Reflections on Building Climate-Informed Economic Pathways for South Africa

Climate transition and decarbonisation are often discussed using technical terms like emissions trajectories, energy pathways, carbon budgets and investment flows. However, one of the biggest lessons I’ve learned from leading the project Developing Scenarios for Climate-Informed Economic Pathways through Stakeholder Dialogues is that transitions ultimately focus on people. They may operate in different institutions, and need to make choices in uncertain situations, but make no mistake: a climate transition to decarbonisation must focus on people. Here, I unpack how this key lesson expressed itself in the Climate-Informed Economic Pathways project, organised by the Economic Development Partnership (EDP) for the Presidential Climate Commission (PCC) and funded by the UK Partnering for Accelerated Climate Transitions (UK PACT) programme.

The stakeholder engagement was intentionally designed as a co-creation process rather than a compliance task.

Focusing on how people are affected by climate pathways

Through systems thinking, scenario planning and ongoing stakeholder engagement, the project team developed four possible climate-informed futures for South Africa by 2050, along with pathways to achieve these futures and a list of ‘no-regret actions’. The four plausible futures for South Africa were built around two key uncertainties: the extent of global climate action and the extent of South Africa’s domestic response to climate change. The four scenarios produced were:

• Status Quo – weak global and domestic climate action
• Opting Out – strong global action but weak domestic response
• Going It Alone – strong domestic response despite weak global coordination
• In Sync – strong and coordinated global and domestic climate action

Using these scenarios, the climate pathways project did not try to predict what will happen in future climate scenarios. Instead, it aimed to help decision-makers think through the range of uncertainties, trade-offs and resilience associated with and needed for different scenarios.

The wider context matters here: South Africa’s climate and economic pathways are inseparable. South Africa faces challenges like inequality, unemployment, and climate vulnerability. Climate change is no longer just a future risk on the edges of development planning; it is becoming central to economic resilience. A transition is inevitable: this became clear throughout the stakeholder engagement process.

Coal infrastructure will phase out. Renewable energy will take the forefront. Global markets will increasingly favour lower-carbon products and supply chains. Transport systems will electrify. The real question is not if change will happen, but whether South Africa will manage that change or respond too late, resulting in much higher social costs.

A recurring theme I observed across stakeholder engagements among participants was the challenge of balancing climate and economic pathways of affordable energy, unemployment and climate ambition. Stakeholders understood that moving too slowly risks economic exclusion and declining competitiveness in a decarbonising global economy. But they also warned that moving too quickly, without adequate planning and coordination, could deepen inequality and create affordability shocks. This tension surfaced repeatedly in discussions around energy reform, industrial policy, transport electrification and labour-market transitions. Getting consensus on ‘no-regret actions’ in this context was not easy.

Stakeholders from diverse sectors worked in groups to interrogate the climate-informed economic pathways presented by the project team.

Focusing on how people can meaningfully build consensus about the future

One of the project’s key strengths was the intentional design of stakeholder engagement as a co-creation process rather than a compliance task. Too often, climate and economic planning are driven by technical experts, with key stakeholders only involved after core assumptions and outcomes are already finalised. This project challenged that norm.

From June 2025 to February 2026, stakeholders took part in two rounds of sector roundtables and multi-stakeholder workshops, which included civil society groups, labour, youth, faith-based organisations, businesses, academics and government. Round one took place between June and September 2025, during which we tested the initial the scenario narratives. Participants emphasised the need to start from a credible baseline that reflects South Africa’s inequality, institutional and governance constraints, infrastructure fragility, and political volatility. These insights informed subsequent revisions to the scenarios.

In November 2025, we launched the second round of engagements to further refine the scenarios and test early modelling outputs. Stakeholders identified key issues, including implementation capacity, institutional coordination, redistribution, accountability and global uncertainty, all of which have been incorporated into our ongoing work. The co-creation process involves constantly going between stakeholders and asking ‘did we understand you correctly?’.

A key element to successfully building this consensus about the implications of the different climate pathways was using a Gender, Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion (GEDSI) framework to guide the project. The GEDSI framework guided stakeholder mapping and participation throughout the project and ensured that transition planning considers diverse lived experiences and avoids replicating existing inequalities.

Stakeholders identified key issues, including implementation capacity, institutional coordination, redistribution, accountability and global uncertainty.

Four key takeaways to make processes like this work better for people

Working on this process reinforced several lessons for me personally and professionally about how climate and economic planning processes can and must focus on people.

Stakeholder engagement strengthens technical robustness | Far from slowing down the process, structured stakeholder engagement improved the analytical quality and real-world applicability of the work. Stakeholders surfaced assumptions that technical teams may have overlooked, highlighted implementation barriers and strengthened the realism of the pathways. The iterative relationship between modelling and engagement was one of this project’s greatest strengths.

Uncertainty must be planned for, not ignored | Traditional planning often assumes a relatively stable future. This project directly challenged that assumption. Scenario planning enabled us to explore how different futures might unfold and to identify actions that remain beneficial across multiple outcomes. In an era of accelerating climate, economic and geopolitical uncertainty, resilience matters as much as optimisation.

Inclusion is not separate from effectiveness | The process demonstrated that inclusion and technical quality are not competing objectives. Incorporating perspectives from youth, labour, civil society and local government improved the pathways’ relevance and legitimacy. Transitions that are not socially grounded are unlikely to succeed politically or institutionally.

Government capability remains central | Across almost every discussion, stakeholders returned to the same issue: institutional capability. Stronger coordination, clearer mandates, integrated planning and implementation capacity emerged as critical ‘no-regret’ priorities. No scenario succeeded without capable institutions.

Focusing on what people need to do next

This project was never intended to produce a definitive roadmap. Instead, it sought to create a shared framework for navigating uncertainty and making more informed choices. If there is one message I would leave with policymakers, practitioners and stakeholders, it is this: South Africa still has agency in shaping its future. The transition is not something happening to us from the outside. The choices we make today on governance, infrastructure, inclusion, industrial strategy and institutional coordination will determine whether the climate transition becomes a driver of resilience and opportunity, or a source of deeper fragmentation and exclusion. The work ahead remains difficult. But this project demonstrated that when technical evidence and inclusive dialogue are meaningfully brought together, it becomes possible to move beyond abstract debates towards practical, grounded and socially legitimate pathways for the future.

Edited: Natalie Tannous

This blog post is subject to the following disclaimer.