Skip to main content
SA Policy Space

Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Act

Regulatory BurdenPartially implementedMedium TermAI draft, partly checkedRaised 8× in committeeMineral Resources and Energy

Theme: Oil and gas exploration

First raisedMay 2022Last discussedMar 20268 meetings on the record ↓
Generate BriefCompareFeasibility Matrix

Reform at a glance

What changes
Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Act
Responsible actor (recorded)
Department of Mineral Resources and Energy / PASA / National Treasury
Recorded status
Partially implemented — editorial assessment.
Milestone described by this status
Status scope has not yet been independently documented; it may cover only part of this reform.
Next documented milestone
Next milestone not yet documented
Compare shortlist (0/3)
Back to ideas
On this page

Description

AI draft, partly checkedThis idea's text was drafted with an AI model in March 2026. Some of its claims have been checked against sources and corrected; the rest has not. Treat its figures as unverified unless a linked source confirms them. How idea text is checked

The Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Act, assented to by President Ramaphosa on 25 October 2024, ends the decades-long legal ambiguity that governed petroleum exploration under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA). The Act separates the petroleum regime from mining, establishing a dedicated framework administered by the South African Agency for Promotion of Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation (SAAPEE). Key provisions include a repayable 20% carried interest for the State Petroleum Company and mandatory black persons' equity participation in exploration and production rights, modelled on the mining sector's black economic empowerment requirements. The Act covers reconnaissance permits, exploration rights, production rights, and retention permits, providing greater regulatory certainty for international exploration companies. The timing is significant: TotalEnergies, Shell, and other majors have been exploring in the Orange Basin off the Southern African coast, while TotalEnergies exited the Brulpadda and Luiperd gas discoveries off the southern coast (Block 11B/12B) in 2024, saying they were too challenging to develop and monetise for the South African market. Gas discoveries in the Karoo and offshore could provide a domestic supply solution to the looming industrial gas shortage.

Assessment

Growth Impact3/5
Feasibility2/5

Responsible: Department of Mineral Resources and Energy / PASA / National Treasury

Feasibility Assessment

Medium: assented to, but not yet in force, and its regulations are still in draft (February 2026). Fiscal regime design (royalty rates, community obligations) is the contested dimension. Environmental authorisation for offshore blocks remains a parallel process.

Drafted with an AI model in March 2026; not yet checked against sources.

Stakeholder Landscape

Who backs this reform, who needs convincing, and which interests or red lines shape political feasibility.

Backers

9

1 stakeholder

Negotiation weight

7

1 conditional actor

Opposition weight

0

0 opposing actors

Coalition Read

AI-drafted stances · 0 reviewed

2 of 38 actors mapped — not scored

A coalition score needs at least 3 mapped stances, or actors carrying 25% of the map's influence. The stances below are the evidence; the average over this few of them would not be.

Anchor: National Treasury. Highest-leverage swing actor: DTIC (Dept. of Trade, Industry & Competition).

Political Tractability

—Needs reviewed signals

No reviewed signals · 0% of mapped influence has been reviewed.

Backers1 stakeholder
National TreasuryCoalition anchorInfluence 9/10

Treasury supports the Petroleum Resources Development Bill as domestic oil and gas exploration could reduce import dependency and generate royalties.

Interest: Fiscal consolidation with public debt stabilising below 75% of GDP; structural reforms that improve revenue without expanding contingent liabilities;…

Concern: Unfunded mandates in energy transition (JETP co-financing); Eskom's R400bn+ debt and how restructuring socialises costs; reform proposals that create…

Engagement path: Reforms must be fiscally neutral or revenue-positive over the MTEF window; SOE restructuring must demonstrably reduce contingent liabilities; credible…

Negotiation Priorities1 stakeholder
DTIC (Dept. of Trade, Industry & Competition)Negotiation priorityInfluence 7/10

DTIC supports upstream petroleum development only with adequate local content and beneficiation requirements.

Interest: Industrial policy objectives — local content requirements, beneficiation, BBBEE transformation, SEZ development, and protection of manufacturing emplo…

Concern: Full logistics liberalisation without local content protections could hollow out domestic manufacturing by reducing input costs asymmetrically for ext…

Engagement path: Logistics and energy reforms include localisation provisions and domestic content requirements; trade agreements include industrial policy safeguards;…

Evidence & Research

No linked research evidence yet. Coverage is incomplete.

Policy documents

No linked official-document evidence yet. Coverage is incomplete.

Get the Monday briefing by email

— A short weekly digest of what moved in SA policy.

Status History

tracked since Mar 2026
  1. Recorded as Stalled when status tracking began — held since at least Mar 2026.
    Mar 2026
  2. Moved from Stalled to Partially implemented on 17 October 2026
    trigger

Data as of 2026-10-18 · latest PMG meeting 2026-10-09