Local political capture impedes SA’s post-1994 planning and development:
South Africa’s planning and development trajectory has been positioned as a tool for transformation, equity and redress since the country’s democratic transition in 1994. However, the promise of developmental governance and spatial justice has not been substantially realised after 30 years of democracy.
This failure is not accidental but symptomatic of a structural problem — planning and development cannot thrive in the hands of local-level politicians who are often driven by patronage, electoral interests and administrative incapacity rather than long-term strategic vision or inclusive development imperatives.
Before 1994, South African planning was rooted in apartheid ideology. Spatial planning served as a tool of segregation, with policies like the 1950 Group Areas Act and 1913 Land Act dispossessing black South Africans and relegating them to the peripheries of urban and economic life.
Planning institutions operated with a top-down (rather than bottom-up), technocratic logic, serving the goals of white minority rule. Development was narrowly defined, often conflated with infrastructure delivery for white areas and the broader African, Indian and coloured populations were systematically excluded from both the process and the benefits.
Despite sporadic attempts at “homeland” development and urban townships upgrades in the 1980s, planning under apartheid entrenched inequality. By 1994, South Africa had one of the world’s most spatially fragmented and racially skewed urban and rural systems.
Post-apartheid South Africa inherited this divided spatial logic. In response, the government developed progressive legislative frameworks to guide transformation, including the Reconstruction and Development Programme in 1994 aimed at meeting basic needs and rebuilding infrastructure (later replaced by the Growth, Employment and Redistribution plan). The Development Facilitation Act of 1995 emphasised integrated development. The Municipal Structures Act (1998) and Municipal Systems Act (2000) established Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) as the primary tool for local-level planning. The National Development Plan 2030 outlines long-term inclusive growth and spatial equity objectives.
While these frameworks were progressive, their implementation has been marred by political interference, weak capacity and administrative paralysis at the local government level. Instead, the promise of “developmental local government” has often produced dysfunctional municipalities.
According to the 2023 State of Local Government Report by the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, only 5% of municipalities are classified as well-functioning, while more than 60% are underperforming or dysfunctional. Auditor general Tsakani Maluleke’s 2022-23 municipal audit revealed that only 38 out of 257 municipalities received clean audits and unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure reached R20.4 billion.
Theoretical models underpinned post-apartheid planning, such as communicative planning, emphasising stakeholder participation and collaborative governance. These ideals assumed rational dialogue and shared visions for development. However, in practice, the technocratic rationality of planners has often clashed with the political rationality of local councillors, who view planning instruments like IDPs as tools to secure votes and allocate tenders.
Marxist geographers such as David Harvey and Edward Soja remind us that space is always political. This forms clientelism in South Africa, where political allegiance, rather than necessity, is a mediator for development access. Thus, rather than serving as a forum for equitable growth, planning becomes a site of power struggles.
Furthermore, municipalities imitate planning frameworks (for instance, by drafting IDPs) without internalising or implementing them, as explained by institutional isomorphism derived from new institutional theory. This leads to form without substance — documents are produced but transformation remains elusive.
Local politicians, often lacking in technical understanding of spatial planning, play a vital role in shaping development priorities. Rather than being facilitators of professional planning, many become gatekeepers. Municipal councils routinely override technical assessments to prioritise politically expedient projects. Tender processes are manipulated to reward loyalists and community participation processes are reduced to box-ticking exercises.
In addition, the planning apparatus has been weakened by cadre deployment. When qualified professionals are sidelined or enlisted in political conflicts, evidence-based planning is undermined. This trend is more pronounced in small and rural municipalities, where planning departments are under-resourced or non-existent. As a result, municipal spatial development frameworks, meant to guide land use and infrastructure investment, are either outdated or ignored.
Despite massive investment, South Africa remains spatially unequal. According to Statistics South Africa figures from 2022, more than a third of South Africans live in informal settlements or backyard dwellings. Access to basic services like water and sanitation has stagnated, with some rural municipalities regressing coverage. Economic opportunities remain concentrated in urban cores, with rural youth facing unemployment rates above 60%.
This reflects a more profound crisis — planning is not merely a technical function but a state capacity issue. When the state at the local level is captured by party politics, service delivery and equitable development become casualties.
Suppose South Africa was to realise the spatial justice envisioned in its Constitution and policies. A shift must occur in that case;
- Depoliticise planning functions by ensuring professional planners are insulated from political interference. This could mean ringfencing planning directorates within municipalities under provincial oversight.
- Re-professionalise local government by investing in skills development, enforcing minimum competency frameworks and creating independent planning tribunals.
- Strengthen accountability mechanisms, including public audits, citizen review panels for IDPs and real-time transparency in tender awards.
- Restructure spatial governance by rethinking the role of metros, district municipalities and traditional authorities in planning, especially in rural contexts.
The failure of post-1994 planning and development in South Africa is not a consequence of the absence of vision or policy; it is a by-product of the political hijacking of development processes at the local level. Until we insulate planning from political expediency, transformation, equity and sustainability objectives will remain lip service. Planning is too important to be left in the hands of politicians.
Siyanda Kate is a PhD candidate (political studies) at Nelson Mandela University and a lecturer at Walter Sisulu University.
G20 take note: Climate adaptation today will ensure Africa’s thriving future:
South Africa is the current president of the G20, a first for the African continent. The government has chosen Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability as its theme. Given the climate-related crises being experienced on the continent, there hasn’t been a better or more urgent opportunity to emphasise how fundamental these concepts are for the development and resilience of Africa.
As we set up the Lancet Countdown Africa to systematically track the health impacts of climate change across the continent, and the health benefits of climate action, we note the unique experiences of this continent. Despite its low contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, Africa faces the brunt of climate change, home to seven out of 10 countries most vulnerable to climate change. Our region is the one most affected by droughts, we face the highest relative potential heat-related income loss, and we continue to experience an exponential increase in severe climate change impacts.
In 2024, in the Sahel, extreme temperatures triggered heatwaves while heavy rains caused flooding, with more than 2000 people losing their lives and millions left displaced. Extreme droughts gripped parts of sub-Saharan Africa. In the midst of these droughts, the impacts of cyclones Chido and Freddy in 2023, caused widespread devastation, destruction of homes and infrastructure, and displacement of millions. In 2025, Southern Africa, including South Africa and Botswana, was hit by heavy rainfall, which resulted in deadly floods and landslides, claiming 31 lives.
Most of these disasters were anticipated and highlighted as potential risks as far back as 2011. But, more than a decade later, faced with huge underinvestment in climate adaptation, Africa is facing the worsening realities of climate change. The most vulnerable lack adaptive capacity, a concept alluded to by the late Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu in 2007 as “Adaptation Apartheid”.
Access to food is a human right that is continuously unrealised in most of Africa. The statistics for the continent are sobering:
- The records of people experiencing food and hunger crises alone have tripled in Africa in the past five years;
- In 2024, a staggering eight out of the 10 hungriest countries in the world were in Africa;
- With more than 20% of its population affected, Africa has the highest rate of hunger, and hunger continues to rise here faster than anywhere else in the world;
- Several African countries are not on track to meet SDG2 (Zero hunger); and
- 53% of the global population facing hunger will be in Africa by 2030.
Famine and acute food insecurity continue to cast long shadows over large swathes of Africa, and countries such as Somalia, South Sudan, Yemen and Ethiopia are facing shocking levels of food insecurity. Women and children suffer the most in such contexts. In children, malnutrition stunts their growth, impairs cognitive development, and the long-term consequences of acute food insecurity are devastating, creating cycles of poverty, malnutrition and economic instability that persist for generations. People in such settings are confronted with impossible choices to survive, yet more than enough food is produced in the world to feed its inhabitants.
Climate change implications for agriculture, the backbone of many African economies, livelihoods and food and nutrition security are profound. Crop yields are declining, water sources are drying up, and livestock herds are dying. In this context, climate change is not just an environmental crisis but a socio-economic and humanitarian crisis that exacerbates poverty and undermines human rights.
Despite the extreme vulnerability, adaptation to climate change has so far been too slow and insufficient. African leaders have not been silent, actively calling for increased climate finance to adapt to climate change.
These calls have been mostly ignored, as exemplified by COP29’s disappointing outcome, where the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance of prioritising and mobilising less than 50% of the estimated target for developing countries a year by the year 2025 was proposed and agreed on. The solution to this shortfall, so far, is an aspirational “Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T” target, rather than a binding commitment, towards scaling up the necessary finance for developing countries.
As the G20 Working Group on Disaster Risk Reduction meets this week, the need for risk reduction and resilience in the form of climate adaptation must be high on their agenda.
