South Africa
- Details
- Written by: News Correspondent
- Category: South Africa
- Hits: 38
Updated 19 September 2026 — Nine women’s bodies have been recovered in Ekurhuleni over roughly two months. Police are investigating possible links, but have not confirmed that the killings were carried out by one person or group.
EKURHULENI — The discovery of a ninth woman’s body in Dawn Park has turned a series of murder investigations into an urgent test of public safety. The immediate task is to identify those responsible. The larger question is why a country that has formally classified gender-based violence and femicide as a national disaster still appears most visible only after fear has spread through communities.
Read more: Nine Women Dead in Ekurhuleni: A Test of South Africa’s GBVF Response
- Details
- Written by: News Correspondent
- Category: South Africa
- Hits: 106
Long before 1994, Black South Africans were building careers in scholarship, medicine, law and business. Their achievements reveal generations of ambition and expertise—and the opportunities segregation and apartheid denied to many more.
The scholar behind the street
Visitors to Vilakazi Street in Orlando West, Soweto, often come for Nelson Mandela. At number 8115 stands the house where he lived before imprisonment and to which he returned after his release. Nearby is the former home of Archbishop Desmond Tutu. The street connects two Nobel Peace Prize laureates, but its name honours a third South African whose story deserves attention.
Mandela House’s account of the street identifies its namesake as Benedict Wallet Vilakazi: poet, novelist, linguist and academic. His career places Black intellectual achievement at the centre of a history too often told only through political leaders.
Vilakazi received his doctorate in literature from Wits in 1946. The university records him as the first Black person in South Africa to earn that qualification in literature. His poetry helped shape modern isiZulu writing, while his collaboration with linguist Clement Doke produced a major Zulu–English dictionary. These were lasting contributions to scholarship, not simply symbolic breakthroughs.
He died in 1947, a year before the National Party came to power. His life therefore belongs to the history of segregation before formal apartheid. The distinction matters: the later regime imposed its restrictions on a society in which Black teachers, scholars and professionals were already building careers.
Scholarship: openings, exclusions and persistence
Institutions such as Fort Hare provided narrow but consequential routes into higher education. Fort Hare’s own history describes a college where Black, Coloured and Indian students studied together despite the segregation surrounding them. Its staff included ZK Matthews and D.D.T. Jabavu; its students went on to work across Southern Africa.
Matthews earned Fort Hare’s first degree in 1923 and later became vice-chairman of its senate and acting principal. His progress illustrates how one generation of graduates could help educate the next. The institution was more than a collection of exceptional individuals: it created relationships, intellectual traditions and routes into professional life.
Those openings were vulnerable. In 1959–60, the apartheid government took over Fort Hare and turned it into an ethnically designated college for Xhosa-speaking students. The university identifies that takeover as the end of its earlier multiracial character. Educational opportunity could be restricted by changing the institution itself.
At the University of Cape Town, AC Jordan worked in African languages from 1946 to 1962. His scholarship helped establish African languages and literature within the academy. UCT’s account of his legacy also records how the political situation forced him into exile. A university appointment offered neither security nor freedom from the state.
Archie Mafeje’s experience made the limits still more explicit. In 1968, UCT approved his appointment as a senior lecturer in social anthropology, then withdrew it under government pressure. UCT records the nine-day occupation by about 600 students that followed, and the university’s eventual apology to his family. Mafeje built a distinguished career abroad; the institution that had selected him failed to defend his appointment.
Later decades brought further gains. Mathematics educator T.W. Kambule joined Wits as a senior tutor in 1978. Chabani Manganyi arrived in 1981 as a senior research fellow and visiting professor, bringing work on psychology and Black experience. Writer and educator Es’kia Mphahlele became Wits’ first Black full professor and helped shape African literature as a field of study.
Together, these careers show change across generations. Black scholars were teaching students, producing research and extending the subjects universities considered worthy of study. Yet Mafeje’s exclusion remains a warning against treating those gains as evidence of equal access.
Medicine: expertise rooted in communities
Medical careers brought professional knowledge into communities underserved by the wider system. They also reveal why this history must include women whose work is sometimes overshadowed by more familiar male figures.
Mary Susan Malahlela-Xakana qualified at Wits in 1947, becoming South Africa’s first Black woman medical doctor. She established practices in Kliptown and Mofolo South and devoted decades to community healthcare. Wits records that forced removals under the Group Areas Act led her to close the Kliptown practice. Qualification did not protect a doctor—or her patients—from racial dispossession.
Nthato Motlana qualified in 1954 after studying at Fort Hare and Wits. His Soweto practice served ordinary residents as well as Mandela, Walter Sisulu and Tutu. South African History Online records that it treated people injured during the uprisings of the 1970s and 1980s. Motlana himself experienced banning and detention and was denied a passport for decades.
These surgeries were places where professional standing acquired a wider purpose. A doctor’s skill mattered to the patient in front of them, but sustained service also built trust, local networks and a measure of independence within segregated communities.
Mamphela Ramphele’s career connected medicine, activism and university leadership. Her published curriculum vitae records her medical qualification in 1972, her founding role at Zanempilo Community Health Centre from 1975, and her appointment as a UCT deputy vice-chancellor in 1991. It also records detention in 1976 and restriction to the Northern Transvaal from 1977 to 1983.
She was appointed UCT vice-chancellor in 1996; the university lists her term as 1997–2000. That democratic-era leadership grew out of medical practice, research and public engagement developed over the preceding decades.
Law: a profession confronting the system
Before Mandela became the world’s best-known political prisoner, he was a practising attorney. The Nelson Mandela Foundation’s timeline dates the opening of his law firm with Oliver Tambo to 1952.
The Foundation describes Mandela & Tambo as South Africa’s first Black legal firm and says much of its work involved defending Black victims of apartheid. Their professional lives therefore belong alongside their political biographies. Legal training gave them a way to assist people facing the consequences of a system they were also organising to change.
The significance reaches beyond two famous names. A Black legal practice challenged assumptions about who could possess expertise, represent clients and exercise professional authority. Its existence also made skilled assistance available to people whose encounters with the law were often encounters with racial power.
Business: building enterprises and institutions
Entrepreneurs faced a related challenge: converting ability and demand into businesses in an economy that restricted their opportunities. Richard Maponya saw commercial potential in Soweto and helped build enterprises serving it. His story is also a reminder that township residents were customers and economic participants, not merely a labour supply for the city.
In his official eulogy for Maponya, President Cyril Ramaphosa described denied licences and permits, difficulty obtaining land and credit, and raids by apartheid authorities. The tribute also recognised Marina Maponya’s contribution. Their success was built through sustained work under constraints that shaped what businesses could own and where they could operate.
Sam Motsuenyane helped turn the ambitions of individual businesspeople into collective organisation. His work with NAFCOC, founded in 1964, and the establishment of African Bank addressed two practical needs: representation and access to finance.
In a 2024 memorial address, Reserve Bank Governor Lesetja Kganyago recounted how Motsuenyane and his fellow founders raised capital from individuals and businesses, secured Barclays’ support and obtained a banking licence in 1975. Kganyago also acknowledged obstruction by Reserve Bank officials during the application process.
That history extends the argument beyond personal achievement. Building a business created livelihoods; building an organisation or a bank could help others gain a foothold. Neither removed the surrounding inequalities, but both expanded the resources Black communities could draw on.
Achievement—and the opportunity denied
These lives demand recognition, but they cannot tell us how many others were prevented from following similar paths. The people who qualified, published, practised or built businesses are visible in the record. Their success does not measure the talent lost to inadequate schooling, exclusion, forced removal or an unaffordable education.
Nor should this be read as a claim that every professional was a political activist, or that a shared racial experience produced a single outlook. The careers differed. What connects them here is the work of developing expertise and institutions under conditions that constrained Black advancement.
The democratic transition changed the terms of access and citizenship. It did not create the intellectual ability, professional ambition or entrepreneurial knowledge that would help shape the new South Africa. Those capacities had histories of their own: in classrooms and clinics, in legal practices, in scholarship and in businesses sustained across generations.
Vilakazi Street gives that continuity a visible form. Visitors remember Mandela and Tutu and the struggle for political freedom. The name on the street sign points further back, to a scholar who died before formal apartheid began and whose work outlasted it.
South Africa’s Black professional class did not suddenly appear when the doors opened in 1994. It had spent generations building the knowledge, skills and institutions those doors had been designed to keep out.
- Details
- Written by: News Correspondent
- Category: South Africa
- Hits: 50
China brings the technology. Japan counters with long-term confidence. Korea majors on common sense, Europe blends polish with practicality, and America goes big. With roughly R400,000 to R550,000 to spend, which family SUV gives South African buyers the most car for their money?
