Mail & Guardian

Fix special economic zones for growth

South Africa’s SEZS can help develop skills and industries, beneficiat­e raw materials and diversify exports if certain measures are put in place

- OPINION William Gumede William Gumede is an associate professor at the School of Governance, University of the Witwatersr­and. This is an edited extract from his Inclusive Society Institute occasional paper, Leveraging Special Economic Zones for Growth.

Special economic zones (SEZS) in South Africa have not fully lived up to their potential — as has been the case in many African countries — to create jobs, beneficiat­e raw materials, develop new industries and transfer skills and technology from foreign companies.

There are aspects of South Africa’s SEZ model that clearly need to change, one being that the zones must be made to fit within a longterm developmen­t plan rather than be ad hoc projects, which many of the country’s SEZS are.

Before special economic zones are considered as a catalyst for developmen­t, it is critical to assess the country’s comparativ­e advantages. In other words, what it can do with domestic resources, capital and skills, and what will need to be built with outside help. As part of this, a comprehens­ive analysis of the country’s position in the global economy, trade and supply chains is required.

There must also be a business case for establishi­ng SEZS. If the intention, for example, is to attract foreign direct investment, the objective must be integrated into a long-term national developmen­t plan.

This means there must be a global demand and market for the products manufactur­ed in these zones, and they must be embedded in the country’s comparativ­e advantage. An SEZ cannot be establishe­d based on political, ideologica­l and interestgr­oup considerat­ions — as many special economic zones in South Africa have been.

There must also be pragmatic and credible laws, regulation­s and institutio­nal frameworks to govern SEZS. And government­s must implement these consistent­ly, honestly and competentl­y to foster investor, market and society confidence that SEZS are not simply another avenue for corruption, self-enrichment and failure. The business environmen­t must be conducive, efficient and friendly. The costs of doing business — registrati­on, logistics and customs — should be conducive to companies setting up.

Public infrastruc­ture — power, rail and water — for SEZS must be working, reliable and cost effective. Poor, unreliable or no infrastruc­ture is a significan­t factor increasing the costs of doing business, global pricing competitiv­eness of products manufactur­ed and of labour.

Sound infrastruc­ture is a vital competitiv­e advantage for investors to set up shop. The neglect and collapse of infrastruc­ture linked to power outages, the broken rail system and port delays have undermined the competitiv­eness of South Africa’s SEZS.

The zones could be fully government-owned — as is the case with many in South Africa — or privately owned or public-private arrangemen­ts.

In developing countries, the stateowned SEZS have mostly failed because the public sector’s governance failures such as corruption, incompeten­ce and red tape are repeated in these zones. Publicpriv­ate arrangemen­ts, in which the private sector co-govern and co-manage, have generally been the most successful.

The problem is that South African national, provincial or city government­s often do not have an adequate understand­ing of the requiremen­ts of businesses that want to invest in the SEZ.

As a result the government services provided for special economic zones are also frequently not tailored for the investors they want to attract.

An effective, competent and pragmatic management structure is crucial in managing SEZS. Many of South Africa’s state-owned special economic zones fail because of the same lack of implementa­tion and execution management capacity in the public sector — especially if the same incompeten­t public sector managers are operating the SEZS.

There must be clear monitoring, evaluation and assessment mechanisms to ensure that SEZS are on track to meet their stated objectives and to intervene if the zone is in danger of veering off course. There must also be benchmarki­ng of SEZS against comparable successful ones elsewhere.

China, for example, in 1996 issued an official administra­tive decree for the compulsory regular evaluation of SEZ performanc­e: those that are poorly managed, not meeting their developmen­t targets, and growing too slowly lose their special economic zone status. Chinese SEZS are evaluated based on several performanc­e indicators, including knowledge creation and technologi­cal innovation, research and developmen­t expenditur­e and the number of R&D institutio­ns and technology innovation incubators establishe­d.

The sluggish bureaucrac­y, red tape and incompeten­ce seen in the public service has undermined the creation of competitiv­e SEZS. The South African government often takes a long time to put legal, regulatory and institutio­nal structures in place for special economic zones — and sometimes even longer to operationa­lise.

For example, then trade and industry minister Rob Davies announced the formation of the Musinamakh­ado SEZ in 2017. But the project has yet to get off the ground.

When finally in operation, business procedures are slowed down by red tape, and special customs and tax regimes are incoherent­ly applied. In comparison, the Hamriyah Free Zone in Sharjah, in the United Arab Emirates, could grant a licence to establish a business within 24 hours of submitting all the required documents.

Many South African SEZS do not have a clear strategy of how local firms will be linked to the supply chains of the global firms. African and South African SEZS also often do not integrate the boosting of research and developmen­t into the industrial value chains of companies.

The technical learning, knowledge transfer and industrial upgrading in South African special economic zones is therefore not as effective as it has been in many Chinese, South Korean or Singaporea­n SEZS.

Another point is that SEZS are often giant industrial structures that could damage the environmen­t significan­tly. The constructi­on and management of these zones must be done in such a way that it protects the environmen­t and investors must be required to report on environmen­tal, sustainabi­lity and governance performanc­e.

Many of the first generation SEZS’ constructi­on also rarely consulted local people, civil society and interest groups. It is essential that new special economic zones do not repeat this mistake. If a site chosen to construct the SEZ involves uprooting residents, acquiring their land and property, the process must be done in consultati­on with them, fairly and compassion­ately.

Special economic zones can play a role in developing new industries, beneficiat­ing raw materials, and diversifyi­ng South Africa’s exports if they are linked to the national developmen­t strategy, done in partnershi­p with business and freed from the public sector’s governance problems that have stymied SEZS up to now.

The constructi­on and management of these zones must be done in such a way that it protects the environmen­t

 ?? Graphic: JOHN MCCANN Data source: DTI ??
Graphic: JOHN MCCANN Data source: DTI

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa