Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that the COVID-19 pandemic and the climate crisis share analytical similarities as global shocks that exacerbate existing inequalities. It identifies six key lessons for South Africa: the necessity of accessible social protection, the need to value care work, the requirement for a strong and proactive state, the importance of localising industrial processes, the necessity of international cooperation, and the need to center justice in responses to mitigate worsening inequalities.

The Institute for Economic Justice asserts that the July 2021 protests in South Africa were triggered by the arrest of Jacob Zuma but are fundamentally rooted in a 'never-ending crisis' of inequality, poverty, and governance. The document highlights that South Africa has a Gini coefficient of 0.7 and that the wealthiest 1% own half of all wealth. It criticizes the government's 500bn Rand rescue package as misleading, noting that less than half of the budget materialized by July 2021. Furthermore, it condemns the National Treasury's commitment to austerity measures, which it claims undermine essential social services and socio-economic rights during a period of record unemployment (32.6%) and pandemic-driven hardship.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that South Africa's initial R500 billion COVID-19 relief package was insufficient and poorly implemented, with only 41% (R207 billion) spent. The brief highlights severe economic vulnerabilities, particularly in construction, manufacturing, and the informal sector, and notes that South Africa spent only 4% of its GDP on relief, compared to a G20 average of 10%. To mitigate the third wave's impact, the IEJ proposes a R71.2 billion package over three months, focusing on sector-specific grants, tax relief, wage support via TERS, and expanded social grants.

The report evaluates nine financing options for a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, focusing on progressive tax measures. Key proposals include a Social Security Tax, a Resource Rent Tax, and the selective removal of tax credits for high earners. The analysis finds that a UBIG aligned with the Food Poverty Line (FPL) for 60% of the population could be fully financed by these measures. The report also models the impact of different implementation speeds on South Africa's national debt and primary balance, suggesting that the FPL grant is the most fiscally feasible over the medium term.

The document analyzes the devastating impact of COVID-19 on South Africa's economy, noting a 7% contraction in 2020 and a record unemployment rate of 32.6% in Q1 2021. It highlights that initial relief measures, such as the R500 billion rescue package, were poorly implemented, with only one-third materializing by February 2021. The brief details severe job losses in construction, trade, and manufacturing, and notes that women and informal workers were disproportionately affected. It specifically identifies a 'second pandemic' of gender-based violence and femicide (GBV-F), with annual costs estimated between R28.4 billion and R42.4 billion. To mitigate these crises, the IEJ recommends replacing the Loan Guarantee Scheme with grants, extending the TERS wage support, reinstating the SRD grant at R585 per month, and increasing public infrastructure spending.

The document proposes a suite of financing mechanisms to fund a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, focusing on progressive taxation and the reduction of government waste. Key proposals include a ring-fenced Social Security Tax, a Resource Rent Tax on extractive industries, and a wealth tax for the top 1% of the population. The brief argues that many UBIG scenarios, particularly those aligned with national poverty lines, are immediately affordable without borrowing if these revenue-generating measures and VAT recoupments are implemented.

The Institute for Economic Justice proposes a suite of financing mechanisms to fund a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, focusing on progressive taxation and the reduction of government waste. Key proposals include a ring-fenced Social Security Tax (SST) with rates between 1.5% and 3%, a Resource Rent Tax on extractive industries, and the selective removal of tax deductions for high-income earners regarding pension funds and medical aid. The brief also suggests implementing a 25% luxury VAT, a wealth tax for the top 1% and 0.1%, and a Financial Transactions Tax (FTT) of 0.1%. Additionally, it argues for the cancellation of the Employment Tax Incentive and the reversal of proposed Corporate Income Tax reductions. The document concludes that many UBIG scenarios, particularly those aligned with national poverty lines, are affordable without borrowing if these revenue-generating measures and reductions in irregular government expenditure are adopted.

The document advocates for a shift from orthodox economics to feminist macroeconomic approaches in the wake of COVID-19, emphasizing the need to rethink the conceptualization of the economy and the link between production and social reproduction to address gendered inequalities.

The document critiques orthodox macroeconomic policies for ignoring social reproduction and gendered power dynamics, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa. It argues that neoliberal austerity and financialisation have undermined public services and increased the burden of unpaid care on women. The authors propose a recovery based on a 'feminist green economy,' increased fiscal space through progressive taxation and debt cancellation, and a shift toward a social reproductive economy that prioritises basic income and universal access to essential services.

The document contends that Africa's historical 'jobless growth' is due to a dependence on primary commodities and a lack of structural transformation. It proposes a shift from 'stabilization' to 'transformation' by coordinating fiscal and monetary policies with sectoral and labour market interventions. Key recommendations include increasing public investment in the care economy and infrastructure, implementing expenditure-switching methods to reduce import reliance, adopting progressive taxation, and establishing national minimum wages to boost domestic demand and productivity.

The Budget Justice Coalition (BJC) contends that the 2021 fiscal framework implements austerity measures that reduce government services for the poor, particularly women, and increase economic hardship. The BJC calls on the Select and Standing Committees on Finance to determine if this framework contradicts the constitutional requirement for the state to allocate maximum possible resources toward fundamental human rights and environmental sustainability.

The Institute for Economic Justice proposes a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) for South African adults aged 18-59 to address widespread hunger and job losses. The brief argues that a universal, unconditional grant is superior to targeted measures due to administrative ease and broader reach. It suggests starting with a grant at the food poverty line (R585 per month), funded by R158 billion in progressive tax increases, including a Social Security Tax and the elimination of certain tax credits. In the medium term, the document recommends a wealth tax to increase the grant to lower-bound (R840) or upper-bound (R1,268) poverty lines. Immediate recommendations include extending and increasing the COVID-19 social relief grant and incorporating caregivers.

The statement criticizes the short-term extension of the R350 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant, noting that it excludes caregivers, who are predominantly women. It advocates for amending eligibility criteria to include caregivers and increasing the grant to at least the Food Poverty Line of R585 per month, arguing that the economic crisis requires long-term solutions rather than temporary relief.

The Institute for Economic Justice reports that only about a third of South Africa's R500 billion COVID-19 rescue package had been utilized by February 2021. While social security and wage relief saw significant spending, other areas like the credit guarantee scheme and municipal funding suffered from disastrous underspending and lack of transparency. The report highlights that the expiration of social grants and the TERS scheme occurred just before the second pandemic wave, potentially plunging millions into hunger and leaving workers without support.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) reports that only about one-third of South Africa's R500-billion Covid-19 rescue package has materialised, citing a systematic failure in implementation and the impact of austerity measures. The statement asserts that economic recovery is impossible without first providing comprehensive rescue and relief, particularly as unemployment has reached 43% (expanded definition). The IEJ recommends increasing income support, fully allocating the R100-billion job protection fund, expanding public employment programmes, and increasing taxes on wealthy individuals to fund these measures. It also highlights corruption, noting that the Special Investigating Unit was investigating R10.3-billion in spending on Covid-19 goods and services as of February 2021.

The South African government aims to mobilise R1 trillion from the private sector over 10 years via an Infrastructure Fund to address an infrastructure deficit and revive economic growth. The document argues that the current focus on 'de-risking' private investment—through blended finance, public-private partnerships (PPPs), and converting infrastructure into asset classes—often shifts excessive risk to the public fiscus and may fail to deliver developmental outcomes. It cites the Gautrain and prison facilities in Bloemfontein and Louis Trichardt as examples of costly public-sector liabilities. The author recommends that the state maintain leadership in structural economic transformation, specifically shifting away from fossil fuels and extractive industries, while implementing stricter governance, transparency, and human rights due diligence for all private-sector involvements.

The document examines South Africa's strategy to mobilize R1 trillion in private investment through an Infrastructure Fund to address a widening infrastructure deficit. It analyzes three primary de-risking instruments: blended finance, the conversion of infrastructure into tradeable asset classes, and public-private partnerships (PPPs). The author argues that these mechanisms often shift excessive risk to the state through contingent liabilities and high transaction costs, while prioritizing 'bankable' economic projects over essential social infrastructure in poor and rural areas. The paper concludes that the current focus on private capital overplays benefits and underplays the risks of public-private arrangements, recommending a governance framework that prioritizes human rights and sustainable development over profit maximization.

The document argues that South Africa's social protection systems are inadequate to ensure a dignified standard of living, a crisis exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights the gap between the recommendations of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR) and the government's actual responses, noting that budget cuts and 'fiscal consolidation' threaten the realization of rights to food, housing, and social security.

The document argues that the South African government's pursuit of fiscal sustainability through austerity—including cuts to health, education, and social grants—violates international human rights obligations. It contends that South Africa's debt is not as dire as claimed, given its high levels of domestically-denominated debt and access to capital markets. The authors advocate for a rights-based definition of debt sustainability, a shift toward progressive taxation (such as a wealth tax), and a global debt deal involving comprehensive cancellation for developing nations.

The report analyzes how the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing disparities in health, wealth, and power, specifically highlighting 'vaccine apartheid' and the failure of multi-stakeholder governance. It critiques the reliance on private sector solutions for public crises and advocates for transformative policies, including the waiver of intellectual property rights for vaccines, progressive tax reforms, and the strengthening of universal public services to ensure a just recovery.