Original Research

Is there a pervasive urban and rural divide of revenue management challenges in the South African local government? A systematic literature review

Mosema J. Mpe, Moses M. Gasela

Received: 21 Jan. 2026; Accepted: 04 May 2026; Published: 22 June 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

Background: Municipalities are expected to collect revenue effectively from their own communities in order to ensure sustainability. However, this is not as easy as it sounds as municipalities have challenges when it comes to the collection of revenue. Little is known on the convergence and divergence of such challenges as a result of the rural and urban nature of municipalities, hence, the contributory value of the study in exploring that phenomenon.

Objectives: This study aimed to perform a literature study with an objective of identifying nuances in revenue collection challenges between the South African urban- and rural-based municipalities in a systematic way, leading to a conceptual framework on the phenomena that may guide future researchers who will explore revenue collection in different South African local contexts.

Method: A systematic literature review is used. The investigation is based on sources of information such as journal articles between 2005 and 2025. Key words of ‘revenue collection in municipalities’ and ‘local government revenue’ were used in the searches of the academic databases, which included JSTOR, Science Direct, Emerald, SCOPUS, IBSS and JSTOR.

Results: Findings indicate that both the rural and urban municipalities face similar challenges (although to varying degrees) in revenue collection. Issues such as corruption, lack of and poor human skills, culture of entitlement and non-payment, lack of commitment by municipal officials, socio-economic factors of local populations, among others, have a negative impact on revenue collection by the South African municipalities.

Conclusion: This study recommends a conceptual framework on revenue management in the context of local government. Furthermore, it was found that the rural municipalities have additional unique revenue collection challenges in villages, where services such as water, waste refuse and in some instances, rates and taxes are not being paid. Finally, it was found that the Local Government Equitable Share (LGES) Formula, which is used by the national government to allocate the equitable share revenue to the municipalities, does not take into account key factors such as the rurality of the municipalities; this exacerbates the challenges. Similarly, the LGES does not take into account the vast geographical distances of certain municipalities, which significantly increase the cost of service of certain municipalities.

Contribution: Using the political legitimacy theory to revenue collection, the study contributes to the understanding of the shortcomings of LGES Formula as it pertains to the rural exclusion and distance factors. There is an opportunity for scholars and policymakers for an exploration of the feasibility, pertaining to new revenue sources such as rates and taxes of some form in the villages of the rural municipalities.

Keywords: political legitimacy theory; revenue collection; municipalities; local government; local government equitable share (LGES) formula; equitable share formula.

Introduction

Background

The existing literature, from different schools of thought sources such as Mamokhere and Kgobe (2023), Kaywood (2022), Nkuna (2021) and others, elucidates numerous challenges around revenue management in the South African local government. What is lacking in the existing literature is a delineation of divergences or convergences of the revenue collection challenges from the perspective of rural or urban municipalities. The article aims to close this gap through an exploration of the nuanced divergence or convergence of revenue collection challenges between rural and urban South African municipalities. Statistics for the 2023/2024 financial year shows that out of 257 municipalities, only 41 managed to secure clean audits, while there are other municipalities that did not submit their financial performances (Thusi & Matyana, 2024). According to Moore and Prichard (2020), revenue collection is one of the biggest sources of income for the government, and this comes through taxes, rates and water bills. The study by Kalonda and Govender (2021) further states that revenue collection is the responsibility of the government to be able to cater for the service needs of the residents. Municipalities are part of the government organisations that have to collect funds from residents for the benefit of the residents. Section 40 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa states that government is constituted as national, provincial and local spheres of government, which are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated. Furthermore, it means that all spheres being national, provincial and local spheres are different, rely on each other and are connected. At the national sphere, there is a president and ministers who are running the entire country at large, not only focused on a specific area. Flowing from the national sphere, the second layer consists of the provincial governments, which are led by the Premiers. Lastly, it is the local government where mayors are at the helm of the executive. Section 152(1) of the Constitution further describes the objects of local government, among others, to provide democratic and accountable government for local communities, to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner and to promote social and economic development. Subsection (2) of the same section 152 further stresses that a municipality must strive to achieve its developmental objectives within its financial and administrative capacity. This is where revenue comes in to improve a municipality’s financial capacity to meet the expectations of its residents by encouraging them to pay for the provision of services such as water, electricity and other rates. Therefore, it is clear that each level of government has its own legislative authority that it must adhere to. Municipalities are directed by the Local Government Municipal System Act (Act 32 of 2000), and in the second chapter, it states that municipalities have to be managed in an efficient and responsible way. Additionally, it is stated that municipalities have the right to collect their own revenue as they also need finances to be able to execute their mandates as part of the local government. The municipality is also governed by the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) (Act 56 of 2003), which says that the manager of the municipality, together with the mayor, is tasked with the mandate to ensure the municipality’s revenue is stable. The study by Faraji et al. (2020) shows that nationwide, local government authorities have been struggling when it comes to the collection of enough revenue from their potential income sources. South African Revenue Services (SARS), on the other hand, is another government authority that also collects revenue from the residents of South Africa (Chong, 2020). However, a study by Mamokhere et al. (2022) states that there is a gap between the collection of revenue by SARS and that of municipalities. At the national level, SARS is seen as a successful revenue collector, while the municipalities struggle. The challenge with revenue collection is an indication of system failures in the municipality, which includes technicalities and employees. For most predominantly rural municipalities, the collection of own revenue is poor because of a lack of revenue base and the inability of citizens to afford services owing to their disempowered position in terms of socio-economic conditions (Mamokhere et al., 2022). Amar and Pratama (2020) show that the poor collection of revenue leads to a slow economic development of the city as it means that the municipality will be operating on very tight budgets, which will make it difficult for them to deliver the much-needed services for the city. Apart from their own revenue (revenue is generated from billing resident’s rates, water, electricity and other things), Section 227 of the Constitution of South Africa of 1996 states that municipalities receive an equitable share from the government to ensure that services that could not be provided by the municipal’s own revenue can be rendered to the public. This income, often referred to as intergovernmental transfers, is seen as a fair share of the revenue generated nationally among the national, provincial, and the local sphere of government (Aritenang, 2020).

Given all the above, the research problem and objective are as follows: South African municipalities have an obligation to make sure that services are conveyed to the community regularly. However, these services have become so difficult to deliver to local government communities as the municipalities are not yielding enough revenue from the residents, and this is because of technical and non-technical issues. The municipalities are owed not only by the residents but also by the government buildings of the provincial and national sphere of government, which are not paying the bills to the municipalities, and this leads to low revenue. Low revenue is one of the main reasons that municipalities have been failing to obtain clean audits and provide other service delivery to their communities. Thus, the ultimate objective of the investigation is to present a conceptual framework. As indicated earlier, this is not as easy as it sounds as municipalities have challenges when it comes to the collection of revenue. The article is arranged as follows: After this introduction, research design and methodology and ethical considerations will be covered. It will be followed by a presentation of the theoretical framework and analysis of relevant literature. The findings and conclusions are presented, which include the conceptual framework. Finally, an elucidation of the study’s findings and limitations is undertaken.

Research methods and design

Literature review is deemed as a systematic, unambiguous and reproducible process of classifying, analysing and interpreting existing or past work by researchers, academics and practitioners concerning a particular subject (Pieters, 2015). The study used a systematic literature review. It is based on secondary sources of information such as books, conceptual papers and journal articles between 2005 and 2025. Key constructs of ‘revenue collection in municipalities’ and ‘local government revenue’ were used in the searches of the academic databases, which included SCOPUS; IBSS, JSTOR, Science Direct and Emerald.

Theoretical framework and analysis of relevant literature

Relevant theory

This study is built on the political legitimacy theory, which assists in understanding the nature of revenue collection. Upadhyay and Manandhar (2017) argue that the political legitimacy theory is fashioned by the extent to which the ratepayers believe in the municipality. The legitimacy theory, which was originally postulated by John Dowling and Jeffrey Pfeffer in 1975, posits that the function of any organisation transpires on the premises of an existing contract with the society. According to Dowling and Pfeffer (1975), the society will support organisations such as municipalities if their expectations are in congruence with the social values represented by the actions of the organisations. Thus, the political legitimacy theory provides insights towards understanding the issue of revenue collection in municipalities. The political legitimacy suggests that for municipalities to continue to exist, they must obtain patronisation or legitimacy primarily from the customers. Thus, according to this theory, whether or not municipalities will be able to collect revenue, the support of the local communities is very important. This will depend on whether their performance is in line with the expected societal values or not. Communities will be unwilling to pay for services when the municipalities are deemed to be unsocial regardless of how much they might attempt to enforce compliance. The Legitimacy Theory seldom posits the moral values of a partisan politics over public officials but basically observes the methods of command and compliance (Benito et al., 2025).

Legal framework

To ensure that the study is located in the appropriate legislative and regulatory underpinnings, the relevant legislation will now be explored. There are numerous legislative and policy instruments that guide municipal revenue in South Africa. According to Życzkowska and Dziuba (2023), regulations adopted by the national government have had a significant bearing on the deterioration of the financial situation of local governments in many countries, with much of the impact being on own source of revenues. On the other hand, Shava (2020) argues that proper adherence to legislative tools should also assist municipalities in raising revenue (Shava, 2020). South Africa, like many other countries, has numerous legislative and policy instruments in place of assisting municipalities to attain prudent financial administration and service delivery. In this study, the following instruments, among others, the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, of 1996; MFMA, Act 56 of 2003; and Municipal Property Rates Act (MPRA), Act 6 of 2004, with their associated amendments will be considered.

Constitution of the Republic of South Africa

According to the Constitution of South Africa, municipalities are expected to plan, budget and administer activities in such a way that the basic requirements of their respective communities and their social-economic development are promoted. Municipalities are expected to always conduct themselves responsibly in the collection and expenditure of the finances as per the stipulations of Section 195(1) (South Africa, 1996). Furthermore, Section 152(1) of the Constitution (1996) outlines that local municipalities are eligible to receive their proportional and fair portion from the revenue that is produced by the central government (Shava, 2020). The South African constitution indicates that the Distribution of Revenue Act determines how revenue received by the national government will be distributed among local, provincial and national governments. The share that municipalities receive is deemed to be for the purposes of developing and servicing their respective communities with basic services, such as water, electricity, sanitation and housing. The constitution makes a provision that people have a constitutional right towards these basic services, which makes it difficult for municipalities to deny these services to members of the community when they fail to pay, thus, further complicating the task of municipalities to collect revenue. Specifically, Sections 160(2), 215 and 227 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 pertain to municipal budget, revenue and expenditure (Molobela, 2016).

Municipal Finance Management Act 56 of 2003

The MFMA 56 of 2003 provides the premises utilised to ensure effective financial management for municipalities (Shava, 2020). According to Molobela (2016), the purpose of the MFMA is to control municipal financial management as well as to stipulate how municipalities ensure efficient and effective management of revenue, expenditure, assets and liabilities. The Act outlines norms and standards for municipalities, which if followed by the municipalities should be able to attain prudent financial management. The Act further stipulates that municipalities are responsible for establishing governance frameworks for their respective entities, as well as a borrowing framework. The responsibilities of municipal financial management are also defined by the MFMA. For instance, Section 64 of the Act unequivocally outlines that the accounting officer is tasked with the management of the municipal revenue (Molobela, 2016).

Municipal Property Rates Act, 2004 (Act 6 of 2004)

Chapter three of the Local Government: MPRA, 2004 (Act 6 of 2004) provides for the recovery of rates from property owners by the municipalities. The Property Rates Act (2004) indicates that municipalities in South Africa ought to collect revenues that are adequate to meet their needs. According to this Act, the collection of revenue should be conducted in a way that is not different across municipalities and ought to be in a simple manner. Furthermore, chapter four of the Property Rates Act (2004) specifies the manner in which local municipalities should go about valuing and preparing for the general valuation of rateable properties. This includes how the preparation of valuation rolls, inspection of properties and appointment of values should be undertaken by the municipalities.

Municipalities and local government

The Republic of South Africa has a multileveled state founded on the 1996 Constitution. The resultant multilevel government structure comprises nine provinces and 257 municipalities and is a product of the negotiations that resulted in the demise of the apartheid system and the establishment of democracy (De Visser, 2023). The local government system of South Africa is significantly premised on the country’s colonial past dating back as far as the 17th century when the first Europeans descended, inhabited the Western Cape in 1652 (Kaywood, 2022). The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act 108 of 1996) Section 151 contains provisions for the local government’s establishment as part of the government that is democratically chosen by the people to govern them. Furthermore, the constitution provides for a quasi-federal structure with provinces led by a democratically elected leadership possessing constitutionally guaranteed powers and functioning within a vastly combined multilevel government and financial system (De Visser, 2023). At the bottom of this hierarchical governance system, guaranteed by the Constitution of South Africa, is the local governments that are comprised of democratically elected councils (De Visser, 2023). Chapter 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa established local governments with both executive and legislative powers vested in its council (Govender & Ramodula, 2020). Municipalities are managed by the local government, and these local governments refer to political representatives, which are democratically chosen. Thus, the political party that wins in local government elections manages the local municipality where they elect a mayor to do so (Govender & Ramodula, 2020).

The constitution stipulates that the local government should exist interdependently and interrelatedly with the provincial and national governments. The Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act 117 of 1998), as amended, provides guidance on the classifications and forms of municipalities aligned with the vision of democratic and developmental local government. The establishment of local governments was primarily to abate the dependency syndrome of municipalities on funding from provincial and national governments, as well as the dependency of the local communities on the national government (Kaywood, 2022). According to Trojanek et al. (2024), local communities’ budgetary concerns in many countries across the globe have been shifted from national governments towards local governments in recent years. The development of local government means that the communities and local authorities are committed to ensuring that the local areas are maintained and developed. According to the Constitution of South Africa (1996), local governments have constitutionally guaranteed powers and possess substantial fiscal sovereignty. Ababneh and Rawabdeh (2018, p. 46) also state in their study that it is the responsibility of the communities to elect the board of the municipality that will be able to cater for their basic needs. The local municipality of any city is tasked with providing the basic services to the community residents (Ababneh & Rawabdeh, 2018). However, in providing these services, they are tasked with the collection of revenue as the funds they receive from the regional government are not enough to develop the city and communities in a way that it should be. The White Paper on Local Government (1998) has outlined that every local administration needs to have enough financial resources to be able to ensure that all its responsibilities have been taken care of for the purposes of the development. However, the development of local government has not been up to par in South Africa, as there is an issue of poor revenue collection. A study by Chauke (2016) on municipal revenue collection also supports that the issue of poor service delivery is also driven by the fact that the income and spending of most municipalities do not correspond. According to Kaywood (2022), most municipalities have been battling and lagging in service delivery in areas such as housing, electricity, refusal removal, water and sanitation. This suggests that local municipalities experience challenges in collecting revenue from communities but are expected to make developments. Usman et al. (2020) also discuss in their research around local government optimisation that if the local government municipality can strengthen its revenue collection, it will positively impact the development of local government, and this will result in the communities’ basic needs being met. Given the contributions from various contributions in this section on ‘legal framework’, it is evident that the reviewed relevant legislative and policy instruments that guide municipal revenue in all South Africa municipalities, have a have a significant impact on the revenue collection practices.

An overview of municipal revenue

Globally, municipalities are battling with ensuring sustainable financial performance amid pressing 21st-century demands such as growing and sophisticated infrastructural demands, urbanisation and constrained funding of a public nature (Feyzipour & Janbozorgi, 2025). According to Hendriks (2018), as municipalities seek to be more economically vibrant, competitive and sustainable, conventional revenue methods and models are proving inadequate in enhancing strategic and long-term urban development. In the past, municipalities relied heavily on land sales or construction permits, government subsidies and other forms of unsustainable financial practices in the contemporary environment (Li & Li, 2022). Municipal revenue is a concept that entails money that municipalities obtain and collect for the purposes of local governments from various sources that include, among others, taxes (property, income, sales and excise taxes), user fees and intergovernmental transfers as well as intergovernmental grants (Brown et al., 2019; Masungini et al., 2023). Municipal revenue to municipalities is vital for the sustainability and sustenance of municipal activities and mandatory purposes within their jurisdictional areas (Masungini et al., 2023). Municipal revenue collection refers to the process of gathering funds by local governments (municipalities) for the purposes of financing public services, infrastructure and administrative functions within their jurisdiction (Brown et al., 2019). This revenue is essential for sustainable urban development, maintaining public utilities and ensuring community well-being. Municipalities are expected to fund much of their activities; as such, about 75% component of the revenue for municipalities is self-funded (De Visser, 2023).

Sources of municipal revenue

This section covers the revenue collection practices in the South African context. Municipalities have three bases of revenue, which include own municipal revenue and intergovernmental transfers, as well as other sources (Manuel & Erasmus, 2024). Local municipalities receive the transfers from the regional government to strengthen the capacity of the municipality in providing services to the residents. According to Masungini et al. (2023), the main sources of revenue in South African municipalities include, among others, property rates, levies and service charges, unconditional and conditional grants from the national government and municipal borrowing. As per the Municipal Act, a municipality should be able to provide for the services mostly from its own revenue. However, the challenge in South African municipalities is corruption, and as a result, the intergovernmental transfers end up not combating the poverty and strengthening the capacity. The next section focuses on the different types of municipal revenue.

Municipal own revenue

According to Życzkowska and Dziuba (2023), municipal own-source revenue relates to funds that according to law are at the disposal of local governments on a permanent basis or as revenues that originate from the local government efforts in full and indefinitely, with a certain degree of freedom in determining them and which are related to the local economic base. In the South African context, municipal own revenue comprises mainly property rates, levies and service charges. The South African constitution in Section 229 indicates that municipalities are required to impose property taxes, rates and other charges on the services that they provide to the community residents. Local municipalities mostly buy water and electricity and sell it to the businesses and residents. Furthermore, municipalities are expected to become creative and search for business opportunities as a means of raising income (Masungini et al. 2023). Hence, this own revenue is referred to as revenue collected. According to Trenovski et al. (2022), property tax and user service charges constitute the major component of ‘own’ revenue generation by municipalities with property tax being payments made by people who own properties within the administrative jurisdiction of municipalities. Similarly, Upadhyay and Manandhar (2017) argue that the primary component of municipal own-source revenue is attributed to taxes followed by rates or service charges. As such, the fees charged on the valuation of properties and user charges comprise revenue that is paid directly for services rendered by the municipality (Manyaka, 2014; Trenovski et al., 2022). More specifically, property taxes based on the value of land and buildings are often regarded as the largest source of income for municipalities (Manyaka, 2014).

Furthermore, user charges are fees for water, sewage, refusal collection and electricity.

According to Shava (2020), the majority of municipalities in South Africa rely on user charges for services such as water and electricity to accumulate revenue. It is widely accepted, given the inadequate property tax base within South African municipalities, that property tax as a stand-alone source of income is not sufficient to cater for the demand and supply of public services. Municipalities must explore cost recovery charging systems to supplement property tax income (Manyaka, 2014). Thus, municipalities sometimes collect money for parking fees and permits, business licenses and permits, which are required for opening and operating businesses. Municipalities also rely on fines and penalties from traffic violations as well as building code infractions, etc. Lastly, municipalities can also collect rent from leasing out buildings and facilities that they own (Chauke et al., 2024). However, municipalities experience challenges when it comes to the collection of this revenue (of which the challenges are to be discussed later in this study). Additionally, Schoeman (2011) also supports this by saying that most rural municipalities are averagely collecting low revenue, and this makes them dependent on the intergovernmental transfers. However, they cannot depend much on the revenue from the national level because the act governing the municipalities suggests that they need to be able to fund the expenses of the local government development through the collected revenue. It is therefore important for the cities to improve their revenue collection as this can reflect badly on them as it means there will not be enough funds to fund their operations. Upadhyay and Manandhar (2017) argue that municipal own-source revenue is the most stable and predictable source of income for municipalities as compared to intergovernmental transfers. With revenue planning being highly dependent on rigorous and precise market forecasting, municipal own-source revenue becomes a very vital component to enable local municipalities in fulfilling their primary mandate of service delivery (Molobela, 2016). James and James (2016) establish that revenue needs to be projected, rather than being awaited over time or at some given point in time.

Intergovernmental transfers

Intergovernmental transfers are the second form of revenue for municipalities. These are transfers that are made from the national level to the local government, meant to reinforce the capacity of local administration in providing services to the community residents. According to De Visser (2023), intergovernmental transfers are primarily for the purpose of supporting municipal own revenue. Kahn et al. (2011) state that municipalities receive their ‘equitable share’ from the national level, and the share is often referred to as conditional and unconditional grants. In South Africa, the equitable share is regarded as the unconditional grant, which municipalities receive from the national fiscus (Manuel & Erasmus, 2024). The national government provides funding for basic service provision through transfer of funds from the national budget to provinces and municipalities through unconditional fair sharing of revenue and conditional grant funding (South African Local Government Association [SALGA] Senior Management Induction Programme, 2014). De Visser (2023) suggests that the purpose of unconditional national government transfers is primarily threefold, namely:

• address fiscal imbalances
• ensure fair distribution of resources across the country
• pursue national policy priorities.

The equitable share of revenue obtained nationally and distributed among provinces and municipalities is provided for in the South African Constitution (Manuel & Erasmus, 2024). In order to avoid bias in the distribution of the revenue by the national government, a formula is utilised based on objective data. Thus, the revenue is not divided arbitrarily in a way that benefits other municipalities while disadvantaging others (Local Government Equitable Share [LGES] Formula Review, 2012). The LGES Formula constitutes five basic elements as stated in Equation 1 (LGES Formula Review, 2012):

BS is the basic services component; D is the development component; I is the institutional support component; R is the revenue-raising capacity correction and C is a correction and stabilisation factor.

Herein,

The basic services component is worth 99.4 per cent of the value of the equitable share and provides for the cost of free basic services for poor households as well as municipal health services; The development component is dormant; The institutional support component is worth 7.9 per cent of the value of the equitable share and provides a subsidy for the costs of running a basic municipal administration; The revenue-raising capacity (RRC) correction accounts for the fact that some municipalities have a much greater ability to raise own revenues than other municipalities and subtracts 7.4 per cent of the value of the equitable share, primarily from the wealthiest municipalities in order to make those funds available for poorer municipalities; The correction and stabilisation factor makes sure all of the guarantees in the formula can be met and accounts for a negligible proportion of the final equitable share allocations. (National Treasury, LGES review, 2012:1)

Thus, overall, the grants are dependent on the location of the municipality, the size of the municipality and the population of the municipality that the municipality caters for. Often when the administration is not fully ethical, they tend to misuse these funds as they do not really work for them but come freely as grants from the national level, and this is the reason most audit outcomes from the Auditor General are not clean audits. However, De Visser (2023) argues that failure of a municipality to raise own revenue will not be compensated by the national government transfers. While unconditional grants have no criteria or prescriptions, conditional grants are earmarked for specific purposes (Balie & Horn, 2021). In South Africa, four broad types of conditional grants are available for municipalities, namely supplementary grants, specific purpose grants, indirect grants and disaster response grants. The majority of transfers under conditional grants are for capital expenditure for infrastructure and capacity building under the specific purpose grants, comprising 72%. According to Tafeni and Mngomezulu (2025), this portion of the conditional grant is commonly known as the municipal infrastructure grant (MIG). The MIG is followed by the indirect grants constituting 14%, which are available for capacity and institutional purposes. After indirect grants, supplementary grants (comprising 13% proportion of the entire conditional grants) are deemed general grants that complement programmes partially financed by municipalities. Lastly, there are the disaster response grants (1%), which capacitate municipalities to respond to disasters or emergencies of diverse kinds. Municipalities need to apply most of the times for them to acquire the conditional grants, and they get to be issued accompanied by a detailed grants framework, which stipulates conditions for the grant (De Visser, 2023). According to SALGA (2014), municipalities are required to formulate and present business proposals to the national transferring departments and need to report on the financial and non-financial performance related to the grant. It is evident that contributions from the different sources in this section such as those by De Visser (2023) have implications for the LGES Formula. The LGES should be re-looked in response to some of the unique revenue collection challenges, which are experienced by rural municipalities. Sources such as De Visser (2023) posit that the 10% equitable share as per the LGES attempts to address fiscal imbalances ensures fair distribution of resources across the country, pursues national policy priorities and so forth. This article argues that the LGES Formula excludes other key quantitative and qualitative criteria such as the rurality of municipalities, which include the provinces of Limpopo, Northern Cape, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and North West; geographical distance that is pervasive in province such as the Northern Cape. Future studies should explore the implications of the phenomena associated with the rurality of some municipalities, such as the emerging opportunities of rates and taxes and other services being received in the villages of rural municipalities. Furthermore, the cost of providing services in municipalities, which are located in a province such as the Northern Cape with vast geographical distances, significantly increases the cost of service compared to other provinces.

Other sources

Municipalities across the globe can receive revenues from donor funding or grants that are received from international agencies (e.g. World Bank, UN-Habitat). Municipalities can also borrow under Section 230A of the Constitution, stipulating conditions of borrowing for municipalities. The section provides for conditions for municipal borrowing, and usually they are permitted to borrow for capital expenditures. According to Slack (2009), municipalities have the capacity to borrow funds from the financial markets for the purposes of capacitating the economic infrastructure component of their capital budget. Borrowing for current expenditures is only permissible if the repayment of the loan will be done in the same year (De Visser, 2023). Furthermore, the Local Government: MFMA 56 of 2003 has established a borrowing framework that stipulates stringent conditions for municipal borrowing. On the other hand, municipal borrowing is not guaranteed by the national government; as such, a municipality’s borrowing capacity depends on prudent financial management, viable own revenue management and the type of infrastructure projects (Slack, 2009). Most metropolitan municipalities and big local municipalities have the capacity to borrow because of their potential revenue streams, such as property rates and service, acting as sureties for the loan. Lastly, other municipalities have in the past relied on the issuance of bonds as a form of raising funds for capital expenditure (De Visser, 2023).

Challenges affecting revenue collection

South African Revenue Services, thereafter referred to as SARS, is also a government authority institute that collects revenue from taxpayers, and it turns out that they are performing quite well (Chauke, 2016, p. 4). However, we cannot say the same with municipalities, which are also government institutes because revenue collection is the biggest issue in most local municipalities. Manyaka (2014, p. 128) acknowledges that most municipalities are struggling when it comes to financial management, and this includes the collection of revenue and the ability to provide services to the community. Ensor (2020) indicates that municipalities across South Africa are experiencing continuous financial challenges because of uncollected revenue. According to Kaywood (2022), a huge proportion (31%) of municipalities had been running on a shortfall with revenues exceeding expenditures. The next section discusses the different challenges in revenue collection by municipalities.

Human skills, capacity and training

Shava (2020) indicates that most rural-based municipalities lack the capacity to fulfil their revenue collection mandate because of the lack human resource skills and poor commitment, which manifests in dismal performance in financial management. For increasing revenue compliance, municipalities must ensure that their job descriptions, competency requirements, advertisements, selection criteria and appointments are associated with the requirements set out in the regulations (National Treasury Republic of South Africa, 2011). According to Kaywood (2022), most municipalities are incapacitated because of plenty of vacancies and instability owing to high labour turnover in critical areas, which possibly affects their revenue collection. Manyaka and Madzivandila (2013) state that the skills of the staff and ability to plan are also a challenge when it comes to poor collection of revenue; this is because the local administration is run through politics and most comrades without adequate qualifications are in the administration. Municipalities are governed by systems and legislations, for instance, Municipal System Act, White Paper on Local Government, MPRA, MFMA, etc. And not having people with an understanding of these systems can be a challenge on its own when it comes to the collection of revenue because these systems need to be understood for a proper execution.

Political pressures

One of the common challenges with revenue collection in South Africa is political interference and pressure. As such, numerous academic works exist on pertaining to the politics-administration impediments that often affect municipalities in delivering their mandate effectively towards the local communities (Mbatha, 2020). The political atmosphere in the local governments has a significant impact on local revenues (Trenovski et al., 2022). Despite the existence of a prudent legislative guiding framework such as the MFMA, their application may be compromised by frequent political pressures to decrease and soften revenue collection, especially in times of elections (Kipilimba, 2018). The South African political sphere is highly contested with political parties often mobilising support through means that mostly involve service delivery and cost-of-living protests (Mamokhere & Kgobe, 2023). Intra- and inter-political party concerns, such as political infighting and rivalry, all adversely impact the ability of municipalities to collect revenue as they often spill over to communities (Kaywood, 2022). Political infighting and its adverse impact on revenue collection can be a future reference and precedence for residents to circumvent payment of municipal services, which could create ripple effect. In the future, there could be reluctance and further protests if the municipalities seek to appropriately follow and implement the existing legislative frameworks. Furthermore, political battles between the Mayor and Municipal manager have been well noted in literature (Ambe & Badenhorst-Weiss, 2012; De Visser, 2010). According to Maseko et al. (2023), municipalities are comprised of technocrats and politicians; however, politicians often have the final say on municipal decisions. A study by Ababneh and Rawabdeh (2018, p. 48) also suggests that in most cases, politicians have an influence when it comes to revenue collection because they tend to overlook the systems of the municipality when looking into receiving votes to be in power.

Informal settlements

Another prominent challenge that is affecting municipal revenue collection is the proliferation of informal settlements. Informal settlements are a significant section of the local communities that are not included in the formal revenue system, thereby restricting the revenue base for municipalities (Feyzipour & Janbozorgi, 2025). Research has indicated that including these sections of the community by providing them with formal title deeds and access to basic services can significantly enhance both the financial stability of municipalities as well as these residents’ quality of life (Smit, 2019). Incorporating these areas into the formal economy could involve establishing systems for legalising property ownership and implementing gradual integration strategies to avoid social tensions. In authors’ view, this approach would not only increase tax revenue but also promote social equity and inclusivity.

Corruption

Corruption is defined as the improper influence or abuse of entrusted discretion, and bribery is a subset in which money’s worth is the persuasive lever used (Svensson, 2005). According to Pozsgai-Alvarez, J. (2020), corruption is the misappropriation of authority for individual gain, and the misappropriation depicts a departure from the societal acceptable norms. The word corruption emanates from the Latin word corruptus, which entails a deviation from the ethically accepted conduct stipulated in traditional and civic morals, ethics and laws (Dassah, 2008; Dye, 2007). Furthermore, corruption deteriorates municipal revenues, causes public talent to become rent seeking and manipulates the state of public expenditure (Kufandarerwa, 2017; Mauro, 1995). Corruption pertaining to municipal revenue could also occur in the form of black markets, municipal taxes and rates evasion, bribery and kickbacks. These practices involve expenses (transfer costs) in the form of net loss for the municipalities and reduce the motivation to embark on creative undertakings. Corruption tends to spiral over into other forms of malpractice (Dassah, 2008). For instance, when businesses are pressured by corrupt officials, they tend to practice defective pricing whereby contractors inflate their costs to increase profits or limit their losses and costs of labour. Alternatively, mischarging frauds occur whereby a contractor or suppliers fraudulently inflate the cost of labour or materials on cost-plus contracts (Cascarino, 2013). Corruption has adverse effects on the functioning of government departments and community service delivery at large, including municipalities (Basheka, 2008). Communities continue to be deprived of essential and extremely needed services as a result of corrupt activities, and this often leads to an escalation of service delivery protests (Chauke et al., 2024). It is therefore imperative that corruption can be extremely decrease municipal funds particularly through the improper procurement systems, which cause poor service delivery leading to municipalities underperforming in their mandate. Mitigating corruption is a daunting task; nonetheless, local municipalities with the assistance of stakeholders can improvise on whistleblowing methods towards abating corruption in its various ways for the purposes of improving communities that rely on services from local municipalities (Mamokhere & Kgobe, 2023).

Inadequate infrastructure for digital collection

However, the challenges do not have to do only with the administration or the poor backgrounds; the billing system not working properly can be an issue. According to the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (2014), an effective and vibrant billing system and revenue are paramount in having an operational municipal financial system. In most cases, the electricity is being altered, and water is being stolen, and this affects the billing system, and it all leads to incorrect billing, slow billing and not processing of some invoices (Mafunisa Consulting-Local Government Sector Education and Training, 2019). The absence of a prepaid and real-time electronic billing system results in municipalities resorting to traditional and manual billing systems, which is associated with numerous challenges (Mofokeng et al., 2025). For instance, sometimes residents are not accessible at their homesteads during billing for electricity and water, and this results in municipalities relying on estimates, which further exacerbates the situation by causing dissatisfaction among ratepayers. When ratepayers are not satisfied with the manner in which they are billed they will simply refuse to pay, thereby hampering revenue collection.

A lack of public trust or awareness

Numerous studies have examined the concept of lack of awareness and negative attitude as pertains to municipal rates and taxes and their consequences on municipal revenue collection (Nkuna, 2021; Out & Anam, 2019). Community awareness plays a significant role in the collection of revenues by municipalities and often communities that exhibit a negative attitude towards payment of municipal revenue services, consequently leading to rebellion against payment of municipal accounts (Nkuna, 2021). In some cases, community members are aware of the operations of municipalities and the role that paying for services is essential for the sustainability of municipalities. Despite this knowledge, they do not pay for fees because of discontentment with the way municipalities are operated, especially the issue of a lack of accountability on the part of municipalities as well as failure to satisfactory deliver services as per the expectations of the community (Nkuna, 2021). In this regard, municipalities should strive to provide information to the community pertaining to the revenues received as well as the expenditures made. It has been observed that informed and involved ratepayers are more willing and aware of the duty to pay for their services. Moreover, there is a need for municipalities to create mutual trust with the ratepayers. Trust towards the municipalities and the trustworthiness of the local governments are related (Fjeldstad, 2004). The absence of trust dissuades citizens to comply and voluntarily cooperate with laws and regulations that focus on revenue collection. Furthermore, trust among ratepayers themselves also significantly contributes towards their willingness and readiness to pay their dues. Thus, ratepayers who hold distrust in their colleagues and counterparts in paying their dues will most likely not find any motivation to pay their rates. Consequently, municipalities that desire a positive trajectory in their revenue collection need to transform negative awareness. This can be achieved through investment in awareness and educational campaigns that aim to conscientise citizens on the functions of the municipality and the essence of paying rates (Nkuna, 2021).

Local population incapacitation

Environmental forces such as economic trends, social forces, technology and legal forces continue to negatively affect municipalities in their quest to raise revenue. For instance, recently, complications because of the recent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic have resulted in the revenue collection base for municipalities dwindling in recent years (Shava, 2020; Życzkowska & Dziuba, 2023). From the economic perspective, unemployment, poor economic performance and global financial crisis are contributing forces that hamper the potential of municipalities to raise funding. Therefore, it can be contended that another factor that can be affecting revenue in the local municipalities is categorisation mostly by rural areas. According to Trenovski et al. (2022), one of the major determinants of local revenue collection is the local population. Attributes such as the population size and its demographic composition influence the ability of the municipalities to collect revenue. While metropolitan municipalities are better positioned to collect revenue because of their urbanisation and having a strong tax base, rural-based municipalities struggle to raise finances to meet their basic requirements (Balie & Horn, 2021). However, Section 96 of the Municipal System Act (Act 32 of 2000) suggests that every municipality must collect all monies due to it, be it rural or urban areas. The Municipal System Act says revenue must be collected from either rural or urban area, but when it comes to the rural areas, the collection of revenue is poor (Manyaka, 2014, p. 134). Hence, the biggest factor in revenue collection arises from rural areas. This is because rural areas are dominated by residents who do not have any revenue base, and most households are suffering from unemployment. Unemployment hinders progress because the unemployed cannot afford the services but expect to be serviced by the municipality (Balie & Horn, 2021).

Culture of entitlement and non-payment

There is a prevailing culture among both rich and poor South African residents, which is associated with non-payment and entitlement (Enwereji & Potgieter, 2018). The concept of entitlement has been defined as a ‘pervading sense that one deserves more and is entitled to more than others’ (Nkomo, 2022). The culture of entitlement is deemed to be prevalent in the context of South Africa, contributing to exacerbated levels of non-payment by rate payers. Primarily, this culture of entitlement is traced back to the political emancipation of the black populace from the Apartheid system, whereby the new dispensation was associated with free basic services, such as water, electricity, sanitation and housing (Fjeldstad, 2004). Another cause of entitlement culture is that during election campaigns, politicians tend to make political promises to reduce service charges and the general cost of living, which in the aftermath will cause the electorate to have expectations they will fail to meet. For Shava (2020), the culture of non-payment appears not to be a matter of choice by some rate papers but rather a result of poverty and high levels of unemployment, which is clearly visible because of vivid demarcations between the rich and poor in the society. According to Molobela (2016), growing poverty and incessant poverty levels within the local communities are the major contributions to non-payment of municipal services. This culture of entitlement severely impacts revenue collection in South Africa as it has been vividly entrenched in the society (Franks, 2014). With the growing prominence of the younger generation, where the spirit of entitlement is very pervasive, this factor is expected to contribute significantly towards non-payment of municipal services (Nkomo, 2022).

A lack of commitment by public officials

According to Shava (2020), lack of commitment on the part of public officials is regarded as one of the major impediments towards revenue collection. A study by Masiya et al. (2021) established that there is a pervasive character among municipal officials when it comes to being serious with their jobs and striving to be excellent in performing their duties.

Thus, there is a culture of mediocrity that reigns in most municipalities, whereby commitment to values of service delivery is lacking. In revenue collection, the lack of commitment manifests in various ways, which include failure to send reminder letters to residents who have outstanding dates. Masiya et al. (2021) cite that the existence of numerous negative factors around municipalities dissuades public municipal officials from being committed. For instance, political harassment and interference in the running of municipal affairs, corruption, poor infrastructure, unwillingness and inability to pay by ratepayers all combine in complicating the task of revenue collection by municipal officials. Consequently, it will take an extremely highly committed and strong-willed official to excel and strive in the non-conducive working environments around municipalities (Masiya et al., 2021).

Trends of the reviewed literature

Even though sources such as De Visser (2023) are of the view that the 10% equitable share as per the LGES formula attempts to address fiscal imbalances, ensure fair distribution of resources across the country, pursue national policy priorities and so forth; the authors argue that it excludes other key quantitative and qualitative criteria such as the rurality of municipalities of South Africa’s rural provinces, as well as geographical distance challenges in some provinces such as Northern Cape, which increase the cost of municipal services. Empirical investigations should be undertaken by researchers in future studies on the constructs of the rurality of the municipalities and the vast geographical distance as it affects the equitable share. Furthermore, even though sources such as Feyzipour and Janbozorgi (2025) and Smit (2019) posit that the proliferation of informal settlements poses a significant challenge that is affecting municipal revenue collection, little is mentioned of the challenges and opportunities associated with revenue collection in villages, which form part of rural municipalities. Currently, the villages pay for electricity services. However, they do not pay for other services such as water, property rates and taxes because of the fact that the properties that are built in villages have no title deeds. Such properties are built on land of traditional authorities. This matter should be explored further in future empirical investigations.

Revenue collection methods

Revenue collection methods tend to vary from municipalities to municipalities across the globe. However, consensus in the method of revenue collection is a vital decision for each municipality with the utilisation of contractors or public–private partnership (PPP) models as well as direct collection by municipalities themselves being prominent methods (Upadhyay & Manandhar, 2017). Furthermore, Upadhyay and Manandhar (2017) argue that regardless of the means of revenue collection, there is a need to ensure transparency and acceptance on the part of ratepayers. Thus, the methods of collection have a significant impact on the ability of a municipality to collect revenue. Regardless of the mechanism of revenue collection, both accountability and cost effectiveness are most considerable factors for taxpayers and municipalities themselves as well. An inept revenue collection approach has serious negative consequences on the revenue base of the municipalities (Shava, 2020). The next section focuses on the different methods of revenue collection for municipalities.

Manual collection

Many African countries rely on traditional and manual revenue collections systems, which are outdated. However, these systems are increasingly being replaced by automated systems, with some municipalities utilising a combination of the two. According to Nel-Sanders and Malomane (2022), traditional municipality is still prevailing and has been defined as traditional governance that uses ‘paper and pen’ in service delivery to their local communities associated with high levels of a ‘bureaucratic culture’. Thus, handwritten and manual processes are regarded as traditional approaches in performing revenue collection (Nel-Sanders & Malomane, 2022). Shava (2020) argues that municipalities in South Africa continue to shun new technologies that have emanated from the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which can immensely improve revenue collection. Most public officials in municipalities prefer the status quo by maintaining traditional and conventional approaches because of the discomfort they experience when switching to new methods (Symmonds, 2015). Traditional municipality is characterised by little use of technologies, poor service delivery, customers’ dissatisfaction and a lack of auto-control systems. Traditional methods are associated with a higher risk of leakage and inefficiency and are prone to corruption and misuse.

Electronic systems

The realisation of improvements in revenue collection by municipalities in South Africa can be attained through the utilisation of recent and advanced technologies. Globally, online revenue collection systems are gaining momentum, thereby radically replacing the classical paper-based collection systems (Kweka & Chikoyo, 2021). Electronic systems in revenue collection involve electronic billing systems where ratepayers are able to interact with electronic gadgets to view, trace, query, request and pay for services delivered by the municipalities (Shava, 2020). Furthermore, smart systems that integrate various technologies in digital platforms and smart metering technology can be utilised to bill, remind, manage financial statements and bills, invoices and other related information by municipalities (Kiprop & Wanjira, 2024). Electronic payment systems, also regarded as digital payment, involve cashless systems where digital money is paid through electronic payment systems. Indisputably, the more advanced the technologies utilised in revenue collection, the more the revenue a municipality gathers. Mobile money, online banking and point-of-sale systems are some of the new methods that can be utilised by municipalities in collecting revenues. According to Nyoka et al. (2023), electronically running revenue collection significantly minimises corruption while satisfying customers because of the speed of service delivery as well as cutting down costs. A study by Mwaura (2019) revealed that the implementation of an electronic municipal billing system in the Tshwane Metropolitan municipality resulted in significant enhancements towards revenue collection by reducing errors and delays while improving security and transparency.

Outsourcing to private agents

There are instances when municipalities opt to utilise the services of third parties instead of performing the tasks themselves. Municipalities are mandated with collecting revenues; however, at times, factors such as lack of skills and capacity limit their ability to effectively perform the task of revenue collection. In this case, they outsource the service to private partners, hoping to improve revenue collected. Collection of municipal revenue through the utilisation of contractors or PPP model is a common method (Upadhyay & Manandhar, 2017). Public–private partnerships enable cities to take advantage of the capabilities of the private sector in terms of skills and finances, which will subsequently propel the interests of the public.

Some municipalities outsource collection to firms, while others outsource revenue management systems that integrate digital platforms for billing, collection and tracking. The PPPs can also be used to fund specific projects by municipalities without depending on collecting revenue from the public (Feyzipour & Janbozorgi, 2025). According to Molobela (2016), municipalities often rely on the services of debt collectors in order to collect outstanding fees owed to them and may employ the services of several debt collectors at a given time.

