ANOTHER LOST DECADE: THE FAILURES OF SOUTH AFRICA'S POST‐APARTHEID MIGRATION POLICY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Despite the political and social transformation set in motion by the collapse of apartheid and the advent of democracy in 1994, South Africa's migration policy remained mired in the past. The Aliens Control Act of 1991 continued to govern the country's policy until the passage of the Immigration Act of 2002. After amendment in 2004, the Act finally came into force in July 2005. This paper focuses on the implications for South Africa and the SADC region of persisting with a policy framework devised in the apartheid period. First, the mine migrant labour system has remained intact despite a prolonged economic crisis in the mining industry. Second, the national introspection of the first democratic government led to a major decline in legal migration and immigration to South Africa. Third, apartheid‐era tactics of migration enforcement intensified through a process of ‘violent othering’. Fourth, the old framework was sexist as well as racist, and while the new policy is gender neutral in language, it is not gender equal in effect. Finally, for a decade, South Africa successfully resisted SADC attempts to develop a regionally harmonised approach to cross‐border migration. Recent changes in South African Government policy, particularly the new JIPSA initiative, suggest that the ‘lost decade’ may finally be over. However, without major policy transformation, the unseemly history of post‐apartheid migration policy will continue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".