Socio Economic Impact Assessment - SAHRIS | SAHRA · Author/Reviewer: Anton Grobler / Anne-marie le...

© Zone Land Solutions 1 | P a g e

Centaur De Roodepoort 435 IS

DEA Ref No

Zone Land Solutions Ref SEIA – CDR

CDR SEIA Reports 31 May 2016 v4

2013

On behalf of:

Centaur De Roodepoort (Pty) Ltd

Produced for:

Cabanga Concepts CC

Produced by:

Zone Land Solutions

(Pty) Ltd

Socio Economic Impact Assessment


Report background

Commissioned by: Centaur De Roodepoort(Pty) Ltd (previously known as Tokicap (Pty) Ltd)

Prepared for: Cabanga Concepts CC

Published by: Zone Land Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Author/Reviewer: Anton Grobler / Anne-marie le Roux

Report date: 20 May 2016 v.2

To be cited as: SEIA – CDR

General declaration

I, Anton Grobler declare that:

I act as the independent specialist in this application;

I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this

results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant;

I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in

performing such work;

I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application,

including knowledge of the Act, regulations and any guidelines that have relevance

to the proposed activity;

I will comply with the Act, regulations and all other applicable legislation;

I have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material

information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of

influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the

competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be

prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority;

All the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct; and

I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of Regulation 71 and is punishable

in terms of section 24F of the Act.

Anton Grobler1

1 Abbreviated Curriculum Vitae attached


As reviewer, I, Anne-marie le Roux, declare that:

I act as the objective reviewer of this application;

I will perform the work relating to this report and findings in an objective manner;

I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in

performing such work;

I have expertise in reviewing specialist reports relevant to this application, including

knowledge of the Act, regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the

proposed activity;

I will comply with the Act, regulations and all other applicable legislation;

I have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material

information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of

influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the

competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be

prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority;

All the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct; and

I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of Regulation 71 and is punishable

in terms of section 24F of the Act.

Anne-marie le Roux2

2 Abbreviated Curriculum Vitae attached


ACRONYMS

BEE Black Economic Empowerment

CBA Cost Benefit Analysis

CDAP Community Development Action Plan

CDR Centaur De Roodepoort

CRR Comments and Response Register

dBA A-weighted decibels

DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

DEA&DP Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning

DM District Municipality

DMR Department of Mineral Resources

DPSIR Drivers-Pressure-State-Impact-Response Model

EE Employment Equity

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMPr Environmental Management Programme (report)

GDPR Gross Domestic Product of the Region

GGP Gross Geographical Product

GSDM Gert Sibande District Municipality

GVA Gross Value Added

HDI Human Development Index

I&AP Interested & Affected Parties

IDP Integrated Development Plan

IRP Integrated Resource Plan

LED/P Local Economic Development/Plan

LUPO Land Use Planning Ordinance 15 of 1985

MLM Msukaligwa Local Municipality

MF Management Forum

MPRDA Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 as amended

NEMA National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 as amended

NSDP National Spatial Development Programme

PDA Potential development Area

PSDF Provincial Sustainable Development Forum

PGDS Provincial Growth and Development Strategy

PPP Public Participation Process

RBS Revised Balanced Scenario

SA South Africa

SDF Spatial Development Framework

SEIA Socio-economic Impact Assessment

SLP Social Labour Plan

VIA Visual Impact Assessment


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposed mining right area is located approximately 5km West of Ermelo / Wesselton within

the Gert Sibande District Municipality (GSDM), specifically the Msukaligwa Local Municipality

(MLM) in the Mpumalanga Province. The total extent of the proposed mineral area is

3,258.9957 hectares.

The intended mine infrastructure will be located on portion RE 0 of the Farm De Roodepoort

435 IS. No surface disturbance is expected to occur on the remaining farm portions (these

include RE1, RE2, 3, RE4, 5, RE6, RE7, 8, RE9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 of De Roodepoort 435 IS).

Centaur De Roodepoort (CDR) appointed Cabanga Concepts CC as the independent

environmental consultant to undertake the EIA in terms of sections 24 and 24D of the National

Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act No. 107 of 1998), in conjunction with the EIA

Regulations (GN R543, Regulations 26-35 and R545) – since amended.

Zone Land Solutions (Pty) Ltd in turn has been contracted to complete the Socio-Economic

Impact Assessment (SEIA) for the CDR development.

