The alignment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with national development agendas has gained traction since the ratification of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in September 2015. This article investigates how South Africa has aligned the climate action SDG (SDG 13) with its national development agenda, with an emphasis on adaptation policies and institutional framework. This comes against a background where the country has been accused of bias towards mitigation policies that were trigged by the Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios in 2007, which could have quickened mitigation responses to SDG 13. The data were generated through the use of three key methods, namely key informant interviews (
According to Arndt et al. (
Whilecontention by Otto et al. (
Given the foregoing discussion, this article is dedicated to investigating how South Africa has aligned the climate SDG with its national development agenda following the proclamation of the 2030 Agenda for sustainable Development in 2015 (United Nations
The article begins by discussing the politics that has engulfed climate change adaptation in general both globally and domestically. This is followed by a reflection on some of the factors that hamper adaptation efforts. The article then moves to research methodology, highlighting the research findings and concluding with policy recommendations particularly for the government.
The underlying assumption of this article is that the politics of climate change adaptation particularly at a global level has not helped to advance the adaptation agenda at national level. This dynamic, coupled with barriers to adaptation has hindered the adaptation efforts nationally, including in South Africa. Masters (
Laves et al. (
Be that as it may, this cannot take away the fact that there was a missed opportunity to adapt to climate change. Similarly, given the prioritisation of mitigation measures globally, it can be concluded that most countries at the national level may have followed this trend where adaptation was not given the urgency it deserves because national policies are by far influenced by trends in policies at a global level. With the growing consensus about the need to adapt, recent discussions are paying more attention on how to operationalise adaptation in policy practice (Biesbroek et al.
Linked to the growing consensus about the need to adapt, Simonet and Fatoric (
Masters (
While increasing voices for more adaptation measures are warranted, such measures may be hindered by the existence of the plethora of barriers to adaptation. Although there are challenges with adaptation in general, Simonet and Fatoric (
Evidence suggests that barriers tend to differ from project to project and from area to area. Biesbroek et al. (
There are also numerous underlying causes of these barriers. Barriers caused by conflicting timescales were found to be the most important group of barriers. This is critical because climate change is one issue that has to compete with other critical issues for an already limited amount of political attention; issues that are more pressing in nature, whose impacts are more immediately felt or have more visible short-term results than adaptation effects, which are long-term (Biesbroek et al.
The availability of resources is an important factor in adapting to climate change, inadequate resources or the inaccessibility thereof can admittedly be a major barrier to climate change adaptation. Saab (
Another group of barriers worth scrutinising is social barriers. Social barriers tend to be widespread and difficult to manage. Paradoxically, they are integral in determining the level of success of adaptation efforts. For instance, in Australia, the community rejected the proposal to drink recycled water, which highlighted the significance for policymakers to gain the community confidence before applying adaptation measures (Laves et al.
Oberlack (
By contrast, institutional crowdedness manifests itself through the existence of a plethora of institutions, which influence the decision-making process on climate change adaptation. This may result in unnecessary competition among institutions, cause confusion about roles and responsibilities and lead to different approaches and perceptions about the problem (Oberlack
Laves et al. (
According to Mccarl et al. (
The study followed the evaluation research principles, which are usually used in big organisations, such as the government, often with a purpose to assess the effectiveness of a new programme or policy so that the necessary improvements can be made. Accordingly, Creswell (
Consistent with the proposition by Creswell (
Twenty-one key interviews were held based on a pre-developed questionnaire. The interviews helped the researcher to obtain first-hand information concerning the research objectives of the study. Among some of the key informants were government officials involved in drawing up national policies related to climate change (adaptation) and sustainable development, as well as global negotiations. The interviews have the advantage of assisting and enabling the researcher to connect with respondents and therefore gain their cooperation. Even though they are time-consuming and expensive, interviews tend to yield the highest response rates (Leedy & Ormrod
According to Leedy and Ormrod (
Furthermore, to probe underlying meaning, semantic differential and categorical response techniques were employed. The semantic differential technique is useful to measure indirectly how the respondents feel about a particular issue and to compare responses among respondents. The semantic technique allows respondents to express feelings by ratings with respect to opposing concepts. The categorical responses technique was used for questions deemed to be of sensitive nature. Some of the questions were designed to obtain information indirectly using this technique. This technique allows the respondents to place themselves in categories rather than to give exact answers. The key to the effective application of this technique is to ensure that all possible options are covered and guarded against overlaps between categories.
