1 / 25

A Andrews

taline
Télécharger la présentation

A Andrews

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS UNDER National Environmental Management Act 1998 as amendedSubmission to the Portfolio Committee on Water and Environmental Affairs, on behalf of the Federation for a Sustainable EnvironmentSouth Durban Community Environmental Alliance30 -07-2013 A Andrews

  2. Overview • Purpose : general/regulatory • Methodology of EIA • Benefits • Concerns re efficiency and effectiveness • Reports and studies • EU model • Recommendations • u • u

  3. Purpose of EIA • Integration and Best Practical Environmental Option “option providing most benefit and least harm to environment at a cost acceptable to society” (BPEO) • Involves: • balancing diverse/competing interests, eg impact minimisation and promotion of development • specialist studies • placing all info before decision maker

  4. Main points: Purpose of EIA under NEMA s 24 • Guides decision making re activities that significantly affect the environment • Gives effect to Constitution section 24: reasonable measures • Gives effect to Constitution section 33: procedurally fair administrative action PAJA 3(2)(b) : right to be heard and 6(2)(e)(iii): all relevant info must be considered

  5. EIA study process • Outsourced to EAPS • Disclosure of information • Public participation • Description of receiving environment • Issues and impacts • Alternatives and mitigation measures • Monitoring of records of decision

  6. Benefits 1 : civil society • Opportunity to influence decision making to improve environmental conditions eg air and water quality • Transparency • Accountability • Public participation • Local knowledge • Impact minimisation

  7. Benefits 2 • Improved decision making for communities living near major polluters • Eg NATREF oil refinery SASOLBERG 2000 expansion application and authorisation to emit 100 tons of SO2 • EIA submissions resulted in reduction to 32 tons of SO2 by 2005 • Targets for 2020: 5,5 tons SO2 per day

  8. Civil Society concerns 1. Insufficient time to comment; 2. inadequate disclosure of information; 3. lack of independence of EAPS; 4. no real consideration of alternatives; 5. poor drafting and voluminous documents;

  9. Efficiency and effectiveness studies • 2010 DEAT “Review of Efficiency and Effectiveness of EIA in South Africa” • Free state study : Retief et al : Screening Retief F, Coert N.J. Welman & Luke Sandham (2011):Performanceof environmental impact assessment (EIA) screening in South Africa: a comparative analysis between the 1997 and 2006 EIA regimes, South African Geographical Journal: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03736245.2011.592263 No national empirical studies on efficiency and effectiveness of EIA

  10. STUDY 1: DEAT 2010 review of EIA’s Concerns: • Costs • Delays • Quality of documents • Partiality of environmental practitioners – paid for by applicants • Access to information - sometimes limited • Monitoring and Enforcement of conditions • Aimed at getting approval not impact assessment

  11. Conclusions Notes: • not an empirical study; variety of perceptions of what is effective and efficient; not defined in the study. • The majority of EIA’s are conducted efficiently and effectively ; • Statistics are skewed by the time taken by a few projects; • Cost not a major issue except in limited case; • “immeasurable role that the existence of the EIA regulations play in the choices people make in respect to activities should also not be underestimated.”

  12. 2010 review of EIA: quality of assessed documents

  13. Recommendations • Increased govt capacity • Greater independence of EAPS • Screening for compatibility required early • Sensitive areas should be protected by specific targets and thresholds • Alternatives and cumulative impacts • Other instruments should complement EIA eg strategic ea, cost benefit analysis, risk assessment

  14. STUDY 2 : Screening: Free State Study • Screening for appropriate use of EIA’s • Lists • Thresholds for impact • sensitive areas • Free States : NEMA eia’s • BA: 64% of assessments triggered by 4 activities ie change of land use (30%) cell phone masts (14%); concentration of animals (10.4%) • EIA: 79% of activities triggered by 3 activities ie developments> 20ha (79%);filling stations (13%) and sewerage treatment (4%)

  15. Studies on EIA • 2010 review of EIA • not empirical; • based on application of criteria to 600 eia’s • Retief et al: Screening of EIA: • Free state only

  16. SCREENING CONCERNS - SA • Screening to determine whether to have an eia or basic assessment? • Use of discretion: • Administrative capacity and its impact on the use of discretion • Uneven results in different provinces • Undue influence on use of discretion

  17. EU approach to screening “Member states must adopt measures that ensure that before consent is given projects likely to have a significant effect on the environment by virtue of size, nature, location must require assessment and development consent” EU Directive 85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC

  18. EU screening (2) • ANNEX 1 Directive 97/11/EC Article 4(1) Projects in Annex 1: always require impact assessments, or basic assessments. Eg oil refineries. • ANNEX 2 Article 4(2) Projects in Annex 2: EIA decided on case by case examination or by thresholds and criteria set by Member states. • Article 4(3) Relevant criteria and thresholds to be applied in article 4(2)All decisions have to be made public

  19. Examples of Screening criteria For EU Annex 2 • Quantitative characteristics Land area, Volume of materials, Voltage, pressure, cost, capacity; eg cell phone near to schools • Characteristics Location, types of chemicals; waste disposal: eg animal feedlots, chemical tanks wetlands, • Combination of both

  20. EXAMPLES of Screening questions : (EU Annex 2) • Some examples illustrating how to use the checklist are given below. • Questions to be Considered For further guidance on factors • Briefly describe Is this likely to result in a significant effect? Yes/No/? - Why? • Brief Project Description: • Development of 500 houses adjacent to an existing rural settlement at ABCville. • 1. Will construction, operation or decommissioning of the Project involve actions which will cause physical changes in the locality • (topography, land use, changes in waterbodies,etc)? • 2. Is this likely to result in a significant effect? If yes, why • Yes. The project will involve development of a large site currently in agricultural use and crossed by a small river. Yes. Loss of agricultural land and diversion of river • 3. Will the Project involve use, storage, transport, handling or production of substances or materials which could be harmful to human health or the environment or raise concerns about actual or • perceived risks to human health? • No except in the small amounts typically used by householders • 4. Is this likely to result in a significant effect? If yes, why :No

  21. EXAMPLES of Screening questions (2): (EU Annex 2) Will the Project produce solid wastes during construction or operation or decommissioning? • Yes. Construction will require excavation of a small hill and transport and disposal or re-use of a large quantity of spoil. Is this likely to result in a significant effect? If yes, why • Yes. Transport could have significant impact on neighbouring village

  22. Assessing significance (EU Annex 2) • For questions answered yes: • Number of people affected • Change in environmental conditions • Effect over a large area • Temporary or permanent effect • Risk that environmental standards might be transgressed • Receptors affected ( fauna flora businesses) • Scarce resources affected

  23. EU: Sensitive natural areas • Special procedure for assessment of activities that have an impact on designated sensitive sites. (NATURA 2000 sites). • Covers additional activities not included under Annex1 and Annex 2

  24. Recommendations for screening : RSA • National study indicating distribution of activities require BA or EIA • Generic low impact activities subject to norms and standards and sensitivity of site • 2 lists of activities. • List 1 requires BA or EIA. • List 2 determine if EIA required based on criteria and evaluation • Mapping of highly sensitive environments where: • Listed activities that should not be authorised • Method determine if non listed activities should be subject to an eia

  25. Thank you

More Related