Study Scope and Objectives

A Socio-economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) evaluates a proposed

development’s impacts on a community’s social and economic well-being in

advance of the impacts, by assessing the quality of life of persons and

communities whose environment may be affected by a proposed project.

(Burdge et al., 1995)

The key aims and objectives of the socio-economic study include:

To provide an accurate representation of the social and economic impacts for the

stakeholders surrounding the proposed mining development;

To assess the identified potential positive and negative socio-economic impacts of the

construction and operations phase (a separate application will be submitted for

closure and decommissioning phases of the proposed project);

To develop social management and monitoring measures to be implemented

throughout the construction and operational phases of the project.

Study Outline

The socio-economic impact drivers and pressures were determined based on the different

sources of research conducted for the CDR development. The outline includes the structure

of this report with the different sections for easy reference. The outline also creates context for

the most important part of the paper: a summary of the SEIA drivers and pressures, concluded


from the primary and secondary research conducted, which is presented in SECTION 3 of this

report.

Structure of the Study

Apart from the Executive Summary, the report is structured as follows, using the DPSIR Model

(see Figure 5 below) for socio-economic assessments.

Section 1 SEIA Methodology Defining the methodology and models used to assess the socio-

economic impacts.

Section 2 SEIA Drivers &

Pressures

To confirm the Socio-economic issues relevant to the proposed CDR

development in reference to the receiving environment, the

Scoping Report, the PPP and the site visits.

Section 3 Socio-Economic

Impact Assessment

This section assesses the nature and significance of social and

economic impacts throughout the construction and operational

phases of the development.

Section 4 Social Response &

Mitigation

This section documents mitigation measures and recommendations

for inclusion in the EMP.

Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Frameworks

The SEIA aims to documents social and economic concerns associated with the development

through the application of listed frameworks and models.

a. Social impact model

This report uses the Driver-Pressure-State-Impacts-Response (DPSIR) model to explore socio-

economic issues in the National Environmental Management Act (No 107 of 1998) – which has

since been amended (henceforth referred to as NEMA). Each section in the report is made up

of a number of indicators, covering key issues related to each of the model variables. Where

appropriate, the report shows the interconnections between the variables and issues.

b. Cost benefit valuation

By completing the assessment tables and documenting the findings (see SECTION 3), the aim

is to give an environmental cost-benefit valuation context, which will not only weigh up the

immediate tangible economic returns derived from projects, but also make an assessment of

the longer-term socio-economic impact. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) attributes value to social

variables and the environment through looking at the overall significance of impacts and the

cost of reversibility.


c. Ethical considerations

In assessing the overall confidence level in the impact assessment, the Velasquez’s (1985)

ethical framework questions ensure that the focus is on “doing the right thing” and the answers

thus guide the confidence level. This model uses a holistic perspective to assess:

The social and environmental costs and benefits

The rewards and burdens for stakeholders

The effect on the rights of stakeholders

The degree of care shown towards the environment and stakeholders

Baseline Socio-Economic Environment

The impacted area has specific salient socio-economic characteristics which are dealt with in

more detail in the impact assessment tables. For introduction purposes, the baseline

descriptions serve as a reverence point for the CDR proposed development.

Description of the proposed CDR development

Project Centaur De Roodepoort 435 IS

Residential areas/Townships adjacent to

proposed development

Ermelo / Wesselton

Closest town Ermelo, Mpumalanga Province

Local Municipality Msukaligwa Local Municipality

District Municipality Gert Sibande District Municipality

Developer Centaur De Roodepoort (Pty) Ltd

Properties included in mineral rights Portions RE0, RE1, RE2, RE4, 5, RE6, RE7, 8, RE9, 10, 11,

12, 13, 14 of De Roodepoort 435 IS

Proposed mining area 3,258.9957 ha

Proposed activity area +130ha


Picture by Zone Land Solutions: Signage indicating Farm De Roodepoort opposite proposed development site.

Overview of the Area

Locally the coal seams occur within the Vryheid Formation of the Ecca Group of which the

Pietermaritzburg and Vryheid Formations are found in the Ermelo Coalfield. The Ermelo

Coalfield stretches from Carolina to Standerton and Wakkerstroom in the Mpumalanga

Province. Coal qualities in mineable seams are generally good. The De Roodepoort Mining

Right Area falls on the boundary of the Ermelo Coalfields.

The information below is taken from Statistics South Africa (Census, 2011) as well as the Socio-

economic profile of Msukaligwa (MP302) (March 2015) and summarises the relevant

demographics of the Local Municipality:

i. Household Structures, Services and Health

The MLM covers an area of 6 016km² and includes the Breyten, Chrissiesmeer, Davel,

Ermelo, and Lothair towns.

The Municipality has a population of 149 378 people, of which 89% are black African,

9% are white, 1% are Indian/Asian, and 0.5% are coloured. The other population groups

make up the remaining 0.4%.

Youth of up to 34 years - 69.1% of MLM’s population.

There is a steady current (since 2001) and a forecasted population growth in the MLM.

Number of households 40 932 (3.8 people per household) – 15.0% of GS’s number of

households.

Female headed households 37.8% and child headed (10-17 years) households 0.6 % in

2011.


HIV prevalence rate of pregnant women 34.4% in 2012 - improving since 2010 (47%)

and 2011 (47.4%).

Reported TB cases also down from 707 in 2010 to 526 in 2011.

ii. Employment and Economic Activities

36 971 are employed whereas 5 311 are discouraged work-seekers.

Unemployment rate of 26.8% (strict definition) in 2011 – 15 267 unemployed as a

percentage of the EAP of 56 965 – decreasing trend (estimated 2013 unemployment

rate by IHS Global Insight 24.0%).

Unemployment rate for females 36.2% and males 19.4% - youth unemployment rate of

34.5%.

A sharp decline in employment has been reported in agriculture in the MLM, and a

slight decrease in the mining sector. In 2011, 11% of all individuals employed in the MLM

were in the mining sector, compared to the 4% in mining.

The MLM has seen a large decrease in overall primary sector employment. All of the

other employment sectors have however indicated an overall growth.

Community services, finance, mining and trade should contribute the most to

economic growth in the period 2013-2018, according to the GSDM Socio-economic

profile of the MLM.

iii. Assessment of Potential Socio-Economic Impacts & Management Measures

The following depiction and table is a summary of the socio-economic impacts identified and

assessed in this document. This list aims to capture the salient concerns and opportunities the

CDR development may afford its stakeholders, as at the time of the publication of the

research.

a. Summary of SEIA outcomes

Social Issue Impact Type Assessment Possible Mitigation

Air quality (including dust & pollution) Health Impact Moderate to

Low (Negative)

Yes

Noise pollution (including blasting &

vibration) Health Impact

Moderate to

Low (Negative)

Yes

HIV/Aids, Cholera, Flu mutations,

Tuberculosis, Sexually transmitted

infections

Health Impact Moderate to

Low (Negative)

Yes

Close proximity to adjacent agricultural

property

Health & Safety

Impact

Moderate to low

(Negative)

Yes

Impact on land use and resulting land

value

Economic

Impact

Moderate

(Negative)

No

Employment opportunities Economic

Impact

Moderate

(Positive)

Yes

Local/ regional business industry Economic

Impact

Moderate

(Positive)

Yes

Aesthetic and ‘sense of place’ i.e. tourism

and lifestyle

Socio-cultural

Impact

Moderate to

Low (Negative)

Yes


Perceptions & attitudes towards the CDR Social Impact Moderate to low

(Negative)

Yes

Impact on roads infrastructure Traffic impact Moderate to

Low (Negative)

Yes

Impact on MLM planning & development

(SDF)

Socio-economic

Impact

Moderate to low

(Positive)

Yes

b. Cumulative Impacts

The EIA Regulation 35 (l)(i) provide the context to cumulative impacts.

“Cumulative impact, in relation to an activity, means the impact of an activity

that in itself may not be significant but may become significant when added to

the existing and potential impacts eventuating from similar or diverse activities

or undertakings in the area.”

The cumulative impact on this development was measured within the regional context of the

MLM.

c. No-Development Option

The no-development option does not change the status quo and thus will have no impact on

the social impact variables e.g. local economy or the geographical landscape. The projected

positive economic impacts which the project would have brought about will also then be lost.

The no-development option will result in the sterilisation of the coal resource. This would reduce

coal resources for power generation which is currently a major issue in South Africa, with limited

viable base load power generation alternatives. The no-go option would also prevent the

socio-economic benefits, including the need for job creation, increased socio-economic

activity and social upliftment. A no-development option would also suggest a loss in local

business revenue through the multiplier effects.

d. Environmental Management Plan

The response to the socio-economic impact assessment is the EMP which will aim to manage

and mitigate the socio-economic impacts the CDR development may have on the various

stakeholders. The detail on this is captured in this report in SECTION 4.

e. Assumptions and Limitations

This assessment was carried out with the information available to the specialist at the time of

executing the study, within the available timeframe and budget. The content of the research

was derived from the following sources:

A review of key planning and policy documents pertaining to the area;

Semi-structured interviews with a sample of interested and affected parties (see

Appendix B & C);

A review of social and economic issues associated with similar developments;


Legislative frameworks;

A review of relevant literature on social and economic impacts;

The experience of the specialist with similar projects in Africa.

All effort has been made to ensure the information is correct at the time of compiling this

report:

The sources consulted are not exhaustive and additional information which might

strengthen arguments, or contradict information in this report, may exist.

As the PPP is not finalised, this study can only include current stakeholders and

concerns, and excludes those that have not yet been identified and listed as I&AP’s.

The specialist did endeavour to take an evidence-based approach in the compilation

of this report and did not intentionally exclude information relevant to the assessment.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: SEIA METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 14

1. Technical Project Overview ............................................................................................................... 14

2. Site Location and Description ............................................................................................................ 16

3. Fit with Policy and Planning ................................................................................................................ 17

Constitution of South Africa, 1996 and common law ........................................................................... 17

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998) – since amended .............. 17

Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Act (Act 49of 2008) ........................ 17

Mine Health and Safety Act, 1996 (Act 29 of 1996) .............................................................................. 17

National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) ............................................................................................ 17

NEMA: Air Quality Act (Act 39 of 2004) .................................................................................................. 18

MLM 2015-2018 ......................................................................................................................................... 18

4. Framework for SEIA .............................................................................................................................. 19

5. DPSIR Model .......................................................................................................................................... 19

5.1 Determination of significance of impacts.................................................................................. 20

5.2 Impact rating system .................................................................................................................... 21

5.3 Status Quo on the CDR development location ........................................................................ 21

5.4 Socio-demographic profile ......................................................................................................... 22

5.5 Institutional and governance framework .................................................................................. 31

5.6 Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 32

SECTION 2: SEIA DRIVERS & PRESSURES ................................................................................................... 33

1. Defining the Scope of the Study ....................................................................................................... 33

2. Salient Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 34

2.1 Cumulative Impact ...................................................................................................................... 35

2.2 No-Development Option ............................................................................................................. 35

2.3 Summary of Issues and Concerns from the PPP ........................................................................ 35

SECTION 3: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT ............................................................................. 38

1. Background Context ........................................................................................................................... 38

2. Potential impacts during the Construction and Operations phase ........................................... 38

3. Indicators for a Cost-Benefit Analysis ............................................................................................... 40

4. Impact Model ....................................................................................................................................... 41

5. Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 41

6. SEIA Impact Tables ............................................................................................................................... 42

7. Confidence Level ................................................................................................................................ 52

7.1 Probability rating ........................................................................................................................... 52


7.2 Ethical consideration .................................................................................................................... 52

7.3 Cumulative Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 53

7.4 SEIA Summary ................................................................................................................................ 53

SECTION 4: SOCIAL RESPONSE & MITIGATION ............................................................................................. 54

1. Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................................ 54

2. Environmental Management Plan .................................................................................................... 56

2.1 2014 EIA Regulations .................................................................................................................... 56

2.2 The Social EMP .............................................................................................................................. 56

2.3 Out of Scope for the CDR SEIA .................................................................................................... 58

3. Recommendations and Conclusion ................................................................................................ 59

Appendix A: MEASUREMENT CRITERIA 60

Appendix B: INFORMATION SOURCES 63

Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................................ 63

Internet sources .................................................................................................................................................. 64

Primary research sources consulted for SEIA (not exhaustive) .................................................................. 64

Appendix C: CRR SUMMARY OF ISSUES ARISING FROM THE PPP 65

APPENDIX D: CV’s 66

ABBREVIATED CV – Anton Grobler .................................................................................................................. 66

ABBREVIATED CV – Anne-marie le Roux ........................................................................................................ 67

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Municipal wide SDF ................................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 2: Local setting of CDR .................................................................................................................................. 15

Figure 3: Proposed Access to the CDR site ........................................................................................................... 16

