The National Land Transport Strategic Framework for South Africa (2015) and Related Transportation Instruments: The Application of Transportation Modelling for Improved Decision Making?

The National Land Transport Strategic Framework (NLTSF) [1] in South Africa was extensively reviewed in 2015 [2] to address current transportation issues after 21 years in a democratic society; the purpose of this article is to assess, relate, and illustrate how transportation and development strategic instruments (i.e., NLTSF [2], National Development Plan (NDP) [3], and National Transport Master Plan (NATMAP) [4]) are applied in the transformation of spatial systems and the development of transportation infrastructure projects. In isolation, these strategic instruments are subservient to their specific goals and objectives formulated to address certain core issues related to transportation and development, and in an endeavour to promote integration between such strategic instruments to guide the sustainable movement of people, goods, services, and communication, this article addresses the role of transportation modelling in strategic decision-making and articulation. The motivation for this article stems from the Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF) [5] and the challenges stated in the aforementioned strategic instruments; from IUDF [5], it follows that one of the key challenges at the local level is the monitoring of municipal performance—currently, monitoring is incomplete and fragmented, lacking adequate analytical capacity to generate real insight into actual performance and risk management.

According to Dressler [6], Haberberg and Rieple [7], Parnell [8], and David [9], strategic management serves a variety of purposes in attaining a vision, goals, and objectives within an organization (including the public sector), and similar strategic and/or fundamental principles support transportation planning and spatial or regional planning (refer to CSIR [10] and Schoeman [11]). The complexities involved in strategic transportation planning are best described by the term CLIOS (complex, large-scale, integrated, open systems) [12]; Robinson [13] points out that business leaders, strategists, and scenario planners have drawn attention for years to the confused and unstructured times we live in, stating that the roots of the strategic approach and its methodologies can be traced back to literature on warfare, business, political science, and operational research—and this relates directly to the issues stated in the introduction of this article. From Thompson and Strickland [14] and David [9], it follows that strategy-making and implementation consist of six interrelated managerial tasks: forming a strategic vision of what the future business makeup will be; setting objectives; conducting external and internal assessment; formulating a strategy to achieve the desired outcomes; implementing and executing the chosen strategy; and evaluating performance and making corrective adjustments to the process. Jeston and Nelis [15] point out that strategic management depends on process management, including strategic alignment, and for the purpose of this study, the interface between strategic management and planning should also be considered; Litman [16] concludes that planning includes the following principles: being comprehensive, efficient, inclusive, informative, integrated, logical, and transparent, so strategic management thus serves as a building block for sustainable planning.

The National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 for South Africa [3] endeavours to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality within the country by 2030, and South Africa can only realize identified development goals by building on the energies of its citizens, growing an inclusive economy, building capabilities, enhancing the capacity of the state, and promoting leadership and partnerships throughout society. The NDP is based on the National Planning Commission’s Diagnostic Report [17] of 2011, which contains the achievements and shortcomings since democratization in 1994 within the national spatial system, and the NDP identifies the failure to implement policies and concludes that the absence of broad partnerships as the main reasons for slow progress. The NDP 2030 [3] provides a broad national strategic framework to guide key choices and actions, identifies challenges and development priorities as shown in Table 1, and of importance to this study is the planned implementation phases of the NDP that underpin the addressing of the development challenges and priorities which mainly focus on social, economic, developmental and infrastructural issues inclusive of safe and reliable public transport; the implementation is divided into broad phases: critical steps to be taken by 2013 to unlock implementation, 2014–2019 planning cycle, 2019–2024 and 2024–2030 planning cycles (note: original text has a typo of “2009” which is corrected to “2030” for logical consistency with NDP 2030). These phases are identified to ensure integration of the NDP into the plans of the various spheres of government and supporting role of different sectors and society, and the integration planning of the NDP thus directly relates to the need to translate strategic management processes into planning policies and plans as pointed out above. The NDP [3] contains the following objectives: an economy that will create more jobs and employment; improving and development of infrastructure (including transportation); transition to a low-carbon economy; an inclusive and integrated rural economy; reversing the spatial effects of apartheid; improving the quality of education, training and innovation; quality health care for all; social protection; building safer communities; reforming the Public Service; fighting corruption; enhancing social cohesion. Zarenda [18] discusses the implications of the NDP for regional development while Van Nieuwkerk [19] deals with the NDP and its foreign policy, and the conclusions in these critiques are of value to both the NATMAP [4] and the NLTSF [2] as transportation is fundamental in terms of internalities and externalities to achieve their goals, objectives and priorities.

In line with the challenges and objectives outlined in the NDP [3], South Africa’s National Transport Master Plan (NATMAP) [4], originally released in 2011, was updated in 2015 [20] to ensure alignment and integration across relevant strategic and planning processes and focuses. When assessing the NATMAP-Synopsis Update [20], it is important to note that this alignment targeted not only the content of the NDP but also the NLTSF [2]; both the NLTSF [2] and NATMAP [20] exemplify how the Department of Transport fulfills its mandate by integrating the NDP’s [3] challenges and priorities. Transportation stands as the core of development—without it, the challenges outlined in the NDP would largely remain idealistic and theoretical (as also noted in report [17]). Table 2 details the objectives and actions identified in NATMAP [20], and two core chapters of this document form the focus of this study: Chapter 2, “An Aligned & Integrated Planning Framework,” and Chapter 13, “NATMAP 2050 Implementation Methodology,” which includes a prioritization methodology, assessment framework, appraisal approach, and appraisal content (covering problems and options, capital costs, operating costs, revenue, wider benefits, and appraisal completion). NATMAP [20] also outlines a four-stage practical guide for transport investment, along with key performance indicators for integrated transport planning, public transport, the environment, freight transport, road and rail infrastructure, road safety, and rural transport—each supported by measurement yardsticks and targets. The document further defines a nine-step delivery and implementation approach: Step 1, Define the needs, objectives, and strategic case to confirm an issue requires addressing; Step 2, Identify the preferred intervention; Step 3, Apply a common-basis assessment framework to prioritize interventions/options for meeting transport objectives; Step 4, Select the highest-ranking options/interventions for scrutiny per transport investment guidance; Step 5, Develop individual business cases for each selected intervention using an appropriate delivery model; Step 6, Apply for funding via the National Transport Forum, local partnerships, or relevant funding agencies; Step 7, Secure funding; Step 8, Implement the project; Step 9, Measure project success, monitor, and review. This approach serves as a flexible decision-making guide—presented as a starting point, with deviations permitted based on project nature and definition—and Figure 1 illustrates the logic of this process. For illustrative purposes, NATMAP [20] includes national-level maps integrating its alignment with the National Infrastructure Plan (NIP), NDP, Department of Human Settlements planning, Department of Public Enterprises (DPE), and Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) projects, while Figure 2 presents a matrix demonstrating the implementation, alignment, and integration conclusions from NATMAP [20]. NATMAP [20] is dynamic in that it establishes a process for integrating vertical policies, visions, and more across different spheres of government, guiding the development of transport solutions and applicable technologies implemented by these spheres. Its approach is practically applied to Strategic Integrated Projects (SIPs) in the NIP [21, 22] and NDP [3], and Table 3 shows the alignment evaluation tool used in NATMAP to integrate national, provincial, and local projects and initiatives in terms of planning and implementation—this tool was utilized to align NATMAP with various SIPs.

Table 4 summarizes the content of the National Land Transport Strategic Framework (NLTSF) [2]. The original NLTSF [1] was reviewed in 2014/15, resulting in the 2015 NLTSF [2], and Table 4 outlines the objectives, current realities, action fields, and functional areas included in this updated framework. Notably, the NLTSF operates on a five-year timeframe, with updates required after each period. As indicated in this article’s title, a key focus is the approach outlined in the NLTSF [2] and its related instruments (discussed earlier), which presents a new challenge for transportation modelling in strategic decision-making. NATMAP [20] demonstrates a transportation-focused approach to integration and alignment by articulating the strategic management concepts, principles, objectives, and priorities from the NDP [3], alongside the challenges and current realities guiding transport planning in NATMAP [20]. The NLTSF—this strategic transport-focused framework—was developed in compliance with the legal obligations outlined in the National Land Transport Act 2009 [23], Section 23, and it sets strategic priorities for applying transport planning to achieve social, health, economic, and environmental outcomes. The 2015 NLTSF [2] was formulated based on the Public Transport Strategy and Action Plan [24], NDP [3], Draft Scholar Transport Policy [25], and NATMAP [20]; it includes strategic priorities and outcomes linked to the strategic instruments discussed in this article, aligning with all transport and spatial planning, strategies, and plans across all spheres of government. For the purposes of this study, it is critical to note that the NLTSF [2] is not a transport strategy or plan, but a framework for transport planning that contextualizes the NDP and NATMAP. From a strategic perspective, it establishes goals, a vision, and objectives for transport system components included in Provincial Land Transport Frameworks (PLTFs) and Integrated Transport Plans, and it links transport projects to specific Key Performance Areas. The NLTSF [2] vision is: “An integrated and efficient transport system supporting a thriving economy that promotes sustainable economic growth, provides safe and accessible mobility options, socially includes all communities and preserves the environment.” This vision aligns closely with the NDP [3] and NATMAP [20], embodying the drive for integration and alignment across all strategic instruments addressed in this article. The interaction between these instruments is as follows: NATMAP supports the implementation of the NDP, NIP, and NLTSF, while relying on support from SPLUMA, IUDF, IDF, and SDF; the NLTSF, IUDF, and SPLUMA, in turn, support the implementation of the NDP and NATMAP. Integrating strategic management, spatial planning, and transport planning processes across all government spheres is far more complex than merely harmonizing and aligning policies and plans—it requires articulation through development impact assessments that account for diverse needs, standards, prioritization, and implementation timeframes. Thus, modelling as a technique to support complex decision-making is essential from transport, infrastructure, and development perspectives, as it enables optimal NDP implementation within the constraints of limited timeframes and available resources. The NLTSF develops Key Performance Areas (KPAs) supported by measurable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), which are monitored by the National Transportation Forum (NTF) to ensure the NLTSF [2] operates effectively across all government spheres. Table 5 presents the indicators identified in the NLTSF [2] to evaluate the success of policies and plans. The role of transportation modelling in strategic decision-making is defined by the implementation of these KPAs and KPIs, as well as the prioritization and sustainable, resilient monitoring of policies, strategies, regulations, and planning. Table 6 reflects that while the NDP outlines inputs and outputs for policy, strategy, and planning—elements also covered in NATMAP, which adds national implementation and planning details—the NLTSF provides more detailed implementation guidance, and the IUDF offers a holistic overarching framework and levers for policy reforms in key areas affecting urban development, spatial transformation, and alignment.

These strategic instruments—NDP, NATMAP, and NLTSF—each have distinct focuses and timelines, yet all serve as vital building blocks in advancing South Africa’s democracy, addressing historical imbalances, and tackling challenges across government spheres, institutions, and sectors. Their integration and alignment are critical to translating strategic goals into tangible progress, and transportation modelling emerges as a key enabler in navigating the complexity of this integration, ensuring that limited resources are optimized to meet development priorities. By linking transport infrastructure, spatial transformation, and broader national objectives, these instruments collectively lay the groundwork for a more inclusive, efficient, and sustainable future—one where transport serves as a unifying force for economic growth and social cohesion.