Economic prosperity for any nation is not achieved on the basis of one policy focus and strategy. It is a result of a carefully chosen and managed set of development drivers and priorities in a complex system with a causal network of linkages that must work together to deliver the economic growth and prosperity we all desire. The state is just a complex system within another complex regional, continental and global system.
The challenge is to manage this complexity in a balanced way. No government has managed this challenge optimally and on a sustainable basis in the context of a dynamic and changing environment. Governments that have managed to be sensitive to this complexity and responded with carefully weighted policy choices and strategies have been able to make progress on the developmental front. The budget is a mediated outcome that allocates resources to strategic choices that have been made.
Statistician-general Pali Lehohla has expressed concern about the challenge of translating statistical evidence into policy and strategy. This article seeks to highlight the development paradoxes and conundrums that are manifested by the disjuncture between statistical evidence and policy in some key areas. The fundamental requirement for successful strategy development is that it must respond to the reality and facts that are available. It must be evidence-based and not be a product of some ideological bias.
The question of lack of skills points to another conundrum in the education policy and strategy
— Thabang Motsohi
In the 21st century world of instant communication and free movement of capital across borders at the push of a button, the ability for democratic nations to maintain political stability and a positive investment climate that can attract investment that creates economic growth is the biggest challenge. In the case of SA — with a low savings rate, a declining business confidence index (at 90.3 it is the lowest since 1985), extraordinary and structurally high and growing unemployment, racialised wealth inequality (10% of the population owns 95% of the wealth), a labour participation rate that is at least 20% lower than competitor countries, and a youth population that is at least 57% of the unemployed — a stable and positive investment climate is a priceless commodity.
It is the responsibility of the government, and especially the president, to lead a co-ordinated effort to protect this commodity at all times. However, it was the president who, on his own, made the reckless decision to fire respected finance minister Nhlanhla Nene in what is now called the 9/12 disaster. This caused huge damage to the investor climate, especially in light of the fragile state of the economy and the already low investment appetite.
The reality we must confront is that about 22-million adults do not have matric and only 34% are employed (Statistics SA 2015). Yet this and the hard figures cited above have not resulted in a fundamental shift and rethink of the assumptions underpinning SA’s economic policy and strategy. The economy has been pushed onto a skills-intensive and capital-intensive growth trajectory. We need to urgently create the kind of jobs for the type of unemployment we have.
What needs to be done for this demographic is to achieve the level of labour flexibility that can lead to the creation of low-wage mass employment opportunities as the way forward, with strategic and targeted state wage subsidies to achieve decent wages.
We currently have three separate policy documents that are intended to address national development policy and strategy: the New Growth Path (2010), the Industrial Policy Action Plan (2009) as revised, and the National Development Plan (2012). A comparative review by Prof David Kaplan of the University of Cape Town reveals that there are contradictory assumptions on the constraints hindering growth in SA. The policy confusion in these documents also betrays the ideological gridlock and conflicting policy positions of the key members of the governing tripartite alliance, and contributes to a negative impact on investor perceptions and decisions. The National Development Plan has been adopted by the governing party as the flagship for development since 2012 and yet there is still contestation in the tripartite alliance about some of its key provisions.
SA is in a classic middle-income trap. Countries in such a trap are not able to make a timely transition from resource-driven growth into production-driven growth. The main reason for this deficiency is the lack of higher-level skills and slow investment in manufacturing.
The question of lack of skills points to another conundrum in the education policy and strategy. The lack of focus on quality education and what must be done to improve it is central to the challenge of the underperforming public education system and lack of skills.
For example, a recurring weakness and feature of the public education system is the high drop-out rate, mostly affecting children from poor and black families. More than 50% of pupils in grades 9 and 10 are lost to the system due to this culling process, which is designed to eliminate poor performers. The objective is to improve examination outcomes for political purposes. Unfortunately, this practice serves only to swell the unemployment numbers, and it is black children from poor families whose futures are stunted.
The role of the South African Democratic Teachers Union in obstructing all efforts to introduce performance management and accountability in schools has contributed to the low quality of teaching and leadership in poorly performing schools. Education administration is the responsibility of the Department of Basic Education but, in many instances, the teachers’ union plays a decisive role in decision-making. It has stymied efforts in this regard since 2008.
The glaring truth is that our fragile economy demands leadership with strategic foresight
— Thabang Motsohi
We are currently facing very disruptive and destructive student protests under the banner of #FeesMustFall. The issues under contestation have been highlighted consistently by the Council on Higher Education, at least for the past 10 years. We should have developed strategies to deal with the funding challenges in an incremental fashion. We did not. This goes to the heart of the failure of leadership and strategic foresight in the ruling party.
The August local election outcomes have emphatically demonstrated that the people have had enough of the arrogance and corruption that have infested the governing party.
I have previously suggested that the erosion of values, internal factional lobby conflicts and leadership paralysis are too deep for the party to avoid collapse. The glaring truth is that our fragile economy demands leadership with strategic foresight. The ruling party is pathetically lacking in this crucial requirement.
Motsohi is with Lenomo Strategy Advisory Services
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.