Search Results

Phumzile Mahlangu | 25 November 2024 Beyond policy and laws, we must act collectively to ensure that we overcome systemic discrimination and inequality levelled against people leaving with disability in our society. We must do more to create an inclusive society that accommodates people with impediments and move from the notion of disability being a welfare or charity issue to a rights-based model. Every person is considered equal before the law and should not be discriminated against on the ground of race, culture or disability. However, it is concerning that 30 years into our democracy people with disabilities still face discrimination and exclusion as conditions for them remain far from ideal worldwide. In our effort to ensure that we become a more inclusive society especially towards persons with disabilities, South Africa commemorates Disability Rights Awareness Month (DRAM) every year from 3 November to 3 December, as part of efforts to improve the quality of life for people with disabilities. This year’s commemoration is being held under the theme “Celebrating 30 years of Democracy, creating a disability inclusive society for a better quality of life and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities” and coincides with the International Day of Persons with Disabilities on 3 December. This period advocates for persons with disability to be accorded equitable social rights, in line with our Constitution. It is also a call for action to citizens, various organisations and institutions to play their part in advancing the rights of people with disability and ensure they are integrated into our society. It also offers an opportunity for society to remove social barriers faced by people with disabilities and reflect on what we have done over the years to improve their lives. As government we are pleased of the advances we have made since 1994 to give effect to the rights of people with disabilities. We have passed legislation, regulations and implemented government programmes aimed at improving the lives of people with disabilities. We have also ensured that they have access to free basic education and receive free higher education through our National Student Financial Aid Scheme. To support their basic needs, persons with disabilities are provided with a monthly cash transfer and we have now recognised South African Sign Language as the 12th official language in South Africa. Furthermore, in 2015, government approved the White Paper on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which stipulates the norms and standards for the removal of discriminatory barriers that perpetuate the exclusion and segregation of persons with disabilities. Among other things, the White Paper provides a framework against which the delivery of services to persons with disabilities can be monitored and evaluated. The document incorporates the vision and objectives of the National Development Plan as well as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with all these instruments working to achieve set targets by 2030. The White Paper is currently being implemented across all spheres of government in partnership with various stakeholders such as NGOs and the private sector. More recently, our government passed the Public Procurement Act, which mandates that a portion of government procurement be sourced from businesses owned and controlled by persons with disabilities. We are determined to ensure that at least 40 percent of the R1.5 trillion of public procurement accounts over the next three years is directed toward businesses not only owned by women but also create economic opportunities for youth and persons with disabilities. However, government alone cannot advance the rights of persons with disability, we need all sectors of society to play their part in building an inclusive society that protects and empowers people with disabilities. Together we can ensure that we build a country as envisioned by our founding fathers and treats everyone equally, irrespective of their gender, background or disability. ‘Disclaimer - The views expressed here are not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.gov.za/blog/disability-rights-awareness-month-2024

As per Schedule 1  of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice, a Black Designated Group Supplier is defined as follows: “means a supplier to the Measured Entity that is at least 51% owned by one or more of the following categories of ownership within its structure: (a) unemployed black people not attending and not required by law to attend an educational institution and not awaiting admission to an educational institution;     (b) Black people who are youth as defined in the National Youth Commission Act of 1996;    (c) Black people who are persons with disabilities as defined in the Code of Good Practice on employment of people with disabilities issued under the Employment Equity Act;                            (d) Black people living in rural and under developed areas;    (e) Black military veterans who qualifies to be called a military veteran in terms of the Military Veterans Act 18 of 2011;”   The above definition/concept is applied under the elements of Ownership and Enterprise & Supplier Development Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice.   Technical Services  are available to assist Members in further understanding the above as well as the application thereof.

Persons with disabilities are the largest marginalised group globally.   Paragraph 2.1.1.3 under Statement 300  of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice encourages the inclusion of persons with disabilities in terms of Bursaries, Learnerships, Internships, Apprenticeships and any other training initiative. The clause is stated as follows:   “2.1.1.3 Skills Development Expenditure on Learning Programmes specified in the Learning Programme Matrix for 'Black' employees with disabilities as a percentage of Leviable Amount”. The points on offer are four with a 0.3% target.”   Human Capital Services  are available to assist members in implementing sustainable Skills Development Strategies for Persons with Disabilities.