Figure 4: Opposite Proposed Access looking towards EAST .............................................................................. 16

Figure 5: UNEP D-P-S-I-R Model (2006) .................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 6: Informal sector in Msukaligwa ................................................................................................................. 22

Figure 7: Population Group No. of People % - MLM (MP302) ............................................................................. 22

Figure 8: Population Group No. of Households % - MLM (MP302) ..................................................................... 23

Figure 9: Annualised growth rates per LM (%) ...................................................................................................... 24

Figure 10: Projected growth for the MLM up to 2025 .......................................................................................... 25

Figure 11: Population per Enumerator Area type ................................................................................................ 26

Figure 12: Examples of economic activity in MLM ............................................................................................... 27

Figure 13: Employment per economic activity from 1995 – 2011 ..................................................................... 29

Figure 14: Proportionality in employment per economic activity in 2011 ....................................................... 30

Figure 15: Percentage growth per sector per annum, from 1995 – 2011 ........................................................ 31

Figure 16: The Gert Sibande District Municipality forms part infrastructure in MLM ....................................... 32

Figure 17: Methodological approach to SEIA ...................................................................................................... 33

Figure 18: Phases of the EMP ................................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 19: Stakeholder Influence Analysis .............................................................................................................. 37

Figure 20: Summary of SEI outcomes ...................................................................................................................... 55


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Labour force analysis of MLM .................................................................................................................. 28

Table 2: Proposed employment summary CDR ................................................................................................... 39

Table 3: Summary of impact significance ............................................................................................................. 42

Table 4: Socio-economic impacts related to air quality .................................................................................... 42

Table 5: Socio-economic impacts related to noise............................................................................................. 43

Table 6: Socio-economic impacts related to disease ........................................................................................ 44

Table 7: Socio-economic impacts related to neighbouring residential development ................................ 45

Table 8: Socio-economic impacts related to propery ........................................................................................ 46

Table 9: Socio-economic impacts related to employment ............................................................................... 47

Table 10: Socio-economic impacts related to local industry and business .................................................... 48

Table 11: Socio-economic impacts related to lifestyle ....................................................................................... 49

Table 12: Socio-economic impacts related to perceptions towards the development .............................. 49

Table 13:Socio-economic impacts related to roads ........................................................................................... 50

Table 14: Socio-economic impacts related to future local development ..................................................... 51

Table 15: Summary of SEIA Pressures & Drivers...................................................................................................... 54

Table 16: Mitigation measures ................................................................................................................................. 57


SECTION 1: SEIA METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this section is to provide a description of the technical aspects, the

methodology and models used to assess the socio-economic impacts.

The technical project overview, site location and description, fit with policy and planning,

framework for SEIA as well as status quo on the CDR development are some of the aspects

presented in this section. The following information is inter alia presented as part of this section.

1. Technical Project Overview

South Africa produces in excess of 255 million tonnes of coal (2011 estimate) and consumes

almost three quarters of that domestically. Around 77% of South Africa's energy needs are

directly derived from coal and 92% of coal consumed on the African continent is produced in

South Africa. South Africa’s coal reserves lie in 18 coal fields. Historically the Vaal coalfields

were the first to be intensively exploited, hosting a number of coal fired power stations as well

as steel and heavy industry. (http://www.africoal.co.za/coal-mining-in-south-africa-2/)

The largest coalfields are found in a continuous expanse from Mpumalanga into Kwazulu

Natal. More recently, coalfields to the North (Waterberg and Soutpansberg) have been

opened up. South Africa has approximately 65 collieries, ranging from among the largest in

the world to small scale producers. A handful of large-scale producers supply coal primarily to

electricity and synthetic fuel producers. About 51% of South African coal mining is done

underground and about 49% is produced by open-cast methods. (www.bothends.org)

The concerned coal seams occur within the Vryheid Formation of the Ecca Group, of which

the Pietermaritzburg and Vryheid Formations are found in the Ermelo Coalfield. The Ermelo

Coalfield stretches from Carolina to Standerton and Wakkerstroom in Mpumalanga Province.

It is proposed that the footprint of mining infrastructure, development and associated activities

will be contained on the RE0 of the farm De Roodepoort. No surface disturbance is expected

on the remaining farm portions (these include RE1, RE2, 3, RE4, 5, RE6, RE7, 8, RE9, 10, 11, 12, 13,

14 of De Roodepoort 435 IS); with the exception of ventilation shafts - local setting indicated in

Figure 2.


Figure 1: Municipal wide SDF

(Source: http://www.msukaligwa.gov.za/SDF.htm)

Figure 2: Local setting of CDR

http://www.msukaligwa.gov.za/SDF.htm


2. Site Location and Description

According to the Municipality’s SDF and confirmed by means of a site visit and telephonic

consultations, the majority of the area is used for agricultural purposes, largely grazing with

some cultivation.

The Richards Bay Coal Terminal rail line bisects the property, and a number of sidings are

located within the area. The N17 connecting Bethal and Ermelo traverses the northern portions,

whilst the Eskom power lines traverse the north eastern portion of the mining right area. (CDR

Scoping Report, 2015)

Figure 3: Proposed Access to the CDR site

Figure 4: Opposite Proposed Access looking towards EAST


3. Fit with Policy and Planning

The legislative environment holds many governance frameworks, which at their core aim to

‘do the right thing.’ Although most of the social impacts are hard to quantify, the capacity

and willingness to regulate environmental and social impacts, is possible with a cross-section

of policies chosen as most appropriate to the socio-economic environment of the CDR

development.

Constitution of South Africa, 1996 and common law

Mines have to comply with the South African constitutional and common law by conducting

their operational and closure activities with due diligence and care for the rights of others.

Section 24(a) of the Constitution states that everyone has the right to an environment, which

is not harmful to his or her health and well-being. This supersedes all other legislation.

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998) – since amended

This Act provides the framework and principles for sustainable development and sets national

norms and standards for Integrated Environmental Management (section 24) where all spheres

of Government and all organs of state must co-operate, consult and support one another.

Section 28 of the Act also imposes a Duty of Care and remediation of environmental damage

on any person who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of

the environment. Furthermore, sections 32 and 33 of the Act provides for legal standing to

enforce environmental laws and private prosecution respectively.

Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Act (Act 28 of 2002)

This Act provides statutory requirements enforcing environmental protection, the

management of the environmental impacts and the rehabilitation of the affected

environment of prospecting and mining in South Africa. Other legislation such as the NEMA,

the National Water Act, 1998, and the National Nuclear Regulatory Act, 1999 and other

applicable legislation provide, inter alia, further controlling measures.

Mine Health and Safety Act, 1996 (Act 29 of 1996)

The Mine Health and Safety Act, 1996 is administered by the Mine Health and Safety

Inspectorate of the Department. The Act provides for protection of the health and safety of

employees and other persons at mines and, therefore promotes a culture of health and safety,

as well as the enforcement of health and safety measures for mines specifically.

National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998)

The purpose of the National Water Act, 1998 is to ensure that the nation's water resources are

protected, used, developed, conserved, managed and controlled in ways that take into

account, amongst other factors: Meeting the basic human needs of present and future

generations.


NEMA: Air Quality Act (Act 39 of 2004)

The obligations contained in terms of this Act with respect to the prevention and control of

dust pollution.

MLM 2015-2018

The MLM is an important stakeholder for the proposed development. Based on the Town

Planning and Townships Ordinance Act (Act 15/1986); and the Spatial Planning and Land Use

Management (Act 16/2013), the alignment of the development will be assessed in line with

the MLM’s future plans in Table 14 (p.54).

Community services, finance, mining and trade should contribute the most to economic

growth in the period 2013-2018 in accordance with Socio-economic profile of Msukaligwa

(MP302) (March 2015). Leading industries in terms of percentage contribution to the MLM’s

economy are community services (22.2%), trade (20.5%) and mining (18.2%).

According to the re-based and revised GDP figures of StatsSa, mining is the largest industry of

Mpumalanga with a contribution of 25% to the cumulative provincial economy other large

industries with contributions of more than 12% include finance, manufacturing, trade &

community services (2010 constant prices).

Government departments – mineral and energy, water affairs and local government –

operate with progressive legislation, but it is the specialist’s opinion that capacity for

monitoring, servicing, and partnering with mining and other big industries is constrained.

Pressure is mounting to act because the future wellbeing of the nation depends crucially on

managing natural resources. While legislation is in place for a stakeholder driven catchment

management system, this has been slow to take effect.

Other Important Guidelines

The Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP)

is one Environmental Departments that has developed a set of best practice guidelines, which

was taken into account in the undertaking of the EIA, in line with NEMA. The Environmental

Impact Assessment Guideline and Information Document Series (August 2010) have been

referred to where relevant.

