If SA keeps failing to implement plans, it’s time to rethink planning

We need to consider what comes after Vision 2030, what future South Africa we want, and what stands in the way of us reaching this goal.

Noluthando Qwelani is a policy researcher in the Office of the Presidency of South Africa, working under the National Planning Commission. Her work focuses on economic policy, national planning and public policy. She writes in her personal capacity. The views expressed are her own and do not represent those of the National Planning Commission or its Secretariat.

South Africa is approaching the end of the National Development Plan: Vision 2030. This is more than the end of a planning horizon. It is an opportunity to ask whether we have been planning sufficiently for the conditions that determine whether our ambitions can become reality.

SA does not lack plans. We have strategies, frameworks, policies, targets and implementation plans. But when these fail to translate into jobs, functioning infrastructure, reliable services and economic opportunity, the cost is not borne by a planning document. It is borne by people.

The National Development Plan (NDP) gave SA a long-term vision of a country that is more prosperous, inclusive and capable of overcoming poverty and inequality. Yet its 10-year review found that the country was not on track to meet important targets, particularly on poverty, inequality and unemployment.

We should also ask whether our approach to planning sufficiently accounts for the conditions under which implementation succeeds or fails.

SA’s developmental challenges do not exist in silos. Weak governance affects infrastructure delivery, public finances and service quality. Poor educational outcomes affect employability and productivity. Inadequate infrastructure limits economic participation. Spatial inequality separates people from jobs and services. Fiscal constraints limit investment, while weak economic performance reduces the resources available to address these problems.

Yet the government still often approaches these challenges through departmental, sectoral and institutional boundaries. Implementation-driven planning should begin somewhere different: with the constraints that prevent development from happening. Before asking what the government should do, planning should ask what must be true for an intervention to work.

Does the institution responsible have the capability to implement it? Are the necessary skills available? Is the infrastructure in place? Is the intervention funded for its full implementation period? Can procurement systems deliver? Which institutions depend on one another for the intervention to succeed? These are not technical questions to be answered after a plan is approved. They are planning questions.

Consider governance. The Auditor-General reported R42.58-billion in irregular expenditure by national and provincial government institutions in 2024/25, with procurement and contract-management weaknesses among the factors contributing to poor outcomes.

Irregular expenditure should not automatically be described as money that has been lost.