Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
07 March 2024 Photo SUPPLIED
Gcina Mtengwane teaches in the Community Development Programme at the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State, Qwaqwa Campus.

Opinion article by Gcina Mtengwane, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.


The notion that 2024 could echo the transformative spirit of 1994 holds weight. South Africans find themselves in a pressing need for positive social, economic, and political change. Yet, the avenue through which this change will manifest - a reformed African National Congress (ANC), an opposition party or a coalition government - remains unchartered territory. South Africa is on a downward trajectory. As various international indexes project corruption and poor governance, noting also that those indexes may not at times be accurate, the lived experiences of South Africans echo despair, disillusionment, and a betrayal of promises for a better life, particularly among the working class and the poor. 

The first democratic election in 1994 heralded an era where a new government had the opportunity to represent the interests and aspirations of all citizens, countering the discriminatory policies of apartheid. It fostered optimism for equal access to opportunities and life chances regardless of race, religion, gender, class, or ethnicity.

However, the transition to democracy, like any new venture, brought forth both opportunities and challenges. Actualising the vision of a ‘rainbow nation’ necessitated tangible legislative reforms and macroeconomic strategies beyond mere rhetoric. Consequently, initiatives such as the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) in 1994, the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy in 1996, The Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (ASGISA) in 2005, the new Growth Path in 2010, and the National Development Plan vision 2030 were implemented. While the efficacy of these macroeconomic frameworks remains contested, there is a consensus that more can be done and perhaps differently.

Parallels between 2024 and 1994? 

South Africa grapples with high unemployment, alarming crime rates, and an education system ranked among the world’s worst. South Africa is among the most unsafe countries in the world with an estimate of 27 494 murders recorded in 2022-2023. Ranked at 50th out of 63 countries, its education system is rated among the worst performing in the world. The education system fails to equip matriculants with practical skills for sustainable livelihoods. Additionally, funding exclusions and high dropout rates plague higher education, exacerbating the crisis. NSFAS has proposed defunding certain qualifications from its budget and half of those who do make it to universities drop out in their first year.  Moreover, South Africa measures the highest income inequality in the world, with a Gini coefficient of around 0.67, race being a key factor in a society where 10 per cent of the population owns more than 80 per cent of the wealth.

Persistent income inequality and deeply entrenched racial disparities are hindering the opportunities for upward social and economic mobility for the majority, notably the youth. The unemployment rate among youth, which includes persons between 15 and 35 years old, is around 60%. There is low support for and a high failure rate of start-up small to medium enterprises (SMMEs) with between 70% to 80% failing in the first five years of operations. There is a high rate of youth neither in employment nor in education or training (NEETs).  Data shows that 32.6% of graduates struggle to find work within the first two years of graduation, implying that for some, regardless of educational attainment, there is no optimism regarding the prospects for a better future.

The issues highlighted above are just some of the issues facing South Africa. These challenges underscore the urgent need for well-conceived and actionable solutions. A governing party must demonstrate clear policy direction and effective implementation mechanisms to uplift the most vulnerable while safeguarding the rights of all citizens, irrespective of race. However, certain radical policy proposals, like affirmative action and land expropriation without compensation, pose significant ideological divides.

Opportunity to nurture democracy

South Africa boasts over 30 years of democratic experience, providing invaluable lessons from past elections. There is a unique opportunity to nurture democracy and freedom, as is enshrined in the constitution, ensuring the well-being of current and future generations. The prospect of a coalition government looms large, potentially marking a historic shift. While unprecedented at the national level, coalition governance has been trialled in various municipalities including Johannesburg, Nelson Mandela Bay, and Ekurhuleni. However, these experiments often resulted in governance failures, characterised by instability and policy dissonance, rather than cohesive leadership. Political rivalry among the parties undermined service delivery and good governance, leading to the failure of coalition governance at the local government level.

Policy misalignment emerges as the key impediment to coalition success. The recent formation of the ‘Moon-shot pact’ underscores the necessity for aligned policy positions among coalition partners to avert governance crises.