There are also a number of guidelines published by the Department of Environmental Affairs

(DEA) which particularly relate to specialists involved in environmental assessments. The

relevant guidelines adhered to here include the following:

Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism (DEAT) Socio-economic Impact

Assessments (2006)

Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) Guideline

for Involving Economists in EIA Processes (2005)

DEAT Cost Benefit Analysis (2004)

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for South Africa (2010-2030)


4. Framework for SEIA

The EIA methodology assists in evaluating the overall effect of a proposed activity on the

environment. This is undertaken using information that is available to the environmental

practitioner through the process of the evaluation of predicted impacts by assessment of the

significance of the impacts. The D-P-S-I-R model is used globally as a best practice in

environmental analytics and impact assessments.

5. DPSIR Model

Figure 5: UNEP D-P-S-I-R Model (2006)

The D-P-S-I-R model was developed by the European Environmental Agency to improve the

socio-economic and socio-cultural aspects of environmental reporting. This is a systems

thinking approach to complex and often paradoxical socio-economic concerns which

enables the study of environmental indicators in order to explore causality (drivers, pressure)

and consequences (state, impact):


Drivers and Pressures - The social, demographic and economic developments in societies and

the corresponding changes in lifestyles, overall levels of consumption and production patterns.

In particular drivers are often defined as socio-economic sectors that fulfil basic human needs

such as clean air, water and food. The socio-economic issues identified in the SEIA Impact

Summary in the EXEUTIVE SUMMARY section 5.a. refers.

State - The pressures exerted by society may lead to unintentional or intentional changes in the

state of the ecosystem. Usually these changes are unwanted and are seen as negative

damage for example drainage, degradation, etc. The pressures exerted by society may

directly impact the ecosystem, such as pollution.

Impact - Changes in the quality and functioning of the ecosystem have an impact on the

welfare or well-being of humans through the provision of ecosystem services. Ecosystem goods

and services are ecosystem functions or processes that directly or indirectly benefit human

social or economic drivers, or have the potential to do so in the future. Environmental change

may positively or negatively influence human wellbeing for example measuring the

significance of a change in agricultural production on a local community. SECTION 3: SOCIO-

ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT refers.

Response - Humans make decisions in response to the impacts on ecosystem services or their

perceived value. Responses are actions taken by groups or individuals in society and

government to prevent, compensate or adapt to changes in the state of the environment by

seeking to mitigate or even to ‘do nothing’. The social response and recommendations in

SECTION 4: SOCIAL RESPONSE & MITIGATION refers.

5.1 Determination of significance of impacts

Significance is determined through a synthesis of impact characteristics which include context

and intensity of an impact. Context refers to the geographical scale i.e. site, local, national or

global whereas Intensity is defined by the severity of the impact e.g. the magnitude of

deviation from background conditions, the size of the area affected, the duration of the

impact and the overall probability of occurrence. Significance is calculated in line with the

DEA&DP Regulations. See APPENDIX A: MEASUREMENT CRITERIA.

Describing the nature of the impact, this may be positive, negative or neutral. The rest of the

calculation refers to the following variables:

Extent of the impact

Probability of the impact occurring

Duration of the impact

Intensity or magnitude of the impact

The reversibility of the impact

Cumulative effect

The significance is calculated by combining the criteria in the following formula:


E = Extent

D = Duration

M = Magnitude

R = Reversibility

P = Probability

Significance = (Extent + Duration + Magnitude + Reversibility) x Probability

Significance is an indication of the importance of the impact in terms of both physical extent

and time scale, and therefore indicates the level of mitigation required. The total number of

points scored for each impact indicates the level of significance of the impact.

5.2 Impact rating system

Impact assessment must take account of the nature, scale and duration of effects on the

environment whether such effects are positive (beneficial) or negative (detrimental). Each

issue / impact is also assessed according to the project stages:

Construction (which includes the planning phase)

Operational (which includes the decommissioning phase)

Overall cumulative impact

The rating system is applied to the potential impact on the receiving environment and includes

an objective evaluation of the mitigation of the impact. Impacts have been consolidated into

one rating. In assessing the significance of each issue the criteria (including an allocated point

system) was used and is outlined in more detail in APPENDIX A.

