Latest news with #2024GeneralHouseholdSurvey
eNCA
13-06-2025
- General
- eNCA
Economic instability determines fathers' involvement
File: A father plays with his son in a park. JOHANNESBURG - South Africa is a country battling the issue of absent fathers, which has led to many broken families. According to the latest numbers from Stats SA's 2024 General Household Survey, over 45% of the country's children live with their mothers only. This number is higher in rural areas, at 50.3% Dr. Charley Pietersen, founder of the Growing Up Without a Father Foundation, said that there must be an investment at an early age, which means investing in young men before they become fathers, and that this should begin in schools.
Daily Maverick
11-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
Are social grant numbers increasing (and is that a bad thing)?
Spending on social grants is a powerful way to support economic growth, because almost 100% of every rand spent flows back into local economies in the form of consumer spending, promoting economic activity and livelihoods. Following the release of the 2024 General Household Survey (GHS), we have seen many headlines pointing to an increase in the number of social grant recipients compared with 2019. These claims need to be interrogated and nuanced. It is not necessarily the case that the overall proportion of monthly social grant recipients continues to increase. At the same time, in South Africa's macroeconomic and historical context, it would not be such a bad thing if it did. The number of social grant recipients is often taken as a sort of proxy indicator for the health of the economy — the implication is that social grant numbers going up is bad, because they track the extent of poverty and unemployment in the country. This is often wrapped up with ideas about 'dependency' on social grants, which frame grant recipients as an unproductive drain on taxpayers, and sometimes directly counterpose the number of social grant recipients to the number of income tax payers. But the quantum of social grants is not only an indicator of the extent of poverty and unemployment. It can also be taken as a measure of growth-enhancing public investment, as well as the progressive realisation of constitutional rights. In this article, I unpack the social security findings in the GHS, and what they do and don't tell us about the state of our social safety net and our economy. Have social grant numbers increased, and relative to what? The GHS shows an increase in the proportion of individuals receiving social grants between 2019 and 2024 of 5.2 percentage points, from 34.9% to 40.1%. Much of this increase is attributed to the introduction of the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant during the 2020 lockdowns. It is of course true that there are more social grant recipients today than there were in 2019, as the social protection system has been extended to include working-age adults in extreme poverty who previously had no access to social assistance. But since 2021, access to the SRD grant has decreased, as has access to the Child Support Grant (CSG). It is easy to be misled by how the SRD recipient data is measured and presented in the GHS. For the longer-standing social grants, including the CSG and Old Age Pension (OAP), eligibility is assessed on application, and, once verified, a beneficiary receives the grant on a continuous monthly basis, unless the government becomes aware of a change in their circumstances. For the SRD grant, people's eligibility is reassessed on a month-to-month basis (a highly problematic methodology), and the grant is paid only in the months they are deemed eligible. The GHS questionnaire does not take into account these differences, but simply asks whether respondents receive each grant. This means that people who have received the SRD grant irregularly or only once or twice in the past year may not know how to respond. This could potentially explain what appears to be large discrepancies between the GHS and other sources with respect to SRD grant numbers. The GHS finds that the proportion of individuals aged from 18 to 59 who 'receive' the SRD grant increased year-on-year, from 5.3% in 2020, to 13.9% in 2024. This is difficult to square with official figures from the South African Social Security Agency (Sassa), which show that in March 2022, 10.9 million people received the SRD grant, while in September 2024, recipient numbers stood at 8.3 million — a marked decline. This decline has been driven by decreasing budget allocations to the SRD grant from the National Treasury. We do not know why the GHS data shows an annual increase in the proportion of people receiving the SRD grant since 2020, but we suspect that it does not reflect the true number receiving it on a regular basis. We note that self-reporting is generally less reliable than administrative data. If you look at monthly SRD grant recipient numbers as shown in the graph below, based on data obtained from Sassa, the picture is very different. But the SRD grant is only one component of the social protection system. It's conceivable that an aggregate increase in social grant coverage could have been driven by significant increases in the proportion of children receiving the CSG, or seniors receiving the OAP. However, this is not the case. The proportion of the eligible population (people aged 60+) receiving the OAP has remained relatively stable over the period in question, ranging from 71% to 73%. The proportion of all children covered by the CSG has fallen from a peak of 69.1% in 2021 to 65.5% today — a significant drop. This does not reflect a reduction in the child poverty headcount. Analysis from the Children's Institute at UCT suggests that the proportion of children in poverty (measured at the Upper Bound Poverty Line) has increased since 2019, reaching 70% in 2022. The declining proportion of children receiving the CSG instead reflects the fact that the government has made it harder to access the CSG in recent years. Newborn babies and their caregivers (who make up the bulk of new CSG applicants) were less likely to access the CSG in 2024 than in 2021. This worrying trend dovetails with the introduction of procedural hurdles in the grant system, like onerous requirements for identity verification and additional documentation. Has dependence on social grants increased? So, contrary to headline findings from the GHS, the proportion of people receiving a social grant in South Africa each month has not necessarily increased in the past few years, despite the ongoing extension of the SRD grant. But another focus of reporting on the GHS is the degree of 'reliance' or 'dependence' on social grants as a primary source of income for households. The GHS tracks the main sources of income for households, and in 2024, found salaries to be the main source of income for 54.5% of households (a slight decrease from 54.8% in 2019), while grants were the main source of income for 23.8% (compared with 20.4% in 2019). This does not suggest an out-of-control welfare state. It reflects a dire crisis of structural unemployment, whereby a massive proportion of households do not have access to income derived from work. In approaching this, it is important to bear in mind that social grants are intended to be the primary source of income for their recipients, by virtue of the design of the social grant system. They are explicitly targeted at persons who are unable to access other forms of income (particularly salaries or wages), either because of their life stage (ie childhood, old age), sickness or disability, poverty or unemployment. Moreover, social grants are means-tested, meaning that individuals are ineligible to receive them if they have a meaningful alternative source of income. My organisation, the Institute for Economic Justice, has been a vocal proponent of moving away from means-testing benefits, precisely because it is a practice that can trap people in poverty as it penalises attempts to generate income and build sustainable livelihoods. Some groups, like persons with disabilities or those with full-time caregiving responsibilities, face specific challenges in generating income from employment, and need to rely fully (and appropriately) on social protection to meet their needs. This has a gendered dimension, as households headed by women (disproportionately likely to be caregivers) are much more likely to list grants as their primary source of income. (Far from languishing on benefits, CSG caregivers are doing the critical work of perpetuating the nation). For others, social grants can provide a minimum income floor to cushion against precarity and shocks. Over 80% of unemployed people have been unemployed long-term. The majority of working-age beneficiaries have little hope of securing work in the short term. But where they have the ability to do so, households receiving social grants should be able to access other income streams as well. South Africa's social safety net is full of holes But to address the question of whether social grant recipient numbers are trending too high (which is the subtext of much reporting on the GHS), we need to put them in broader perspective — of poverty and unemployment in South Africa, as well as of international standards for social protection. Even if we accept that the proportion of individuals regularly receiving social grants has increased in the last few years (which as discussed above is likely not the case), the South African social safety net remains woefully inadequate. Aside from the SRD grant, which provides a meagre R370 per month, able-bodied working-age adults have no access to non-contributory social assistance. The proportion of the working-age population that was unemployed (including discouraged work seekers) reached over 43% in the first quarter of 2025. At least 16 million working-age adults are estimated to be in food poverty. Only half of that number receives the SRD grant each month. The