If we are to see the chosen values of Solidarity, Equality, and Sustainability applied, the global community needs to commit to and support an African-led just transition that reflects the will and aspirations of Africa and secures its future as an equal global partner. Similarly, local governments need to be intentional and innovative about climate action. Changes in how things are “normally done” are urgent, and a recognition that there will be no future growth possible without paying for climate risks today.
Key actions that could be advanced in 2025 include:
- Strategic and meaningful climate action in Africa. The international community needs to support Africa in bridging the existing climate adaptation funding gap.
- African countries must develop inclusive, sustainable and equitable National Adaptation Plans and Climate Resilience indicators to attract funding.
- Support and strengthen community-led climate adaptation programmes to empower local communities to take climate action.
- Strategic and contextualised post-disaster humanitarian aid that does not reinforce, redistribute or create new vulnerabilities.
- Advances in the evidence base to improve understanding of the connections between health and climate change in Africa, to inform effective adaptation action which protects health.
While Africa faces daunting problems, which are being exacerbated by climate change, there is always hope. With the right support, robust evidence, and strategic collaboration, Africa can achieve a future where its environment and people thrive.
Professor Tafadzwanashe Mabhaudhi is the director of the Lancet Countdown Africa, and holds positions on various advisory committees and panels and is an editor for several journals. The Lancet Countdown: Tracking Progress on Health and Climate Change was established in partnership with the Wellcome Trust, which continues to provide core financial support. Mendy-Lisa Ndlovu is the project coordinator for the Wellcome Trust-funded Sustainable and Healthy Food Systems for Southern Africa Project.
Bridging the skills gap in South Africa starts with reimagining its approach to education:
As the world hurtles toward a more digital, automated and interconnected future, the question that should be on our minds as a nation is – “Are graduates being adequately prepared with the right skills to survive and thrive, now and in the future?”
According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025, employers anticipate that 39% of core skills required in the job market will change by 2030. Technological proficiencies such as AI and big data, networks and cybersecurity, and technological literacy are projected to see rapid growth in demand. Human skills like creative thinking, resilience, flexibility, curiosity, social influence and environmental stewardship are also expected to rise in importance, underlining the importance of thinking about the increasing rise of AI in terms of a human-in-the-loop approach.
“Most universities are still largely geared toward traditional academic disciplines and theoretical learning, and while these remain important, they don’t always translate into employability. What’s needed is a mindset shift, from qualification-first thinking to skills-first education,” says Dr. Gill Mooney, Dean Academic Development and Support at The IIE, including Varsity College and Vega, educational brands of the Independent Institute of Education (The IIE).
To bridge this growing gap between what the world of work demands and what education currently provides, South Africa must urgently reassess how and what is being taught in classrooms and lecture theatres alike. A future-focused education system can no longer be built solely on rote learning, or memorisation and limited application of theoretical knowledge, but must equip young people with the skills to think critically, adapt quickly and engage meaningfully, particularly in uncertain and rapidly evolving environments.
Analytical thinking, resilience and emotional intelligence are no longer “nice-to-haves”, but are the very qualities employers now prioritise alongside technical skills like data literacy, AI proficiency and digital communication. Yet, in a country where youth unemployment remains stubbornly high and nearly half of 15- to 24-year-olds are not in employment, education or training (NEET), too many young South Africans are still entering the job market underprepared.
This is not a problem unique to South Africa, but it is one that must be tackled head-on, says Mooney. “It requires a shift in the philosophy of teaching itself. That means moving from qualification-first models to skills-first thinking, where knowledge is contextualised, debated and applied. It means placing more value on curiosity, creativity and problem-solving than on reproducing and applying facts in limited contexts.”
Some local institutions have started responding to this challenge by reimagining what higher education looks like. For example, the IIE’s teaching models across its campuses — including IIE Varsity College, IIE Vega and IIE MSA — are being adapted to centre learning on dialogue, engagement and real-world problem-solving. Students are encouraged to explore multiple perspectives and to test theory through diverse applications, whether in collaborative projects, simulated work environments or industry engagements.
“We must move from simply transmitting knowledge to fostering the kind of thinking that allows students to navigate ambiguity, work effectively in teams and continue learning long after graduation,” says Mooney.
In a labour market where change is the only constant, South Africa’s education system must evolve from producing graduates with more theoretical knowledge, to producing graduates who can adapt, lead and create, in order to build a more inclusive, resilient and future-ready workforce.
Submit and get free exposure here: Showcase Your Business | Advertise Your Special Offers.
