Ignore society’s welfare at your peril

I READ recently of a new shopping mall development that has caused consternation in the local community because retail jobs are not being given to its members.

Last year, the developers also had to deal with the anger of local people who resented employment opportunities not being afforded to those who lived close by.

On the face of it, one might deplore this additional discouragement to development and investment – but it highlights some home truths that need to be faced in South African society.

In the days of apartheid, communities of unemployed, poor people did not intrude on the lives of suburbia because legislation had been carefully crafted to isolate the former and protect the latter. Business was conducted and shopping precincts and other properties developed without reference to the general citizenry.

All over the world at the time, suppliers called the shots and the market consisted only of those who chose to buy, or not.

In the global village, however, it has become clear that the market is a great deal larger than just the consumers who purchase.

Businesses ignore this reality at their peril and many have been shaken out of complacency by the influence of the market, which has developed a sense of indignation about business practices that appear contrary to society’s welfare.

Here, where unemployment is rampant and opportunities exist for developers to seek likely sites closer to those communities that were previously isolated and where poverty and hopelessness reside, it is even more important for it to be acknowledged that the new shopping mall or secure residential estate cannot claim immunity from the people who live in the area – not by pretending that they are not there or erecting high walls.

In fact, on one hand the developers have a responsibility to ensure there is social and economic development within the neighbouring communities. They may not always accept this, but the reality is that if they ignore it, they are compromising the economic welfare of the market, and the country on which they will increasingly depend. This is the longer-term threat. In the short term, their projects will not earn the credibility they need to make progress. If a community sets itself against a development, the delays and frustrations will involve huge extra costs. This has already happened several times in our city, and it is a trend which will gain momentum as communities discover the power they have.

From our positions of prosperity we may regard this as anarchy and raise all the appropriate noises of objection – but no matter how loud, they will not deter communities from demanding that they be recognised as stakeholders.

Of course, the problem is that unemployed people usually lack the skills to be employed either at the stages of construction or later when the new development becomes operational.

They have lacked the necessary preparation, and this is what developers should give attention to. There are ways in which unskilled people can be trained for employment; not at a high level, but in such a way that they could participate in modern construction, as plumbers, or road builders, for example.

Setas offer short courses and are even prepared to pay for the training in many instances.

Jumpstart, a national programme initiated by Mr Price, supported by other retail chains and funded extensively by the national Jobs Fund, prepares unemployed people for employment in the retail sector by developing the relevant soft skills and, more importantly, giving hope by way of some sort of career aspiration. Without a start, aspiration is practically impossible, surely.

Very large projects are called “catalytic” and are expected to have major economic spin-offs but, in reality, all projects have the potential to be transformative. Not to whole communities, perhaps, but to some people within them.

Such transformation has little life of its own – there has to be an impelling force to make sure it takes place. For their own good, developments need to be embraced by local communities, which, from an early stage, can recognise tangible benefits and advancement.

Dependence is absolutely mutual, and so it must be if the country’s economy is to thrive. In case we hadn’t noticed, “trickle down” is entirely inappropriate.