South Africa’s economic debate is still largely conducted at the national level. We argue about fiscal consolidation, structural reform, industrial policy and investment promotion, as if the primary levers of growth sit in Pretoria. But for businesses operating on the ground, the decisive factors are far more immediate and far more local.
The real economy is experienced through whether the lights stay on, whether water flows, whether goods can move efficiently and whether approvals are processed in time. These are not national competencies. They are municipal ones.
This is why a quiet but consequential shift is under way in South Africa’s economy. Businesses are not simply growing or struggling, they are moving. Companies are relocating within the country, concentrating in municipalities where systems function, and withdrawing from those where they do not.
The result is a gradual but increasingly visible reallocation of economic activity, driven not by sectoral change or macroeconomic policy but by the uneven performance of local government.
The closure of the Clover dairy factory in Ditsobotla, North West, five years ago provided one of the clearest examples. This was a major agro-processing facility, employing hundreds of workers and forming a cornerstone of the local economy. Its closure was not the result of declining demand or a failing industry. It followed repeated disruptions to water and electricity supply, along with deteriorating local infrastructure. Production did not disappear; it moved to a more functional municipal environment.
That distinction is critical. South Africa is not only experiencing economic stagnation; it is experiencing internal economic sorting. Businesses are making location decisions based on whether municipalities can provide the basic conditions required to operate.
This dynamic is not confined to a single case. In parts of the Vaal area south of Johannesburg persistent sewage pollution and failing water systems have contributed to the erosion of industrial activity. In towns such as Makhanda, repeated water shortages have disrupted tourism and local business. In Pietermaritzburg, long-struggling Msunduzi’s core city, governance instability and service delivery challenges have weighed on investor confidence.
South Africa is not only experiencing economic stagnation; it is experiencing internal economic sorting. Businesses are making location decisions based on whether municipalities can provide the basic conditions required to operate.
These are not dramatic, one-off events. They are incremental, cumulative changes. However, over time they reshape local economies. At the same time, other municipalities are experiencing the opposite effect.
In Midvaal in Gauteng, large-scale industrial investment has taken place in recent years, supported by reliable infrastructure and access to logistics corridors. The City of Cape Town continues to attract investment in sectors ranging from technology to renewable energy, underpinned by proactive governance and infrastructure planning. In other Western Cape municipalities such as Stellenbosch and George, local economies have expanded on the back of stable municipal systems and growing inward migration.
These municipalities are not necessarily offering more generous incentives or more ambitious development strategies. Their advantage lies in something more fundamental: they provide an environment in which businesses can operate with a reasonable degree of certainty. This is what makes the current shift so significant. Municipalities are not competing through policy rhetoric. They are competing through functionality.
For years local economic development has been framed as a set of programmes: support for small enterprises, local projects or targeted interventions designed to stimulate growth. While these initiatives have their place, they often miss the central point. Economic activity depends less on the presence of programmes and more on the functionality of underlying systems.
• Subscribe to Business Day
This reality is beginning to register in policy discussions. At the recent National Local Economic Development Summit there was renewed emphasis on strengthening local economies. But perhaps the most important message to emerge was implicit rather than explicit: economic outcomes depend on infrastructure, governance and administrative capability. In other words, local economic development cannot substitute for municipal performance.
Consider what businesses actually require. Reliable electricity is essential not only for heavy industry but for services, retail and small enterprises. Water systems underpin everything from manufacturing to hospitality. Roads determine whether goods can reach markets efficiently. Local administrative processes such as planning applications shape the speed and certainty of investment decisions.
When these systems work, they reduce costs, improve productivity and create the conditions for growth. When they fail, they introduce risk, increase expenses and undermine competitiveness. Companies respond rationally. They invest where conditions are favourable and withdraw where they are not.
In weaker municipalities businesses are already adapting. They install generators to manage electricity outages. They truck in water when supply fails. They absorb delays in approvals and navigate administrative uncertainty. But there is a limit to how far this can go. Beyond that point relocation becomes the logical decision.
In stronger municipalities the opposite dynamic takes hold. Investment flows in, employment grows and economic activity expands. As this happens, local revenue bases strengthen, allowing for further investment in infrastructure and services. A positive cycle emerges.
Conversely, in weaker municipalities a negative cycle sets in. As businesses leave, local economies contract. Jobs are lost, property values decline and municipal revenues shrink. This further reduces the capacity to maintain infrastructure and deliver services, reinforcing the conditions that drove businesses away in the first place.
Over time this produces an increasingly bifurcated economic landscape. On one side are municipalities that are able to sustain and attract economic activity. On the other are those experiencing gradual but persistent decline. This has profound implications for how economic policy is understood.
Much of the current focus remains on national-level interventions: industrial policy, investment promotion, regulatory reform. While these are necessary, they are not sufficient. Without functional municipalities these initiatives cannot translate into sustained economic activity.
South Africa does not lack economic potential. The country has a diverse economic base, access to global markets and opportunities across multiple sectors, from manufacturing and agriculture to services and energy. The constraint lies in the ability to convert that potential into local economic activity. That conversion happens, or fails to happen, at municipal level.
This suggests a shift in emphasis is required. Economic reform must include a far stronger focus on the performance of local government. This means prioritising infrastructure maintenance, strengthening municipal finances, improving administrative efficiency and stabilising institutions. Fixing municipalities is not only a governance imperative. It is an economic one.
The national economy is, in effect, the sum of its local parts. When those parts function, growth becomes possible. When they do not, it becomes constrained. South Africa’s economic future will not be determined solely by decisions taken in Pretoria. It will be shaped, municipality by municipality, by whether the systems that underpin economic activity are able to function effectively.
- Allan, a former special adviser to a previous local government minister, is MD of data and intelligence organisation Municipal IQ. This article is a synthesis of the organisation’s recent review: The Local Growth Machine: How South African municipalities enable, or block, economic development.
