Public Participation in Socio-Economic Impact Assessment for the Revised White Paper on Arts, Culture and Heritage

Abstract

This study critically examines the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment System (SEIAS) as a tool for participatory governance in the formulation of South Africa’s 2020 Revised White Paper on Arts, Culture and Heritage. SEIAS was introduced by the South African government to ensure that policymaking is transparent, inclusive, and evidence-based (The Presidency, 2020). The research was undertaken to assess whether SEIAS achieved its participatory objectives during the White Paper review process and to explore the experiences of cultural stakeholders who engaged in that process. It aimed to uncover whether SEIAS enhanced or hindered democratic cultural governance, and whether its application challenged or reinforced systemic exclusions within policymaking. A qualitative research design was employed, involving semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and policy document analysis. The study was guided by a multi-theoretical framework drawing on Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Participation, Gaventa’s (2004) Power Cube, Habermas’s (1984) theory of communicative action, Fraser’s (1990, 2021) concept of participatory parity, Fricker’s (2008) theory of epistemic injustice, and postcolonial critiques from Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2013) and Mbembe (2016). The findings show that SEIAS, while formally participatory, often functioned as a technocratic and symbolic process. Rural, black, and community-based stakeholders were systematically marginalised through inaccessible language, urban-centric consultations, and a lack of feedback and accountability mechanisms (Cornwall, 2008; Gaventa, 2004). Participation occurred largely in what Gaventa (2006) calls “invited spaces,” with limited opportunity to influence outcomes. Moreover, the oversight role of the Portfolio Committee focused on procedural compliance rather than democratic deliberation, reinforcing Fraser’s (1990) notion of “weak publics.” The study concludes that SEIAS, as currently operationalised, is ill-equipped to address the democratic deficits within policymaking. For it to serve as a genuinely participatory mechanism, fundamental reforms are needed to dismantle institutional hierarchies, recognise diverse forms of cultural knowledge, and ensure equitable inclusion throughout the policy process.