But equally the downside should be leavened with caution against overdoing it. Despite noticeable fragility, we remain a going concern of some repute.

Not quite business as usual, with too many things weighing us down, restraining our performance, but probably still resilient enough to keep inching forward.

That is aside of discounting the longer term upside future. A great African growth story unfolding on our doorstep and having decades to run, also pulling us along. And a great fracking story from the next decade, globally suppressing energy prices (boosting real consumer incomes and spending) and domestically at the core of another great commodity resurgence (driving investment and displacing imports).

Also, less than half our labour force is formally deployed. Consider the growth potential in the coming generation if we were to get serious about educating the coming age cohorts adequately and then absorbing them productively.

With at the core of any growth upliftment story a huge infrastructure expansion running for decades.

Be that as it may. The litany of short-term woes is lengthening. What do these mean for growth, inflation, and policy?

The growth outlook appears modest because of slower real household income gains and ability to spend, reticence by business to commit on capital investment, inventories and new hiring, not much improvement expected in the trade account, and public fixed investment ongoing (rather than greatly accelerating through major new tenders).

It is an environment that suggests not much more than 2.5% growth. Anything that outperforms, such as the motor industry in February still expanding car unit sales at 5% y/y at a daily selling rate, is an oddity.

The main concerns remain labour unrest and electricity constraint to which we may have to add maize harvest prospects, depending on March rains in the interior.

We lost a lot of output to labour unrest last year, especially in mining and in transport, but possibly growth suffered more due to the cap on confidence this set throughout much of the economy.

Yet things are not as unsettled in mining now as it was last year. A peace agreement was signed, the mines are by and large back at work.

There are mines where conditions remain unsettled, and there are still the wage negotiations starting in May.

It doesn't come across as an area where we will see large output gains, wage demands will be high and whatever is settled will probably be accompanied by labour shedding.

Yet instead of providing inspiring leadership under such trying circumstances, government keeps sending mixed messages. In December nationalisation was ruled off the table, yet talk of more taxes and a tax review remained, with Transnet this week announcing high bulk tariff increases.

There doesn't seem to be an end to mining uncertainty. Instead, there is this drumbeat of pronouncements suggesting the industry remains under siege from policy, never mind labour or global competition.

It creates an unholy feeling (uncertainty), not knowing what to expect, and as mining goes, so will the nation?

These perceptions may become overstated relative to the reality that is playing, but people locally and overseas will require time to fully assess what needs to be discounted. What is the real downside, if any?

This negative frame continues to weigh on sentiment, even if actual conditions in many sectors of the economy aren't as much a struggle as suggested still by mining.

Still, the metal working parts of manufacturing are not enjoying robust conditions and likely to be fragile going into next year's wage negotiations.

In agriculture, there doesn't seem to be a complete train smash underway. Instead, it is rather the usual mid-summer drought in the interior seen every year. Yet where the maize harvest in February was still estimated at over 12mt (an excellent harvest), it may have eroded 10% by now. If it rains adequately the next two weeks, this would probably be the extent of any harvest downside.

But if it doesn't rain adequately, we may lose another 10% to nearer 10mt harvest, which would clearly not be as good as a 12mt harvest. This would still cover home consumption (at 9.5mt) whereas a real train smash would be a harvest of 5mt with massive import requirements.

Still, as the harvest estimate shrinks, the maize price for local consumption will likely rise, even towards import parity. International prices may be down from their peaks, but the weaker Rand, the neutral oil price (at $110/b) and the drift towards import parity could push food inflation higher later this year.

Electricity supply worries for many reasons, with output for the past nine months some 3% below the previous 12 month period.

Early this year, there were unplanned outages (Koeberg, Cahora Bassa). There is strike action at coal collieries linked to power stations making up over 12% of Eskom generating capacity. Even if Eskom has 30-days of coal buffer stock, one notes the (growing) exposure to unplanned stoppages.

Eskom is buying back more electricity supply (1000MW). Also, flood damage in neighbouring countries appears to have reduced import ability, further constraining supply.

This electricity situation reduces energy availability to local industry and suggests very tight supply (and consequent risk of abrupt supply reductions).

Overhanging us all are possible delays in the Medupi commissioning due to labour strikes and quality issues. It may mean the output constraint of recent years moves deeper into 2014, with (growing?) downside risk to new unfavourable developments.

Every bit of these output losses must be added to an already overall struggling growth reality.

If the food price outlook is not good despite global agricultural commodity prices coming down, the NERSA decision to grant Eskom only half its tariff increase request (8%), along with a neutral oil price, are important positives.

Fiscal policy is aiming to be restraining (lowering the growth in real government spending, reducing the budget deficit). Though the Rand is weakening, and may ease the position of producers, it will also erode real consumer incomes and ability to spend yet further.

Provided labour unrest, inflation and Rand weakness don't surprise unfavourably too much (not a robust set of assumptions), the SARB in coming months may find itself challenging its policy stance, as was the case in mid-2012 when it lowered rates by 0.5%.

With much of any potential downside in growth and upside in inflation of our own making, except for drought and global underperformance, it remains to be seen how much SARB can do to alleviate matters.

For the present, the SARB is signaling a preoccupation with upside inflation risk, presumably preventing any policy action. It remains to be seen whether as the year and events unfold, that message stays the same.

One would like fewer mixed messages from government (to mining), fewer threats looming (about tax reviews, however realistic), fewer demands from labour outside of productivity deals, and less destructive competition among unions.

We need higher mining output and more electricity supply soonest. We need fewer mixed messages, better growth performance and a clearer restoration of business confidence after struggling unusually long in the aftermath of recession, with GDP growth undershooting its potential, thus getting back into a more normal cyclical recovery pattern (when going by 30 years of BER opinion survey data).

Whether we will have to give up more of the maize harvest is not within our control. But the other stuff is. Get on with it, please. We can't afford the possible downside to a 2.5% growth scenario for 2013-2014, or the implied upside to a 5.5% inflation scenario that labour, drought and weaker Rand over 10:$ potentially imply.

We are doing far too modestly as it is, with no formal job gains this past year and likely few this year too.

Not a particular healthy basis on which to have a general election in April 2014.

Source: Cees Bruggemans, FNB Consulting Economist