The middle-class SUV market has never been this crowded—or this interesting. Walk into a South African showroom with about R450,000 and you are no longer choosing between three interpretations of the same car. You are choosing between genuinely different philosophies.
There is a Chinese hybrid loaded with power and equipment; a locally built Japanese hybrid backed by Toyota’s formidable reputation; a Korean SUV designed around family life; a rugged French-badged crossover; a polished German compact; and an American-badged SUV with the size and muscle to sit half a class above the rest.
The surprise is that price no longer predicts capability. The cheapest contender is far from the least useful, the most expensive is not automatically the best, and the badge on the nose tells only part of the story.
The contenders
Six family SUVs, one fiercely contested corner of the market:
| Model | Price | Power | Claimed consumption | Standout quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Renault Duster Techno 1.3T EDC | R399,999 | 116 kW / 260 Nm | 5.4 L/100 km | Big boot, proper clearance |
| Kia Seltos 1.5 LS CVT | R414,995 | 85 kW / 144 Nm | 6.4 L/100 km | Space and simplicity |
| Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV Comfort | R439,900 | 150 kW / 310 Nm | 5.4 L/100 km | Serious power for the price |
| Volkswagen T-Cross Life DSG | R471,400 | 85 kW / 200 Nm | ~5.6 L/100 km | Compact, polished, familiar |
| Toyota Corolla Cross HEV XS | R506,100 | 90 kW combined | 4.3 L/100 km | Efficiency and ownership confidence |
| Ford Territory Ambiente | R534,900 | 138 kW / 318 Nm | 7.4 L/100 km | More car, more space, more thirst |
The numbers immediately upset the old order. Chery tops the power table. Toyota wins the economy contest by a clear margin. The bargain-priced Duster produces more torque than both the Kia and Volkswagen, while the costliest vehicle—the Ford—is also the biggest. The T-Cross occupies the awkward middle ground, where polish must justify a sizeable premium.
How we rate them
These provisional on-paper ratings express the editorial assessment in this comparison, using the prices, claimed figures and descriptions quoted here. They are not instrumented road-test results. Comfort and technology scores are indicative where the article provides limited detail; a road test and trim-specific equipment check may change them.
Performance considers quoted power and torque; comfort considers cabin accommodation and the refinement described; technology considers the powertrain and equipment discussed; practicality considers space and versatility; economy uses claimed consumption; value weighs price against capability and the ownership proposition.
Stars out of five: 1 = weak · 2 = below average · 3 = competitive · 4 = strong · 5 = outstanding within this group. Scores are category judgements, not an overall ranking.
China: Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV
The spec-sheet assassin
If this contest were judged on brochure numbers alone, the Chery would arrive wearing the championship belt. For R439,900, the Tiggo 4 Cross HEV delivers a claimed 150 kW and 310 Nm—more power than anything else here, including the larger Ford Territory, and almost twice the output of the Volkswagen T-Cross.
That is the new Chinese playbook. The goal is not to be marginally cheaper; it is to make established rivals look under-equipped. Hybrid assistance, large displays, strong connectivity, modern safety technology and generous comfort equipment give the Chery instant showroom appeal. Buyers can see the screens, touch the trim, count the cameras and compare the power figure before the first test drive begins.
The unanswered question is what happens much later. Toyota brings decades of resale data; Volkswagen has an enormous servicing and parts footprint. Chery’s South African presence is expanding rapidly, but resale values, out-of-warranty hybrid costs and long-term parts availability will only reveal themselves over time. Those uncertainties do not make the Chery a poor buy—they explain why a less powerful Toyota can still command more money.
On-paper ratings
| Performance | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
|---|---|
| Comfort | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Technology | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
| Practicality | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Economy | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Value | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
The verdict: The hardest vehicle here to beat with a calculator and a specification sheet.
Best for: Maximum performance and equipment per rand.
We like: Strong claimed output, hybrid assistance and generous equipment for the price.
Could be better: Long-term resale and out-of-warranty hybrid costs remain uncertain.
Japan: Toyota Corolla Cross HEV
The safe money
Toyota does not need to shout, and that may be its greatest strength. The R506,100 Corolla Cross HEV XS produces a relatively modest 90 kW combined, but its claimed 4.3 L/100 km changes the conversation. This is the SUV for a buyer thinking beyond the first test drive—to fuel bills, servicing, parts, resale value and life ten years down the road.
The Corolla Cross is also built in KwaZulu-Natal. Its cabin may not overwhelm with giant screens and theatrical lighting, but Toyota has mastered something harder to display under showroom spotlights: ownership confidence. A five-year-old Corolla Cross should still be easy to understand, easy to service and easy to sell.
