Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the South African cannabis industry, arguing that current legal and regulatory frameworks create high barriers to entry that exclude traditional growers and small enterprises. It identifies critical bottlenecks in medical cannabis exports, such as the lack of mutual recognition for SAHPRA licenses in European markets, and a lack of processing capacity for industrial hemp. The authors advocate for a tiered licensing system, the legalisation of a regulated adult-use market to support inclusive growth, and the establishment of a specialised state agency to coordinate the sector's development and ensure decent work and environmental sustainability.

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 IEJ 2023–2027 Strategy transitions the organisation from a 'start-up' to a 'consolidation' and 'growth' phase. It aims to challenge neoliberal economic orthodoxies through a research-policy-advocacy nexus, promoting heterodox and feminist economic analysis. The strategy identifies five key objectives: advancing inclusive macroeconomic frameworks, growing communities of practice for progressive economic thinking, supporting just transitions in response to the climate crisis and changing work, popularising economic justice policies, and strengthening internal organisational capacity.

The policy brief examines the shortcomings of South Africa's current climate finance landscape, specifically the Just Energy Transition Investment Plan (JET-IP) and the initial implementation of Climate Budget Tagging (CBT). It argues that current efforts suffer from horizontal and vertical incoherence, limited transparency regarding debt and private financing, and a top-down approach that marginalizes social justice and adaptation needs. To remedy this, the author proposes a comprehensive Climate-Responsive Budgeting (CRB) framework that integrates positive and negative expenditure tagging, revenue tracking, gender-responsive budgeting, and regular Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Reviews (CPEIR).

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.

This report advocates for the prioritization of decent work and employment creation in South Africa's tourism sector planning. It notes that despite the sector's capacity to employ low-skilled workers and the establishment of a dedicated Ministry in 2009, policy focus on employment has been lacking. The document highlights the need for strategies to recover from Covid-19 job losses and supports the reinstatement of the national tourism masterplan process over the Tourism Sector Recovery Plan (TSRP).

The Institute for Economic Justice criticizes the $8.5-billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa, arguing that its reliance on loans and private-sector 'de-risking' rather than grants will increase energy costs and benefit foreign investors while neglecting local manufacturing and worker protections. The document further condemns the secretive nature of the negotiations, which it claims undermines procedural justice and excludes key stakeholders.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that South Africa's JETP is a flawed climate finance model that relies heavily on loans rather than grants, benefiting private Independent Power Producers (IPPs) while leaving the state with the financial risk. The author contends that the deal lacks transparency, fails to adequately fund the localization of the renewable energy value chain, and provides insufficient social security for workers in the coal belt.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) criticises the South African National Treasury's 2022 Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement (MTBPS) for maintaining a path of austerity and fiscal consolidation since 2012. The IEJ asserts that prioritising debt stabilisation over developmental goals leads to declining expenditure per learner in basic education and real-term cuts in healthcare spending. The document also highlights the failure to adjust the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant for inflation and the exclusion of 3.5 million people from the grant due to stringent criteria. While noting positive infrastructure investment and Eskom debt absorption, the IEJ warns that Eskom's unbundling and private sector participation may lead to higher tariffs. The IEJ advocates for progressive taxation to fund public services and reduce income inequality.

The policy brief argues that the USD 8.5 billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa relies on a 'de-risking' model that prioritises private finance and Independent Power Producers (IPPs), shifting commercial risks to the state and consumers. This approach is criticised for potentially worsening South Africa's debt profile, increasing energy poverty through higher tariffs, and undermining local renewable energy manufacturing. The authors suggest alternatives including the regulation of PPPs, debt cancellation of 'odious debt' (such as World Bank loans for the Medupi plant), climate reparations, and the implementation of allocative green credit policies to direct investment toward productive, labour-intensive green industries.

The document critiques the South African JETP for prioritising blended finance and public-private partnerships (PPPs), which the authors argue shifts commercial risk to the state while privatising gains. It highlights how this model can increase energy poverty through higher tariffs and hinder local renewable energy manufacturing. The brief suggests alternatives such as regulating private finance, pursuing debt cancellation and climate reparations, and implementing allocative green credit policies.

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 report analyzes the African medical manufacturing landscape, highlighting a heavy reliance on imports (over 70% for health technology) and a concentration of capabilities in North Africa, South Africa, and Nigeria. It identifies critical gaps in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) production and medical device manufacturing, while noting that vaccine production is limited to four countries. The study argues that localization is a political project requiring a shift from generic-drug business models to more complex technologies, supported by patient capital, innovative public procurement, and the establishment of specialized pharmaceutical parks. It emphasizes the need for regulatory harmonization and the development of local 'notifying bodies' for medical devices to reduce compliance costs.

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 factsheet outlines how a universal basic income guarantee (UBIG) serves as an investment in human capital by improving child health, mental health, and educational attainment. It cites evidence from South Africa and other low- and middle-income countries to show that cash transfers reduce malnutrition, increase school enrolment, and improve life satisfaction, which in turn enhances labour market productivity and long-term economic security.

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 IEJ criticizes South Africa's current fiscal strategy of austerity and debt stabilisation, arguing it has led to a 'lost decade' of low investment and increased inequality. The document details real-term budget cuts in basic education and healthcare, and the lack of a permanent replacement for the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant. To reverse these trends, the IEJ proposes a pro-macroeconomic framework using counter-cyclical spending and a progressive tax regime—including a wealth tax, a resource rent tax, and the reversal of corporate income tax cuts—to fund public services and a Universal Basic Income Guarantee.