Section 1 of the Employment Equity Act  defines People with Disabilities as “ people who have a long-term or recurring physical. or mental impairment, which substantially limits their prospects of entry into, or advancement in, employment”   Furthermore, the Codes of Good Practice for Persons  with disabilities outlines more detailed requirements and definitions in line with the above. Members need to ensure that the definition of People with Disabilities is clearly understood.   Human Capital Services  are available to assist members in understanding the definition of People with Disabilities in line with B-BBEE requirements.

Myra Knoesen | 20 November 2024 South Africa’s recent greylisting by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has had significant implications for the country’s regulatory landscape, particularly in the realm of corporate governance. In response, the South African government has introduced amendments to the Companies Act, specifically aimed at enhancing transparency in company ownership structures. The key change is the introduction of beneficial ownership disclosure provisions, which are designed to assist in the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism. FAnews spoke to Yaniv Kleitman, Director and Counsel in Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr's Corporate and Commercial practice, and Roxanne Bain, Professional Support Lawyer in the same practice, to understand the implications of these amendments for South African businesses. The key amendments to the Companies Act The new provisions in the Companies Act require certain companies to disclose the identities of natural persons who ultimately own or control the company. This disclosure must be made to the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC). The goal is to improve transparency regarding the true owners - referred to as the “beneficial owners” - of companies, even in cases where ownership is obscured through complex structures such as trusts or corporate entities. The changes are particularly focused on companies with intricate ownership chains, where the company is controlled by another company or trust. In these cases, the company must trace ownership up the chain until it identifies a natural person who is the ultimate beneficial owner. Kleitman explains, “These amendments are crucial for aligning South Africa with international anti-money laundering standards and addressing the concerns that led to the country’s greylisting by FATF.” The complexity of beneficial ownership disclosure The amendments to the Companies Act introduce complexities for companies trying to determine whether they are required to disclose beneficial owners. A company must first assess whether it is an “affected company”, which depends on its share transfer history. Affected companies are required to disclose the holders of a 5% or greater beneficial interest in their shares, while non-affected companies must disclose their ultimate controllers - concepts that are distinct but interconnected. Bain adds, “The challenge lies in the fact that there is no clear-cut threshold for determining who is a beneficial owner. The Companies Act does not specify a percentage of ownership at which a person becomes a beneficial owner, leaving businesses in a grey area.” Interpreting the definition of beneficial ownership The ambiguity surrounding the definition of “beneficial owner” in the Companies Act poses significant risks for businesses. Although the CIPC has indicated that companies should apply a 5% threshold for disclosure, this is not explicitly stated in the legislation. This has created confusion, as the 5% threshold appears to conflate the concepts of a “beneficial owner” and a “5% beneficial interest holder,” which are not necessarily the same. As Kleitman highlights, “Companies now find themselves in the unenviable position of trying to reconcile the technical definition of beneficial ownership with the 5% guideline provided by CIPC. Many companies are likely to err on the side of caution and simply comply with the 5% threshold to avoid potential complications.” Practical implications of disclosure From a compliance perspective, it is crucial for companies to disclose their beneficial owners to the CIPC. Failure to do so can result in severe consequences, including the inability to file annual returns, which may eventually lead to deregistration. However, companies with complex ownership structures face a significant challenge in identifying and disclosing their beneficial owners. Bain notes, “In many cases, companies may not even be aware of who controls their ownership at higher levels, particularly where these structures involve offshore entities, trusts, or partnerships. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for companies to meet the disclosure requirements.” Moreover, while companies are allowed to request information from shareholders about beneficial ownership, there is no legal obligation for shareholders to disclose such details. This lack of enforceability adds another layer of difficulty for businesses striving for compliance. Balancing compliance with privacy concerns The introduction of beneficial ownership disclosure raises important questions about privacy and data protection. Under the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPI), businesses must ensure that the personal information of beneficial owners is handled appropriately. Fortunately, Kleitman explains, “In most cases, over-disclosure is not a concern, as the beneficial owner will generally consent to the disclosure of their personal details. However, companies must still navigate the fine line between compliance and protecting sensitive personal data.” Consequences of non-compliance Companies that fail to comply with the new beneficial ownership disclosure requirements face significant penalties. Bain clarifies, “If CIPC identifies an issue with a company’s disclosure, it must first investigate the matter and provide the company with an opportunity to rectify the situation. If the company fails to comply with the notice, CIPC can apply to the court for a fine to be imposed.” This process ensures that companies are given a fair opportunity to correct their disclosures, but it also highlights the importance of timely and accurate compliance with the regulations. Impact on corporate governance The recent amendments to the Companies Act are likely to have a long-term impact on corporate governance practices in South Africa. The emphasis on transparency in company ownership is expected to drive more rigorous internal controls, particularly in terms of record-keeping and shareholder communications. Kleitman suggests, “To ensure compliance, companies should BREAK maintain detailed organograms and regularly update their ownership structures. They should also encourage shareholders to notify the company of any changes in their ownership interests. This proactive approach will help companies stay on top of their obligations and avoid costly compliance issues.” In conclusion, while the new beneficial ownership disclosure provisions are designed to combat money laundering and terrorism financing, they also pose significant challenges for South African businesses. The lack of clear thresholds, the complexity of identifying ultimate owners, and the need for companies to balance compliance with privacy concerns will require careful attention. However, these amendments are a necessary step in aligning South Africa’s corporate practices with international standards, and businesses that can navigate these changes successfully will contribute to improving the country’s global standing. As Bain aptly puts it, “The regulatory landscape may be challenging, but it also presents an opportunity for businesses to strengthen their governance practices and demonstrate their commitment to transparency.” ‘Disclaimer - The views expressed here are not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.fanews.co.za/article/compliance-regulatory/2/general/1082/south-africa-s-new-disclosure-laws-a-step-forward-or-regulatory-chaos/40654

Tian Alberts | 18 November 2024 Sakeliga has filed litigation to protect air services providers and customers from harmful and unlawful BEE conditions in air services. In papers served this week, Sakeliga asks the court to set aside the  Air Services Licensing Council’s (ASLC)  harmful, unlawful, and unconstitutional licensing requirements regarding BEE and transformation. The ASLC is a statutory body responsible for the licensing of domestic air services providers, including passenger services, medical services, cargo services, fire-fighting services, and more. Since at least December 2023, the ASLC has been denying and/or frustrating domestic air services providers’ licences by arbitrarily insisting on B-BBEE certification and transformation undertakings. Our lawyers warned the council to halt this conduct and limit itself to the regulatory duties it is lawfully authorised to carry out, but the council persisted and refused to admit any wrongdoing. Denying licences based on BEE is contrary to the ASLC’s statutory mandate in the Air Services Licensing Act (115 of 1990).The Act prescribes that the ASLC must issue licences whenever an applicant complies with requirements on safety, residency, and control and registration of aircraft, and precludes the ASLC from adding additional requirements. There is no basis in law for making race, transformation, or B-BBEE a prerequisite for air services licences.By introducing licensing criteria that have nothing to do with operational standards and accountability, these licensing practices are compromising commercial freedom and the availability and safety of local aviation services. As part of our investigation, Sakeliga discovered an additional concerning practice by the ASLC. Unlawfully so, the ASLC expressly prohibits applicants from recording their licensing application hearings and even bringing any electronic equipment into such hearings. This, despite the fact that the Act stipulates that the hearings should be public.During these hearings, applicants have found themselves confronted with arbitrary and verbal demands regarding BEE and transformation, which conveniently appeared nowhere on paper. If the panel wasn't satisfied with undertakings or explanations, applicants would be instructed to reapply after they had complied with outstanding BEE requirements. Following the ASLC’s refusal to cease its harmful and unlawful conduct, Sakeliga is now requesting the court to: 1.      Set aside the ASLC’s decision to include BEE criteria in its licensing process and declare the inclusion of race-based criteria in such licensing unlawful. 2.      Declare unlawful the ASLC’s prohibition on the use of electronic devices during hearings and on the recording of meetings and other interactions with ASLC staff. Sakeliga’s founding affidavit and supporting documents may be found  here . International Air Services Also Affected Since initiating our investigation into the harmful and unlawful conduct of the ASLC regarding domestic air services licences, we have uncovered and been made aware of similar unlawful conduct regarding international air services in South Africa.  It appears that the ASLC’s counterpart for licensing of international air services, the International Air Services Council (IASC), has been making demands of major international airlines to comply with arbitrary BEE and transformation requirements.  Sakeliga is in the process of obtaining further information through PAIA requests and industry relations and will consider litigation against the IASC should it prove necessary. Issued by Tian Alberts, Legal and Liaison Officer: Sakeliga, 15 November 2024 ‘Disclaimer - The views expressed here are not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/sakeliga-brings-bee-case-against-air-services-lice

BR Reporter | 19 November 2024 The Mineworkers Investment Company (MIC) has launched the third round of its MIC Khulisani Ventures, a R300 million early-stage investment initiative aimed at empowering black-owned, innovative and high-growth businesses in South Africa. Applications are open from November 18 to January 31, 2025. MIC said on Tuesday that this funding window continues MIC’s commitment to fostering economic transformation by supporting businesses with more than 51% black ownership, strong management teams and scalable, innovative solutions. The focus sectors include technology-enabled services, internet connectivity, and cybersecurity. Investment amounts will range from R15m to R30m. “Through MIC Khulisani Ventures, we are committed to creating pathways for sustainable, socially responsible businesses that can thrive in South Africa’s unique economy,” said MIC chief investment officer, Nchaupe Khaole. The venture prioritises post-revenue businesses with the potential to create significant social and economic value, especially those targeting underserved markets. Since its inception in 2021, MIC Khulisani Ventures has supported impactful businesses in sectors such as healthtech and fintech. Past investments include Rentoza, a subscription-based electronics retailer, and Quro Medical, whose Hospital at Home program transforms healthcare delivery. The first two funding windows collectively deployed around R145m, attracting over 2500 applications, 34.4% of which came from women-owned businesses. MIC Khulisani said it continues to encourage applications from businesses that demonstrate the potential to disrupt markets and drive societal impact. Interested entrepreneurs can apply via the platform at khulisani.mic.co.za. ‘Disclaimer - The views expressed here are not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/economy/mic-khulisani-ventures-opens-third-funding-window-for-black-owned-firms-83b5098d-bb64-4c07-9fd9-d130e9467a52

Dimpho Madiba | 19 November 2024 RS South Africa , a global product and service solutions provider for industrial customers, has announced its recent achievement of Level 2 Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) certification, underscoring its unwavering commitment to transformation. This milestone, attained at the end of September, is not merely a badge of honour for the company, it signifies a holistic approach to inculcating transformation within the company and the broader industry. Lebohang Kungoane, B-BBEE Compliance Specialist at RS, explains the importance of the certification in relation to the company’s overarching goals. “We are currently at Level 2 and aim to maintain that status. Our Level 2 certification, achieved in 2023, has become our benchmark, and we will work hard to maintain this level.” This achievement is not an isolated effort but part of an ongoing journey that requires constant planning and implementation. Kungoane highlights the rigorous annual processes involved in maintaining the company’s B-BBEE rating. Her responsibilities encompass everything from strategic planning to sourcing beneficiaries, implementing enterprise and supplier development and socio-economic development initiatives and ensuring compliance. RS’s B-BBEE initiatives are deeply integrated into the company’s Corporate Social Investment (CSI) objectives. “We aim to be a preferred supplier for our customers while contributing to transformation and economic participation in our country. Our mantra drives us to build the company we aspire to be,” she says. RS does not view B-BBEE compliance as a mere tick box exercise but prioritises genuine engagement and meaningful participation. “We pride ourselves on implementing the true intentions of the B-BBEE codes,” affirms Lebohang. “It is about achieving a good scorecard while positively impacting the communities we impact.” This commitment to community engagement is evident in the company’s partnership with the Inqolobane Investment Trust and Qhubeka Charity, which has facilitated bicycle donations to children in rural areas. The initiative not only provides transportation to school but also aligns with RS’s mission of creating sustainable opportunities for those facing socio-economic challenges. Lebohang also highlights the company’s focus on skills development and education through its bursary programmes. “We fund students in engineering fields at universities like the Cape Peninsula University of Technology and the University of KwaZulu-Natal,” she explains. RS goes beyond just funding tuition, as the company conducts needs analyses to provide additional support, such as accommodation and travel allowances. It also offers internal bursaries for employees seeking further education, ensuring that the next generation is equipped for success. The importance of Science, Technology , Engineering , and Mathematics (STEM) education is another critical aspect of RS’s strategy. “We engage with communities at various universities and hope to extend engagement at high schools, to guide students in selecting relevant subjects that will benefit their future career prospects,” says Lebohang. This outreach aims to bridge the gap between education and employment, addressing the prevalent issue of unemployment in South Africa . “Our Level 2 B-BBEE certification is a testament to our dedication to transformation and social responsibility. Through strategic partnerships, community engagement and a focus on education, we not only enhance our operational capabilities, but also make a significant contribution to sustainable growth and social impact in the communities we serve,” concludes Lebohang. ‘Disclaimer - The views expressed here are not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/rs-south-africas-level-2-b-bbee-certification-is-testament-to-its-transformation-2024-11-19