The challenge is that the opposition has become very good. Toyota must now explain why its hybrid costs roughly R66,000 more than the Chery. It can answer with proven hybrid technology, exceptional economy, manufacturing heritage and residual value—but the fact that it must answer at all shows how dramatically this segment has changed.
On-paper ratings
| Performance | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
|---|---|
| Comfort | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Technology | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Practicality | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Economy | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
| Value | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
The verdict: Not the flashiest or fastest, but probably the easiest to own.
Best for: Fuel economy and long-term peace of mind.
We like: Low claimed consumption and an established ownership network.
Could be better: A sizeable premium over the Chery and modest combined output.
Korea: Kia Seltos
The quietly clever family car
The Kia Seltos is almost aggressively sensible. At R414,995, its naturally aspirated 1.5-litre engine produces 85 kW and 144 Nm. Those numbers will not dominate a weekend braai conversation, but the 536-litre boot might win the argument on Monday morning.
Prams, school bags, groceries, holiday luggage and cooler boxes matter more to most families than a headline power figure. Add Kia’s five-year unlimited-kilometre warranty and a mature dealer network, and the Seltos feels less like an alternative choice than an established one.
Its weakness is performance. Fully loaded, at altitude or during a quick overtake, the engine’s modest output may become apparent beside turbocharged and hybrid rivals. Yet buyers seeking a dependable family tool rather than a performance statement may consider that a fair compromise.
On-paper ratings
| Performance | ★★☆☆☆ 2/5 |
|---|---|
| Comfort | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Technology | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Practicality | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
| Economy | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Value | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
The verdict: It may not win the brochure war, but it could quietly win the ownership war.
Best for: Families wanting space without drama.
We like: A large boot, sensible price and five-year unlimited-kilometre warranty.
Could be better: Modest torque limits its appeal for heavily loaded journeys.
Europe: Renault Duster
The honest utility vehicle
The Renault Duster is the surprise of the group. At R399,999, it is the cheapest contender, yet its turbocharged 1.3-litre engine produces a healthy 116 kW and 260 Nm. It also brings approximately 212 mm of ground clearance and a useful 518-litre boot.
Those figures make sense in South Africa, where the road can change from smooth tar to potholes, gravel or a farm track without warning. The Duster understands that “utility” should mean more than black wheel-arch trim. It offers the clearance, luggage capacity and torque to deal with real journeys, without pretending to be a luxury car.
The French badge disguises a thoroughly global product: the South African Duster is sourced from India. That matters less than how naturally its priorities suit local roads.
On-paper ratings
| Performance | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
|---|---|
| Comfort | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Technology | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Practicality | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
| Economy | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Value | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
The verdict: The most honest and underrated SUV in the contest.
Best for: Buyers who value usefulness and rough-road ability over status.
We like: Strong torque, useful clearance and a big boot at the lowest price.
Could be better: Its utility-first proposition places less emphasis on cabin luxury.
Germany: Volkswagen T-Cross
The price of polish
Volkswagen’s problem is arithmetic. The T-Cross Life DSG costs R471,400 and its 1.0-litre turbo produces 85 kW and 200 Nm. Those are respectable figures—until you notice that the Renault is about R71,000 cheaper with more power and torque, while the Chery costs roughly R31,000 less and delivers vastly more of both.
The Volkswagen fights back with qualities that resist spreadsheet comparison: intuitive ergonomics, tidy calibration, consistent steering, ride refinement, brand familiarity and an extensive ownership ecosystem. Its sliding rear bench also lets owners trade luggage space for passenger room as needed.
These are meaningful advantages, but they lead to the defining question for every established premium-leaning brand: how much extra will buyers pay for polish?
On-paper ratings
| Performance | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
|---|---|
| Comfort | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Technology | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Practicality | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Economy | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Value | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
The verdict: A convincing all-rounder whose best qualities are felt rather than counted.
Best for: Buyers who prioritise refinement, familiarity and the VW ownership experience.
We like: The refinement described here, familiar controls and a sliding rear bench.
Could be better: Less power for the money than the cheaper Renault and Chery.
USA: Ford Territory
Go big or go home
At R534,900, the Ford Territory is the most expensive entrant—and the most substantial. Its turbocharged engine produces 138 kW and 318 Nm, it offers the room expected of a larger family SUV, and it can tow up to approximately 1,310 kg braked.
The trade-off is thirst. A claimed 7.4 L/100 km looks heavy beside the Toyota’s 4.3 L/100 km. Over a short test drive the difference is academic; across 100,000 km it becomes part of the ownership calculation. Families who regularly travel fully loaded may nevertheless accept the extra fuel use in exchange for space, comfort and torque.
There is one final twist: although the Territory carries one of America’s most recognisable badges, it comes through Ford’s Chinese manufacturing operation. The neat national labels in this comparison are already beginning to unravel.
On-paper ratings
| Performance | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
|---|---|
| Comfort | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
| Technology | ★★★☆☆ 3/5 |
| Practicality | ★★★★★ 5/5 |
| Economy | ★★☆☆☆ 2/5 |
| Value | ★★★★☆ 4/5 |
The verdict: More SUV in every sense—including appetite.
Best for: Families who need genuine space and size.
We like: A substantial cabin, strong torque and useful towing capability.
Could be better: The highest price and claimed fuel consumption in this group.
The CrocodileNews scorecard
| Category | Winner | Why it wins |
|---|---|---|
| Best value | Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV | Standout performance and specification for the money |
| Best fuel economy | Toyota Corolla Cross HEV | 4.3 L/100 km and proven hybrid experience |
| Best practical family buy | Kia Seltos | Large boot, sensible price and a mature ownership package |
| Best utility | Renault Duster | Ground clearance, luggage capacity and strong torque |
| Best refinement | Volkswagen T-Cross | Polished, familiar and easy to live with |
| Best for space | Ford Territory | The most substantial family-SUV package |
So, which one wins?
There is no universal winner because each car answers a different question. The Toyota Corolla Cross is the easiest long-term recommendation. The Renault Duster is the most underrated and arguably the best tailored to imperfect South African roads. The Kia Seltos is the low-drama family choice, the Ford Territory delivers the most physical SUV, and the Volkswagen T-Cross rewards buyers who appreciate refinement more than raw numbers.
For pure rand-for-rand shock value, however, the Chery is impossible to ignore. At R439,900, its 150 kW and 310 Nm do more than win a specification contest—they force every established rival to explain why it gives you less.
The old rules are dead
Twenty years ago, buying by nationality almost made sense: German for engineering, Japanese for reliability, American for size, Korean for value and Chinese when the budget was tight. That tidy world has disappeared.
A French Renault comes from India. An American Ford comes from China. A Japanese Toyota is built in Durban. A Chinese Chery offers hybrid technology at a price that puts pressure on everyone. Modern cars are global products born from global supply chains, and the nationality of the badge is no longer a buying guide.
Stop asking which country makes the best cars. Ask who gives you the most useful car for your money. Right now, China is winning part of that argument, Japan still owns another, Europe has not forgotten how to engineer a polished car, Korea may offer the smartest compromise, and America still understands the appeal of going bigger.
Forget the badge for a moment. Drive the deal.
- Details
- Written by: News Correspondent
- Category: South Africa
- Hits: 45
Europe has changed the rules. South Africa’s automotive industry now has to prove it can do more than assemble and export cars: it must recover materials, trace them and put them back to work. The country can build that capability—or leave another part of its industrial future to somebody else.
PRETORIA — South Africa exported a record R291 billion in vehicles and automotive components in 2025. Vehicle exports reached 414,271 units, according to naamsa’s Automotive Trade Manual 2026 release, published on 15 May 2026. That is an industrial achievement worth defending. But last year’s export record is no guarantee of a place on the next production line.
The European Union’s new end-of-life vehicle regulation extends environmental requirements into vehicle design, materials and recovery. South African producers need suppliers that can prove where recycled materials came from and how they were processed. A competitive factory needs a compliant supply chain behind it.
The next vehicle programmes will be won through engineering, investment and execution. South Africa needs to make its case before those decisions are taken. Waiting until an export order is in trouble is not an industrial strategy.
The export record is no shield
Naamsa reports that the EU and UK together received R182.8 billion, or 62.8%, of South Africa’s automotive export value in 2025. That concentration leaves South Africa heavily dependent on a narrow group of customers. Their changing requirements belong at the centre of industrial planning.
The real pressure point is factory scale. Export orders help support assembly lines, tooling, component contracts, logistics and engineering. Losing enough volume can weaken the economics of an entire operation, including production for customers unaffected by a particular rule. Conversely, complying early can help a supplier remain part of future vehicle programmes.
Brussels is reaching into the factory
The European Commission’s overview describes a framework covering the vehicle lifecycle, from design and production to collection, dismantling and recycling. The objective is to make parts and materials easier to recover and return to use, rather than treating recycling as a problem that begins at the scrapyard.
That changes the questions facing a manufacturer. Can a component be removed efficiently? Can its materials be separated? Can recovered material meet the quality required for a new part? Can the supplier produce reliable evidence? A technically suitable material may still be commercially difficult to use if its origin and processing cannot be demonstrated.
For an exporter, this work belongs in the design office, the purchasing contract and the supplier’s records. By the time the finished car reaches the port, it is too late to fix the supply chain.
The clock is running
The following milestones come from Regulation (EU) 2026/1738, particularly Articles 6 and 59. Different obligations have different start dates.
- 13 August 2026: Entry into force.
- 1 September 2028: General application date, with specified exceptions and transitional provisions.
- 14 August 2030: Conditions and independent-audit requirements apply to qualifying material recycled in third-country installations.
- 1 September 2032: Newly type-approved vehicle types must contain at least 15% post-consumer recycled plastic by weight of their plastic content.
- 1 September 2036: The corresponding target for newly type-approved vehicle types rises to 25%.
These are not blanket replacement deadlines for every vehicle already being manufactured. The regulation’s scope and transitional provisions matter. Further measures will determine recycled-metal requirements; steel and aluminium should not be presented as having a single, already-settled 2033 compliance deadline.
The calendar invites complacency. Automotive planning punishes it. Material testing, supplier qualification, tooling and investment approval happen years before a car reaches a showroom. South Africa has to work backwards from the programmes it wants to win—and start now.
A scrapyard is not yet a supply chain
South Africa already has vehicle manufacturers, component businesses, dismantlers and recyclers. The job is to connect them into a system that delivers consistent materials and credible records. Selling scrap is a transaction. Feeding a vehicle factory is an industrial capability.
A vehicle reaching the end of its life may contain reusable parts, recoverable metals and plastics, as well as fluids and components needing specialised treatment. The value of recovery depends on safe handling, separation, quality control and a customer willing to buy the output.
How the circular supply chain works
Collection → Safe dismantling → Material recovery → Quality checks and traceability → Manufacturing
Reusable parts can also move into repair and remanufacturing. Not every recovered material is suitable for a new automotive component.
Consider a plastic part removed from an old vehicle. Its route back into manufacturing requires more than collection: materials must be identified and separated, contamination controlled, the recovered plastic processed and its properties tested. The component maker then needs a dependable supply and documentation acceptable to its customer. This example puts the commercial test in plain sight: the material must meet a buyer’s specification. Manufacturers belong at the table from day one.
Build collection capacity without buyers and the country risks creating stockpiles. Ignore recovery capacity and manufacturers may have to import the recycled inputs. Neither outcome delivers the industrial value South Africa should be chasing.
Do not build the new industry by shutting workers out
In a statement dated 1 September 2026, the Motor Industry Staff Association called for a worker-centred end-of-life vehicle framework. MISA’s operations chief executive, Martlé Keyter, linked the proposal to safe working conditions, recognised qualifications and career paths for dismantlers, recyclers and technicians.
The union also called for transition support for informal operators. A framework that shuts capable small businesses out could destroy livelihoods and discard collection and repair networks the country already has. MISA is making the case for jobs; delivering them will take viable businesses and enforceable working standards.
Set standards and enforce them. Then make the route to compliance usable: training, technical guidance, affordable certification and access to buyers. A licence that a small operator cannot realistically obtain is a barrier, not a transition plan.
The policy discussion is already under way. Engineering News reported on 11 September 2026 that Parks Tau, speaking at the Eastern Cape Export Symposium on 20 August, identified an end-of-life vehicle policy as part of the response to the sector’s challenges.
Component makers face a double squeeze
Circularity arrives alongside electrification and changing expectations for industrial emissions. Component businesses must decide which products will remain in demand and which new capabilities justify investment. A supplier can face pressure on both its product range and its choice of materials.
Battery-electric vehicles do not use exhaust catalytic converters. Other opportunities may emerge in battery systems, thermal management and electrical components. But a slide deck is not a factory. Firms need customers, skills, finance and competitive production costs before an opportunity becomes an order.
Apply the same discipline to recycling and remanufacturing. Name the buyer. Define the specification. Secure the material. Show how the operation makes money. Regulation can create an opening; it cannot run the business.