Recommendations

The article assessed literature pertaining to theories, legislations and concepts that are related to revenue collection. Furthermore the literature review unearthed various challenges that contribute towards revenue collection impediments. The findings reveal that for both the rural and urban municipalities, there are challenges to revenue collection such as corruption (Pozsgai-Alvarez, 2020; Cascarino, 2013; Chauke et al., 2024; Dassah, 2008; Kufandarerwa, 2017; Mamokhere & Kgobe, 2023; Svensson, 2005), a lack and poor human resources (HR) skills (Kaywood, 2022; Manyaka & Madzivandila, 2013; National Treasury Republic of South Africa, 2011), culture of entitlement and non-payment (Enwereji & Potgieter, 2018; Fjeldstad, 2004; Molobela, 2016; Nkomo, 2022), a lack of commitment by municipal officials (Masiya et al., 2021; Shava, 2020), political pressures (Kipilimba, 2018; Mamokhere & Kgobe, 2023; Mbatha, 2020; Trenovski et al., 2022), socio-economic factors of local populations, a lack of public trust or awareness (Nkuna, 2021; Out & Anam, 2019), inadequate infrastructure for digital collection (Mafunisa Consulting-LGSETA, 2019, Mofokeng et al., 2025), among others, which have a negative impact on revenue collection by the South African municipalities.

Figure 1 shows the developed and recommended framework, which analyses the impact of various factors that contribute to low revenue collection with a negative impact on service delivery. Therefore, the findings show that there is a convergence and similarity of revenue collection challenges in both rural and urban municipalities. The findings are in line with the political legitimacy theory on which this study is built. According to Upadhyay and Manandhar (2017), the political legitimacy theory is fashioned by the extent to which the ratepayers believe in the municipality. Using the political legitimacy theory, it can be deduced that when the ratepayers perceive the municipalities to be having corrupt tendencies, lack and poor human skills, existence culture of entitlement for non-payment, lack of commitment by municipal officials and socio-economic factors of local populations, it will not encourage the ratepayers to pay for their services. However, there are certain challenges around revenue collection, which are only unique to rural municipalities such as rates and taxes, provision of water services as well as refuse collection in some contexts. Even though sources such as Feyzipour and Janbozorgi (2025) and Smit (2019) posit that the proliferation of informal settlements poses a significant challenge that is affecting certain municipal revenue collection, little is mentioned of the challenges and opportunities associated with revenue collection in villages, which form part of rural municipalities. Currently, the village communities pay for electricity services. However, in the current dispensation, they do not pay for water and any form of rates and taxes because of the fact that the properties in villages have no title deeds and they are built on land of traditional authorities. This matter should be explored further in future empirical investigations. These findings are in line with the political legitimacy theory, which suggests that for municipalities to continue to exist, they must obtain patronisation or legitimacy primarily from the customers. Thus, according to this theory, whether or not municipalities will be able to collect revenue, the support of the local communities is very important. This will depend on whether their performance is in line with the expected societal values or not. Communities will be unwilling to pay for services when the municipalities are deemed to be unsociable, regardless of how much they might attempt to enforce compliance (Benito et al., 2025). Furthermore, the findings of this article have implications for the LGES Formula. The LGES should be re-looked in response to some of the unique revenue collection challenges that are experienced by rural municipalities. Sources such as De Visser (2023) posit that the 10% equitable share as per the LGES attempts to address fiscal imbalances ensures fair distribution of resources across the country, pursues national policy priorities and so forth. This article argues that the LGES Formula excludes other key quantitative and qualitative criteria, such as the rurality of municipalities, which include the provinces of Limpopo, Northern Cape, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and North West, as well as geographical distance, which is pervasive in Northern Cape. Future studies should explore the implications of the phenomena associated with the rurality of some municipalities such as the emerging opportunities of rates and taxes and other services being received in the villages of rural municipalities. Furthermore, the cost of providing services in municipalities, which are located in a province such as the Northern Cape with vast geographical distances, significantly increases the cost of service compared to other provinces. The Northern Cape province occupies approximately 33% (372 889 square kilometres) of South Africa’s total land area. Hence, the issue of geographical distance is a key relevant factor that should be factored in the computation of the LGES Formula as well as in the computation of the provincial equitable share formula. The article also discussed the role that electronic and traditional modes of payment play in influencing revenue collection by municipalities.

FIGURE 1: A framework of revenue collection.

Limitations of study

The investigation is conceptual in nature, with the susceptibility that its findings are inherently limited. However, the findings can be explored further in future research through empirical investigations. Empirical investigations should be undertaken by the researchers in future studies to explore the possibility of factoring in the constructs of the rurality and vast geographical distance in the LGES Formula as it affects the equitable share. Future research should also be extended to the provincial equitable share formula, which also faces a similar dynamic of not factoring in the constructs of rurality and vast geographical distance. The potential new revenue opportunities for rates and taxes stemming from the villages in rural areas should be explored in a judicious manner. Any potential proceeds should be reinvested in the socio-economic development of those communities.

Conclusion

The study developed and recommended framework, which analyses the impact of various factors that contribute to low revenue collection with a negative impact on service delivery. The lack of public trust or awareness, corruption, political pressures, lack of and poor human skills, culture of entitlement and non-payment, lack of commitment by municipal officials, socio-economic factors of local populations, are some of the issues which have a negative impact on revenue collection by the South African municipalities. Rural municipalities have additional unique revenue collection challenges in villages, where services such as water, waste refuse and in some instances, rates and taxes are not being paid. The local government equitable share (LGES) formula, which is used by the national government to allocate the equitable share revenue to the municipalities, does not take into account key factors such as the rurality of the municipalities; this exacerbates the challenges. Finally, the LGES does not take into account the vast geographical distances of certain municipalities, which significantly increase the cost of service of certain municipalities.

Acknowledgements

This article includes content that overlaps with research originally conducted as part of Mosema J. Mpe’s master’s thesis titled ‘Exploring revenue collection in Polokwane Municipality, Limpopo Province, Republic of South Africa’, which is currently work-in-progress. Once completed, the aforesaid thesis will be submitted to the Faculty of Economics and Management Sciences, UFS Business School, University of the Free State. The thesis will be submitted during the 2026 academic year. The thesis is being supervised by Moses M. Gasela. Relevant portions of the thesis and/or discussion have been revised, updated and adapted for journal publication. The original thesis will be publicly available at the relevant directory of the UFS Business School. The authors affirm that this submission complies with ethical standards for secondary publication, and appropriate acknowledgement has been made to the original work.

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

Mosema J. Mpe: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualisation, Writing – original draft. Moses M. Gasela: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualisation, Writing – review & editing. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

This article does not contain any studies involving human participants performed by any of the authors.

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings and content.

References