Search Climate Insights Directory

The Budget Justice Coalition (BJC) argues that South Africa's National Treasury has implemented a regressive austerity budget since 2012, prioritising debt reduction over essential social spending. This approach has led to systemic underinvestment in health, education, and social security, which the BJC claims was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The report, 'Imali Yesizwe', advocates for a transition to a human rights-based budget that focuses on progressive tax reform, the introduction of a Universal Basic Income Grant (UBIG), and increased investment in the care economy and clean energy. It specifically criticises the use of Zero Based Budgeting (ZBB) as a tool for cuts and calls for greater fiscal transparency and public participation in the budgeting process to ensure the progressive realisation of constitutional rights.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that allowing COVID-19 special grants to expire in October 2020 would plunge over 5.8 million South Africans into hunger. The report highlights that 37% of people ran out of money for food in June 2020 and that 2.8 million jobs remained lost by the end of that month. It recommends extending the R350 Social Relief of Distress grant and the R500 Caregivers Allowance until March 2021 and increasing both to the food poverty line of R585 per month, estimating a combined cost of R37.3 billion for current recipients.

The document analyzes the crisis facing Eskom, South Africa's state-owned energy monopoly, attributing it to a combination of historical reliance on the 'minerals-energy complex', financial mismanagement, and costly, corruption-mired power station projects. It evaluates the proposal to 'unbundle' the utility into generation, transmission, and distribution entities, drawing on cautionary examples from Kenya and Uganda. The paper argues for a 'Just Transition' that protects workers and communities while transitioning to renewables, suggesting the use of international climate finance or public pension funds to alleviate Eskom's unsustainable debt.

This research paper by the International Labour Organization (ILO) provides a rapid assessment of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on South Africa's economy and labour market, emphasizing the disproportionate effect on disadvantaged groups and the need for a sequenced policy response based on the ILO's four-pillar framework.

The report assesses the impact of COVID-19 on South Africa's economy, forecasting significant job losses and wage declines. Using a 10% contraction in final demand as a median scenario, it estimates 1.77 million jobs are at risk, with the most severe impacts falling on low-skilled, informal, and poverty-stricken workers. The analysis highlights that the service sector and agriculture are hardest hit due to their reliance on consumption spending. The authors argue that the government's R500 billion rescue package is insufficient and poorly implemented, recommending a net new expenditure of at least R500 billion, expanded social protection, and targeted support for the informal sector and primary industries.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) proposes a managed reopening of South Africa's economy that prioritizes worker safety, social protections, and state-led economic transformation. Key recommendations include democratizing workplace health and safety, expanding income support through a universal Basic Income Guarantee, improving public health and education infrastructure, and implementing a proportionate fiscal stimulus to reverse austerity measures.

The policy brief critiques the South African government's 'risk-adjusted' strategy for reopening the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic, arguing that it prioritizes business profitability over worker safety and ignores the impact of deep social inequalities. The authors propose a 'well-being economy' framework that treats health and economic performance as intertwined. Key recommendations include democratizing the return to work through worker oversight, implementing a universal basic income guarantee, expanding social infrastructure in townships, and reversing austerity measures in the national budget to provide a genuine rescue package for the most vulnerable.

The Budget Justice Coalition (BJC) attributes the July 2020 unrest in South Africa to a combination of food and economic insecurity, state capture, and the government's adherence to austerity budgets. The BJC highlights that the termination of the R350 COVID-19 Social Relief of Distress grant and the caregiver allowance in October 2020 increased hunger for millions. The coalition criticizes the 2021 budget for implementing R265 billion in cuts to public services, including R50.3 billion from health care, R9 billion from public schools, and R39 billion from the police budget. To address the root causes of violence, the BJC demands the implementation of a Universal Basic Income Grant, the reinstatement of COVID-related grants at a rate of R585 per month, and the reversal of austerity measures in health, education, and social welfare.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and other experts contend that the South African government's Supplementary Covid-19 Budget is an austerity measure rather than a rescue package. They argue that the budget provides only R36-billion in new spending—less than 1% of GDP—compared to the promised R500-billion, and may involve cuts between R400-billion and R600-billion over the next few years. The authors claim this approach violates constitutional obligations to socio-economic rights and risks deepening the economic depression, potentially increasing the GDP drop from 10% to over 16%.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that the South African Supplementary Budget of 24 June 2020 betrays the promised R500 billion COVID-19 rescue package. Instead of the promised amount, the budget provides a net increase to non-interest spending of R36 billion, representing less than 1% of GDP. The document details shortfalls across seven key areas: social security, job protection, health, wage support (TERS), municipal support, tax relief, and the credit guarantee scheme. It highlights that much of the R145 billion targeted for COVID-19 is funded through reprioritisations and the suspension of baseline allocations, while planning a further R230 billion reduction in spending over two years.

The document is a formal recommendation from a group of economists to the South African Parliament to reject the Supplementary Budget tabled on 24 June 2020. The authors argue that the budget contradicts President Ramaphosa's R500 billion rescue package by reducing government expenditure by R230 billion over two years and relying on the reprioritisation of existing funds rather than providing new spending. They highlight significant shortfalls in social security, job protection, and health, while noting dangerous cuts to basic education, higher education, and energy transition programmes. The economists suggest alternative financing methods, such as solidarity taxation and increased borrowing, to prevent a catastrophic economic crisis.

The report contends that the COVID-19 pandemic exposed deep structural faults in South Africa's economy, including extreme inequality and a dependence on fossil fuels. It advocates for a 'Just Recovery' based on five principles: prioritizing health, providing direct economic relief, supporting workers over corporations, creating resilience for future crises, and building international solidarity. The authors propose a transition to 100% renewable energy by 2050, the implementation of a 'purple economy' to value care work, and a shift toward democratic public ownership to replace market-centric neoliberal policies.

The document argues that the 24 June 2020 Supplementary Budget reneges on the promised R500 billion COVID-19 rescue package by providing only a net increase of R36 billion in non-interest spending. The authors contend that the budget relies on reprioritising existing funds, leading to dangerous cuts in basic education, higher education, transport, and energy, while failing to provide adequate support for social security, job creation, and health. They recommend the budget's rejection in favour of counter-cyclical measures financed through solidarity taxation, increased borrowing, and reserve bank action.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) evaluates South Africa's R500 billion COVID-19 rescue package, concluding that the government's support measures have largely failed due to poor uptake, bureaucratic hurdles, and insufficient funding. The report highlights significant underspending, with an estimated R375 billion remaining unspent by June 2020. Key failures include the Temporary Employer/Employee Relief Scheme (TERS), which reached only 8% of employers, and the Social Relief of Distress Grant, where only 1.2 million of 6.2 million applicants had been paid by June 18, 2020. Business support, including tax deferrals and the Credit Guarantee Scheme, suffered from low uptake and stringent eligibility criteria. Health and municipal support were described as patchy or underspent, with critical gaps in ICU bed capacity and water infrastructure in informal settlements.

The paper contends that South Africa's current policy of austerity is economically destructive and proposes a R1 trillion fiscal stimulus over three years. It argues that the country has the fiscal space for expansion because its debt levels are comparable to emerging market peers and its productive capacity is underutilised. Using input-output modelling, the authors estimate an average fiscal multiplier of 1.68, suggesting that a stimulus of 10% of GDP (approximately R500 billion) could generate over R800 billion in economic expansion and nearly 3.5 million jobs. The proposed stimulus is guided by ten principles, including targeting high-multiplier sectors, reducing inequality, and ensuring environmental sustainability through a 'Green New Deal'. Financing is proposed through progressive taxation, rebuilding the capacity of the South African Revenue Service (SARS), leveraging Development Finance Institutions (DFIs), and reforming monetary policy.

A coalition of experts and civil society leaders has submitted a request to the South African government to revise its COVID-19 social relief package. They argue that the current allocation of the child support grant (CSG) increase—applied to the caregiver rather than per child—will leave an estimated 2 million more people below the food poverty line. The coalition demands that the CSG increase be attached to each grant and that unemployed caregivers be eligible for the R350 Covid-19 grant, particularly as 10 million children lost daily meals due to school closures.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that South Africa's initial R41 billion COVID-19 rescue package is insufficient and proposes a more realistic injection of at least R310 billion, plus R100 billion in short-term financing. The proposal focuses on four main spending areas: health funding (R20 billion), income support (R211.5 billion), wage guarantees (R60 billion), and business support (R150 billion). To fund this, the IEJ suggests a combination of short-term borrowing, utilizing the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) surplus, issuing 'social solidarity bonds', and implementing a solidarity tax on high earners. The plan also includes measures to stabilize the economy, such as managing capital flows and securing US Dollar swap lines.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that the South African government's R41 billion rescue package is insufficient to counter a projected GDP fall of 6% to 8%. The brief proposes a total intervention of R411.5 billion, comprising R310 billion for direct economic injection and R100 billion for tax and payment deferrals. Key recommendations include a once-off Universal Basic Income (UBI) of R4,500 for all adults, expanded social grants, and a scaled-up wage support scheme (TERS) to prevent mass unemployment. To stabilize the macroeconomy, the brief suggests the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) continue purchasing bonds, implement capital flow management, and secure dollar swap lines with the US Federal Reserve. Financing options include special COVID-19 bonds, solidarity taxes on high earners, and the deployment of UIF surpluses. The document also advocates for South Africa to lead a G20 coalition to secure better financing terms and debt relief for emerging markets and least developed countries.

A group of over 75 South African economists and analysts argues that current government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic are insufficient in scale. They propose a comprehensive set of measures including income transfers, payment holidays, expanded emergency loans, and increased health system funding to protect vulnerable populations and sustain businesses during the crisis.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that South Africa must implement bold, decisive economic stimulus measures focused on four objectives: supporting households and communities, protecting workers, sustaining businesses, and managing the economy for long-term transformation. The authors advocate for universal income transfers, emergency paid sick pay, conditional business relief, and a 'Green New Deal' to ensure a more equitable and sustainable recovery. They emphasize that financing these measures should avoid austerity-driven reprioritization and instead rely on solidarity taxation and increased borrowing.