Draft only please do not cite or distribute without author’s permission

Black Economic Empowerment and the Tale of Three (and a draft) Charter(s)

The concept of “black economic empowerment” has been very prominent in the South African economic landscape post-1994 and has found its way into the mining industry by means of the Mining Charter.¹⁰⁵ Nevertheless, even though the notion “empowerment” has been customised for the South African context as “black economic empowerment”, it is not a uniquely South African concept. In realising that the participation of poor citizens of developing countries is required for the larger development project to be successful, the World Bank’s policies have since the late 1990's placed more focus on the “empowerment” of people.¹⁰⁶ Empowerment, therefore, constitutes a global approach to development that emphasises the importance of including the voices of the poor in global conversations about their well-being and development.¹⁰⁷

Empowerment, in this global developmental sense, is regarded as a means to improve efficiency and economic growth¹⁰⁸ but also as a “struggle towards new consciousness and actions” by poor groups and individuals.¹⁰⁹ The idea of progress or transformation that we find in the idea of development can therefore also be traced in the idea of empowerment.

Broad-based black socio-economic empowerment as included in the latest Mining Charter,¹¹⁰ therefore, can be situated in the development paradigm, as will furthermore be shown in the section that follows. The origins of black economic empowerment (“BEE”) as well as its conversion into broad-based black economic empowerment (“BBBEE”) will firstly be expounded, where after the Mining Charter, and its different iterations,¹¹¹ will be discussed to determine how empowerment of mining communities is framed. The last part of this section includes an analysis of the trend, regarding mine communities, followed by the different charters.

1. BEE to BBBEE – “Addressing the challenge of disempowerment”¹¹²

The Black Economic Empowerment Commission (“BEEcom”) issued its strategy for the implementation of BEE in 2001.¹¹³ The “vision and values” of BEE were provided for in the Reconstruction and Development Programme (“RDP”).¹¹⁴ The RDP was regarded as SA’s “blueprint for transformation”, but was not very successful in achieving its goals.¹¹⁵

In terms of the RDP, BEE was introduced in South Africa to deracialise business ownership.¹¹⁶ Hence, during the 1990’s BEE initiatives focused mainly on the ownership of businesses. The mining industry was first to comply and various transfers of stakes in mining companies to black persons took place.¹¹⁷

The hope was that these transfers of ownership would stimulate the growth of the South African economy that would lead to the eradication of poverty. Unfortunately, the outcome was different - only an elite few benefitted from these BEE ownership deals, therefore not doing much to address poverty.¹¹⁸ BEEcom conceded that BEE in this narrow sense had failed and proposed measures for the inclusion of black persons on all levels of the economy.¹¹⁹ Black economic empowerment, therefore, underwent a transformation into broad-based black economic empowerment (“BBBEE”).¹²⁰ The verdict is still out as to whether the broad-based nature of empowerment has actually resulted in benefits for a broader spectrum of society, specifically persons living in rural communities, and not only an elite few.¹²¹

The “new” South Africa came into being during a time characterised by the world’s (especially the Western world) fascination with globalisation and neo-liberalism.¹²² Commentators have noted that during the transition negotiations in the early 1990’s, the ANC maintained a nationalist approach, firmly behind the ideals of the Freedom Charter (which included nationalisation of mines, banks and monopoly industries, and a somewhat leftist approach).¹²³ Post-1994, however, there was a shift to a more neoliberal or free market capitalist policy - probably in an attempt to retain investor and business confidence and to make the most of the current economic climate.¹²⁴ This setting also created the opportunity for many corporations to internationalise and to gain additional bargaining power.¹²⁵

Economic policies such as the RDP, from which BEE originated, and Growth Employment and Redistribution (GEAR), created during this time are often critiqued for following guidelines of institutions such as the World Bank (which is synonymous with the “idea of development”) and therefore for promoting a neo-liberalist agenda.¹²⁶

BEEcom frames “disempowerment” in the language of development by presenting BEE as a means to achieve sustainable development and to break “the cycle of underdevelopment”, specifically regarding rural areas.¹²⁷ The problem identified is low economic growth and poverty and investment and growth are prescribed as a new path to development.¹²⁸ BEEcom furthermore reiterates that the disempowerment of black people occurred because the South African economy was constituted on the “domination, exploitation and marginalisation of the black majority”.¹²⁹

In addressing the need for the development of rural areas, BEEcom places significant emphasis on the poverty by which these areas or communities are afflicted. Poverty measurements such as the “poverty line” are used to classify people as poor.¹³⁰ The report, however, does acknowledge that poverty is not only a lack of income but also a lack of opportunities and therefore requires not only an economic approach but also a social approach.¹³¹ The recommendations made included land reform, promoting economic opportunities and ownership by communities and investment in rural infrastructure.¹³²

2.