Julienne du Toit
There are few things that strike fear into the heart of an environmentalist faster than high-speed industrialisation in remote, beautiful areas. Spatial Development Initiatives (SDIs) have been planned on and near some of the finest beauty spots.
So the response of many environmentalists and environmental organisations has ranged between outrage and mistrust, much to the surprise of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). The DTI, in fact, had already catered for rigorous Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) long before these became law through the new environmental management Bill.
“So really, the SDIs don’t require NGOs to proclaim jihad on them,” explained Saliem Fakir, South Africa’s World Conservation Union representative. He feels fairly comfortable with the measures being planned for reducing environmental damage. “It would be far more useful for NGOs to work with the SDIs, not against them.”
But as head of the World Wide Fund for Nature in South Africa Dr Ian MacDonald points out: “Suddenly there was an industrial juggernaut coming down on us at the speed of a jet airplane. Communication was not as good as it could have been, and quite honestly, we’re not used to this kind of time schedule of development. This was a top-down process, driven at break-neck speed.
“But I must say, after two workshops with policy-makers and project managers, I came away quite optimistic. It was made clear to me that the principles of Integrated Environmental Management would be applied throughout, there would be thorough scrutiny, and even any follow-up developments would have to adhere to strict environmental guidelines.”
Broadly speaking, the process goes like this: once the feasibility study has been completed to make sure the SDI is needed and viable in a certain area, a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) or a Strategic Environmental Management Framework (SEMF) is done. This highlights any potential environmental problems, and it’s at this stage that excessively harmful projects are ruled out.
An SEA is basically a stocktake of important environmental valuables in the proposed area, taken in the light of the proposed development. An SEMF is a new tool, adapted by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, and pioneered by the SDIs. It is more detailed, and can take into account cumulative impacts on a region.
Then, as individual projects start coming through, thorough EIAs are carried out.
Tanya Abrahamse, deputy director general of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, is working closely with the DTI and with SDI projects managers. She’s particularly pleased with the Environmental Management Framework the department has helped adapt for the SDIs
Didn’t she have any misgivings about this fast track development? “Well, I’m of the environmental school that sees the major threats in poverty and inequality.”
But this does not mean that there is nothing to worry about. Environment certainly is not the main concern of the project managers of all the SDIs, as Fakir pointed out. Labour, job creation and investment protocols fight for space at the top of the priority list.
And very worrying is the fact that most provincial environmental departments don’t possess enough manpower, expertise or information to do the job properly.
So, where necessary, the national Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism is helping to build capacity. The SDIs themselves, in some cases, are helping to build the capacity of some provincial departments.
Even NGOs lack the capacity and knowledge to deal with the potential problems of SDIs at the necessary speed.
Many environmentalists are now comparatively happy with what they see on paper. But the SDIs echo the fast-track development strategies of the Asian tiger economies. There the agenda was to build up wealth and jobs fast, and the thought was that any damage caused could be fixed later with the money generated.
But the Asian tigers turned out to be made of paper and their economic malaise has meant that environmental regeneration quickly slips down the list of priorities.
Also, as environmental consultant Conrad Steenkamp points out, the socio-economic upheaval may completely overshadow, or perhaps cause, environmental damage. Squatter camps and factories may replace rural farms.
Another weakness of the SDIs, says Steenkamp, is that they are planned from the top down, and information may be in flux, incorrect or non-existent. It’s possible that a crucial resource may be compromised because the information was not there in time to stop the juggernaut.
The Group for Environmental Monitoring is also worried that the damage caused by the SDIs may not match any benefits, or that the benefits will only be short-term, and not sustainable, but cause long-term damage.
All these things are worrying, but as Dr John Ledger of the Endangered Wildlife Trust points out in Endangered Wildlife, NGOs have nothing to gain by sitting back and carping.
“The answer is simple – get on board or get left behind. We all have to make that extra effort to attend meetings, comment loudly and participate actively. We have to make our voices heard, and we must make a contribution to the development process …”