M.Sc. (Environmental Management) / South Africa is exceptionally rich in biodiversity. South Africa has been recognized as the third most biologically diverse country in the world, and has three globally recognized biodiversity hotspots; namely the Cape floristic, the Succulent Karoo and the Maputaland-Pondoland regions (NSBA, 2004). South Africa’s seas straddle three oceans, and provide a range of habitats from cool water kelp forests, to tropical reefs and deep ocean abyss (NSBA, 2004). Unfortunately, due to various pressures, many ecosystems are in trouble: 34% of terrestrial systems, 82% of river signatures, 65% of marine biozones and 8 estuarine types are threatened (NSBA, 2004). Mining has been identified as one of the sectors impacting negatively on biodiversity; the other significant pressures being agriculture, afforestration, urban and industrial development, extractive fishing, alien invasives and climate change (NSBA, 2004). The concept of ‘biodiversity offsets’ is relatively new and there are only generic methods whichare ill suited to determine appropriate biodiversity offsets in the South African context. The rationale for biodiversity offsets in South Africa is two-fold: firstly, South Africa contains biodiversity that is unique globally; secondly, its ecosystems underpin socioeconomic development and delivery of important services such as the reliable supply of clean water, ecotourism and coastal protection. Land-intensive development poses a significant threat to the countries remaining biodiversity. South African policies have, over the past few years, increasingly prioritised the conservation of biodiversity and important ecosystem services (Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, 2007). The motivation for this is a decline in global biodiversity (WWF & ZSL, 2012). Land use changes are the main motivation for identifying the need for creating a system within the planning process that tackles unavoidable and residual impacts to biodiversity. The implementation of EIA in South Africa in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998) allowed for the formal evaluation of impacts to habitat, wildlife and other natural considerations to be done as a prerequisite for developers to receive approval for a project to go ahead (BBOP, 2000). The aim of this study was to compare the current South African biodiversity offset approach to that of offset banking and no net loss or net gain principles as a feasible and beneficial alternative. A structured interview process was conducted to ascertain current understanding and perceptions relating to biodiversity offsets, biodiversity offset guidelines and regulations, offset banking, relevant experience and perceptions to determine the current level of understanding in the mining sector and with environmental consultants. This aided in determining whether biodiversity offset practices in its current form in South Africa were understandable, can be implemented effectively and achieves the rationale of biodiversity offset banking.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:uj/uj:13663 |
| Date | 30 June 2015 |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Rights | University of Johannesburg |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds