This research is based on reflections of various practitioners and their views on how public participation processes may or may not contribute to effective EIA decisions. It is therefore grounded in what is described as practitioner-based research. To study comparative development activities effectively, one must draw on many disciplines and construct a balanced understanding of historical and contemporary development processes. No single conventional disciplinary area of research is able to integrate the issues of public participation, EIA and decision-making in the context of the current development debate. The emergence of Trans-disciplinary areas of research allows for such integration. The Africa Earth Observatory Network (AEON) institute creates the space for this study to achieve an integrated response to the question of the effectiveness of public participation in EIA and decision-making. This further creates the opportunity to contribute and expand the growing body of knowledge and literature of public participation in the earth stewardship science discipline. Making use of triangulation, this study fulfils four major tasks: firstly, an assessment is made on the historical and theoretical importance, process and outcome of both EIA and public participation internationally and in South Africa. Secondly, three prominent case studies (i) the Coega IDZ, (ii) the Pondoland N2 Toll Road, and (iii) the anticipated Hydraulic Fracturing in the Karoo each focusses on concerns of an environmental, socio-economic, and political nature to assess if the public participation process has had influence, if any, on the final decisions for these projects to go-ahead. Thirdly, a survey was conducted to establish the views and perceptions of practitioners in the EIA and public participation domain on the effectiveness of public participation in EIA processes. Lastly, face-to-face interviews were conducted with various ‘pracademics’, i.e. consultants, practitioners, government, and non-governmental officials to establish their views on how public participation may or may not influence EIA decisions. Utilising the International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) participation spectrum as an evaluation tool, this research explores thirteen key criteria normally attributed to effective public participation. This provides a scale (inform, involve, consult, collaborate) to assess whether public participation in EIA in South Africa is least effective (inform) or most effective (collaborate). My research confirms that in South Africa an enabling environment to address impacts on our environment is emerging. One of the main challenges remains putting in place robust, clear and effective regulations, models or approaches that provide for effective public participation and decision-making in EIAs. My research also suggests that the legislation on which EIA is based cannot by itself guarantee the effectiveness of public participation processes. In practice, EIA is an institutional process of power division between different actors, and the practitioner or ‘pracademic’ has to play a more fundamental role to ensure effectiveness and fairness in the public participation process. Academic commentators should therefore call for new approaches that emphasise collaborative interaction between decision-makers and the public as well as deliberation amongst participants.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:21015 |
| Date | January 2015 |
| Creators | Uithaler, Eldrid Marlon |
| Publisher | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Faculty of Science |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Doctoral, DPhil |
| Format | xxiv, 247 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds