Climate change is often described as a crisis that affects everyone, demanding urgent action to prevent widespread devastation from storms and rising seas. However, a significant concern is that climate change discussions are not open to everyone for engagement or inquiry. This exclusion is not accidental but a deliberate tactic to promote specific agendas and achieve predetermined political and economic goals. Despite claims of equality and justice, the reality is that the world operates on hierarchical structures that marginalise the Third World, perpetually relegating them to the fringes.
The seemingly noble climate discussions occur against this backdrop, raising questions about those championing this campaign to save the world. Nevertheless, understanding climate change requires delving into the historical Transition Debate, as Jason Moore calls it, on capitalism’s origins, which is crucial for contrasting two contrasting schools of thought on climate change. The Anthropocene claims all humans are responsible for environmental harm, while the Capitalocene directs blame on the capitalist system and its mode of primitive accumulation.
As nations leverage international law to tackle climate challenges, the Anthropocene discourse gains momentum in UN-led negotiations. Key agreements such as the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 2015 Paris Agreement establish greenhouse gas reduction targets, enhance climate resilience and offer financial assistance to developing countries. Like numerous countries in the UN system, South Africa aligns its climate strategies with the Anthropocene approach by endorsing these crucial agreements.
This article focuses on the Anthropocene-induced South African policy environment and how it may not be suitable for the country, owing to its history and current rigid structural matters in the economy that fail to upgrade the black majority and underclasses into full humans with rights, choices and opinions. Furthermore, it considers the quick rush to net zero through policies like the Just Transition Framework (JTF) and the Just Energy Transition (JET) as extensions of European foreign policy aimed at “greening” the empire and facilitating exclusive access to minerals and markets.
South Africa’s Climate Strategy and Global Commitments
South Africa has an unenviable task of balancing economic growth with emission reduction goals, a dilemma exacerbated by socio-economic disparities and political pressures. The potential impacts of climate change on South Africa’s economy and society are said to be significant. In the early days, South Africa prioritised economic development over stringent mitigation measures but has gradually shifted towards promoting emissions reductions at all costs. The entire climate change focus is on its electricity sector, which entails a transition away from coal and centring renewable energy.
Generally speaking, it would be premature to talk of ‘progress’ on an issue dependent on global dynamics, where achieving consensus is akin to finding the holy grail. In 2015, the Paris Agreement represented a significant global commitment to limit global warming well below 2°C. However, ongoing disagreements among nations have shaped subsequent summit agendas, as evidenced by the United States’ withdrawal under Donald Trump and subsequent re-engagement under Joe Biden.
Other measures by the likes of the European Union (EU) and the US, such as domestic mandatory human rights due diligence laws and Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs), continue to complicate the global climate governance landscape. The Paris Agreement relies on voluntary pledges and the ‘good hearts’ of wealthy countries. This leaves a gap for the EU and the US to develop measures to ‘enforce’ emissions reductions using trade, human rights and other measures. The long-term impact of these domestic policies designed for the world on South Africa will be immense.
A significant but often overlooked point is that the Anthropocene-cantered discourse perpetuates neoMalthusian racism within the climate crisis narrative. This perspective unfairly blames the Global South equally for climate change, focusing on overpopulation in poorer regions rather than addressing overconsumption and environmental degradation in the Global North. Consequently, this discourse ignores the unequal contributions to climate issues and risks imposing solutions that unfairly burden developing nations and marginalised communities worldwide. South Africa and other developing countries face intensified pressure to phase out coal under this narrative.
Nonetheless, South Africa’s energy transition remains a focal point, and its commitment to dish coal by 2050 is contestable. Political and economic complexities thwart the implementation of ambitious climate pledges. Scholars like Richard Calland claim that an intricate web of interests influences the country’s policy decisions, where the push for economic growth clashes with the urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. At the core of South Africa’s commitment to a ‘just’ transition is the Presidential Climate Commission (PCC), complemented by the Just Transition Framework and the Just Energy Transition Investment Plan (JET-IP).
With an estimated R1 trillion in new investments, the JET-IP operationalises the USD 8.5 billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) established at COP26 with France, Germany, the UK, the US and the EU. This contestable agreement deepens the empire’s ‘greening’ while blindsiding the Marikana tragedy and its consequences. This means that the impact of low-carbon mineral exports on local communities and the environment is trivialised. This is no coincidence since the JTF policy closely resembles the EU’s Just Transition Mechanism, which may not suit South Africa’s unique circumstances. Robert Pollock argues that this was to be expected as the EU has aggressively “externalised” its Just Transition agenda after 2015.
The Gathering of Elites ‘Without Us’
Under the theme Moving the needle on Climate Change and Just Transition, the role of the National Treasury, the National Treasury Climate Resilience symposium took place in Pretoria from 15 to 17 July 2024. The gathering focused on integrating climate goals into national finances and coordinating government efforts to tackle climate change. The discussions aimed to create a clear role for the National Treasury in supporting South Africa’s transition to a low-carbon economy.
At this event, President Ramaphosa presented Operation Vulindlela, a collaborative programme that aims to strike a delicate balance between tackling climate change and fostering economic growth through a multifaceted approach. Operation Vulindlela drives reforms across crucial sectors, including energy, water, telecommunications, and transportation, to enhance South Africa’s economic competitiveness and productivity. The Anthropocene climate change discourse is now embedded in state policy, which means its weaknesses have infected the whole state and its machinery.
There is a celebrated projection of USD 98 billion worth of investments that the JET-IP would attract in various green sectors, including minerals extraction, green hydrogen production, new power infrastructure, and electric vehicle manufacturing. According to Ramaphosa, the government invests in retraining programmes, creates jobs in renewable energy and supports small enterprises in affected areas to ensure a just transition. Pollock describes just transition as “a pervasive but slippery concept” subject to various interpretations. It advances a caring side to ‘victims’ of climate change while unleashing the dogs of war in toxic capitalism as ‘saviours’.
This means that both local and global capitalists see an opportunity to make money to finance the seemingly noble endeavour of climate change. As a result, the National Treasury’s Climate Finance Strategy seeks to leverage public and private finance for climate goals. South Africa is among four countries with JET-P agreements: Indonesia, Vietnam and Senegal. At its core, a JET-P is a ‘country sector platform’ aimed at coordinating collaboration between governments and various stakeholders, including Multilateral Development Banks, bilateral funders, national development banks and the private sector in national investment plans.
In simple language, the National Treasury Climate Resilience Symposium launched a ‘country sector platform’ known as the Transition Funding Platform to mobilise capital for its climate change action. Elsewhere, North Macedonia launched a sector platform in 2023 with support from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Climate Investment Fund, and international partners. According to Reuters, the €3 billion plan aims to phase out coal by 2030 and accelerate renewable energy deployment alongside grid investments.
Understanding Just Energy Transition through the Capitalocene Logic
The Capitalocene logic warns against capital hijacking the global climate agenda and wants it held culpable for historical and ongoing environmental degradations and social disruptions in its profit-maximising enterprise. This theory posits that powerful corporations, buoyed by the protection of international law and narratives like the Anthropocene, escape culpability for exacerbating the climate crisis. Historically, the capitalist economy has thrived on extracting and utilising fossil fuels, a practice identified as a primary driver of environmental destruction.
Contrary to the notion that all individuals share equal responsibility for climate change, historical and contemporary examples highlight significant disparities. The growth of the South African economy in the past relied heavily on burning fossil fuels. For decades, Eskom and the mining sector have been pivotal in fuelling industrial activities, creating significant dependence on coal-based energy sources and polluting the environment in this process. What is often not discussed is that capital also sustained apartheid-era policies that segregated blacks and heightened greenhouse gas emissions.
Contrary to the notion that all individuals share equal responsibility for climate change, historical and contemporary examples highlight stark disparities. In the past, South Africa’s racially unequal economy’s growth relied heavily on burning fossil fuels. For decades, Eskom has been pivotal in fuelling industrial activities, creating significant dependence on coal-based energy sources. As with other parts of the world, initiatives like JET now shift the burden onto mining communities that were excluded from the initial planning of a coal-dependent economy.
The dominant Anthropocene discussions disregard the historical fact that a minority of predominantly white capitalists in South Africa adopted coal-powered electricity under oppressive conditions. This oversight by JET underscores how capitalist interests prioritise economic gain over environmental sustainability and the welfare of ordinary citizens. Ongoing fossil fuel disputes highlight the continuing conflict between profitdriven agendas and broader societal and planetary health considerations. In conclusion, the empire’s ‘greening’, as framed by international climate discourses and policies like JET, deserves critical examination through the lens of historical injustices and ongoing socio-economic disparities. South Africa’s journey towards a just energy transition cannot afford to replicate past inequalities or prioritise external agendas that fail to adequately address local realities.
Instead, inclusive and equitable climate policies must emerge from genuine dialogue and collaboration, not capital-inspired country sector platforms, that centre the voices and needs of affected communities, as Adil Nchabeleng argues. Only then can climate action truly serve the dual purpose of environmental sustainability and social justice, transcending the limitations of current global climate governance frameworks.
Siya yi banga le economy!
Siyabonga Hadebe is a PhD candidate in international economic law and a labour market expert based in Geneva.
