Browsing by Author "Francis, David"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Black Economic Empowerment: A Review of the Literature
    (Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2021-09) Francis, David; Valodia, Imraan
    South Africa has the highest income inequality in the world. A recent report by the World Bank found the Gini coefficient of income to be 0.66, the highest of all 149 countries for which the World Bank has reliable data. In the workplace, this is reflected in vast inequalities in salaries and wages between high and low earners, but importantly between different race and gender groups. Despite a plethora of legislation aimed at addressing inequality in the workplace, women and black workers in South Africa continue to be paid less than men and white employees, even when doing the same work (the pay gap), and are more likely to work in precarious, low-paid jobs (occupational segregation). These factors are driven by differences in the characteristics of workers, and by structural discrimination in the economy. Conceptually, we can decompose structural discrimination into two forms – that which discriminates against people who do the same job, based on race and gender (the pay gap) and that which discriminates indirectly by occupational segregation – black people and women are concentrated in low-paying occupations. In this paper, we review the literature on occupational segregation and the gender and race pay gaps in post-Apartheid South Africa. We examine the various policy interventions that have attempted to address this enduring problem. In particular, we ask whether broad-based black economic empowerment – while not explicitly a labour market intervention – has had any positive impact on reducing labour market inequalities.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Estimates of Employment in South Africa Under the Five-Level Lockdown Framework SCIS Working
    (Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2020-05) Francis, David; Ramburuth-Hurt, Kamal; Valodia, Imraan
    During the COVID-19 pandemic and response, an important question, from both a health and economic policy perspective, is how many workers are able to return to work as the lockdown is eased and tightened in response to the spread of the virus. Using a static analysis derived from industry subsectors, we estimate employment allowed under each level of the five-level lockdown framework. We estimate that under level five of the lockdown framework, 40% of total employment is permitted, or 6.6 million workers. This rises to 55% (9.2 million) under level four; 71% (11.8 million) under level three; 94% (15.6 million) under level two and 100% under level one. This is a static analysis and assumes that no jobs are lost as a result of a lockdown. As such, its principle use is as a distributional analysis of the share of workers permitted to work under each level of the lockdown.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Inequality—Financial Markets Nexus: Implications for Developing Metrics for Voluntary Disclosures
    (Southern Centre for Inequality Studies (SCIS), 2024-01-21) Khan, Zoheb; Theobald, Stuart; Ewinyu, Arabo K.; Francis, David; Mogale, Etumeleng; Valodia, Imraan
    Can a disclosure framework reduce overall socio-economic inequality, or will it shift inequality somewhere else, for example, to other firms, other regions, or out of the firm and the private sector and into households? Are there material regional variations in the perceptions of the causes and effects of socio-economic inequality? What is the appropriate level of focus for an inequality disclosure framework? Surplus generated by workers accrues to the owners of capital and, at the most basic level, is a significant contributor to socio-economic inequality. There is also inequality in income between workers within firms and sectors. Furthermore, inequality is produced by access to and changes in asset prices, and by sovereign investing activities, among other factors. The correct unit of analysis for the proposed Taskforce on Inequality-related Financial Disclosures (TIFD – which since the original drafting of this paper has now converged efforts with new partners to form the Taskforce on Inequality and Social-related Financial Disclosures (TISFD)) deserves attention. The authors of this paper believe that regional variations mean that a one-size-fits-all disclosure framework is unlikely to be appropriate. For instance, the distribution of informal employment needs to be considered, with 61% of all global employment being informal and with as much as 90% of employment being informal in many countries in the global South. While disclosure frameworks matter for formal companies, what is often overlooked in the development of disclosure frameworks are the implications for the large number of people, particularly in the global South, who are informally employed or who work in informal enterprises. A second consideration is high unemployment given that the distribution of labour income is one of the great drivers of income inequality. Furthermore, the growth of precarious and non-standard employment, with the rise of platform work as an example, is an additional concern.