/ 24 April 2006

Simpler. Better. Greener?

There have been some who have implied that the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism’s re-examination of the environmental impact system is somehow indicative of a weakened commitment to the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The South African experience continues to prove that the interests of communities and of the environment can never be separated — and that development and conservation need never be opposing end-goals. It was this fundamental conviction that has informed our approach to EIA.

EIA, as a regulated tool, is relatively new in South Africa. Although undertaken on a voluntary basis before 1997, the first regulations were promulgated in 1997 in terms of the Environment Conservation Act of 1989.

Our existing system of EIA has helped authorities to make informed decisions about development activities; allowed developers to ask the right questions and often to save money; required that the voices of affected communities be heard; and, perhaps most crucially, ensured that negative impacts on our environment and on human health are proactively identified, prevented or managed.

But the lack of clarity in the old regulations often led to inconsistent application of the laws — especially in different provinces. The process itself was not as streamlined or flexible as it could be. The public participation processes lack proper guidance and have often been abused; there has been a growing need to align assessments with our much-evolved environmental management law; and the content, quality and independence of EIA reports has sometimes been problematic.

The result has been a review of our system and the rebirth of EIA in the form of new regulations. They will come into effect on July 11 for all activities except those related to mining, which will come into effect on April 1 next year. These new regulations retain the best of our old system, introduce new provisions to modernise and streamline the processes, and will ensure that the application and administration of our environmental laws are more efficient and effective.

Elements improved include the identification of activities to be subject to EIA; the prescription of the process and reports; the clarification of roles and responsibilities; public participation requirements; and the appeal process.

The list of activities requiring an EIA has been thoroughly reworked into nine thematic areas such as property development, energy generation and industrial activities. These have been further divided into two schedules based on the nature and associated risk of the activity — those in schedule one, such as transformation of land to develop residential areas larger than three hectares, will now be subject to only a basic assessment process; while those in schedule two, such as power stations, will require a thorough assessment process.

Differentiating like this is an important milestone towards addressing concerns related to unnecessary cost and delays. It is estimated that these lists, and the introduction of development thresholds, will see the number of EIA applications reduced by up to 20%. This empowers our environmental authorities to make an informed decision after a faster and cheaper process, and to ensure the protection of environmental quality.Although to date 50% of EIA applications have been finalised within half a year, almost 6,5% have taken more than two years — with some taking more than three years to finalise. These hold-ups have been the result of a combination of government and applicant delays, but under the new regulations authorities will be obliged to deliver within 14 days for purely administrative actions; within 45 days for review and decision-making on minor reports; and between 60 to 105 days for review and decision-making on complex reports.

Do we have the capacity? It is likely that it will take time for the full benefits of the new regulations to be felt as we work to put into place the necessary skills and capacity across the country. We will be holding one-day information seminars in all nine provinces and two national seminars in May and June to help familiarise people with the new system. The end-result will be an EIA system among the best in the world.

The system has been further improved by including provisions aimed at moving towards a more strategic decision-making process. These provisions include process and content requirements for production of site-specific environmental management plans, environmental management frameworks (EMF) for geographic areas, and sector guidelines. A provision has been included for activities to be excluded from the EIA requirements in cases where an EMF or guideline is in place.

The new EIA regulations will be better for conservation, better for communities, better for development, and better for South Africa.

Marthinus van Schalkwyk is the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism