Thesis (MPhil (Sustainable Development Planning and Management))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / Despite our best planning and Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) efforts we seem to be
failing in our pursuit of Sustainable Development. In South Africa we find ourselves confronted
with the harsh reality that after 14 years of democracy, more than a decade of compulsory EIA,
and 12 years of legislated Integrated Development Planning (“IDP”), poverty remains
widespread and persists alongside affluence, while inequalities are also growing. In addition
South Africa’s life-supporting ecosystems continue to deteriorate at an alarming rate. Critically
reflecting on what is going wrong, it is clear that there is an emergent consensus in the
discourse that points towards the inadequate consideration of alternatives.
A literature review of the historical development and social construction of the concept of
“sustainable development”; a theoretical analysis of sustainable development, planning and EIA;
as well as an analysis of the legislative and policy framework for EIA and IDP in South Africa,
shows that the consideration of alternatives is the “heart” and “soul” of EIA and IDP, and
therefore of the pursuit of sustainable development in South Africa. A content analysis of a
sample of EIAs and IDPs undertaken and produced in the Western Cape Province of South
Africa, however, indicates that alternatives are not being adequately considered during the
current practice of EIA and IDP in South Africa – resulting in only slightly less unsustainable
development and a perpetuation of the unsustainable and unjust “business-as-usual”
development types and patterns of the past.
EIA and IDP can never be, and were never supposed to be completely separate processes.
EIAs must be considered within the context to be provided by the sustainable development
vision, goals and objectives to be formulated in, and the desired spatial form and pattern of land
use to be reflected in an area’s IDP and Spatial Development Frameworks (“SDF”). Properly
informed Strategic Environmental Assessment based IDPs and SDFs, refined by Environmental
Management Frameworks, should therefore provide the strategic context and decision-making
framework for the consideration of need, desirability and alternatives; with the actual and
potential socio-economic and ecological impacts of a specific proposal to be considered during
the project-level EIA. Project-level EIAs in turn providing “feedback” to the planning processes to
ensure reflexivity and continued improvement. The improved integration and convergence of
IDP and EIA decision-making methodologies and practice are therefore paramount to the
adequate consideration of alternatives and the pursuit of sustainable development in South
Africa.
While the challenges to be addressed by EIA and IDP in South Africa are complex and ‘wicked’,
and the pursuit of sustainable development solutions is therefore also a complex and ongoing
process, the need for fundamental alternatives that will lead to drastic and urgent change for the
better are, however, just as real. The urgency and importance of the sustainable development
challenge for South Africa calls for bold decisions and the search for sustainable alternatives
that will deliver urgent and fundamental change for all South Africans. The practice of EIA and
IDP should be driven by these realities and reflect the need for urgent and fundamental change.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/2401 |
| Date | 03 1900 |
| Creators | Gerber, Gerhard |
| Contributors | Muller, Anneke, University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences. School of Public Management and Planning. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Rights | University of Stellenbosch |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds