South Africa’s creative sector struggles with fragmented support

The creative economy in South Africa contributes 271 billion rand ($17 billion) and sustains 1.4 million jobs, yet its expansion is constrained by a persistent issue: the breakdown in coordination among institutions. Last month’s symposium in Sandton brought together artists, policymakers, and funders to address a long-neglected problem. Unathi Lutshaba, representing the South African Cultural Observatory, opened discussions by asking how a nation’s cultural heritage can drive economic growth when critical transitions between support stages collapse. The answer, as the event progressed, became clear—too often, nothing happens.

Artists frequently secure early-stage funding only to face a dead end when they need additional support. A filmmaker may require arts policy funding, trade incentives, and copyright protection simultaneously, yet these responsibilities are split across government departments. As a result, no single agency takes ownership of the full process, leaving producers to manage a fragmented system. This fragmentation prevents the creative sector from operating as a unified force.

Bonga Makhanya, executive deputy chairperson of the National Youth Development Agency, illustrated the consequences with a stark example. A celebrated maskandi musician died after a successful career, but his peers had to raise 200,000 rand ($12,500) to cover funeral costs. The musician had received public recognition, yet at the end, his community bore the financial burden. Makhanya called this a systemic breakdown.

Princess Celenhle Dlamini, deputy chairperson of the National Arts Council, highlighted how funding gaps exacerbate the problem. Some calls for proposals receive applications totaling 1 billion rand ($62 million) when only 150–170 million rand is available. Approximately four out of every hundred applicants secure funding, while the rest must rebuild their careers between grants. The issue stems from institutions treating creativity as a series of disconnected tasks rather than a continuous process.

Government silos block creative sector growth

Sibusiso Tsanyane of the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture described this as “territorial protection,” where departmental mandates create blind spots. Jeanette Morwane from the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies emphasized that without measurable accountability, cooperation remains optional. The symposium suggested that coordination could be tied to performance metrics to ensure real progress.

Deputy Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition Zuko Godlimpi acknowledged that South Africa’s film and television incentive programme is oversubscribed and noted that “the ones who apply for a rebate are those who have the money to start.” He committed to reviewing the programme and resuming adjudication panels to reduce the backlog in payouts. He also made the case that South African producers need to treat the region and continent as a market, rather than seeing the domestic audience as the limit of a production’s commercial life.

Copyright law fails in the digital age

South Africa’s Copyright Act, dating to 1978, further complicates matters. Pfanani Lishivha of the South African Music Performance Rights Association stated that “you cannot fight technology and win.” For him, the question is whether the economic connection to the creator survives as the work changes form. As a song enters a platform or training set while the line back to the writer or performer becomes increasingly difficult to follow.

Nic Burger of Universal Music argued that creators should consent to training, remain credited and be compensated when their work is used. Africa has particular reason to pay attention. Our music, languages, images and stories are increasingly valuable beyond where they originate. If that material becomes training data for products developed elsewhere, can African creators still participate in the value created from it? The South African Constitutional Court has considered constitutional objections to specific provisions of the Copyright Amendment Bill, finding some constitutional and others not.

Funding gaps leave artists stranded between grants

The symposium exposed a fundamental flaw: institutions can fund, approve, and protect creative work, but they fail to connect the stages between them. This disconnect is most visible in film incentives, where the current system favors producers who already have capital. Godlimpi committed to reviewing the programme and resuming adjudication panels to reduce the backlog in payouts, and made the case that South African producers need to treat the region and continent as a market.

The Copyright Act’s framework, which dates to 1978, may add another layer of difficulty. The 1978 law does not account for digital platforms, streaming, or machine learning, leaving creators vulnerable when their work is used in training data or algorithmic systems. Lishivha said “you cannot fight technology and win”, which highlights the challenge of technological change.