Exploring the conflicting ideals of ecological modernisation and environmental justice in South Africa: Evidence from the 2020 National Waste Management Strategy

ABSTRACT

This article explores the impact of the shift towards neoliberalism on environmental management in post-1994 South Africa. The adoption of ecological modernisation as a policy strategy for sustainable development is examined, focusing on the reliance on market mechanisms. However, a lack of balance between the environment, society, and the economy is observed, as socio-economic and environmental concerns are often compromised for economic growth concerns. The resulting technocratic and bureaucratic approach to environmental governance is thus disconnected from the realities on the ground, indicating weak ecological modernisation. This study specifically assesses the implementation of ecological modernisation in waste management initiatives and emphasises the importance of policy implementation. The findings underscore the need for greater attention to policy imperatives to achieve a more effective, just and sustainable approach to waste management in South Africa.

KEYWORDS:

• Environmental governance
• green economy
• environmental justice
• waste management
• ecological modernisation

Introduction

Following the shift from the autocratic apartheid regime in South Africa’s first democratic elections in 1994, the newly elected African National Congress (ANC) aligned the country with a firm commitment to human rights and democratic principles. The years following the democratic elections slowly become marred by claims of rampant corruption, nepotism and mismanagement. In a country that is often praised for its democratic transition and constitutional democracy, political elites are often accused of crony capitalism, corruption, a lack of transparency and ‘state capture’¹ – themes that became prominent during the presidency of Jacob Zuma (2009–2016) and which have continued into the presidency of Cyril Ramaphosa. Corruption has affected South Africa’s overall good governance and effectiveness ratings, which in tandem with growing rates of poverty and unemployment have contributed to growing social instability.²

These issues impact the overall governance of South Africa, including environmental governance. Regardless of this backdrop, on the international stage South Africa has continued to brand itself as a ‘custodian of sustainable development’, formulating much of its socioeconomic and environmental policy around the concept of sustainable development and the achievement of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).³ According to Carl Death, the national imagination of South Africa is closely tied to the environment, especially regarding land, soil, mountains, sea and the open veldt.⁴ Such a branding has thus made the environment into one of the country’s greatest assets in terms of attracting tourists.

However, South Africa’s development policy, it is here argued, has not been characterised by a commitment to the environment and sustainable development. To date, the country remains dependent on cheap coal-fired energy sources, and the economy has been branded as one that is energy-intensive and unsustainable; since the 1994 democratic elections, environmental issues related to land, soil and air quality and land degradation have narrowly improved. South Africa was ranked 116 out of 180 states in the 2022 Environmental Performance Index (EPI), which reflects a lower ranking than in 2020 when it was 95th.⁵ South Africa is also regarded as one of the top 20 emitters of carbon dioxide in the world, according to 2019 statistics.⁶ According to Death, ‘South Africa’s environmental policies and statements seem characterised by an exceptionally successful global performance, underpinned by a questionable domestic political commitment’.⁷

For some, this lack of a political commitment to the environment is indicative of South Africa’s adoption of weak ecological modernisation⁸ as a policy strategy for the achievement of sustainable development, spurred on by Pretoria’s early adoption of neoliberal macroeconomic development strategies.⁹ This study aims to assess whether ecological modernisation is indeed present within South Africa’s environmental governance strategy, using evidence from the waste sector, and if so, to consider the implications of such an approach.

Governing the South African environment

In post-apartheid South Africa, there was a clear shift in environmental policy, as under apartheid environmental policy had primarily focused on conservation and the displacement and dispossession of people of colour in the country.¹⁰ According to Zarina Patel, poor people of colour in the country were subjected to the environmental externalities of the undemocratic, unjust and unsustainable practices of the apartheid regime.¹¹ Patel further adds that the environmental policy shift that took place in post-apartheid South Africa was geared toward sustainable development, environmental justice, and climate change.¹² As such, the post-apartheid government adhered to democratic and participatory decision-making objectives of sustainable development, while attempting to address the needs of marginalised people across the country. In addition, the decision to adopt sustainable development principles was also influenced by the political reality of the time, in which sustainable development was becoming increasingly popular in the development discourse.¹³ Although the newly elected ANC ushered in reformed environmental policy in South Africa, Suzan Oelofse et al argue that ‘in the development context of the new democracy, government institutions faced with the implementation of these new regulatory policies, find themselves in a situation of “institutional ambiguity” where there is little experience or precedent of how to proceed’.¹⁴

The South African government’s initial response to climate change was the National Climate Change Committee (NCCC) in 1994. In 1997 the country signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and hosted the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development. It should, however, be noted that with the shift to neoliberal development the approach to sustainable development by the South African government became aligned with that of ecological modernisation. Garth Myers¹⁵ and Patel¹⁶ explain that, like most African states, South Africa became infatuated with the allure of neoliberal solutions such as ecological modernisation, ‘wherein marketization, new technology and focus group stakeholder meetings are the panacea that will rescue Africa’s cities from themselves and from environmental calamity, magically reducing poverty, and instituting democracy’.¹⁷

Similar to the developed states in the Global North, environmental issues would be approached in a technocentric scientific manner in South Africa, ‘which often legitimize[s] the destruction of the environment by capitalist development … ’.¹⁸ This weak ecological modernisation approach that applies technical solutions to complex environmental issues has become the norm in the Global North and has been exported to the Global South as the predominant approach to environmental management. In line with this dominant neoliberal approach to sustainable development, the newly elected South African government attempted to create a balance between the three pillars of sustainability: the economy, the environment and society. This was achieved through the Consultative National Environmental Policy Process (CONNEPP) in 1995/1996, which involved a range of civil society actors ranging from non-governmental organisations to environmental experts. The inclusion of civil society in the CONNEPP became a watershed moment for the country, as it was praised for its democratic and participatory objectives.¹⁹ Given the country’s history, the focus of environmental policy in South Africa had to be aligned with the South African Constitution – which emphasises human rights and justice for all. As such, environmental justice played a large role in the formulation of environmental governance in South Africa. According to Nigel Rossouw and Keith Wiseman, ‘the environmental policy discourse in the period leading up to, and immediately after, the 1994 elections saw citizens’ rights, socio-economic issues and quality of life included in the environmental policy agenda for the first time’.²⁰

The result of the CONNEPP process saw the creation of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) 107 of 1998, which has become the cornerstone for environmental governance in South Africa.²¹ Despite a greater focus being placed on environmental justice within the NEMA in 1998, some have however argued that due to South Africa’s neoliberal shift, ecological modernisation has become embedded within the country’s environmental management system.²² As a result, many have argued that environmental policy in South Africa has followed a pathway of economic growth and neoliberal development through ecological modernisation, at the expense of social-environmental justice in the country.²³ In addition, it has been argued that the overall financialisation of the South African economy strengthened the influence that the mining, energy and minerals sectors (referred to as the minerals-energy complex or MEC) have had (and continue to have) on the South African socio-political and economic regime.²⁴

According to Seeraj Mohamed²⁵ and Lucy Baker,²⁶ the MEC was born out of a relationship between the state and big business in shaping the South African economy around mining, minerals, and energy during colonialism and apartheid, and still shapes the power dynamics of South Africa’s political economy. With the MEC so entrenched within the South African economy, a transition towards sustainable development becomes more complex. According to Dianne Scott et al ‘policy and practice display the continued power of the private sector corporations at the centre of the minerals-energy complex to shape development to their own profit-driven interests’.²⁷ Mark Swilling et al add to this, stating that South Africa has been placed in a political position whereby it is in a ‘socio-technical lock-in that ensures that South Africa continues to be committed to energy-and-carbon-intensive pathways and undercommitted to supporting manufacturing that is unrelated to the MEC’.²⁸ To date, the South African economy remains carbon-intensive and the country is regarded as being the world’s 13th largest GHG emitter.²⁹

There have been efforts, it must be noted, made by the South African government in attempting to bring the country’s economy in line with the green agenda and to transition to a less carbon-intensive economy. The decision to make this shift has been influenced by the South African Constitution, which calls for the provision of a safe and pollution-free environment for all South Africans, as well as a global shift towards climate change awareness within neoliberalism. The latter shift was sparked by the 2007/2008 financial crisis as well as the growing consensus that climate change was a real phenomenon, after which the ‘green economy’ became the dominant development discourse. The green economy can be regarded, in principle, as a product of ecological modernisation.³⁰ The overall goal of the green economy is to achieve sustainable development by bridging the divide between economic growth and environmental protection. In the neoliberal sense, the green economy seeks to create a win-win scenario whereby economic growth continues in tandem with environmental protection; such an approach is evident in the adoption of market mechanisms and technology in the solving of environmental issues.

Greening the South African economy

South Africa responded to the 2007/2008 financial crisis by investing actively in the greening of industrial sectors such as those related to railways, energy-efficient infrastructure, and water and waste management.³¹ The unsustainable nature of South Africa’s development path was recognised by the South African government in 2010 when Pretoria hosted the Green Economy Summit. According to Mark Swilling and Eve Annecke, the views expressed at the summit ‘signalled that there was mounting concern in government policy circles that the resource-and-energy-intensive growth path was no longer sustainable’.³²

The outcome of the Green Economy Summit was a shift in South Africa’s macroeconomic policy framework; from that point the government pursued the New Economic Growth Path (NEGP), which prioritised the green economy, job creation and innovation.³³ A notable part of the NEGP was the creation of the Green Economy Accord in 2011. The plan of the Green Economy Accord was the creation of 300 000 jobs by the year 2020, and it formed part of a ‘broader policy to shift the economy onto a more labour-absorbing trajectory’.³⁴ The South African government, thus, recognised the potential of greening initiatives to deal with the issues of unemployment, high carbon emissions, environmental degradation, and energy shortages.³⁵

It should be added that the most prominent and forward-looking policy regarding South Africa’s transition has been the National Development Plan (NDP): Vision 2030, which was approved in 2012. The aim of the NDP: Vision 2030 is to set goals for the lowering of poverty rates, addressing economic inequality in the country. It serves to integrate the SDGs into South Africa’s overall socio-economic development plan. Regarding the green economy, the purpose of the NDP: Vision 2030 is to establish a South African economy that is low-carbon and resilient and to create a just society. At the same time, NDP: Vision 2030 recognises that to transition to a greener economy, it will have to reduce levels of inequality and poverty, and improve access to education, healthcare, and skills development. In line with the principles of ecological modernisation, the South African government has sought to make use of market mechanisms in its response to climate change.³⁶ The government has also pledged to reduce the country’s carbon emissions. To combat the increasing levels of carbon emissions, the South African government, after many years of negotiation, set into law the Carbon Tax Act in 2019. According to the Carbon Tax Act:³⁷

… the costs of remedying pollution, environmental degradation and consequent adverse health effects and of preventing, controlling or minimising further pollution, environmental damage or adverse health effects must be paid for by those responsible for harming the environment (the polluter pays principle).

Therefore, the purpose of the Carbon Tax Act is to internalise environmental externalities, penalise those who pollute and motivate citizens and corporations to be more environmentally responsible. The long-term impact of the new Carbon Tax is yet to be seen. It is hoped that the Carbon Tax will allow South Africa to remain competitive in the global market, as most of the world has already begun its efforts toward low-carbon economies.

In the view of some, the government’s approach to dealing with environmental degradation and climate change has been reactionary ‘lip service’, resulting in the creation of ad hoc solutions and policies that do not restructure the deeper socio-political regime in the country or create a space for change.³⁸ The reactionary approach taken by the government can be witnessed in the government’s efforts to present South Africa as a ‘green state’ during the 2010 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup. The government introduced the Green Goal 2010 programme, but the greening project became marred by an absence of leadership and direction, leaving host cities to manage the programme unassisted.³⁹ Recent evidence shows that South Africa has been slow to move ahead with transitioning to a green economy. For example, the 2018 South Africa Green Economy Barometer rated South Africa a five out of ten for the country’s transition, noting heavy dependence on fossil fuel energy and other carbon intensive industries.⁴⁰

Green economy aims: Minimising waste

Part of creating a green economy is the minimisation of waste, as waste is the antithesis of efficient green economies. According to a report by the CSIR, it was estimated that South Africa generated 58 million tonnes of general waste, 48 million tonnes of unclassified waste and 1 million tonnes of hazardous waste in 2011, while only 10% was being recycled.⁴¹ Additionally, South Africa struggles with issues of waste service backlogs, delivery, and a lack of proper infrastructure. Shaheen Thakur and Adrian Nel add that the context of South Africa’s waste management system or governance is built on the legacy of apartheid and its skewed service delivery model; thereby the environment and human life are harmed due to waste not being properly disposed of, situationally, or not disposed of at all.⁴²

As a means to minimise waste in South Africa, the National Environmental Management Waste Act 59 of 2008 was adopted in line with the principles set out in the NEMA. The purpose of the Waste Act is to provide ‘reasonable measures for the prevention of pollution and ecological degradation and for securing ecologically sustainable development’.⁴³ The Waste Act also acknowledges the negative impact that improper waste management can have on the poor, and notes that to sustainably develop, the country needs to avoid the generation of waste. The act was created under the South African Constitution to give effect to NEMA to ensure that waste management ensures the protection of the environment. In line with the ecological modernisation principles within NEMA, the Waste Act makes note of environmental policies, solutions, market mechanisms and terms such as the life-cycle approach, producer responsibility and polluter pays principle (PPP).⁴⁴ E Zhakata et al note that the Waste Act does not provide details regarding how different types of waste should be managed.⁴⁵ These details are allotted to other governmental (national and local) legislation, policies and programmes and governmental departments.

Most noticeably, the adoption of ecological modernisation is evidenced by the implementation of the National Pricing Strategy for Waste Management (NPSWM). The NPSWM gives effect to the Waste Act, which allows ‘for targeting of economic instruments to specific waste streams to serve as incentives or disincentives to encourage a change in behaviour towards the generation of waste and waste management by all sectors of society’.⁴⁶ Such an approach to waste management falls within the realm of ecological modernisation as it is hoped that by adding economic value to the environment through market mechanisms, sustainable practices will be encouraged. Such market mechanisms or economic instruments are aligned with the PPP which sees responsibility being placed on the generators of waste; this is in line with the provisions afforded in the NEMA that requires measures to be put in place to prevent pollution. As such, extended producer responsibility (EPR) is thus promoted not only to boost the recycling economy in South Africa but also as a means to internalise environmental costs.

Most importantly, the National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) was introduced in 1999 by the then Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), which saw a shift in waste management from a focus on disposal to recycling. The NWMS was then revised in 2011 to include the PPP.⁴⁷ The NWMS adopts a hierarchical approach to waste management and appears to seek to improve the relationship between all stakeholders for the improvement of waste management in South Africa.⁴⁸ This hierarchical approach places increased importance on preventing, reducing, reusing, recycling, and recovering waste before disposing of it. The idea of a waste hierarchy in South Africa is not new, however, as the country has a long history concerning recycling. Key among this was the establishment of Steelrec (the predecessor to Collect-a-Can) in 1976, which focused on the collection and recycling of beverage cans. There is also evidence that suggests that waste-sorting facilities were present during the 1970s in Johannesburg and Pretoria.⁴⁹

One notable advancement on the goals of the 2011 NWMS is the development of the recycling industry in South Africa through sector-specific industry waste management plans (IndWMPs). The NWMS outlined specific sectors that the IndWMP approach is to focus on, namely those dealing with tyre waste, paper and packaging, lighting, pesticides and e-waste.⁵⁰ According to the 2011 NWMS, the IndWMP is ‘a planning instrument that will identify how a specific waste stream will be managed by industry’ and ‘gives industry the opportunity to set out the additional standards that it will meet for waste management activities and how it will adhere to these’.⁵¹ Additionally, the IndWMPs can be either mandatory or voluntary and include industry-specific producer responsibility organisations (PROs) and EPRs. It is further stated by the NWMS that mandatory EPR schemes are to be applied in the event that voluntary EPR schemes fail to improve the management of a specific waste stream.⁵²

Overall, the NWMS was driven by eight goals relating to (1) the promotion of waste minimisation, (2) effective and efficient waste services, (3) aligning the waste sector to the green economy, (4) making citizens aware of the health and environmental effects of waste, (5) ensuring integrated waste management planning, (6) ensuring the proper financial management of waste services, (7) implementing and creating measures to remedy contaminated land, and (8) ensuring the enforcement of the Waste Act. On a broader scale, the South African government views the creation of the NWMS as being vital to its overall sustainable development goals (achieving the SDGs) and its NDP: Vision 2030 plan.⁵³

Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries, Barbera Creecy, reaffirmed this sentiment by stating that ‘the waste management sector has strong potential to innovate and improve socio-economic conditions and contribute to sustainable development and resource use’.⁵⁴ The overall purpose of the NWMS is thus to view waste as a resource and to divert waste from landfills. The Department of Science and Technology (DST) has acknowledged that South Africa has been late in adopting circular economy strategies; there are hopes that the NWMS and the adoption of a waste hierarchy will transform the South African waste sector.⁵⁵

Minimising waste through ecological modernisation

Although South Africa has been late to the adoption of circular economies, it has made strides in waste management legislation. However, much more needs to be done as issues of capacity, lack of infrastructure and the continued reliance on unsustainable landfilling persist. Proper waste management is of utmost importance in the achievement of the (ambitious) goals of sustainable development, which requires the minimisation of waste, the efficient use of resources and long-term planning to ensure that products are designed with environmental protection in mind.

Joan Nyika et al noted in 2020 the long road ahead for effective waste management as the South African government continues to pursue the eight goals listed in the 2011 NWMS.⁵⁶ Harro von Blottnitz⁵⁷ and Nyika et al⁵⁸ add that the NWMS is plagued by financial constraints and infrastructure issues, and that many municipalities (especially in rural areas) lack the technical and managerial capacity to transform their waste sectors in accordance with the National Waste Act. Zelda Rasmeni and Daniel Madyira have highlighted the lack of waste management services in South Africa’s informal townships, which has been exacerbated by a rapidly growing population, expanding informal townships and an insufficient landfill capacity in many of the country’s provinces.⁵⁹ It has been reported that the majority of waste generated in South Africa is still being sent to landfill (approximately 90%), while approximately only 10% is currently being recycled; in addition, the percentage of waste being sent to landfill is rising, and only 60% of the South African population enjoy adequate waste collection services (whether this be municipal or private).⁶⁰ In a separate study, Nyika et al found that over 80% of municipalities in South Africa do not have adequate infrastructure and capacity to put effective waste minimisation strategies into place, resulting in poor collection services and overall poor waste management.⁶¹ This, it is argued here, constitutes an environmental justice issue. Those who do not receive adequate waste collection services are usually those living in lower socio-economic townships and rural areas, and as a result of these inadequate waste collection services, people in those areas have no option but to either bury, dump, or burn their waste, which causes further environmental damage as well as human health risks. The poor and vulnerable therefore suffer the most from the negative impacts of inadequate waste management in the country.⁶²

A study by Linda Godfrey et al in 2013 pointed out several issues underlying South Africa’s waste management practices in the public and private sectors. These issues were related to problems in funding, bureaucratic governance, politicisation and decision-making. Concerning funding, it was determined that several municipalities were affected by a lack of funding for waste management. As a result, multiple municipalities looked towards outsourcing landfill and recycling operations to competitive private waste companies, thus privatising their waste management services. This resulted in cost savings and access to better waste management equipment, technical knowledge, and services.⁶³ In addition, it was found that within public waste management, there had been prominent political interference regarding decision-making and service delivery. There was evidence of corruption, where waste management tenders were often awarded to companies with political connections. Godfrey et al also noted that among the waste officials that were interviewed, several were not entrusted with the authority to implement proper waste management practices, as decision-making authority had been granted to those in the municipal council and senior management. The study noted at the time that ‘those who have the responsibility to manage waste and implement good waste management practices, i.e., the waste officials, do not have the authority to do so’.⁶⁴

Private sector respondents in this study also noted that waste management in South Africa was riddled with red tape, especially concerning compliance. ‘While private sector respondents may want to implement good waste management practice, they are often constrained by facility permit conditions’.⁶⁵ The bureaucracy, on the part of the government, was thus hampering private sector waste management in their view, given that the waste sector is heavily regulated and also greatly influenced by global markets.

A subsequent study by Michael Fakoya supported the view that the poor institutional practices of the South African national and local governments are to blame for the unsustainable management of waste in the country.⁶⁶ Fakoya also noted the continuing inequity in waste management, seen in the large disparity in the waste management services received in high- and middle-income areas compared to those within low-income and more rural areas.⁶⁷

New developments in South Africa’s waste management approach?

Based on these and the more recent studies noted above, it is clear that priority needs to be given to improving South Africa’s waste management systems, especially the recycling sector. This becomes pertinent when one considers South Africa’s growing population. It must be acknowledged that the South African government has reviewed the NWMS and worked to implement more realistic goals for improving waste management in the country, in view of the failure to meet the goals of the 2011 NWMS. In addition, the South African government has sought to bring waste management in the country into line with a growing international focus on the creation of circular economies.

As such, the NWMS was updated and revised in 2020 to resolve the shortcomings of the 2011 NWMS. One of the key reasons for this revision was that the strategy failed to divert waste from landfills into the recycling value chain and it also failed to address the negative impact of economic activity on the environment.⁶⁸ Furthermore, the 2020 NWMS acknowledges that waste reclaimers play a key role within the recycling sector – which signals a shift away from the 2011 NWMS which inadequately addressed the role of waste reclaimers in waste management. The 2020 NWMS thus seeks to improve waste collection service delivery, recycling rates, compliance, licensing, government data collection (regarding waste volumes and types), and the monitoring and implementation of integrated waste management plans (IWMPs).⁶⁹ The 2020 NWMS likewise places increased importance on the promotion of waste hierarchy and seeks to firmly align the achievement of the green economy through the effective management of waste. All this is to be achieved within a context that considers the socio-economic issues in the country.

The current 2020 NWMS seeks to establish a cycle whereby waste from one production source serves as a resource in a different production process. In addition, the goal is to encourage ‘the adoption of new approaches and techniques in product design, production, packaging and use’.⁷⁰ Considering the somewhat ambitious eight goals of the 2011 NWMS, the 2020 NWMS has simplified its strategy seeking to streamline this through three pillars, namely (1) waste minimisation, (2) effective and sustainable waste services, and (3) compliance, enforcement and awareness. Commenting on the new strategy, the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) observed that the 2020 NWMS differs from the 2011 NWMS in that there is a greater focus on vulnerable groups and the informal sector, on the promotion of approaches that encourage reduction and reuse of waste, and on addressing skills gaps within the sector.⁷¹ The revision of the NWMS in 2020 therefore aligns waste management in South Africa with the global shift towards the creation of circular economies, whereby waste is being viewed as a resource.⁷²

2020 NWMS: Towards inclusive ecological modernisation?

The 2020 NWMS places increased importance on the prevention of waste in South Africa’s waste management hierarchy.⁷³ The policy itself aims to deal with waste at the source as is evident in its waste minimisation pillar. A key goal here is to divert waste from landfill, coastal regions, wetlands, and rivers. As such, importance is placed on reuse and recycling and, in line with the Waste Act, to find alternative waste treatment avenues.

On further inspection of the 2020 NWMS, several ecological modernisation principles can be identified within the policy itself. As outlined by Maarten Hajer, for ecological modernisation to be present within policy there needs to be the presence of prevention, internalisation of environmental costs, the notion that pollution prevention pays, embracing scientific and technological approaches and solutions and the promotion of participation.⁷⁴ In the case of the 2020 NWMS, the notion of pollution prevention pays is strengthened by the polluter pays principle (PPP), which can be implemented through the use of taxes and other economic instruments. As noted earlier, putting a price on waste management through the NPSWM has allowed market mechanisms to discourage wasteful activities. Under pillar three of the 2020 NWMS, a landfill tax and advanced recycling fees are implemented to discourage waste from reaching landfills and to encourage recycling.⁷⁵

Central to ecological modernisation is the economisation of the environment.⁷⁶ A key focus of ecological modernisation is creating a balance between the environment and the economy. It is therefore believed that by using market mechanisms, producers would be encouraged to adopt more sustainable means of production. As such, the purpose of ecological modernisation is to ‘put an end to the externalization of economic costs to the environment or third parties’.⁷⁷ Within ecological modernisation, emphasis is therefore placed on recycling, technological innovation, and ecological pricing. As part of the 2020 NWMS waste minimisation efforts, EPR is encouraged to internalise environmental costs. As such, further effort is being made to hold producers responsible for their products when they reach their end-of-life. It is thus hoped that mechanisms such as the EPR will encourage producers to adopt sustainable and recyclable methods and products. In addition, the 2020 NWMS proposes that benefits should be attached to the prevention of pollution. As such, the 2020 NWMS refers to the use of economic incentives and subsidies that motivate behavioural changes. This thus clearly aligns with the principle that pollution prevention pays and echoes that the South African government is committed to the polluter pays principle that was first established in the NEMA and the Waste Act.

One of the key aspects of the NWMS is the embracing of science and technology. The promotion of science and technology spurs innovation and is used to prove environmental degradation, which then informs policy.⁷⁸ Science and technology also play a key role in the creation of solutions to environmental problems, such as the use of green technologies. The adoption of such technologies should also aim to bring about efficiency, and in the long term should benefit producers through increasing competition among economic actors.⁷⁹ The South African government has embraced science and technology within the 2020 NWMS, stating that technology (waste management technology) and innovation play a crucial role in the minimisation of waste and the creation of secondary-resource economies; furthermore, science and technology are viewed as being key parts of achieving sustainable development.⁸⁰ More specifically, the South African government has looked toward technologies that enable the diversion of waste from landfills, with the aim of converting that waste into energy such as biogas.⁸¹

Public participation is key

Lastly, the most important principle in ecological modernisation is the promotion of public participation. Hajer notes that public participation is vital to environmental governance as it enables the creation of a stronger relationship between the state and the public or civil society.⁸² Within the South African context, public participation is integral to the country’s democracy, and has been enshrined within the South African Constitution. As such, policies such as NEMA stress the importance of public participation in environmental governance. The NEMA⁸³ clearly states that:

… participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance must be promoted, and all people must have the opportunity to develop the understanding, skills and capacity necessary for achieving equitable and effective participation, and participation by vulnerable and disadvantaged persons must be ensured.

This sentiment is echoed in the 2020 NWMS whereby the drafting of the policy involved a range of stakeholders from academia and the private sector to civil society. The 2020 NWMS also stressed the importance of stakeholder collaboration from inception to implementation as it allows for a broader scope of solutions to waste management issues and the achievement of a circular economy. According to DEFF, ‘After all, to achieve success, the NWMS 2020 will rely on the activities of all stakeholders – not just DEFF’.⁸⁴

Most notably, the 2020 NWMS makes mention of an increased need to involve waste reclaimers⁸⁵ in the implementation of the NWMS. This brings the NWMS in line with the sentiments of NEMA where the latter stresses the participation of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged persons. According to Jean Takouleu, this is the fundamental difference between the 2011 NWMS and the 2020 NWMS, as the 2011 NWMS inadequately addressed the role played by reclaimers in the recycling sector and the overall waste hierarchy.⁸⁶ It is therefore acknowledged within the 2020 NWMS that reclaimers play an important role in the achievement of the circular economy. Therefore, strategies need to be created to better engage with the informal sector and improve the integration of reclaimers into the country’s waste management system. As such, the 2020 NWMS seeks to involve civil society organisations such as the South African Waste Pickers Association (SAWPA) in the design of IWMPs to ensure that the interests of waste pickers/reclaimers are recognised and accommodated.⁸⁷

Early studies by Patel⁸⁸ and Scott and Oelofse⁸⁹ highlighted how ecological modernisation is the dominant approach to environmental assessment practice in South Africa; yet despite the principles of environmental justice evidenced within environmental policy, there are disconnects between those principles and the realities on the ground. According to Patel, it is ecological modernisation’s reliance on market mechanisms that has resulted in minimal transformation leading to weak sustainable development.⁹⁰ As such, the poor continue to be marginalised in the process of achieving sustainable development.

According to Melanie Samson, in a study that supports Patel’s observations, the heightened financial strain faced by municipalities in post-apartheid South Africa has facilitated the privatisation of waste management, enabling private firms to extract recyclable materials from municipal landfills. This shift toward privatisation is seen as advantageous for many cash-strapped municipalities, as it injects much-needed funds into their coffers and alleviates the burden of landfill management costs.⁹¹ However, this may lead to a conflict between formal and informal sectors and may negatively impact waste reclaimers who perform the work of salvaging recyclable waste from landfills. Godfrey highlighted the potential consequences of excluding waste reclaimers from formal waste management systems, warning of possible conflict between informal and formal sectors, even suggesting the risk of sabotage against formal collection and sorting systems.⁹²

A prominent case of conflict arising from waste reclaimers’ exclusion occurred during the 2018 privatisation of the Genesis Landfill in Johannesburg. Historically, waste reclaimers were permitted to operate within the landfill's premises. However, following the privatisation, the multinational corporation Averda enforced a prohibition on waste reclaimers accessing the site. According to the Global Alliance of Waste Pickers, Averda issued eviction notices to waste reclaimers (despite the fact that the waste reclaimers had resided in the vicinity for nearly 17 years), sparking a violent confrontation between them and the private security firm known as the Red Ants.⁹³ It has been reported that the waste reclaimers received support from civil society groups, Women in Informal Employment: Globalising and Organising (WIEGO) and the Socio-Economic Rights Institute (SERI) in their legal action against the Red Ants and Averda. However, the current status of the case, which was postponed in October 2018, remains uncertain, while waste reclaimers persist in negotiating terms to regain access to the landfill.⁹⁴

This negative consequence of the privatisation of state responsibilities, labelled as ‘entrepreneurial governance’ by Thakur and Nel, arises from an overemphasis on economic imperatives and gains associated with embracing neoliberalism, and consequently, ecological modernisation as a policy strategy.⁹⁵ According to Thakur and Nel, although privatisation may result in the creation of jobs, business development and environmental protection, it can also become a source of animosity between state and non-state actors, namely the informal waste sector.⁹⁶ As argued by Martin Jänicke, ‘ecological modernization is no effective alternative where it only adds the clean(er) technology to the existing “dirty” branch structure’.⁹⁷ This, it is here argued, holds especially true in developing and emerging economies in the Global South, where waste reclaimers have established advanced recycling networks and play a vital role in the creation of circular economies.

According to Kasay Sentime, a leading issue in South Africa’s waste management efforts has been that it has often marginalised the informal sector rather than encouraging and supporting it.⁹⁸

The inclusion of reclaimers in the 2020 NWMS is therefore an important shift within South Africa’s waste management policy. As seen in the case of Brazil, one of South Africa’s counterparts in the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) group, the inclusion of the informal waste sector in the management of waste can bring about increased attention to the socio-economic issues faced by the most vulnerable⁹⁹ This is an important shift as ecological modernisation-driven policies have tended to ignore socio-economic issues. The shift toward reclaimers’ inclusion in the 2020 NWMS also brings about a shift away from viewing reclaimers as a problem to be solved, and toward viewing them as an integral stakeholder in the greening of the South African economy.

South Africa would be ill-advised to deal with environmental issues from a purely neoliberal perspective, and in fact already makes selective use of market-oriented interventions and welfare ideals.¹⁰⁰ A purely market-oriented approach to sustainable development would likely lead to weak sustainability in the country, as it would prioritise short-term capital accumulation over the long-term human welfare and socio-economic requirements of its people. Issues relating to sustainable development will remain difficult to manage if the country continues to manage the environment in a technocratic way that ‘do[es] not deal with the environment in a holistic and integrated manner’, notes Oelofse et al.¹⁰¹ According to Gaylor Montmasson-Clair, greening the South African economy requires giving attention to socio-economic issues such as poverty, unemployment, inequality, competitiveness, rural development, and resource management.¹⁰²

The Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP) is a leading example of a governmental project that has followed economic logic and has tended to ignore or downplay the importance of public participation and environmental justice. According to Patrick Bond, in the early years of the LHWP (2003-2004), there were displacements of thousands of people and a loss of resources such as land and soil and the destruction of habitats, especially that of the Maluti Minnow.¹⁰³ For this reason, Death argues that the main concern is the commodification of the environment in South Africa, wherein there has been the furthering of a green economic growth model that fails to address the socio-economic issues of the state.¹⁰⁴ The technocentric, economics-heavy and often top-down approach of the government towards environmental management shows that weak ecological modernisation has become the dominant approach in South Africa (in line with international norms).

Falling short: Conflicting ideals of ecological modernisation and environmental justice

As noted above, and in accordance with the findings of Long,¹⁰⁵ Long and Patel¹⁰⁶ and Oelofse et al,¹⁰⁷ ecological modernisation has been adopted as the predominant environmental management strategy in South Africa, not only within waste management but also within the country’s environmental policy framework. This has largely been the result of the country’s neoliberal shift post-1994, which has among other effects led to the economisation of the environment. The foregoing analysis of the 2020 NWMS shows, however, an attempt to shift from ecological modernisation to a more inclusive strategy, seen for example in the inclusion of reclaimers as integral stakeholders in the country’s circular economy efforts.

Despite this shift, in the view of many, the South African government’s policies still fall short of creating an efficient, inclusive and just green economy. In the words of Mao Amis et al,¹⁰⁸

In practice, the opportunities for a greener economic system have yet to be grasped in South Africa. Despite some successes and areas of progress, the economy remains locked into ‘brown’ energy systems and investments, the benefits of which are not reaching most people – but particularly the poorest … . South Africa is at a crossroads, where it needs to either fully embrace a green economy trajectory – or continue to grapple with the triple challenge of poverty, inequality and environmental degradation’.

Vuyokazi Mtembu and Mershen Pillay¹⁰⁹ describe South Africa’s position and relationship with greening its economy aptly with the following analogy:

Balancing green growth and taking care of socio-economic needs of citizens in emerging economies, like South Africa, is like a trapeze artist trying to balance on a very thin bar; it is very challenging, yet it is something that cannot be ignored. South Africa finds herself between a rock and a hard place as it strives to balance between job creation (people), resource conservation (planet) and economic growth (profits), all of which are important, and balance should be found one way or the other.

However, creating such a balance is a mammoth task requiring trade-offs. This is evident in the case of South Africa as environmental and societal concerns are often traded-off in favour of economic concerns. Llewellyn Leonard goes so far as to say that the environmental injustices of South Africa’s past have been perpetuated by the ANC-led government’s adoption of neoliberal macroeconomic policy.¹¹⁰ This can be seen in the location of some informal townships, which were placed next to or close to industrial developments – and the associated pollution – as a means of ensuring a supply of cheap labour during apartheid; many of these urban layouts remain the same to this day. The environmental injustices of the past have thus continued into the present, reinforcing the environmental exclusion of many black communities in South Africa.

Ecological modernisation and environmental justice are thus conflicting ideals in South Africa’s environmental governance. The reconciliation of the economy and the environment does not occur within a vacuum since society, government, and dominant ‘dirty’ industries, like the minerals-energy complex, all have settled and primarily different interests in the economy and the environment. The struggle for the government will, thus, be how to green the South African economy and leapfrog development in a way that is economically viable, technologically ethical, socially beneficial, and environmentally sustainable. In addition, for a truly sustainable and green economy to emerge in South Africa, large-scale structural changes will be required to overcome the injustices of the country’s past. All of this must be viewed as a long-term project, rather than short-term/fragmented sector-based programmes.¹¹¹

The current approach based on ecological modernisation in South Africa is detrimental to the future of South Africa’s waste management and overall environmental governance, as it tends to ignore the key democratic principles of justice and participatory decision-making. Weak ecological modernisation can lead to a weakening of the relationship between the state and civil society, and this can work against the inclusion of socio-economic issues in decision-making.¹¹² Environmental management in South Africa today is thus a far cry from the foundations laid at CONNEPP. Although CONNEPP would be praised for its democratic and participatory principles, NEMA would, however, continue to struggle with putting such ambitious principles into practice and favour the ecological modernisation approach to environmental governance – one that is highly bureaucratic and technocentric. This disjuncture between policy and implementation has been blamed on the South African government’s overly bureaucratic and technocentric approach to environmental governance, which has seen a lack of public participation and failure to promote civil society in an ongoing consultative process.¹¹³

It is important to note that there is evidence of South Africa’s sustainable transition being driven by economic/private actors. In line with ecological modernisation, there seems to be growing support from the government in terms of providing such non-state actors to become ‘agents of change’. The South African government’s institutional ambiguity and implementation deficits have, however, allowed for opportunities for non-state actors to create new and innovative approaches to the country’s greening efforts.¹¹⁴ This is particularly noticeable in the renewable energy sector. At the time of writing, the South African government is in full support of the private energy sector in solving the country’s latest energy supply crisis through cutting back on bureaucratic red tape, restrictions, and energy generation licences. The new Energy Crisis Plan is set to be a comprehensive plan to minimise the social and economic impact of the country’s energy crisis and allow non-state actors to produce energy while adhering to environmental policy.¹¹⁵ However, such a transition will require a broadscale approach, as it not only needs to consider the creation of jobs, upskilling and reskilling of workers, and the prevention of job losses; it must also consider the socio-economic impact of a sustainable transition.

Conclusion

The shift to a neoliberal macroeconomic development strategy in post-1994 South Africa influenced how environmental management would be approached. As such, a shift toward neoliberalism created an enabling environment for the adoption of ecological modernisation as a policy strategy for the achievement of sustainable development. Therefore, the South African government has come to rely on market mechanisms and technology as solutions to solving environmental degradation. This approach to environmental management has become encapsulated within the NEMA (and subsequent policies) in directing the overall governance of the South African environment. Unfortunately, in its efforts to create a greener South African economy, the South African government has failed to create a balance between the environment, society, and the economy. Socio-economic and environmental concerns are thus often traded-off in favour of economic growth and development concerns; this and many other studies have observed that this trade-off has only exacerbated environmental injustice in the country.

One positive outlook coming from this analysis is that in theory, ecological modernisation provides emerging economies such as South Africa with an opportunity to reconcile environmental issues with economic growth – at least within a well-implemented ecological modernisation approach – as the theory has proven to bring together stakeholders from public and private spheres within the environmental policy-making process. However, the success of ecological modernisation in emerging African economies such as South Africa cannot only be measured by its inclusion within environmental policy. Sustainable economies in the African context need to reflect the realities on the ground, meaning that where ecological modernisation imperatives are used as a pathway to sustainability, there needs to be reflected some attempt to address socio-economic issues as well – not only within policy, but also within implementation. In the case of South Africa, the values of environmental justice and ecological modernisation are seemingly at odds, as one finds that weak ecological modernisation has become the dominant approach to environmental governance in the country – even though one finds elements of strong ecological modernisation in the policy creation phase, where there is an involvement of civil society, private sector and government and an acknowledgement of socio-economic (environmental justice) issues. Where the South African government has fallen short is in its approach to achieving sustainability through ecological modernisation, especially in its implementation of its policy imperatives. As such, more concerted efforts are required at the implementation stage to realise the worthy environmental justice principles encapsulated within its environmental policies and strategies.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Universiteit Stellenbosch.

Notes on contributors

Michael Hector

Michael Hector was at the time of writing a post-doctoral researcher at the Department of Political Science, Stellenbosch University, South Africa. Dr Hector is now an economist with Trade and Industrial Policy Strategies (TIPS), South Africa.

Derica Lambrechts

Derica Lambrechts is a senior lecturer with the Department of Political Science, Stellenbosch University, South Africa.

Notes

1 State capture can be described as a type of corruption whereby private interests influence or alter state decision-making processes for the benefit of such private actors.

2 Jakkie Cilliers and Ciara Aucoin, “Economics, Governance and Instability in South Africa,” ISS Paper 293 (2016): 1–22.

3 Carl Death, “Leading by Example: South African Foreign Policy and Global Environmental Politics,” International Relations 25, no. 4 (2011): 455–78.

4 Death, “Leading by Example.”

5 Environmental Performance Index, “2022 EPI Results,” 2022, https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2022/component/epi.

6 UCS, “Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions,” Union of Concerned Scientists, 2022, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions.

7 Death, “Leading by Example,” 469.

8 A measure to determine the performance of ecological modernisation has been created. As such, weak ecological modernisation is limited and less cooperative, whereas strong ecological modernisation is collaborative, transformative, inclusive and proactive. For more see: Michael Howes, “Joining the Dots: Sustainability, Climate Change and Ecological Modernisation.” Pathways to a Sustainable Economy: Bridging the Gap between Paris Climate Change Commitments and Net Zero Emissions (2018): 15–24.

9 Paul Williams and Ian Taylor, “Neoliberalism and the Political Economy of the ‘New’ South Africa,” New Political Economy 5, no. 1 (2000): 21–40, https://doi.org/10.1080/13563460050001961; Sagie Narsiah, “Neoliberalism and Privatisation in South Africa,” GeoJournal 57, no. 1–2 (2002): 29–38, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026068802114; Joan Alier, “Problems of Environmental Degradation: Environmental Justice or Ecological Modernization,” Capitalism Nature Socialism 14, no. 1 (2003): 133–8; Catherine Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa: Deliberation, Innovation and Institutional Opportunities,” Local Environment 11, no. 1 (2006): 61–78, https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830500396214; Death, “Leading by Example”; Carl Death, “The Green Economy in South Africa: Global Discourses and Local Politics,” Politikon 41, no. 1 (2014): 1–22; Dianne P Long and Zarina Patel, “A New Theory for an Age-Old Problem : Ecological Modernisation and the Production of Nuclear Energy in South Africa,” South Africa Geographical Journal 93, no. 2 (2011): 191–205, https://doi.org/10.1080/03736245.2011.610131.

10 Nigel Rossouw and Keith Wiseman, “Learning from the Implementation of Environmental Public Policy Instruments after the First Ten Years of Democracy in South Africa,” Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 22, no. 2 (2004): 131–40, https://doi.org/10.3152/147154604781766012; Zarina Patel, “South Africa’s Three Waves of Environmental Policy: (Mis)Aligning the Goals of Sustainable Development, Environmental Justice and Climate Change Sustainable Development, Environmental Justice and Climate Change,” Geography Compass 8, no. 3 (2014): 169–81, https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12119.

11 Patel, “South Africa’s Three Waves of Environmental Policy: (Mis)Aligning the Goals of Sustainable Development, Environmental Justice and Climate Change Sustainable Development, Environmental Justice and Climate Change.”

12 Patel, “South Africa’s Three Waves of Environmental Policy.”

13 Dianne Scott et al., “Pro-Growth Challenges to Sustainability in South Africa,” in Emerging Economies and Challenges to Sustainability: Theories, Strategies, Local Realities, ed. Arve Hansen and Ulrikke Wethal (New York: Routledge, 2015), 205–17.

14 Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa,” 62.

15 Garth Myers, “Sustainable Development and Environmental Justice in African Cities,” Geography Compass 2, no. 3 (2008): 695–708, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00111.x.

16 Patel, “South Africa’s Three Waves of Environmental Policy.”

17 Myers, “Sustainable Development and Environmental Justice in African Cities,” 696.

18 Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa,” 62.

19 Rossouw and Wiseman, “Learning from the Implementation of Environmental Public Policy Instruments.”

20 Rossouw and Wiseman, “Learning from the Implementation of Environmental Public Policy Instruments,” 113.

21 Rossouw and Wiseman, “Learning from the Implementation of Environmental Public Policy Instruments.”

22 Dianne Scott and Clive Barnett, “Something in the Air: Civic Science and Contentious Environmental Politics in Post-Apartheid South Africa,” Geoforum 40, no. 3 (2009): 373–82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2008.12.002.

23 Myers, “Sustainable Development and Environmental Justice in African Cities”; Scott and Barnett, “Something in the Air”; Dianne P Long, Reaching for Sustainability: Ecological Modernisation and Environmental Justice in South African Energy Policy and Practice (University of Witwatersrand, 2017).

24 Sabaa Ahmad Khan, “E-Products, e-Waste and the Basel Convention: Regulatory Challenges and Impossibilities of International Environmental Law,” Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 25, no. 2 (2016): 248–60; Firaz Khan and Seeraj Mohamed, “From the Political Economy of the MEC to the Political Ecology of the Green Economy,” in Greening the South African Economy: Scoping the Issues, Challenges and Opportunities, ed. Mark Swilling, J. K. Musango, and Jeremy Wakeford (Claremont: UCL Press, 2016), 178–92; Mark Swilling, JK. Musango, and Jeremy Wakeford, “Developmental States and Sustainability Transitions: Prospects of a Just Transition in South Africa,” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 2015, 1–23; Mark Swilling and E Annecke, Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World (Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press, 2012).

25 Seeraj Mohamed, “Financialization of the South African Economy,” Development (Basingstoke) 59, no. 1–2 (2016): 137–42, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-017-0065-1.

26 Lucy Baker, “Renewable Energy in South Africa’s Minerals-Energy Complex: A ’low Carbon’transition?,” Review of African Political Economy 42, no. 144 (2015): 245–61.

27 Dianne Scott et al., “Pro-Growth Challenges to Sustainability in South Africa.”

28 Swilling, Musango, and Wakeford, “Developmental States and Sustainability Transitions.”

29 Nicholas Nhede, “South Africa’s Eskom Overtakes US, EU and China as Planet’s Largest Emitter,” Power Engineering International, 2021, https://www.powerengineeringint.com/coal-fired/south-africas-eskom-overtakes-us-eu-and-china-as-planets-largest-emitter/; UCS, “Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions.”

30 Martin Jänicke, “Ecological Modernization–a Paradise of Feasibility but no General Solution.” The Ecological Modernization Capacity of Japan and Germany: Comparing Nuclear Energy, Renewables, Automobility and Rare Earth Policy (2020): 13–23.

31 Mark Swilling and Eve Annecke, Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World (Cape Town: UCT Press, 2012), 211.

32 Swilling and Annecke, Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World, 211.

33 Swilling and Annecke, Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World.

34 Leanne Seeliger and Ivan Turok, “The Green Economy Accord: Launchpad for a Green Transition?,” in Greening the South African Economy: Scoping the Issues, Challenges and Opportunities, ed. Mark Swilling, JK. Musango, and Jeremy Wakeford (Claremont: UCL Press, 2016), 6–21:7.

35 This would later lead to the creation of the Green Fund in 2012, to finance South Africa’s transition to a green economy.

36 National Planning Commission, “NDP 2030 – Chapter 5 – Transition to Low-Carbon Economy,” 2020, https://www.nationalplanningcommission.org.za/National_Development_Plan.

37 RSA, “Carbon Tax Act 15,” Government Gazette 647, no. 42483 (2019).

38 Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa”; Death, “The Green Economy in South Africa”; Swilling, Musango, and Wakeford, “Developmental States and Sustainability Transitions”; Seeliger and Turok, “The Green Economy Accord: Launchpad for a Green Transition?”

39 Carl Death, “Greening the 2010 FIFA World Cup: Environmental Sustainability and the Mega-Event in South Africa,” Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 13, no. 2 (2011): 99–117.

40 MoaAmis et al., The Green Economy Barometer 2018 South Africa (Pretoria: African Centre, TIPS, GEC, 2018), www.greeneconomycoalition.org.

41 William Stafford and Kristy Faccer, “Steering towards a Green Economy,” CSIR (Stellenbosch: CSIR, 2014); Stats SA, “Only 10% of Waste Is Recycled in South Africa,” 2018, http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=11527.

42 Shaheen Thakur and Adrian Nel, “Between the Market and the Developmental State–the Place and Limits of pro-Poor ENGO Led ‘Waste-Preneurship’ in South Africa,” Local Environment (2021): 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2021.1937969.

43 RSA, “National Environmental Management: Waste Act 59,” Government Gazette 525, no. 32000 (2008), https://doi.org/102GOU/B.

44 E Zhakata et al., “A Critic of NEMA : Waste Act 59 of 2008, so Many Promises, Little Implementation and Enforcement,” in SAAPAM Limpopo Chapter (Limpopo: University of Limpopo, 2016), 228–36.

45 Zhakata et al., “A Critic of NEMA.”

46 Department of Environmental Affairs, “National Pricing Strategy for Waste Management No. 904,” Government Gazette 40200, no. 11 August (2016).

47 Linda Godfrey and Suzan Oelofse, “Historical Review of Waste Management and Recycling in South Africa,” Resources 6, no. 57 (2017): 1–11, https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040057.

48 Nzalalemba Kubanza and Mulala Danny Simatele, “Sustainable Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries: A Study of Institutional Strengthening for Solid Waste Management in Johannesburg, South Africa,” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 63, no. 2 (2020): 175–88.

49 Godfrey and Oelofse, “Historical Review of Waste Management and Recycling in South Africa.”

50 RSA, “National Waste Management Strategy,” Department of Environment, Forestry & Fisheries, 2011.

51 RSA, “National Waste Management Strategy.”

52 RSA, “National Waste Management Strategy.”

53 RSA, “National Waste Management Strategy.”

54 Theresa Smith, “Using Waste Management to Widen the Job Circle in South Africa,” ESI Africa, 2020, https://www.esi-africa.com/industry-sectors/future-energy/using-waste-management-to-widen-the-job-circle/.

55 “A National Waste R&D and Innovation Roadmap for South Africa: Phase 2 Waste RDI Roadmap. Trends in Waste Management and Priority Waste Streams for Waste RDI Roadmap” (Pretoria: Department of Science & Technology, 2014).

56 Joan Nyika et al., “Waste Management in South Africa,” in Sustainable Waste Management in Challenges in Developing Countries (IGI Global, 2020), 327–51.

57 Harro von Blottnitz, “Waste Management Reform and the Green Economy: When Will They Meet,” in Greening the South African Economy: Scoping the Issues, Challenges and Opportunities, ed. Mark Swilling, JK. Musango, and Jeremy Wakeford (Claremont: UCT Press, 2016), 252–67.

58 Nyika et al, “Waste Management in South Africa.”

59 Zelda Rasmeni and Daniel Madyria, “A Review of the Current Municipal Solid Waste Management Practices in Johannesburg City Townships,” Procedia Manufacturing 35 (2019): 1025–31.

60 Nzalalemba Kubanza and Mulala Simatele, “Sustainable Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries: A Study of Institutional Strengthening for Solid Waste Management in Johannesburg, South Africa,” Journal od Environmental Planning and Management 63, no. 2 (2020): 175–88.

61 Nyika et al., “Waste Management in South Africa.”

62 Zhakata et al., “A Critic of NEMA.” 

63 Linda Godfrey, Dianne Scott, Cristina Trois, “Caught between the Global Economy and Local Bureaucracy: The Barriers to Good Waste Management Practice in South Africa,” Waste Management and Research 31, no. 3 (2013): 295–305, https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X12470204.

64 Godfrey, Scott, and Trois, “Caught between the Global Economy”, 301.

65 Godfrey, Scott, and Trois, “Caught between the Global Economy”, 302.

66 Michael Fakoya, “Institutional Challenges to Municipal Waste Management Service Delivery in South Africa,” Journal of Human Ecology 45, no. 2 (2014): 119–25.

67 Fakoya, “Institutional Challenges to Municipal Waste Management.”

68 “National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) 2020 Costing Framework,” National Waste Management Strategy, 2020.

69 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy 2020” (Republic of South Africa: DEFF, 2020).

70 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy 2020.”

71 DEFF, “Consultation on the Proposed Regulations Regarding Extended Producer Responsibility,” Government Gazette 660, no. 43481 (2020): 1–12, http://dx.doi.org/9771682584003-32963.

72 Thandazile Moyo et al., “Barriers to Recycling E-Waste within a Changing Legal Environment in South Africa,” South African Journal of Science 118 (2022): 1–8.

73 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) 2020 Costing Framework.”

74 Maarten Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).

75 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS) 2020 Costing Framework.”

76 Arthur P. J. Mol, “Ecological Modernization and the Global Economy,” Global Environmental Politics 2, no. 2 (2002): 92–115, https://doi.org/10.1162/15263800260047844.

77 Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process, 28.

78 Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process.

79 Joseph Murphy and Andrew Gouldson, “Environmental Policy and Industrial Innovation: Integrating Environment and Economy through Ecological Modernisation,” Geoforum 31, no. 1 (2000): 33–44, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(99)00042-1.

80 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy 2020.”

81 Such initiatives are closely linked to the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) in light of growing energy supply issues at Eskom and a growing renewable energy sector in the country. For more information see: Turning Waste Into Energy: A Roadmap For South Africa – SANEDI https://www.sanedi.org.za/turning-waste-into-energy-a-roadmap-for-south-africa/index.htm

82 Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process.

83 RSA, “National Environmental Management Act,” Government Gazette 401, no. 19519 (1998).

84 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy 2020,” 58.

85 Here a waste reclaimer is referred to as someone who informally collects waste from households, curb side and businesses, otherwise known as waste pickers in some regions. Waste reclaimers are usually the most vulnerable within the waste and recycling value chain.

86 “SOUTH AFRICA: The Government Has Its Plan to Fight Climate Change,” Afrik 21, 2020, https://www.afrik21.africa/en/south-africa-the-government-has-its-plan-to-fight-climate-change/.

87 DEFF, “National Waste Management Strategy 2020.”

88 Zarina Patel, “Environmental Justice in South Africa: Tools and Trade-Offs,” Social Dynamics 35, no. 1 (2009): 94–110.

89 Dianne Scott and Catherine Oelofse, “Social and Environmental Justice in South African Cities: Including ‘invisible Stakeholders’ in Environmental Assessment Procedures,” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 48, no. 3 (2005): 445–67.

90 Patel, “Environmental Justice in South Africa: Tools and Trade-Offs.”

91 Melanie Samson, “Wasted Citizenship ? Reclaimers and the Privatised Expansion of the Public Sphere,” Africa Development XXXIV, no. 3 & 4 (2009): 1–25.

92 Anine Kilian, “CSIR Considers Impact of EPR Schemes on Informal Waste Pickers,” 2016, https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/csir-considers-impact-of-epr-schemes-on-informal-waste-pickers-2016-03-29.

93 Global Alliance of Waste Pickers, “Violent Assault of Waste Pickers Near Genesis Landfill, Johannesburg,” 2018, http://globalrec.org/2018/07/07/violent-assault-of-waste-pickers-near-genesis-landfill-johannesburg/.

94 Environmental Justice Atlas, “Genesis Landfill Privatization by Averda in Johannesburg, South Africa | EJAtlas,” 2019, https://ejatlas.org/conflict/violence-against-wastepickers-linked-to-the-genesis-landfill-privatization-by-averda-in-johannesburg-south-africa.

95 Thakur and Nel, “Between the Market and the Developmental State–the Place and Limits of pro-Poor ENGO Led ‘Waste-Preneurship’ in South Africa.”

96 Thakur and Nel, “Between the Market.”

97 Martin Jänicke, “Ecological Modernization – a Paradise of Feasibility but No General Solution,” in The Ecological Modernization Capacity of Japan and Germany: Comparing Nuclear Energy, Renewables, Automobility and Rare Earth Policy, ed. Lutz Mez, Lila Okamura, and Helmut Weidner (Berlin & Tokyo: Springer, 2019), 13.

98 Kasay Sentime, “The Impact of Legislative Framework Governing Waste Management and Collection in South Africa,” African Geographical Review 33, no. 1 (2014): 81–93, https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2013.847253.

99 Jutta Gutberlet et al., “Waste Picker Organizations and Their Contribution to the Circular Economy: Two Case Studies from a Global South Perspective,” Resources 6, no. 52 (2017): 1–12, https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040052; Christian Luiz da Silva, Niklas Weins, and Maija Potinkara, “Formalizing the Informal? A Perspective on Informal Waste Management in the BRICS through the Lens of Institutional Economics,” Waste Management 99 (2019): 79–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.08.023.

100 Sangeetha Chandrashekeran et al., “Rethinking the Green State beyond the Global North: A South African Climate Change Case Study,” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 8, no. 6 (2017): 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.473.

101 Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa,” 62.

102 Gaylor Montmasson-Clair, Governance for South Africa’s Sustainability Transition: A Critical Review (London: Green Economy Coalition, 2017).

103 Patrick Bond, Economic Growth, Ecological Modernization or Environmental Justice? Conflicting Discourses in South Africa Today (Johannesburg: Municipal Services Project, 2000).

104 Death, “The Green Economy in South Africa: Global Discourses and Local Politics.”

105 Long, “Reaching for Sustainability: Ecological Modernisation and Environmental Justice in South African..”

106 Long and Patel, “A New Theory for an Age-Old Problem : Ecological Modernisation and the Production of Nuclear Energy in South Africa.”

107 Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa: Deliberation, Innovation and Institutional Opportunities.”

108 Amis et al., “The Green Economy Barometer 2018 South Africa,” 6.

109 Vuyokazi Mtembu and Mershen Pillay, “A Contextual Review of South Africa’s Socio-Economic Content of Green Economy and Green Growth Indexes,” Journal of Public Administration 52, no. 3 (2017): 614–24:618–9.

110 Llewellyn Leonard, “Another Political Ecology of Civil Society Reflexiveness against Urban Industrial Risks for Environmental Justice: The Case of the Bisasar Landfill, Durban, South Africa,” Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 33 (2012): 77–92.

111 Academy of Science of South Africa, Towards a Low Carbon City: Focus on Durban (Pretoria: ASSAF, 2011); Long and Patel, “A New Theory for an Age-Old Problem : Ecological Modernisation and the Production of Nuclear Energy in South Africa”; Death, “The Green Economy in South Africa: Global Discourses and Local Politics.”

112 On civil society, Daniel Warshawsky comments that the post-1994 state-civil society relationship in South Africa is one of fragility, complexity and tension as the ANC-led government has become one beset by bureaucratic inefficiency, corruption, and an incapacity to implement policy. Furthermore, the ANC-led government has opted for the prioritisation of eco-efficiency and the marketisation of the environment to manage the environment. See Daniel Warshawsky, “State, Civil Society, and the Limits of NGO Institutionalization in Post-Apartheid South Africa,” African Geographical Review 32, no. 1 (2013): 1–13.

113 Rossouw and Wiseman, “Learning from the Implementation of Environmental Public Policy Instruments”; Carl Death, “Resisting (Nuclear) Power? Environmental Regulation in South Africa,” Review of African Political Economy 33, no. 109 (2006): 407–24; Clive Barnett and Dianne Scott, “Spaces of Opposition: Activism and Deliberation in Post-Apartheid Environmental Politics,” Environment and Planning A 39 (2007): 2612–31; Scott and Barnett, “Something in the Air: Civic Science and Contentious Environmental Politics in Post-Apartheid South Africa”; Long, “Reaching for Sustainability: Ecological Modernisation and Environmental Justice in South African Energy Policy and Practice.”

114 Oelofse et al., “Shifts within Ecological Modernization in South Africa: Deliberation, Innovation and Institutional Opportunities”; Mtembu and Pillay, “A Contextual Review of South Africa’s Socio-Economic Content of Green Economy and Green Growth Indexes.”

115 Sheree Bega, “Ramaphosa’s Energy Crisis Plan Far-Reaching and Comprehensive, Says Presidential Climate Commission,” Mail & Guardian, 2022, https://mg.co.za/environment/2022-07-28-ramaphosas-energy-crisis-plan-far-reaching-and-comprehensive-says-presidential-climate-commission/; Paul Burkhardt and Antony Sguazzin, “S. Africa Unshackles Private Sector in Bid to End Blackouts,” Bloomberg Africa Edition, 2022, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-25/south-africa-removes-license-rules-for-private-power-generators.