Defend Europe. Stop depending on it so heavily.
South Africa should prepare for demanding European standards without making Europe its only industrial objective. Greater market diversity would reduce the concentration risk identified by the export figures.
A credible recovery and remanufacturing system could also serve domestic repair businesses and, over time, customers elsewhere in Africa. Winning that business will require competitive prices, workable logistics and knowledge of each market’s rules. Continental ambition needs customers behind it.
The strategic prize is capability that has value beyond a single regulation: trained workers, reliable material specifications, traceable supply chains and manufacturers able to adapt as their customers’ requirements change.
Enough diagnosis. Who delivers?
- Government: Coordinate an end-of-life vehicle framework across industry, environmental regulation and trade, with clear responsibilities and published implementation milestones.
- Manufacturers and component suppliers: Map affected vehicle programmes, specify material and documentation requirements, and test potential suppliers early.
- Recyclers and dismantlers: Develop safe treatment, separation and record-keeping systems around the requirements of actual buyers.
- Training and standards institutions: Build qualifications, testing capacity and accessible certification routes, including for smaller operators.
Judge the response by what gets built and qualified: suppliers ready to deliver, workers trained, materials meeting specifications and recovery operations earning their keep. Workshops and strategy launches are not the finish line.
South Africa already has factories, engineering expertise and export relationships worth defending. The missing connections between dismantlers, recyclers and manufacturers will not build themselves. Every year spent debating the need to act is a year lost to testing, training and investment.
Europe has written the rules. South Africa must now do the industrial work. Build the system, back the workers and win the next generation of orders. An export record is worth celebrating. It is not a plan.
- Details
- Written by: News Correspondent
- Category: South Africa
- Hits: 74
Johannesburg is becoming one of Africa’s most important data-centre hubs. That is good news for South Africa’s digital economy. But billions in investment should not end the conversation. They should start one: how much electricity, water, land and public infrastructure will these facilities consume — and who ultimately pays?
Johannesburg is fast becoming one of Africa’s digital infrastructure capitals. The city and wider Gauteng region are attracting some of the world’s biggest cloud, technology and infrastructure companies. The reason is straightforward: Johannesburg is South Africa’s commercial and financial centre, with extensive fibre networks, major internet exchange infrastructure and a concentration of banks, telecoms operators, businesses and public institutions that increasingly depend on cloud services. That is an economic opportunity South Africa should welcome.
Data centres underpin digital banking, e-commerce, artificial intelligence, government systems, streaming, cybersecurity and telecommunications. Hosting more computing infrastructure locally can improve resilience, reduce latency and strengthen South Africa’s position as a digital gateway into Africa.
But data centres are not just buildings full of computers. They are large, concentrated infrastructure consumers. They need electricity around the clock. They need high-capacity connections, substations, backup generation and well-serviced land. Depending on how they are designed, they may also require substantial water for cooling.
And AI is raising the stakes.
AI is changing the power equation
The new generation of AI infrastructure packs enormous computing power into increasingly dense facilities. That means more electricity.
Global demand from data centres is expected to rise sharply this decade as cloud computing and AI expand. For Johannesburg, the question is not simply whether South Africa has enough generating capacity today. These facilities may operate for decades. The real test is whether the electricity network — generation, transmission, substations and municipal distribution — can absorb large new users without pushing costs onto everyone else.
If a hyperscale facility requires a new substation, who pays for it? If the surrounding electricity network must be strengthened, does the developer cover the cost or does it eventually appear in tariffs? And if additional generation or storage is needed to support the load, should that form part of the investment obligation?
These are not hypothetical questions. Other countries have already discovered what happens when data-centre expansion runs ahead of infrastructure planning.
Ireland learned the hard way
Ireland enthusiastically attracted the world’s largest technology companies and became a major European data-centre hub. Then electricity demand became impossible to ignore. Data centres grew into a significant part of the country’s power consumption, creating grid pressures and forcing regulators to rethink how new facilities should be connected. Ireland did not reject the industry. It changed the rules.
New developments face greater scrutiny over where they are built, their effect on the grid, whether additional generation or storage accompanies them, and the wider economic value they create. That is the lesson South Africa should absorb early. Once data centres reach a certain scale, they stop being ordinary property developments. They become energy-policy decisions.
Singapore asks: value per megawatt
Singapore went further. With scarce land and limited energy resources, it temporarily constrained data-centre development and later reopened the market more selectively. The crucial shift was philosophical. The question was no longer simply: How much money is being invested? It became: How much economic and strategic value does the country receive for the energy and land being allocated? That is a better question for Johannesburg too.
A billion-rand project sounds impressive. But if it consumes enormous amounts of scarce infrastructure while creating relatively few permanent jobs and importing most of its equipment, the headline number tells only part of the story. Investment should be measured against what remains in the local economy.
Land is not free simply because an investor buys it
Data centres also compete for prime industrial land. The best sites tend to have exactly the infrastructure cities struggle to provide: strong electricity connections, fibre, water, roads and proximity to economic centres. That land has alternatives. It could support manufacturing, logistics, housing or other commercial activity. The Netherlands eventually restricted the location of very large hyperscale facilities partly because government concluded that land and energy were too important to allocate without a wider strategic test.
Johannesburg need not copy the Dutch approach. But it should copy the question: Is this the highest-value use of scarce, infrastructure-rich land?
Then there is water
For Johannesburg, water deserves particular scrutiny. Residents already live with outages, ageing infrastructure, losses and supply constraints. In that environment, the water demands of large new developments cannot be treated as an afterthought.
Not every data centre is a water guzzler. Cooling designs differ significantly. Some use evaporative cooling; others rely on closed-loop or air-cooled systems with far lower water consumption. That is precisely why disclosure matters. For every major facility, the public should know how much water will be required, whether it will be potable water, what cooling technology will be used and what happens during droughts or supply interruptions. A promise that a facility is “water efficient” is not enough. Show the numbers.
What about the jobs?
The same principle should apply to employment. Data centres can create large numbers of jobs during construction. Engineers, electricians, builders, fibre contractors, security companies and equipment suppliers all benefit. But once construction ends, the permanent workforce can be relatively small compared with the billions invested. That does not make the investment undesirable. Data centres can support broader digital ecosystems and create valuable technical jobs. But the numbers should not be blurred.
How many jobs are temporary? How many are permanent? How many are South African? How many apprentices, graduates and technicians will be trained? And how much of the procurement actually goes to local companies rather than imported servers, cooling systems and electrical equipment?
A project should not qualify as transformative simply because the capital expenditure is large. The better question is: How much capability does it leave behind?
South Africa absolutely needs data centres
This is not an argument against the industry. Quite the opposite. South Africa cannot build a serious AI, cloud, fintech or digital-services economy without world-class data-centre infrastructure.
Johannesburg should compete aggressively for that investment. But competing for investment does not mean accepting it on any terms. South Africa should want the most efficient facilities, the strongest skills commitments, the deepest local supply chains and the greatest economic value per megawatt consumed. That is what strategic investment policy looks like.
Publish the numbers
Large data-centre developments should therefore come with a basic public-interest disclosure.
The public-interest checklist
- How much electricity will the facility require?
- How much water?
- What cooling system will it use?
- What new substations, transmission or municipal infrastructure will be required?
- Who will pay for those upgrades?
- How many construction and permanent jobs are expected?
- What are the commitments on local procurement and skills development?
- And, critically, were those promises ultimately delivered?
A national register of major data centres would help too. One project may look manageable on its own. Ten large projects drawing electricity and water from the same constrained system are a different matter. Infrastructure planning must consider the cumulative load.
Follow the infrastructure bill
The most important question may ultimately be the simplest: Who pays?
When a private development requires major public infrastructure, somebody carries the cost. If the investor pays, say so. If a municipality, electricity utility or water provider is expected to contribute, disclose that too. Because there is a real danger in celebrating a R10 billion private investment while quietly socialising part of the infrastructure bill.
Johannesburg already has communities waiting for reliable electricity, water, roads and basic municipal services. Those residents should not unknowingly subsidise infrastructure for some of the world's richest technology companies.
Make public value part of the deal
Johannesburg should want to become Africa’s leading data-centre city. But leadership should mean more than hosting the most servers. It should mean building the continent’s smartest framework for digital infrastructure. Every major project should face a simple test: What does South Africa get for the megawatts, water, land and infrastructure it gives up?
Are local companies gaining business? Are South Africans gaining skills? Are permanent jobs being created? Is new energy capacity being added? Are infrastructure costs being carried fairly? And can the public see the answers? The choice is not between data centres and development.
The real choice is between unmanaged growth and strategic growth. Johannesburg should welcome the investment — but it should negotiate from the position that access to scarce public infrastructure has value. The billions matter. But what South Africa gets in return matters more.