The Trade-Offs Between Pro-Poor and Cost-Reflective Tariffs in South Africa: A Regulatory Perspective

  • Michael Maphosa National Energy Regulator of South Africa
  • Patrick Mabuza National Energy Regulator of South Africa


Abstract: This paper presents arguments for and against cost reflectivity and pro-poor tariff policy in South African electricity supply from a regulatory perspective. This debate has been ongoing for decades in developing countries; however, there is still no clear direction on how countries should approach these two important competing policy positions. There are those that argue that achieving cost-reflective tariffs will attract private sector investment into the electricity supply industry (ESI) that will lead to much needed competition and reduced electricity tariffs. However, there are also those who argue that cost-reflective tariffs will make it difficult to achieve government social objectives of universal access through pro-poor tariffs, as cost-reflective tariffs will be unaffordable to the majority of the population. The fundamental question is what should come first, between cost-reflective tariffs and pro-poor tariffs in a developing country context, specifically in South Africa. This paper therefore attempts to examine the real trade-offs between pro-poor tariff policies and cost-reflective tariffs. The study attempts to answer one critical question: How can the electricity sector attract local and foreign investors, without necessarily affecting government social objectives such as universal access to electricity? The study finds that electricity consumers, and in particular poor households, have historically benefited from relatively cheap electricity and that tariffs have not been cost reflective. In other words, there is a mismatch between tariffs and the underlying costs of supplying electricity in South Africa. It also finds competing expectations between poor consumers and utilities. Consumers expect to receive electricity at an affordable price, while utilities argue that a good, reliable electricity supply’s tariffs must be matched with costs. Lastly, the study finds that it is difficult to achieve cost reflective tariffs in the short run, in an environment characterised by a high number of consumers dependent on government social grants and cross-subsidies. The study therefore recommends a gradual movement towards cost-reflective tariffs, together with the introduction of competition and energy efficiency and demand side management (EEDSM), in order to minimise the impact on the poor.

Keywords: Tariffs, pro-poor, cost reflectivity, electricity, consumers


Download data is not yet available.


Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS). (2013). Energy efficiency and people on low incomes. Available online at: Accessed 10 November 2016.
Banerjee, S. G., Barnes, D., Singh, B., Mayer, K. & Samad, H. (2014). Power for all: Electricity access challenge in India. World Bank Publications.
Consumer Utilities Advocacy Centre (CUAC). (2015). Cost reflective pricing: Engaging with the network tariff reform in Victoria. Available online at: Accessed 10 June 2016.
Department for International Development (DFID). (2002). Energy for the poor: Underpinning the millennium development goals. Available online at: Accessed on 1 February 2016.
Department of Energy. (2014). Overview of Universal Energy Access Strategy. IEP Planning Report Workshop. Available online at Accessed on 1 February 2016.
Department of Minerals and Energy. (2008). Electricity Pricing Policy (EPP) of the South African Electricity Supply Industry. South African Government Gazette No. 31741.
Dubach, N. K. (2003). Revisiting electricity reform: The case for a sustainable development approach. Utilities Policy, 11(3), 143-154.
Eskom. (2012). Revenue application: multi-year price determination 2013/14 to 2017/18 (MYPD 3). Accessed on 1 February 2016.
Franks, L. (2014). The impact of rising electricity tariffs on urban poor. A South African case study. Energy Research Centre. Available online at Accessed on 02 February 2016.
Gaunt, T. (2005). Meeting electrification’s social objectives in South Africa, and implications for developing countries. Energy Policy, 33, 1309–1317.
Gerlach, E. & Franceys, R. (2010). Regulating water services for all in developing economics. World Development, 38(9), 1229–1240.
Goldstein, M. (2009). An Argument for the Introduction of IPPs in the South African Electricity Industry. Frost and Sullivan.
Howells, M., Victor, D. G., Gaunt, T. Elias, R. J. & Alfstad, T. (2006). Beyond free electricity: The costs of electric cooking in poor households and a market-friendly alternative. Energy Policy, 34, 3351–3358.
Lago, J. N. (2010). The changes in the social tariff of electricity in Brazil. Available online at Accessed on 20 January 2016.
Maxwell, M. J. (2015). Can low-income households afford alternative energy? Institute for Economic Inquiry. Creighton University. Available online at Accessed 10 November 2016.
PriceWaterhouse Coopers (PwC). (2015). Africa Power & Utilities Sector Survey. A New Africa Energy World: A More Positive Power Utilities Outlook. Available online at: Accessed on 13 January 2016.
Schreiber, M., Wainstein, M. E., Hochloff, P. & Dargaville, R. (2015). Flexible electricity tariffs: Power and energy price signals designed for a smarter grid. Energy, 93, 2568–2581.
South African Government News Agency. (2015). SADC Energy Ministers approve establishment of renewable energy centre. Available online at: Accessed on 13 January 2016.
South African Social Services Agency. (2015). A statistical summary of social grants in South Africa. Fact sheet: Issue no. 12 of 2015. Available online at Accessed on 15 February 2016.
Southern African Development Community (SADC). (2015). Energy Ministers target 2019 for electricity surplus, cost-reflective tariffs. Available online at Accessed on 13 January 2016.
Tait, L. (2011). The potential for local community benefits from wind farms in South Africa. Cape Town: University of Cape Town, Energy Research Centre.
Trade and Industry Chamber. (2010). A study into approaches to minimise the impact of electricity price increases on the poor. Available online at Accessed 20 January 2016.
Trade and Industry Chamber. (2011). Fund for Research into Industrial Development, Growth and Equity (FRIDGE): Study to collect all research work done on Administered Prices.
How to Cite
MAPHOSA, Michael; MABUZA, Patrick. The Trade-Offs Between Pro-Poor and Cost-Reflective Tariffs in South Africa: A Regulatory Perspective. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, [S.l.], v. 8, n. 6, p. 206-215, jan. 2017. ISSN 2220-6140. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 24 nov. 2017.
Research Paper