As per Schedule 1 of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice , 51% Black Owned and 51% Black Women Owned is defined as follows:   “51% Black Owned means an Entity in which:   (a)      Black people hold at least 51% of the exercisable voting rights as determined under Code series 100; (b)     black people hold at least 51% of the economic interest as determined under Code series 100; and (c)      has earned all the points for Net Value under statement 100;”   “51% Black Women Owned means an Entity in which:   (a)      Black women hold at least 51% of the exercisable voting rights as determined under Code series 100. (b)     Black women hold at least 51% of the economic interest as determined under Code series 100; and (c)      has earned all the points for Net Value under statement 100;”   Technical Compliance Services  are available to assist Members in understanding definitions under Schedule 1 of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice.

More often than not when organisations enter into a relationship with an Enterprise Development or Supplier Development Beneficiary, it wants a guarantee that their investment will be successful. Hence, many choose to incorporate accountability clauses to secure their investment. However, Clause 4.12 in Statement 400 of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice  states:   "4.12 Measured Entities are encouraged to develop and implement an Enterprise Development plan and Supplier Development plan for Qualifying Beneficiaries. The plan should include:   4.12.1 Clear Objectives. 4.12.2 Priority Interventions. 4.12.3 Key Performance indicators; and 4.12.4 A concise implementation plan with clearly articulated milestones".   Placing accountability conditions on Beneficiaries may be punitive without taking into account all factors in clause 4.12.   Enterprise & Supplier Development Services  are on hand to guide organisations before entering into a contractual agreement with a Beneficiary, as B-BBEE Sector Codes of Good Practice may have differing requirements.

Early payments apply to Supplier Development Beneficiaries only. Clause 3.7 in Statement 400 of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice  outlines the definitions, as well as the only circumstance in which a Large Enterprise can qualify for early payments:   “3.7 Beneficiaries of Supplier Development or Enterprise Development are EMEs, QSEs or Generic Entities which are at least 51% Black Owned or at least 51% Black Women Owned utilizing the flow through principle. However, in terms of Generic Entities, this is based on the provision that at the first instance of receiving assistance from the Measured Entity, it was identified that such suppliers were EMEs or QSEs. This recognition for Generic Entities will only be allowed for 5 years from the first time of receiving assistance from the Measured Entity.”   Enterprise & Supplier Development Services  are available to help members determine how to claim Early Payments.