percentage of persons who experienced hunger increased from 11.1% in 2019 to 14.3% in 2024. As mentioned above, vulnerable children are also falling through the cracks, as approximately 4.5% of children in poverty are not receiving the CSG. It is often claimed that South Africa spends a high proportion of its GDP on social grants compared with peer countries, usually by those who would seek to limit this area of spending. Yet, according to the International Labour Organization's (ILO) World Social Protection Report 2024-26, South Africa's social protection coverage — at 63.4% of the population — is below average for upper-middle income countries (UMICs), which have an average coverage of 71.2%. Our coverage of non-contributory benefits (ie excluding UIF) is 44%, compared with an average of 51% among UMICs. The ILO, alongside many local and international experts, recommends that countries move towards universal social protection coverage — that is 100% of the population. Many high-income countries are already there. As to the claim that South Africa's social protection expenditure is higher than peers, this is also untrue. As a proportion of GDP, our spending on social protection excluding health is much lower than the UMIC average (5.4%, compared with an average of 8.5%). At the same time, we have much higher levels of income poverty and inequality compared to other UMICs. South Africa is the most unequal country in the world based on the World Bank's Gini Index. Among UMICs, we have by far the highest proportion of people below the international extreme poverty line — at 20.1% (aside from Turkmenistan, which at 43% is an extreme outlier and relies on very old data). Compared with emerging economies, South Africa's wealth distribution is skewed significantly towards the richest 20% — the top 20% owns 68% of the country's wealth, compared with an emerging economy average of 47%. Viewed in light of this shameful status, we should not be using peer countries as a yardstick to test whether South Africa's social protection spending is too high. Instead, we should be asking why we don't redistribute a greater proportion of our wealth through social protection programmes. The relationship between social grants, unemployment and economic growth If poverty is a cliff, we can either view social grants as the fence at the top or the ambulance at the bottom. Having a comprehensive social protection system is not an indication of the failure of growth and employment creation. It is a critical tool in the policy toolbox for fighting economic exclusion and unemployment. Spending on social grants is a powerful way to support economic growth, because almost 100% of every rand spent flows back into local economies in the form of consumer spending, promoting economic activity and livelihoods. In turn, this boosts government revenue as higher spending equals a higher VAT take, creating a virtuous macroeconomic cycle. Social grants also (if designed well) give people a foundation to escape the poverty trap, generating employment and building sustainable livelihoods over time. Receiving the SRD grant has been shown to increase the likelihood of entering into employment by six percentage points in the first year — an astounding finding given the grant's low value. This is because people use their grants to cover the costs of job seeking and accessing work (like data and transport). The SRD grant is also used to start or expand small businesses. However, the positive economic impacts of social grants are undermined by excessively low values, and restrictive means-testing systems which pull the safety net out from under beneficiaries as soon as their income increases slightly above a minimal threshold (in the case of the SRD grant, this threshold is set below the food poverty line). It may seem counterintuitive, but the truth is that if the proportion of households that are covered by adequate social protection does increase — and gaps in the social protection system are plugged — we will see a reduction in the proportion of households reporting social grants as their primary source of income. To achieve this, it is critical that we move away from a punitive approach that treats beneficiaries with suspicion and requires them to jump through administrative hoops and demonstrate utter desperation to access entitlements. Far from creating dependency, adequate, comprehensive and accessible social protection provides a springboard for economic inclusion and growth. To address the crisis of structural unemployment, food insecurity and poverty highlighted by the General Household Survey, South Africa should fill the gaps in the social safety net and expand social protection coverage to 100% of the population. DM Dr Kelle Howson is a senior researcher in labour and social security at the Institute for Economic Justice, in the workers' rights and social security programme. She is also a postdoctoral researcher with the Fairwork project at the Oxford Internet Institute.
The Star
08-06-2025
- Business
- The Star
Lack of support for Gauteng ECD centres leaves children vulnerable
The Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) has constantly failed in its mandate to provide effective oversight and support for Early Childhood Development (ECD) centres in line with Section 94 of the Children's Act (2005). A glaring example is the unresolved impasse over the Bantu Bonke ECD Centre in Vereeniging, where more than 100 children have been denied access due to bureaucratic confusion between the GDE and the Department of Social Development regarding the facility's transfer and ownership. The injustice continues; the ECD government subsidy, which was suspended at R17 per child per day since 2019, is set to increase to R24 in 2025. This increment still falls short of the target of R36 per child per day, which experts say would be sufficient to cover the costs of beneficial ECD programmes. Moreover, recent statistics from the 2024 General Household Survey further illustrate the scale of the issue: only 41.1% of children aged 0–4 in Gauteng attend formal Early Childhood Development (ECD) facilities. GDE has spent over R186 million on management fees for ECD logistics from 2019 to 2024, rather than directly benefiting the children. The MEC of Education, Matome Chiloane, failed to provide a basic register of the number of ECD centres that meet the basic infrastructure standards in Gauteng. He was responding to the DA's questions tabled in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature (GPL). These shortcomings have left thousands of children without access to quality early learning, undermining the province's developmental goals and perpetuating educational inequality. The DA Gauteng demands that the GDE prioritise universal access to ECD programmes by ensuring that proper facilities are available to all children, particularly in disadvantaged and impoverished communities. Sergio Dos Santos MPL, DA Gauteng Shadow MEC for Education
IOL News
03-06-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Urgent petition launched in South Africa to tackle soaring food prices
Pietermaritzburg Economic Justice and Dignity Group (PMBEJD) has been mootoring food prices for many years Image: Armand Hough: Independent Newspapers A nationwide petition has been launched calling on the government and retailers to intervene to bring down rising food prices as South Africans are facing a daily battle to feed their families. The action has been brought by United Against Hunger (UAH), which hopes to collect about 100,000 signatures as part of its campaign to reduce food prices. The organisation stated that many families are no longer able to feed themselves, and children are starving. The petition has also been linked with door-to-door campaigns, with affiliates of the union visiting homes to collect signatures and brief residents on the issues of hunger and malnutrition among children. The petition was launched as part of the World Hunger campaigns. Mark Heywood, the leader of UAH, stated that the petition aims to encourage large retailers making significant profits to respond to the moral needs of their customers or to get the government involved in regulating food prices. "The petition is going slower than we had hoped, but we are beginning to engage communities, going door to door in KwaZulu-Natal. Abahlali BaseMjondolo (the shack dwellers' movement) is visiting homes, collecting signatures, and engaging with communities on issues of malnutrition," he said. The 2024 General Household Survey, which was released last week revealed that nearly 14 million South Africans, equivalent to almost a quarter of all households, faced daily hunger last year. The data showed that 22.2% of households reported inadequate or severely inadequate access to food, with the Northern Cape (34.3%), Eastern Cape (31.3%), Mpumalanga (30.4%), and KwaZulu-Natal (23.9%) the most affected provinces. Children are particularly vulnerable. Malnutrition significantly impairs physical and cognitive development, increasing mortality risks and undermining long-term educational and economic outcomes. Heywood said: 'By the age of five, 29% of children have experienced malnutrition and are stunted as a result of not having sufficient food. We know that there are several causes of hunger, and they are complex, but one of the biggest causes is the prices and profiteering off essential foodstuffs." He added that the organisation believes, based on studies by universities, that if food could be made available to poorer people, malnutrition could be significantly reduced. He said they wrote to the CEO of one of the major food stores, urging the company to reduce prices on essential food items for children developing in the early stages of their lives. He emphasised that big companies in the retail sector can afford to reduce prices and are currently making huge profits. "Everyone has a right to sufficient food; that is a constitutional right. If companies that set high food prices are violating the realisation of those rights, then we say the government must regulate not just the quality of food but also the affordability of food to ensure that people in this country do not go hungry. Hunger is a human rights violation; it is not something that we should subject people to because our country produces a surplus of food," he said. Heywood suggested several interventions that can be undertaken, including: Pass legislation to prevent food waste. Reduce food prices Introduce legislation to prevent food wastage Set up a National Food Security and Nutrition Council and finalise the National Plan on Food Security and Nutrition in consultation with communities. Mervyn Abrahams, director of the Pietermaritzburg Economic Justice and Dignity Group, stated that the calls for food prices to be reviewed are genuine. The group has been assessing food affordability for the past few years. "As we have demonstrated before through our Household Affordability Index, food prices continue to rise both on a monthly and annual basis, making it difficult each and every day for many families, especially those in the low-income bracket, to buy essential food items." He added, "We have been consistent in calling for transparency in the food ecosystem primarily out of concern that big business is driven by the sole desire to make profit. This concern arises from an appreciation that when profits are prioritised above everything else, families find themselves having to make difficult choices and compromises when it comes to buying food because of high prices."
IOL News
28-05-2025
- Health
- IOL News
One in four SA households experienced hunger in 2024, Stats SA report shows
South Africa's hunger crisis demands sustained, multi-sectoral action. Image: Pexels/file Hunger remains a pressing global crisis, with its impact acutely felt in local communities. The recently released 2024 General Household Survey reveals a staggering statistic: nearly 14 million South Africans, equivalent to almost a quarter of all households, faced daily hunger last year. What is hunger? The UN World Food Programme (WFP) defines hunger as a discomfort or pain caused by a lack of food. It is worth noting that it is different from food insecurity, which means a lack of regular access to safe and nutritious food for proper development and an active and healthy life. Hunger is a global crisis. The estimates that 343 million people face acute food insecurity globally, with 44.4 million in 'emergency' conditions across 49 countries. Conflict, climate shocks, and economic inequality are among the leading drivers. Children are particularly vulnerable. Malnutrition significantly impairs physical and cognitive development, increasing mortality risks and undermining long-term educational and economic outcomes. How hunger affects South Africans The data shows that 22.2% of households reported inadequate or severely inadequate access to food, with the Northern Cape (34.3%), Eastern Cape (31.3%), Mpumalanga (30.4%), and KwaZulu-Natal (23.9%) the most affected provinces. The report indicated structural vulnerabilities that worsened food insecurity. Female-headed households made up 42.4% of all homes, with the highest concentrations in rural areas, notably Eastern Cape (48.8%) and KwaZulu-Natal (46.8%). Family structures varied widely. A total of 26.9% of homes were single-person households, while 39.4% were nuclear families. Skip-generation households—where grandparents care for grandchildren—made up 4.2%, with the Eastern Cape again recording the highest rate at 7.7%. The challenges extend to children's living conditions. Fewer than a third (31.4%) lived with both parents, while 45.5% lived with only their mother. Over 11% were orphans, and nearly 19% lived without either biological parent. On a more positive note, the percentage of households living in formal dwellings rose to 84.1% in 2024, up from 73.5% in 2002. Still, housing security remains precarious for many, with 60.1% owning their homes and 25.1% renting. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ South Africa's response to hunger During his State of the Nation Address this year, President Cyril Ramaphosa once again vowed to tackle poverty. "We want a nation where no one goes hungry. For 30 years, since the dawn of democracy, we have worked together to reduce poverty. Today, we spend around 60 percent of our national budget on the social wage: on health, education, social protection, community development and public employment programmes. More than 28 million unemployed and vulnerable people receive social grants. More than 10.5 million learners go to public schools where they do not have to pay fees. Last year, over 900,000 students from poor and working-class backgrounds received funding to study at universities and colleges. Through these programmes, we are alleviating the worst effects of poverty." Despite these promises, there is a long way to go to solve hunger in South Africa. Amid growing concern, government and civil society in South Africa are mobilising resources to combat the crisis: Food Recovery and Distribution SA Harvest rescues surplus food and delivers it to vulnerable communities, while tackling the root causes of hunger through technology-driven solutions. FoodForward SA, in collaboration with UNICEF's One Small Spoon campaign, redistributes food to feeding schemes across the country. Government Welfare Support The Child Support Grant and Social Relief of Distress Grant provide financial lifelines to low-income families. Experts advocate for increases in grant amounts to better meet nutritional needs. The National School Nutrition Programme offers daily meals to learners in under-resourced schools, although calls for broader coverage and year-round support are growing. NGO and Community Initiatives Save the Children and Oxfam South Africa run targeted interventions, including malnutrition treatment and food security projects. The Union Against Hunger movement focuses on direct food aid and advocacy. Buhle Farmers Academy supports sustainable agriculture by training smallholder farmers. Rise Against Hunger engages in community farming and early childhood development feeding schemes, especially in areas like Orange Farm. IOL NEWS
