As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms human labour, South Africa faces a critical choice: allow AI to displace workers or actively steer its adoption to augment human capabilities, protect jobs and drive inclusive economic growth.
South Africa has, within its means as a democracy, the ability to shape how artificial intelligence will impact employment.
The question is not whether AI will transform our economy. It is beyond doubt that AI, and particularly deep-learning “generative AI”, will reset the benchmarks for human labour. The question is whether that transformation will benefit working people or see them displaced in the interests of short-term profitability.
There are two fundamentally different paths facing our country, and indeed peoples across the world: an anti-employment model that seeks to accelerate profitability through the automation of human labour, or a pro-employment model that leverages AI capabilities to augment human capabilities.
These are not predetermined technological outcomes. These outcomes will be determined by our political economy choices. It is becoming increasingly apparent that, with the right regulations and collective efforts, we can influence a more positive outcome.
First the bad news. The AI revolution is not like the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution took effect from 1760 to 1840, and there were massive job losses, but humans and economies had time to gradually reskill. For example, the steam engine took 80 years to reach 50% adoption. By contrast, AI is advancing much faster. McKinsey finds that businesses’ use of generative AI rose from 33% in 2023 to 79% in 2025. According to Stanford University’s AI Index Report, AI system performance increased by 67% in the year to 2025.
With AI, unlike with the Industrial Revolution, humanity will not have 80 years to adjust.
The World Economic Forum’s 2025 Future of Jobs Report offers a misplaced Industrial Revolution analogy. It estimates that by 2030 AI will destroy 92 million jobs. But not to worry, it says, AI will also create 170 million new jobs, so we will be 78 million jobs ahead. Unfortunately, the biggest job creation they forecasted was in big data-centre construction and software development. Within a year of that report, we see that projection unravelling, as junior software developer jobs decline rapidly because AI can do that work more cheaply.
And can we simply retrain everyone for this new reality? Certainly, reskilling is critical. But only a fraction of the population can be reskilled at any given time to keep pace with AI’s relentless evolution.
If this is a process of “creative destruction”, with winners and losers, the distribution of job destruction and job creation will be uneven across countries and demographics.
South Africa has 34% of working-age people unemployed, rising to 60% for those under 25. The country cannot afford to have AI deepen unemployment and destroy entire categories of entry-level jobs for young people.
So, what national choice do we face?
The first scenario sees companies using AI to eliminate junior employees, automate customer service, and reduce their workforce. Productivity and short-term profits may rise, but employment will decline. As unemployment rises, consumer markets become more distressed and social instability increases, and the economy suffers in the longer term.
The second scenario sees companies equipping employees with AI tools, enabling inexperienced workers to take on sophisticated tasks, improving productivity, and expanding their business. As workers become more capable, overall economic capability and competitiveness rise.
In both scenarios, the country can claim to be “innovating”. But the consequences for society are profoundly different.
Augmentation over displacement
The good news is that the rise of AI can be contested and shaped. The AI industry is in its early and uncertain phase – and it is politically contentious, overindebted, and loss-making. Regulations are being proposed, including by AI companies themselves.
Globally, awareness is rising that AI adoption must be steered toward augmenting human labour rather than displacing it. It is becoming clearer that countries can regulate pro-employment AI adoption, where AI tools enable workers to better achieve practical, on-demand competence.
This process of AI adoption concerns societal “stakeholders” (government, business, social formations) and not merely corporate shareholders.
As with long-term issues such as climate change, shareholder value and short-term profit maximisation fall short. The choices companies make have spillover effects on the rest of society, including future generations.
Ravi Naidoo, CEO of the Youth Employment Service (YES) and a member of the National Planning Commission
©Higher Education Media Services.