This article was first published in the Star on 9 May 2016

Since 27 April 2015, ‘Mandela’s children’ have been turning twenty-one. They are the first of the ‘born-free generation’ to become adults. Are they better off than young adults were in the early nineties? It’s a difficult question to ask at the best of times, but in an election year it is particularly loaded. Statistics South Africa must therefore be lauded for its recent release of a rather depressing report of the state of young people from 2009 to 2014.  Materially, educationally, economically – there’s not much good news.

But how do you compare the despair of joblessness with the dignity of political freedom?  For some, the prospect of a job trumps the right to vote. For others, the desire for liberty is more visceral than the ache of hunger. Inevitably, we gauge progress by what we think others should value most.

Further complicating the question is that the world has moved on since 1994. Guns, germs and steel – to quote Jared Diamond’s famous book published twenty years ago – keep redesigning our lives. Today its title would, rather clumsily, have to include cellphones and fibre optics. The global context has changed radically, with seismic effects on Generation Z.  So, has democracy improved the lives of young people in South Africa, all other things being equal? It will always be a question of opinion.

There is however a question that is far more important because our future depends on it.  That question is: What did we miss – that we must put in place now – to ensure that the babies born today have a far brighter future than ‘Mandela’s children’ who are now reaching adulthood?

We may quibble over the size of some of our failings, but probably the biggest is that we missed making the majority of our young people employable. According to Statistics South Africa, 57% of 15-34 year olds are unemployed, and the percentage of black African workers classified as ‘skilled’ increased by only 2.8 percentage points between 1994 and 2014.  Still fewer than one in five black African workers is skilled, while the minority population groups have become a lot more skilled over the past twenty years.  Dr Mignonne Breier and Prof. Pieter le Roux have shown that proportionally fewer black South African men aged 20-24 years participated in higher education in 2011 than in 1996.  This in an economy that relies on large numbers of skilled workers to grow.

With good reason, much of the criticism has been directed at the quality of public vocational training colleges and their dislocation from the needs of industry. But that’s looking at the end of a human capital pipeline that leaks badly all along the way. Fixing the tap is important, but that is not enough to improve the volume and quality of graduates that come through the system of education and training. The starting point must be to protect and develop the source of human capital, and this is what we keep missing.

The National Development Plan notes that “South Africa loses half of every cohort that enters the school system by the end of the 12-year schooling period, wasting significant human potential and harming the life-chances of many young people”. However, schools are not the main source of human capital that needs protection. It goes even further back than that – to the first few years of a child’s life.  If we protected and developed our children before they went to school, they would be able to learn better and be prepared for the world of work. Government policies and labour practices that make it hard for young people to enter the workforce still need to be tackled, but arguably the biggest constraint to employment will have been overcome.

This is what we are missing most: young children who are sufficiently well-fed, ready-to-read and connected into simple networks of care and support. A study published in the Lancet in 2008 followed cohorts of children into adulthood in five different countries (including South Africa). It found that children’s height at two years of age was the best predictor of adult human capital. Stunted children performed worse at school and were less economically productive as adults. Yet, a quarter of our children under three years of age are stunted – a percentage unchanged in the last twenty years.

A 2010 study by the Department of Economics at the University of Stellenbosch concluded that the per capita GDP in South Africa would be around 23% higher if all South Africans were sufficiently literate to participate in the formal economy. They estimate the loss to GDP in the order of R550 billion per annum. Halve that projected benefit and it would still be equal to the total annual public spending on education.  A recent report from the same department shows that by Grade 4, more than half of all learners are already off track, unable to read or do the basic math expected of them. These are the same children who repeat grades later on and end up dropping out of school. Education would pay for itself if we made the relatively modest investments in early learning that are necessary for the full beneficiation of schooling.

The third missed opportunity is that we have failed to create networks of care and support for young children.  Once they leave post-natal clinics at six weeks of age, they only visit health services for vaccinations or when they are sick. Yet connections to modest opportunities – that provide companionship for young mothers, bring books into their homes and enable participation in early learning playgroups – can build lifelong resilience in children. The child psychologist Ann Masten calls these connections the ‘ordinary magic’ that can place even the poorest children on a pathway to success.

These are the three critical factors that too many of Mandela’s children have missed out on.  Every day though, more children are born and for them the clock has started ticking. If they get to school well-nourished, ready-to-read and connected to networks of care and support, they will thrive. If not, they will join the ranks of millions of young South Africans who will probably never find a decent job.  For them, the next five years are critical.

It seems deceptively easy to do – feed children, get them reading and connected to networks of care and support. But there is no way that government will achieve these goals in the next five years, on top of all its other priorities. No, the greatest possibility for success rests with us as ordinary South Africans.  Imagine if we declared our determination to make South Africa a country free of nutritional stunting and each of us took some responsibility for it.  Every year, over 11 million tonnes of food reaches its ‘best-before’ date on grocery store shelves and is discarded. Working with major retailers, the Food Bank is able to rescue over 3 million tonnes and redistribute it to hungry families. Who is dumping the other 8 million tonnes? Letting perfectly good food go to waste should be unacceptable in the eyes of the nation.  It’s not the whole solution to food insecurity, but it’s a start.

Stand by one child who would otherwise be at risk. Tell them stories, give them books. Tap into a national reading campaign like Nal’ibali that has created a wealth of resources for young children. Take that child and his or her family to the beach or museum.  Look for simple opportunities that will enrich their lives.

It sounds too simple, too insignificant to have far-reaching impact on the national economy – or too complicated because it relies on a massive collective effort. But every year, a million children are born in South Africa and half of them will miss out on achieving their full potential. All it needs is for 500 000 people in this country to show interest in them and confidence in our common future.

Mandela’s children missed out on some of the most basic ingredients for a fulfilled and prosperous life, and the whole country has consequently lost out. Now they themselves are having children. We know what needs to be done, and done urgently.  Mandela’s grandchildren cannot miss out too.

Little boy

 

 

To see how you can help to create better life outcomes for South Africa’s children click here.

 

 

2 Comments

  • Kayin says:

    Interesting piece, thanks for marshaling this evidence.

    I worry that sometimes human capital theory creeps into descriptions of education in ways which powerfully shape interventions. This comes out in this piece through the use of the word “unemployable”. I’m not entirely sure what this word means. I worry that it represents the hegemony which develops through the disproportionate voice employers have. To borrow from the literature around differently-abled persons, it seems that the difficulty lies in the match between our current employers, and our current youth. Though there are economic realities such as international competition which act as fixed points that we must work around, it still is not clear that the greatest issue at play in South Africa is our education system. While our poor economic situation may be the result of educational inadequacies, educational inadequacies may equally be the result of an inappropriate economic strategy (unemployment = poverty = low educational outcomes). Of course it needn’t be solely one or the other, the two inter-relate. I’d be interested in looking at the 2010 US study you mentioned, I’d like to understand how the projections around improved literacy rates are calculated. Often I find assumptions around increasing levels of academic competency may ignore increasing competition for a finite number of employment opportunities, and academic inflation.

    To use the question “What did we miss – that we must put in place now ” as a way to re-orientate this discussion is, I think, useful. It seems that part of what we missed is that policies are context specific. Countries with historically poor education systems are unlikely to make a sudden transition to being leading “knowledge economy” countries. Idealism can be an easy political win, but often falls down in implementation. Phased plans, priorities, working with what exists (the teachers we have, the schools we have, the youth we have, the business sector we have), while expending resources carefully and consistently towards achieving the egalitarian vision we aim towards seems wise. Many of the suggestions outlined here do just that, but only for individuals. When we see systems as fixed we will continue to construct deficits as existing within people.

  • Judy-Marie Smith says:

    Hi Kayin – a response from David:

    “Thank you, Kayin, for your thoughtful response.

    The purpose of the article was to challenge ordinary South Africans to use the power they have, now – to take personal responsibility and not to externalize all solutions to the country’s biggest challenges. Of course the call for individual action must go hand in hand with the call for structural changes to an economy which continues to exclude vast numbers of young people, in particular.

    I deliberately used the language of human capital theory because I’m frustrated by the disconnect between the language of business and the language of child’s rights activists. Children must not be reduced to factors of economic production, but I think we now need to lean towards the lexicon of big business to ensure that children are on their radar too. If they’re not, inefficiencies in resource allocation for human capital formation – or more broadly, human development – will continue.

    I agree that the relationship between education and the economy is probably endogenous i.e. there is not a one-directional pipeline between education and economic attainment. The argument was that we need to keep moving back to the source of ‘human capital’, which is children (and not education per se). Enabling children to thrive is at the heart of social and economic transformation in South Africa – and not only through the channel of education. There is now such a strong body of evidence that early childhood development mediates better health, better education, greater economic productivity, greater social cohesion and less violence and risk tolerance, and a more equal society! What is missing most are children who are sufficient well fed, ready-to-read through early language development, and connected into networks of care and support.

    Education is only one driver. Nutrition and social and economic connectedness are just as important. But we can’t wait for the economy to change before we respond to the 2 750 babies born each day who require the critical inputs of food, love, safety and stimulation today. Immediate pro-social response should not be viewed as band-aid treatment, but as part of a collective mobilization to address social and economic divides in South Africa. Interestingly, Malcolm Keswell and Justine Burns have just completed a randomized controlled trial to gauge whether a prosocial (non-market) intervention – Activate! leadership network for public innovation – can affect economic fundamentals. The exciting findings will soon be published on this website.

    The 2010 paper referred to is by Martin GUstaffson, Servaas vd Berg, Debra Shepherd and Cobus Burger. The costs of illiteracy in South Africa. https://ideas.repec.org/p/sza/wpaper/wpapers113.html

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment from showing. There is no need to resubmit your comment.
Comments will be made public, should they be approved.