Voter implications

Voting entails entrusting a political party with the responsibility to serve the interests of millions. It demands an informed understanding of the party’s policies as outlined in its manifesto. While individual charisma may sway voter preferences, informed decisions are imperative amidst South Africa’s challenges and opportunities. 

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof. Phillipe Burger
2007-11-26

 

Attending the lecture were, from the left: Prof. Tienie Crous (Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences at the UFS), Prof. Phillipe Burger (Departmental Chairperson of the Department of Economics at the UFS), and Prof. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS).
Photo: Stephen Collet

 
A summary of an inaugural lecture presented by Prof. Phillipe Burger on the topic: “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

South African business cycle shows reduction in volatility

Better monetary policy and improvements in the financial sector that place less liquidity constraints on individuals is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the volatility of the South African economy. The improvement in access to the financial sector also enables individuals to manage their debt better.

These are some of the findings in an analysis on the volatility of the South African business cycle done by Prof. Philippe Burger, Departmental Chairperson of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Economics.

Prof. Burger delivered his inaugural lecture last night (22 November 2007) on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein on the topic “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

In his lecture, Prof. Burger emphasised a few key aspects of the South African business cycle and indicated how it changed during the periods 1960-1976, 1976-1994 en 1994-2006.

With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of the business cycle, the analysis identified the variables that showed the highest correlation with the GDP. During the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006, these included durable consumption, manufacturing investment, private sector investment, as well as investment in machinery and non-residential buildings. Other variables that also show a high correlation with the GDP are imports, non-durable consumption, investment in the financial services sector, investment by general government, as well as investment in residential buildings.

Prof. Burger’s analysis also shows that changes in durable consumption, investment in the manufacturing sector, investment in the private sector, as well as investment in non-residential buildings preceded changes in the GDP. If changes in a variable such as durable consumption precede changes in the GDP, it is an indication that durable consumption is one of the drivers of the business cycle. The up or down swing of durable consumption may, in other words, just as well contribute to an up or down swing in the business cycle.

A surprising finding of the analysis is the particularly strong role durable consumption has played in the business cycle since 1994. This finding is especially surprising due to the fact that durable consumption only constitutes about 12% of the total household consumption.

A further surprising finding is the particularly small role exports have been playing since 1960 as a driver of the business cycle. In South Africa it is still generally accepted that exports are one of the most important drivers of the business cycle. It is generally accepted that, should the business cycles of South Africa’s most important trade partners show an upward phase; these partners will purchase more from South Africa. This increase in exports will contribute to the South African economy moving upward. Prof. Burger’s analyses shows, however, that exports have generally never fulfil this role.

Over and above the identification of the drivers of the South African business cycle, Prof. Burger’s analysis also investigated the volatility of the business cycle.

When the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006 are compared, the analysis shows that the volatility of the business cycle has reduced since 1994 with more than half. The reduction in volatility can be traced to the reduction in the volatility of household consumption (especially durables and services), as well as a reduction in the volatility of investment in machinery, non-residential buildings and transport equipment. The last three coincide with the general reduction in the volatility of investment in the manufacturing sector. Investment in sectors such as electricity and transport (not to be confused with investment in transport equipment by various sectors) which are strongly dominated by the government, did not contribute to the decrease in volatility.

In his analysis, Prof. Burger supplies reasons for the reduction in volatility. One of the explanations is the reduction in the shocks affecting the economy – especially in the South African context. Another explanation is the application of an improved monetary policy by the South African Reserve Bank since the mid 1990’s. A third explanation is the better access to liquidity and credit since the mid 1990’s, which enables the better management of household finance and the absorption of financial shocks.

A further reason which contributed to the reduction in volatility in countries such as the United States of America’s business cycle is better inventory management. While the volatility of inventory in South Africa has also reduced there is, according to Prof. Burger, little proof that better inventory management contributed to the reduction in volatility of the GDP.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept