Introduction
The paper will seek to locate South Africa’s poverty within historical sphere and will highlight positive steps that the post apartheid government led by ANC took to eliminate this social ill; steps which culminated into the development of the White Paper for Social Welfare and the adoption of the developmental approach to welfare. The paper will again look at the challenges that make the implementation process of the developmental model a big challenge for the government, NGO, Civil society organization and practitioners. It will then advance for some recommendations which would be integral to the successful implementation of the developmental approach to welfare, within which political shift and political will are central.
2.0) Poverty eradication in South Africa: Impact of GEAR and ASGISA
At the foremost, it is important to highlight that the poverty in South African context is historically rooted. On this premise, it is therefore important to highlight that the apartheid socio-economic order had in many ways played a significant role in the entrenchment of poverty in the periphery of economic consumption-thus in rural areas and informal settlements outside major town. This had a major impact on the creation of poverty in the black communities and polarized the country across two divides, with the economically well off white minority on one side and the poor black majority on the other side. The black society was mostly socialized around the provision of labour to the mines and informal jobs not high economic capital activities like the white population. Frye (2007) states that in order to ensure optimal reproduction of labour, the former colonial government, and later the former government of the Republic of South Africa introduced a legislated strangulating latticework of repressive policies and legislation that systematically dispossessed black South Africans of the right to own land except in reserves, the right to operate businesses, to accumulate surplus, as well as the right to human capital development
Thus the black majority across the country lived within the trap of impoverished situations because their lives were systematically incarcerated in situations of poverty. It is from that historical perspective that we will see that the dawn of democracy in South Africa, though a rebirth of the nation, presented a major challenge to the ANC government due to the class and race inequalities that existed at that time. The majority of the country lived in places with poor infrastructural development and with limited possibilities for socio-economic development. Thus the adoption of Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) by the by Nelson Mandela’s ANC led government in 1994, which was cognizant of the socio-historical and economic realities within which most South Africans lived. Thus this macro-economic framework provided the foundation and parameters within which a nation could be reunified towards achieving greater goals of uplifting the lives of the majority of the population which was living in poverty. This is what the nation needed, to even the gaps that existed, the need for mobilization of all the people towards reconstruction and development of the nation. At that time the RDP was viewed as a holistic perspective in which nation building could occur, as its introduction stated “the RDP is an integrated, coherent socio-economic policy framework. It seeks to mobilize all our people and our countries resources towards the final eradication of apartheid and the building of a democratic, non racial and non-sexist future” (RDP ,1994). Thus the RDP encapsulated six key basic principles within which nation building would occur (RDP, 1994), which are:
1) An integrated and sustainable programme
2) A people driven process
3) Peace and security for all
4) Nation building
5) Link reconstruction and development
6) Democratization of South Africa
The shift to nation building equally meant the consolidation of the welfare system which was racially biased towards the ruling minority white. Consolidation had to happen to bring the two welfare set ups- for the white and the black- into a unified entity. “The welfare model inherited from colonialism and apartheid was inequitable, discriminatory and relied on inappropriate and unsustainable methods of service delivery. Social policy was modeled on Western European institutional welfare for the white minority whilst a residual system of social welfare prevailed for black” (Patel, 2008:72). The adoption of the White Paper for Welfare (1997) was a hallmark to this transition process. It is important at this far to mention that the White Paper for Social Welfare was formulated within the parameters of Reconstruction and Development Programme, recognizing that there was need to shift from residual welfare system to social development model in which active citizenship is the norm “Social development is conceived of, first, as a pro-poor strategy promoting the participation of the socially excluded in development activities to achieve social and economic justice, human rights, social solidarity and active citizenship. Second, a collaborative partnership approach is envisaged between government, civil society, and the private sector, with government playing a proactive leading role. Third, high impact intervention strategies, a community based and developmental approach to service delivery and a better balance between remedial, protective, preventative and developmental strategies were proposed by the White Paper of 1997”, (Patel, 2008:73). This was the right direction that the nation took towards reconstruction and poverty alleviation, however as Patel (2008:80) indicated “ten years from White Paper for Social Welfare it is clear just how complex it is to redesign a social welfare system in a society in transition within a changing regional and global context”. The reality in modern South Africa is that poverty remains quite high. This is greatly attributed to the shift in macro economic policies from RDP to Growth Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) and later to Accelerated Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (ASGISA). This represented a focus shift from people’s development to the economic growth which is consistent with neoliberal ideological agenda. “Government’s investigations, supported by independent research, indicate that the growth rate needed for us to achieve our social objectives is around 5% on average between 2004 and 2014. Realistically assessing the capabilities of the economy and the international environment, we have set a two phase target. In the first phase, between 2005 and 2009, we seek and annual growth rate that averages 4.5% or higher. In the second phase, between 2010 and 2014, we seek an average growth rate of at least 6% of growth domestic product (GDP)” (ASGISA:2006:2 )
At this far it is important to indicate that this shift, which meant that people’s social development would be as a result of trickle down effects of an economic growth to the projected levels by the government meant abandoning people’s welfare to the market forces. While in the apartheid era the society was divided along racial lines, It is equally worthy noting that the post apartheid South African society while trying to recover from the apartheid legacy is heavily impacted upon by the neo liberal policies. Neo liberal policies have polarized the country into two different poles, with the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ living side by side, this deliberate movement by the government from being people centered to economic growth and capital accumulation at the expense of people’s welfare, has had enormous contribution to poverty and powerlessness in the communities. In neo-liberal capitalistic societies ‘what emerge are gigantic monopolies which cripple creativity, freedom and participation in economic, political and social efforts. The end result is the existence of a massive global population of silenced, blind and apathetic consumers on the one hand, and disadvantaged, desperate and a starving population on the other. Neo-liberalism has made it possible for a “powerful few” to tie up global resources in terms of ownership, production and massive capital gains’ (Okosun, 2008:4). The result of which has been rampart poverty in the periphery of the cities and economic establishments, while at the same time with a few very rich people who have benefited from policies like Black Economic Empowerment at the expense of the greater needy population.
The economic policies of GEAR which was later re-casted in the form of ASGISA have in many ways contributed to poverty growth, embracing neo-liberalism by the government meant implementation of structural adjustment programmes (SAPS). “Structural adjustment programmes (SAPS), with its emphasis on creating macro economic stability, impose a range of negative effects. SAPS have failed throughout Africa to increase investment and saving rates, improve export performance, diminish debt, create jobs, bring about sustained growth, or bring out the productive capacity of the poor, the majority of whom are women” Sewpaul (Unpublished:13). The lives of the poor are thus left to unconcerned global forces; the result is the entry into the market of multinational companies which are mostly tied up in the West and United States of America. These multi national companies only serve to grow the economies of their countries at the expense of South Africans, a problem in these multinational economic players results in serious consequences in the people of South Africa, as evidenced by the global recession which started in United States, had direct impact on people’s lives with high cost of living, especially on the food market. “Ideological hegemony of neoliberal capitalism” (Sewpaul: Unpublished:16), presents the greatest challenge to poverty alleviation in South Africa
The implementation of the structural adjustment programmes meant a special challenge to South African manufacturing industries, especially textile which had to compete with large volumes of imported Chinese goods; this stifled the market for locally produced textile products. This resulted in falling of many companies in the textiles industries, the result of which was the increase in job losses and increase in unemployment, especially on the part of the women who constitute a great percentage in the textile industries. While is true that this opening up of the countries borders to open up the markets for competitive trading may be as a result of following World Trade Organization (WTO), the environment created by WTO is not conducive for emerging economies, it is used to the advantage of larger economically well off countries of the West. “The United States government uses the WTO to protect the market for its Multinational corporations, (Kema, 2005, cited in Sewpaul, unpublished: 14). Thus the free trade promoted by the WTO through free market ideologies is thus orchestrated by an invisible hand that is trying to take advantage of the weak and emerging nations for its own economic growth through its own multinational companies-the direct and indirect result is increase in deprivation due to poverty and joblessness in South Africa, as Sewpaul (unpublished:14) affirms, “under the guise of free trade poverty and inequality are repeatedly reproduced”
At this far it is important to indicate that while people in the periphery of the town and cities may experience their own impoverished conditions and locate their troubles within their own failure, it is important to indicate that as illustrated above, much of South Africa’s poverty is systematically made by adopting neo liberal and capitalistic driven agendas.
Constraining factors to operationalization of developmental approach welfare in South Africa
Operationalization of developmental approach to welfare is a big challenge in the contemporary South Africa; this part will tackle some of the major factors that inhibit successful implementation of the developmental approach to social work. Which are:
Ideological conflict in the policies
The conflict at a policy level is in many ways crippling the efforts to implement the developmental approach to welfare. As indicated in the forgoing discussion, the White Paper for Social Welfare was formulated within the parameters of RDP, in which people participation and empowerment was integral to the realization of the greater goal of poverty alleviation after the end of the apartheid era, as the RDP document (1994:7) indicated, “thorough going democratization of our society is in other words, absolutely integral to the whole RDP. The RDP requires fundamental changes in the way that policy is made and programmes are implemented. Above all, the people affected must participate in decision making. Democratization must begin to transform both the state and civil society. Democracy is not confined to periodic elections. It is, rather, an active process enabling everyone to contribute to reconstruction and development”. However market fundamentalism entrenched in GEAR and ASGISA have alienated people participation. The ideological conflict between those of macro-economic policies of GEAR and ASGISA against that of the welfare policy is not conducive to the successful implementation of the developmental welfare policy. Implementing the developmental welfare within these macro economic policies is just like the battle between a lion and a rabbit, the social democratic principles underpinned in the developmental welfare policy are being crippled by the macro economic policies and the agendas entrenched in them. “The government has veered from social development, leaving the developmental welfare floundering in uncertain and turbulent waters; in a shaky structure filled with holes” (Gray, 2006:54)
While the government may have good reasons warranting much focus on economic growth rather than people’s social development, it is important to indicate that priority over one of the two constitutes a grave mistake that has in many ways slowed down the people’s holistic development, as the White paper for Social Welfare (1997:1) affirms, the welfare of the population will not automatically be enhanced by economic growth. Economic development has to be accompanied by equitable allocation and distribution of resources, if it is to support social development. Social development and economic development are therefore interdependent and mutually reinforcing”
Shortage of skilled personnel
The shift in economic policies from RDP to ASGISA and GEAR in many ways increased poverty in the periphery of towns and cities as demonstrated in the foregoing paragraphs, thus we would appreciate that there was demand on the skilled personnel to offer services to the disadvantaged poor. The pressure on social services and its workforce is in many ways as a result of poverty increase, this does not give the social workers enough space in which they can offer proactive means of facilitating programmes with the people that need them. Patel (2008:77) indicated that “the slow process of change in the welfare sector pertains to lack of social workers and inadequate overall human resource capacity. While the number of registered social workers has increased by 27% (3000) social workers over the past decade, in 2006, there were still 11000 registered social workers nationally for a population of some 48 million people”. It is important to mention that “approximately 40% of [whom] …..are living in poverty – with the poorest 15% in desperate struggle to survive”, (Landman et al cited in Holscher, 2008:116). It is also important to mention that before the ANC government came into place, civil society leadership was quite strong, it was part of the process advocating for change, “however when the ANC government was into place and the RDP launched…..many of community leaders in the community based NGO moved to employment within the public sector…when the time came to implement the RDP and developmental welfare programmes, the government was faced with a much weakened civil or non-government sector as well as an in efficient public sector, especially at the provincial and municipal levels”, (Lodge, 2002; Sparks, 2003, cited in Gray, 2006:S55). The weakened NGO sector has had a profound impact on the failure of the development model of services delivery, especially in the rural areas.
Equitable financing
The South African welfare system is made up of government sector, non government organization (NGO) and civil society organizations (CSO). Most NGOs are dependent on the government for financing. It is important to mention that there disparities between the salaries for the social worker working in the NGO sector and those in government, with a greater social service work force in the NGO sector getting less pay compared to their government counterparts. This in many ways does not motivate social workers in the NGO sector. It thus presents a special challenge for NGOs working in rural area. As Patel (2008:77) stated “the majority (social workers) are concentrated in urban areas. Many social workers have left the profession due low salaries and poor working conditions. There is therefore limited human resource capacity to implement new approach”. At the same time the change needed to be reinforced with budgetary adjustments to have long lasting impact. “Sustainable programmes are not cheap! Somebody pays……whether community volunteers, family members who take on the roles of carers, practitioners who commit themselves to making things happen, the organization or government” (Sewpaul and Holscher, 2007, cited in Holscher, 2008:119). Thus there was need for greater and equal collaboration between government, NGO sector civil society organizations and the people themselves in the communities for a sustainable change.
Personnel orientation
The developmental approach to social welfare is an empowering paradigm; integral to the process is people involvement and active participation. At the same time, it is “a process of planned social change designed to promote the populations whole in conjunction with a dynamic process of economic development” (Gray cited in Holscher, 2008:115). It is thus a proactive process which needed skills reorientation for social workers to start appreciating that they can start viewing service users as masters of their own lives, thus the need for greater collaboration between service users and social workers. It is a radical process that is difficult to undertake, for it challenges the dominant perception that the university acquired knowledge is privileged over knowledge acquired over life time by our service users. Therefore “a skills mismatch exists between what social workers feel competent to do and what is required by the developmental welfare policy as set out in the White Paper. Social workers are historically trained in a treatment paradigm and practice settings required these skills. This situation has reinforced resistance to change and has caused considerable confusion and inertia in the implementation of the developmental approach” (Patel, 2008:77)
Over expectations and impatience
The country is just over a decade out of one of the most unequal systems of governance, the apartheid social economic order. It is important to say that while the country had experienced a lot of disadvantages, especially on the part of the black people, the need for quick fix solutions to problems that had been enduring for centuries since colonialism, was setting unfair expectations which were bound to collapse the efforts. These social disadvantages were part of historical processes of the country, “they are seen to arise from centuries of colonial and apartheid oppression wherein indigenous populations were systematically robbed of their lands, their productive assets, their cultural heritage and their self respect. The historic disinheritance of the vulnerable and poor is seen to have been exacerbated and entrenched by contemporary global political and economic conditions”, (Terreblanche, 2002, cited in Holscher, 2008:121). Undoing the wrongs of the past, though people expected change as promised by the ANC government, it is important that this change should have been looked at within historical parameters and also within the changing global economic climates.
Recommendations to overcome the challenges
While it is possible to look at the negatives and failures that have hampered the positive and successful implementation of the developmental welfare approach, it is important to mention that in many ways, the approach has not entirely failed; it has equally facilitated the development of the welfare system to what it is today. “The adoption of the social development model as a guiding framework for post apartheid social welfare and social work practice brought notions of poverty and underdevelopment into the centre of concern” (Gray, 1996; Patel and Triegaardt, 2005, cited in Holscher, 2008: 116). However, there is need to look at some of the changes that may facilitate a successful implementation of the model. The following are some of the recommendations that this paper advances for:
The need for harmony between macro economic policies and the welfare policy cannot be overstated, as indicated earlier on people’s social development and economic development are issues which cannot be looked at in isolation, they are mutually dependent on each other. Thus this paper would strongly argue for the bold decision for economic shift from capitalism to social democracy in which people’s welfare takes centre stage. “In its pre election manifesto, the Reconstruction and Development Programme (African national Congress, 1994), the African National Congress (ANC) committed itself to a social democratic welfare ideology, (Gray, 2006 cited in Holscher, 2008:116). While, it may have been abandoned, one of the major reasons for its failure is impatience and quick fix ideas to undoing the wrongs of the past, which led to the implementation of GEAR and ASGISA, capitalistic laden policies; which have greatly contributed to poverty, especially as impacted by the economic recession that started in 2008. “The current crisis might present the political and theoretical spaces to reconceptualize the relationship between the market, the state, the corporate world, the public good and democracy, and challenge the presumed inevitability of welfare models being subservient to the dictates of the global economy”, (Sewpaul, unpublished:14). For successful implementation of the developmental welfare to happen, then there is need to combine economic shifts as well as political will, this would be integral in meeting the holistic needs of the people of South Africa.
With the creation of the necessary political and economic environment, the developmental model would be feasible; however, this should be integrated with equitable funding to welfare organizations both in the government sector and the NGO sector which would create an equal partnership that would enhance successful implementation of the model. An environment should thus be created that would be attractive for social workers to work both in urban and rural areas to meet the needs of the people of South Africa. At this far it is important to appreciate that the government is in many ways trying to adopt proactive measure as evidenced by the provision of bursaries to social work students to attract more people into the social work profession. This would be integral in the implementation social work practice through the integrated service delivery model (2005) which seeks to harness social security, social welfare and community development. This is a holistic perspective to welfare approach that looks at empowering the communities with sustainable development strategies. ‘Despite having adopted a developmental approach to service delivery, the focus of the department over the last decade has been predominantly on social security, primarily due to the need for urgent and effective interventions to alleviate poverty. However, the intensive social security focus has been to the detriment of other developmental social services’ (Benjamin, 2005). There by rendering pressure on social security. Integrated development approach would thus allow for people participation in economic development through deliberate programmes that have people’s social economic development in their interest.
Finally, it is thus important to highlight the need for greater democratization of services to allow for true participation that allows people to show their own creativity and own the need to change their personal situations of poverty. Without thoroughgoing democratization the resources and potential of our country and people will not be available for a coherent programme” (RDP, 1994)
References
ASGISA (2006) accessed from http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/briefings/asgibackground.pdf on 27 June, 2008 at 10am
Benjamin, J. (2005) Benjamin: Launch of the integrated service delivery model. Accesses from: http://www.polity.org.za/article/benjamin-launch-of-the-integrated-service-delivery-model-28112005-2005-11-28 on 15/09/09 at 6pm
Frye, I. (2007) The ‘second economy’ as an intellectual sleight of hand. Africanus: Journal of Developmental Studies
Gray, M (2006) The progress of social development in South Africa. In International Journal of Social Welfare. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford
Holscher, D. (2008) The Emperors new clothes: South Africa’s attempted transition to developmental social welfare and social work. International Social Welfare. 17:114-123
Patel (2008) Getting it right and wrong: An overview of a decade of post Apartheid Social Welfare. Practice: Social Work in Action, 20(2)71-81
RDP (1994) Accessed from http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/policy/white.html on 27 June, 2008 at10 am
Sewpaul, V (unpublished) Social work education in the era of globalization.
White Paper for Social Welfare (1997) Department of social development.
