Featured Post

NEWS: Coastal wetlands are unable to adapt to the rate of sea-level rise and are constrained by infrastructure

Wetlands, precious ecosystems that shield coastlines, safeguard drinking water from saltwater contamination, and nourish diverse wildlife, face a dire threat from the accelerating pace of sea-level rise, driven by global warming. Wetlands have historically adapted to rising sea levels by expanding upward and inland. However, predictions indicate that the waterline will soon shift far too rapidly for wetlands to keep pace. Consequently, future decades may witness the tragic loss of these vital wetland ecosystems. Wetlands along coastlines have historically played valuable roles for people and wildlife, but are now facing the threat of sea-level rise. As temperatures rise, sea levels are rising at an accelerating rate, and wetlands are unable to keep pace by building upward and migrating inland. This is due to human-induced climate change and the burning of fossil fuels, which has warmed the oceans and melted glaciers. Sea levels are now rising at about 10 millimeters per year, and are

NEWS: Who gains from incompetent tender awards for infrastructure projects?

Frustrated by lack of progress on key infrastructure projects in the Makana Municipality. Philip Machanick the Chariperson of the Grahamstown Resident Association, is suggesting this as a solution to stop patronage on infrastructure projects . Do you agree with him? Is his solution too simplistic?

Who gains from incompetent tender awards? and this leads me to another question. What particularly favours this development and how can that be changed?

Government awards contracts like on the condition that 30% be awarded to local SMMEs. That, on the face of it, looks like a good idea, in an economically-distressed region particularly. But there is a flaw in the concept. If a local economy is depressed, patronage has extra power because the only resources to be had flow from the government. Consequently, there is a temptation to steer contracts away from contractors with a strong track record towards those most likely to be compliant with rewarding patronage networks. So the 30% SMME fraction becomes the patronage slice.

This would not be such a bad thing if the job got done. As infrastructure shortfalls are remedied, the investment climate improves leading to more work. Recipients of patronage, even if not super-productive, add to local wealth.

The problem is that this model perversely incentivises failure. Why? Because if the project fails and it is essential infrastructure, it has to be done again. And the patronage networks are greased again. Worse: if infrastructure continues to fail, government funding becomes the only game in town, making patronage all the stronger.

The solution? 


If the government wants to promote development of SMMEs and local skills,  they should make that a separate project. Also, heavily police essential infrastructure projects for wrongdoing – throw the full weight of the law at any misconduct or corruption: SIU, lifestyle audits, the works. 

If the government wants to promote development of SMMEs and local skills,  they should make that a separate project.

If the patronage slice is now a separate budget, it’s bad if it goes astray, but not the end of the world. If we carry on with decaying sewerage, water, roads and power infrastructure, the government becomes a ponzi scheme and there is no new income to pay for further development. Even the corrupt in the end lose as they become parasites killing the body they feed off.


So the remedy is simple. 
  • Remove the 30% SMME fraction from major infrastructure projects and instead award economically distressed municipalities grants to replace this funding. 
  • Police infrastructure projects rigorously so if any money does go astray it is out of a less essential pocket.

The cost of not doing this? 

An economic death spiral. Nationwide we are suffering an investment strike and our local economies are not better. More businesses are closing than opening; houses are hard to sell; jobs are scarce. Don’t tell me this isn’t a problem.

If my solution isn’t the right one, let’s hear others. One thing is for sure: we need a new approach because the old one isn’t working.


This was published as an opinion piece to view the full article click here

Comments