The selection of respondents was undertaken simultaneously for both the online survey and the interviews before data collection commenced. Furthermore, all respondents who participated in the online survey and interviews were asked to respond to the same broad set of pre-determined questions as discussed earlier. As policy on climate change is the responsibility of national government departments, the majority of respondents, particularly key informants were purposefully selected from these departments. These included among others, the Department of Environmental Affairs, Department of Energy, Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, Department of Science and Technology, Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation. Respondents (middle to senior management) were purposefully selected from mainly the environmental and economic clusters of government departments. Furthermore, climate change adaptation policy and related documents were also gathered. This permitted both the document and critical discourse analysis as a method (Vogt, Gardener & Haeffele
In addition to focusing on national government departments, the online survey technique was emailed to state-owned entities (SOEs) that perform government mandate related to climate change and sustainable development, research organisations and non-governmental organisations. The SOEs included Electricity Supply Commission (ESKOM), South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), South African Weather Service (SAWS), South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON), Applied Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science (ACCESS), South African Energy Development Institute (SANEDI), National Cleaner Production Centre (NCPC), Statistics South Africa (StatsSA), National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC), stakeholders in the renewable energy industry, academia among others.
As indicated earlier, 103 respondents finished the online survey, which had been loaded onto the QuestionPro platform. Data collection through the online platform commenced from December 2018 to August 2019, while the interviews were held between February and September 2019. The 21 key informants who took part in the interview were coded from 1 to 21 to ensure anonymity and confidentiality.
Pertaining to ethics, the study ensured that respondents were provided with adequate information about the study, including the risks so that they could make an informed decision of whether or not they wished to participate in the study. Furthermore, the researchers ensured that the integrity and quality of the research are not compromised. Hence, the need to ensure the well-being of the participants in the study. One way of achieving this was to guarantee the privacy of participants in the study by protecting their identity and ensuring that the information obtained always remains secret and is stored securely at all times. Prior to participating in the study, the respondents were provided with the participant information sheet that was approved by the General Research Ethics Review Committee of the College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences (University of South Africa).
This provided them with all the necessary information about the study, why they had been selected to participate in the study and what was expected of them. It further informed them of their rights, how the data would be handled and used, assured them that their privacy and anonymity would be protected and that they would be required to consent in writing to participate in the study. Encryption of specific details was employed where it was relevant to protect the identities of respondents so that colleagues from the same organisation could not identify the participants from information about the study. As such, participants were asked to indicate which information should be kept secret. At an institutional level, permission was sought from organisations that may be affected by the study, particularly the Department of Science and Technology, the Department of Environmental Affairs and the Department of Energy. All data collected were used for the sole purpose of achieving the research objectives.
Of the respondents who took part in the online survey, 51% were male while 46% were female. With regard to the racial composition of the sample, 56% were black, 29% white and 14% fell in other racial groups. A total of 95% of respondents were employed, the majority of whom (31%) held middle management positions, 26% in senior management and 11% in executive management. Similarly, 90% of the surveyed respondents possessed honours degree and above, while 10% had diploma and undergraduate qualifications.
Accordingly, 45% of respondents were very familiar with climate change management policies in South Africa, while 46% were moderately familiar and only 9% indicated that they were not familiar. With regard to sustainable development, overall, 95% of respondents were very familiar with sustainable development strategies in South Africa. Only 5% indicated that they were not familiar with sustainable development.
Boyd et al. (
Given that climate change adaptation is largely seen as a local issue globally, it can be inferred that developing countries are able to exercise much more direct policy control with respect to adaptation than with respect to mitigation. In addition to the policies and strategies that were identified, the
Availability of policies to respond to climate change adaptation.
The respondents were asked if they thought the policies adequately address climate change adaptation challenges faced by the country. What was notable was that even though the respondents felt that the policies are in place, 39% of the respondents were of the view that such policies do not appear to have influenced climate change adaptation challenges that are faced by South Africa. Among other reasons, they perceived climate change as a moving target that requires strong implementation.
On the contrary, the respondents repeatedly asserted that the policies have not been translated into concrete actions. Failure to translate the policies into concrete action has seemingly resulted in the laxity of implementation in general which the respondents felt was necessary. It is also for this reason that the policies were found to be superficial and only good on paper with limited impact on the ground (Respondent 13).
Fischer-Smith (
Policies adequately address climate change adaptation challenges.
Another perspective that emerged from Respondent 19 that is linked to poor implementation relates to what was termed as ‘gaping-holes in knowledge base’. This did not necessarily mean new knowledge but rather critical knowledge that would complement existing knowledge, for example, on predictions. This came as a result of a recognition that South Africa has the ability to make good projections. However, it was contended that very little if any appears to have come out in terms of the second-tier applications where such projections are applied to a specific sector domain such as water, agriculture and others.
It was suggested that such analysis of projections to those domain levels would provide South Africa with empirical evidence on how the respective sector domains would be affected in the short-, medium- and long-term. This would also assist the country in determining exactly what it needs to be adapting to. Laves et al. (
Furthermore, Laves et al. (
The respondents indicated that the lack of vision also manifests itself in government departments that are important for adaptation that do not appear to be fully engaged with adaptation issues and challenges (Respondent 15). Hence, 54% of the respondents felt that while policies are in place, they have not translated to real change on the ground and therefore have not enabled South Africa to have adequate climate change resilience. This was raised partly because Respondent 6 felt that South Africa still experiences incidents that have happened in the past and with similar consequences as if there are no adaptation measures in place. Similarly, it was felt that past experiences do not seem to have influenced how things are carried out when it comes to adaptation responses. Having said that, the respondents felt that some sectors should be given more attention when it comes to adaptation interventions (
Sectors that must be prioritised for adaptation.
Sectors that must be prioritised to meet the desired policy objectives for adaptation | ||
---|---|---|
Water and catchment management services | Biodiversity | Ecological infrastructure and services |
Ecosystem management services | Agriculture | Early warning systems |
Human safety | Transport sector and/or infrastructure | Fisheries |
Methodologies for estimating the adaptation costs | Institutional capacity to deliver on actions | Processes that define adaptation objectives |
One of the areas raised here that need urgent attention relates to agriculture. According to Arndt et al. (
Although these sectors came up, Respondent 19 was of a view that South Africa needs to first and foremost define its economic and development interest. It must also understand how it is impacted by climate change and how those economic interests affect the socio-economic priorities. Based on that, it would then be easy to define what needs to be prioritised and funded. While it was felt that funding could be an issue, it was suggested that it could easily be sourced provided a compelling case is advanced for resources to be made available.
The challenges discussed earlier about the laxity of implementation may be attributed to the issue of capacity to implement policies and programmes. This is a serious issue that cannot be ignored to effectively implement policies and strategies. Fischer-Smith (
Put differently, it does not help to have good policies when there are no institutional mechanisms or weak institutional capacity to derive value from those policies. When asked if they thought that South Africa has institutional capacity to implement the different climate change adaptation sectors identified in the policy there was a mixed reaction to that question as shown in
Availability of institutional capacity to implement adaptation measures.
A total of 46% respondents who disagreed felt that despite the best intentions and good-will that South Africa has shown; the reality is that South Africa does not appear to have built adequate institutional capacity. They argued that even where capacity exists, it appears to be scattered and uneven across sectors and different spheres of government. This is something that Marquardt (
Worryingly, there was a concern that there appears to be a complete lack of capacity at the municipal government level. The lack of capacity was attributed in part to adaptation being a ‘poor cousin and a late comer’ compared with mitigation (Respondent 8). Faling, Tempelhoff and Niekerk (
It was recommended that as South Africa strengthens its institutional capacity, it would also have to define the roles of different players. Fischer-Smith (
Clearly, implementation cannot happen in a vacuum unless there is effective coordination. When asked about the effectiveness of the coordination of various institutions that are involved in climate change adaptation, the respondents viewed the institutional coordination as being largely ineffective and uneven across sectors and spheres of government. Exceptional pockets of excellence at national level, KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape provinces were highlighted (Respondent 6). According to Galvani (
Among the coordination mechanisms that were cited included the MINMEC
The respondents decried the inherent disjuncture and lack of coherence at what happens at the different spheres of government. Hence, each sphere of government appears to be doing its own thing with limited communication and collaboration with other spheres sectors. Marquardt (
With this in mind, Respondent 19 argued that what seems to be the real problem is not necessarily lack of ability to convene different sector players, but rather the thought leadership that is lacking to ensure that these structures can be used much more effectively. Therefore, it was insinuated that ineffective coordination is not because of the lack of structures but rather it is because of the lack of knowledge and thought leadership to achieve it, hence coordination largely remains reactive and not proactive
The respondents were asked to identify the five most important barriers they thought presented the maximum challenge for South Africa in responding to climate change adaptation.
Barriers that present most challenges to adaptation.
Among the reasons that were cited were that in an environment where resources are limited, there will always be competition for resources. The long-term nature of adaptation projects or effects presents problems because adaptation is not prioritised now because its effects may only be felt much later. Accordingly, Ekins and Speck (
Furthermore, some of the benefits of adaptation policies may be in the form of co-benefits. Hence, the authors argue that it is crucial for policymakers when they make decisions, which have long-term implications, to understand as much as possible the full range of links between their current actions and future outcomes. The respondents felt that climate change is seen largely as the preserve of intellectuals and has not been simplified for ordinary people on the ground (Respondent 16).
Even with intellectuals, it was contended that it seems that the understanding is largely limited to physical science and not full appreciation of what it means for specific sectors (Respondent 19). The respondents observed the fact that adaptation is viewed as costly, generally not bankable and profit-oriented, which is not helpful. They decried the lack of national attention to adaptation simply because it is not being taken seriously; hence there is no robust public awareness campaign on it. Conflicting timescale was also highlighted as a barrier, especially when one considers the fact that climate change competes with other issues for an already limited amount of political and economic attention that are more pressing in nature, whose impacts are more certain and more visible short-term results compared with adaptation that requires a long-term horizon. Faling et al. (
Balance between short- and long-term adaptation scenarios.
The respondents indicated that the effect of a political-term of office cannot be ignored when it comes to issues that get political attention, because inevitably, there will always be competition for priorities. Hence, Galvani (
Respondents were also asked whether adaptation should be addressed purely in the context of other programmes such as disaster risk management, sustainable development and not as a standalone measure. A total of 59% felt that it should not be addressed in isolation (
Adaptation should be addressed purely in the context of other programmes.
In supporting the notion that adaptation should be integrated into other programmes, it was argued that one cannot dissociate climate change from things such as disaster risk management, sustainable development and other issues were seen as two sides of the same coin (Respondent 19). Ekins and Speck (
The purpose of this article was to investigate and present the findings relating to policy coverage and institutional spread that are in place to address climate change adaptation capacity and resilience building. The study contributed to knowledge by examining adaptation policies, improving practice and even decision-making by government on adaptation measures. The study revealed that South Africa has policies and strategies in place even though it was inferred that they are superficial, difficult to implement and not supported by resources. The study demonstrated that part of the problem is the lack of leadership and a clear vision for adaptation. The study concluded that policies have not assisted to make South Africa to build climate change resilience. There was also a concern about poor institutional coordination. Although climate change adaptation is regarded as important in South Africa, there is a lack of emphasis on adaptation in general. Hence, adaptation is neglected. In the light of these challenges and considering South Africa’s development agenda, the study recommends that there should be deliberate enhancement of adaptation measures at all levels of government. Furthermore, a full alignment of the climate action goal is necessary, specifically the adaptation and resilience perspectives should be addressed within the context of other programmes such as disaster risk management and sustainable development.
We would like to thank all the respondents that took part in the study. Our appreciation also goes to the reviewers for their useful insights and suggestions.
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Both authors substantially contributed in the article. D.E.M. was responsible for conceptualisation, methodology, data collection, data analysis and writing the report. G.N. also assisted with conceptualisation, supervision, editing and review.
Approval to conduct the study was obtained from the University of South Africa, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, General Research Ethics Review Committee, reference number: 2018/CAES/049.
Funding was received from the University of South Africa and the Department of Science and Technology as part of pursuing the PhD studies.
Data availability is subject to approval by Ethics Committee of the University of South Africa.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the official position of the University of South Africa.
This is a structure consisting of the minister and the nine provincial Members of Executive Council (MECs) who deal with the same portfolio.
MINTEC is a structure consisting of senior government officials that was established to facilitate coordination between the national department and the provincial authorities particularly on environmental affairs. It supports MINMEC and is chaired by the director general.