Dr Linda Meyer | 18 November 2024 As globalisation and technological advancements reshape economies, South African universities confront a crucial challenge: equipping graduates for emerging technology and renewable energy sectors. Insights from the recent Universities South Africa (USAf) Higher Education Conference underscored the need for the sector to lead with innovative strategies and partnerships. Now more than ever, South Africa’s universities must offer globally competitive and locally relevant education, empowering graduates to thrive in a world marked by rapid change. Globalisation has transformed the educational landscape, requiring universities to maintain international standards while addressing local socio-economic demands. To make matters worse, rising costs and diminishing public subsidies have added pressure to South African universities and students alike, with national student debt reaching R21 billion in 2021 (DHET, 2021). Financial sustainability is critical as these institutions strive to provide accessible education under increasingly challenging circumstances. With over 60% of Africa’s population under 25, the continent’s education and skills development demand is unmatched (World Bank, 2022). This “youth bulge” presents both challenges and opportunities, as universities can play a transformative role in preparing young people for high-demand sectors such as technology and renewable energy (African Development Bank, 2023). For education to resonate locally, it must reflect African cultural knowledge and indigenous research. Current curricula, which are often based on historical frameworks, limit the inclusion of African perspectives and local knowledge. This disconnection hampers students’ ability to relate meaningfully to their studies. Incorporating African knowledge systems and decolonising the curriculum is critical to creating an educational offering that is as culturally grounded as it is globally relevant (Mamdani, 2021, Decolonising the African University). While higher education demand surges, enrollment growth at South African public universities has stagnated at around 1.1 million students. This contrasts sharply with the nearly 570 000 matriculants who qualify for higher education each year (Statistics South Africa, 2023). With limited state funding, public universities can only offer around 210 000 first-time enrolment spaces annually, leaving many students to turn to Private Higher Education Institutions where their NSFAS awards may not be used or to Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) institutions where their employment prospects are limited. This gap means that many young South Africans face barriers to higher education and economic mobility. The National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) has provided essential support for low-income students. However, NSFAS alone cannot sustain the growing demand and associated costs. For the programme’s sustainability, a system could be introduced where tuition remains free for those who qualify while living and book allowances convert into a payback scheme that graduates repay once they reach a certain income level. This approach could extend NSFAS’s reach and ensure ongoing access for future students (NSFAS, 2023). South Africa’s graduate unemployment rate, while better than the national average, remains troubling at 9.7% (Statistics South Africa, 2024). This disconnect between qualifications and job market demands has sparked concern about the relevance of traditional degrees. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), around 50% of graduates are employed in fields unrelated to their qualifications, revealing a disconnect in the educational pipeline (ILO, 2022). Employers continue to prioritise graduates from select universities over TVET graduates, restricting employment prospects for vocationally trained individuals (CEDA, 2023). To address this, we must expand work-integrated learning (WIL) through incentives and partnerships that link education to real-world skills. Legislative reform could encourage businesses to provide internships and bursaries by offering tax rebates, akin to Section 12H of the South African Income Tax Act, which supports occupational learnerships and apprenticeships (SARS, 2023). This would increase WIL opportunities, enabling students to transition more seamlessly into employment. One glaring skills gap is the shortage of veterinarians. The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform, and Rural Development (DALRRD) reports that while South Africa graduates approximately 147 veterinarians annually, about 107 emigrate each year, leading to a deficit that impacts the agricultural sector. Adopting a policy similar to Australia’s, where emigrating graduates repay the public funds invested in their education, could help South Africa retain essential skills and ensure local benefits from education investments. The Council on Higher Education’s Quality Assurance Framework (QAF) is a step toward a more flexible and accountable system. However, bureaucracy still hampers responsiveness to industry needs. Streamlining these processes would empower institutions to introduce programmes aligned with a globalised economy, ensuring that South African higher education remains competitive and relevant. The debate over academic salaries is contentious. Recent studies from PwC and REMchannel reveal that academic salaries in South Africa are often higher than the national median, raising questions about long-term sustainability. However, discussions around salaries should consider the broader value that academics and universities bring to society. Rather than fixating on salaries alone, universities and the government should focus on resource allocation to maintain educational quality while ensuring financial health. South Africa’s higher education sector faces challenges that demand collective action. Regulatory reform, sustainable funding models, and partnerships with industry are essential to create a system that prepares graduates for impactful careers. South Africa can build an educational ecosystem that drives economic growth and societal progress by fostering collaboration between academia, government, and private sector stakeholders. As green technology and sustainable development opportunities emerge, innovation and collaboration in higher education are urgently needed. South Africa risks missing out on these critical economic openings without swift adaptation. Now is the time for South African leaders across education, government, and industry to reimagine and reshape higher education, ensuring that tomorrow’s graduates are competitive participants in the global economy and innovators and leaders. The stakes are high, and the window for change is closing. Only through transformative, collaborative efforts can South African higher education rise to meet this moment, crafting a future where universities are at the forefront of economic growth, social development, and global progress. ‘Disclaimer - The views expressed here are not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.iol.co.za/the-star/opinion/transforming-south-african-higher-education-for-a-sustainable-future-e9a4be2a-1560-4a5f-bef3-4e50b62c5c4e