debt workout mechanism.

The Southern African Yearly Meeting of the Quakers calls for the South African government to implement an unconditional universal basic income (UBI) for all citizens and legal residents. The authors argue that South Africa's high unemployment and poverty have created a 'tinderbox' of social instability, and that a UBI—set at least at the upper-bound poverty line—would provide dignity, stimulate local economies, and reduce crime. They contrast UBI with means-tested social grants, noting that universality removes bureaucratic inefficiency and stigma. The document cites a 2008 pilot in Namibia as evidence of UBI's ability to improve health, education, and entrepreneurship. Proposed funding sources include taxes on carbon emissions, wealth, and resource rents, alongside reducing wasteful public expenditure.

The report analyzes R141 billion in pandemic-related loans from the IMF, World Bank, New Development Bank (NDB), and African Development Bank (AfDB). While these loans were cheaper than market-issued debt, the authors find they were approved opaquely and often carried conditionalities that pushed South Africa toward fiscal consolidation and privatization. The report highlights a lack of gender-responsive budgeting and human rights impact assessments, noting that austerity measures have negatively impacted social grants and public services. It recommends that all future IFI loan agreements and their projected costs be tabled in Parliament and subjected to human rights impact assessments.

The document analyzes the South African food system as a site of deep social inequality and climate vulnerability. It highlights a dualistic production structure where a small number of large-scale commercial farms dominate, while millions of smallholder farmers lack resources. The paper details the system's vulnerability to climate change—specifically heatwaves, droughts, and rainfall variability—and its contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, primarily through livestock and synthetic fertilizers. It critiques 'market-centred' and 'technofix' approaches to sustainability, advocating instead for a 'deep just transition' based on agroecology, food sovereignty, and the redistribution of power and resources to ensure the right to food and decent work for all.

The Universal Basic Income Coalition criticizes the South African government for extending the COVID-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant to March 2024 without increasing the payment amount or removing restrictive eligibility criteria. The Coalition highlights a massive rate of exclusion, noting that while 13.5 million people applied by January 2023, only 7.48 million were approved. They advocate for increasing the grant from R350 to at least the Food Poverty Line of R663 and eventually to the Upper Bound Poverty Line of R1417, while calling for the removal of barriers such as English-only online platforms and flawed verification databases.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) expresses concern over the Department of Social Development's draft amendments to the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant, which only extend the grant's expiry to March 2024 without increasing its R350 monthly value. The IEJ argues that the lack of funding in the 2023/24 National Budget suggests a plan to withdraw the grant, which would exacerbate food insecurity amid 13.4% food inflation in January 2023. Furthermore, the IEJ highlights that beneficiary numbers have dropped by approximately three million since March 2022 due to exclusionary regulations and flawed application systems. The IEJ calls for the grant to be retained indefinitely and transitioned into a comprehensive basic income support system, asserting that National Treasury has the fiscal space to do so following a R94 billion revenue overrun.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and the Socio-Economic Rights Institute (SERI) express concern that proposed amendments to the 2022 Regulations for the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant only address the expiry date, failing to resolve issues regarding beneficiary exclusion, the low means test, and the inadequate grant value.

The submission by IEJ and SERI criticizes the South African government's limited amendments to the SRD grant regulations, which only extended the expiry date to March 2024. The authors argue that the R350 grant value is arbitrary and eroded by inflation, and that the means-test threshold of R624 is too low. They highlight systemic exclusions caused by flawed bank and database verification, digital barriers in online-only applications, and a restrictive appeals process. The document recommends transitioning the SRD grant into a permanent Universal Basic Income (UBI) indexed to the upper-bound poverty line (UBPL) of R1417, removing the budget cap, and eliminating work conditionality clauses to ensure the right to social assistance is progressively realized.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) criticises the 2023 National Budget as 'anti-poor' due to its focus on fiscal consolidation and debt stabilisation over public service provision. The IEJ recommends a new macroeconomic framework targeting unemployment and inequality, unconditional debt relief for Eskom including 'haircuts' for private debt holders, and the implementation of progressive taxation measures such as a wealth tax and returning the corporate income tax rate to 28%.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and Climate Finance for Equitable Transitions (CLiFT) argue that the JET-IP's strategy of 'de-risking' private finance is insufficient to mobilise the required R1.5 trillion and exposes South Africa to significant fiscal, legal, and social risks. The authors contend that the plan fails to meet National Determined Contributions (NDCs) due to an over-reliance on private renewable energy and a lack of investment in public transport and energy efficiency. They recommend shifting to a 'rights-based' governance framework and an 'allocative credit policy' that prioritises public investment, local manufacturing, and comprehensive social protections for workers and communities.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) critiques the 2023 South African Budget, asserting that it prioritizes debt stabilization and austerity over essential public services and social protection. The IEJ highlights significant real-term funding shortfalls in healthcare, education, and social grants, and warns that conditions on Eskom's debt relief facilitate privatization and exacerbate energy poverty. The document calls for a shift toward a developmental macroeconomic framework, progressive taxation—including a wealth tax and returning the corporate tax rate to 28%—and the implementation of a permanent basic income support system to address systemic inequality and poverty.

The Institute for Economic Justice describes the 2023 National Budget as an 'anti-poor budget' that redistributes wealth from the poorest 80% to the richest 20%. The analysis highlights a R162 billion real decrease in non-interest expenditure over the medium term, with significant cuts to health, basic education, and social protection. It specifically criticizes the failure to protect the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant from inflation and its removal from the budget for 2024/25 and 2025/26. The document also critiques the conditional debt relief for Eskom, arguing that restrictions on new capacity investment favor private sector profit over energy affordability, and condemns subsidies for rooftop solar as benefiting only the wealthy.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) calls for the 2023/2024 Budget to abandon regressive macroeconomic policies and prioritize public investment in infrastructure, the green economy, and social services. The statement emphasizes the need for the state to absorb Eskom's debt, renegotiate power purchase agreements, and increase the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant to the Food Poverty Line to combat extreme poverty and energy instability.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) warns that National Treasury is undermining the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant through restrictive regulations and underfunding. Despite the President's commitment to a permanent basic income floor, the IEJ notes that the grant's value remains frozen at R350, failing to account for inflation and falling short of the Food Poverty Line (FPL) of R663. The document highlights a significant drop in approved applications—from 10.9 million in March 2022 to 7.5 million in January 2023—which the IEJ attributes to an excessively low means test of R624 and an onerous application process. The IEJ demands that the grant be increased to the FPL and that exclusionary provisions be revoked to protect the constitutional rights of the approximately 18.3 million people living in extreme poverty in South Africa.

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 Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) critiques the 2023 SONA for relying on private sector solutions for infrastructure and the energy transition, which it argues undermines state capacity and affordability. While welcoming the National State of Disaster for the energy crisis and the extension of the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant, the IEJ highlights failures in grant accessibility and the imbalance of the Just Energy Transition Investment Plan (JET-IP), where infrastructure receives 89.4% of funding compared to minimal allocations for skills and diversification. The IEJ calls for a radical shift toward a rights-centered development agenda, including the removal of Eskom's debt from its balance sheet and the implementation of a universal basic income grant.