5.3 Status Quo on the CDR Development Location

In order to evaluate the potential impact of the CDR development on the current locality, it is

important to give a detailed description of the study area. The Scoping Report and PPP findings

were complemented by a site visit. Further to that, Census 2001 and 2011 datasets were used

in order to maintain compatibility and consistency in assessment of the historical, current data

and future projections. Projections made by the GS Municipal District Council (SOCIO-

ECONOMIC PROFILES, MARCH 2015) were also included in the analysis.

The approach followed in the analysis of the indicators was to describe and analyse the data

on local municipal level (Msukaligwa [MP302]). It is however important to mention that local

economies and demographic areas in general are open and it is practically impossible to

isolate as a unit of analysis. The approach therefore was, where appropriate, to do the analysis

on a comparative basis by comparing the municipality with the profile of the DM, the

economy or demographics of Mpumalanga and also with the broader context of the national

economy.

The ultimate objective of this report is to analyse the population (people) of a municipal area

since the people provide labour and entrepreneurship for production and also consume the

output of production. Demography does not necessarily form part of economic analysis but


needs to be taken into account as the population forms the basis of all economic activity in

the area.

5.4 Socio-demographic profile

I

Figure 6: Informal sector in Msukaligwa

5.4.1 Population size

The size of the population and in particular the number of households are some of the most

important determinants of the needs of the inhabitants. These needs are expressed in the

demand for infrastructural and social services and the potential on the extent of involvement

in economic activities. It also forms the basis from which all other calculations are made.

Figure 7: Population Group No. of People % - MLM (MP302)

Black population , 88.12%

Coloured population , 0.6%

Asian population, 1.12%

White population , 9.85%


The largest population group is Black, comprising of over 88% (n=131 625) of the municipality’s

total population as estimated in 2011. The second largest group is the White population which

accounts for close to 10% (n=14 707), while the Coloured population makes up less than 1%

(n=892) of the total population; and the Asian and other population 1% (1 678) of the total

population of this municipality (N=149 378).

Figure 8: Population Group No. of Households % - MLM (MP302)

The majority of the households in the municipality are from the Black population (89%, n=36

473), followed by the White population which accounts for close to 9% (n=3 474). The Coloured

population as well as the Asian population in terms of households in the municipality (including

“others”) are significant smaller in representation.

5.4.2 Population growth rate

The growth in population as well as population growth rate projections are of the utmost

importance for planning purposes. A negative or below-average growth rate is indicative of

an out-migration of people – normally due to a lack of economic growth and the concomitant

loss of job opportunities in the municipal area. The reverse is true for an above-average growth

rate. In order to analyse the migration of people between municipal areas (within the GS

district), the population growth of the three local municipalities over time is depicted in Figure

9. The annual growth rate is calculated by looking at the incremental increase/decrease from

the 2001 to 2011 census years expressed as a percentage, over the number of observation

years in order to get an annual average.

89.11%

0.46%

0.93%

9.14%

0.36%

Black population

Coloured population

Asian population

White population

Other


Figure 9: Annualised growth rates per LM (%)

Figure 9 compares the total growth in population of the three Municipalities within the GSMD,

Mpumalanga. Albert Luthuli shows a slowly declining growth rate which is currently around 1%.

According to the GSDM Socio-Economic Profiles (March 2015) this pattern is mostly the same

for both the province and the district. The three local municipalities show some very interesting

growth patterns. From 2001 to 2008 the municipality’s growth rate has declined rapidly from

about 4% to -2%. This decline is a characteristic of modern rural municipalities in South Africa.

This can show to large majorities of people migrating to other areas in search of employment

opportunities. However, since 2009 the growth rate has improved and in 2011 was calculated

at about 1.5%.

5.4.3 Future expected growth

Population and household growth is one element that determines the long-term demand for

goods and services. Based on historical population figures from 2000 to 2011, a trend analysis

was done for the municipality. The trend analysis is based on historical data. This data was used

to determine the municipal growth rate and extrapolate the figures to give a projected growth

for the municipality up to 2025.

-0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

Msukaligwa

Municipality Albert Luthuli

Municipality Mkhondo

Municipality


Figure 10: Projected growth for the MLM up to 2025

In terms of the projected population growth the following should be noted:

The growth rate was calculated at 1.5%. This is similar to other rural municipalities in the country.

The general trend indicates that the municipality’s population will increase at a steady but

slow pace. The priorities, policies and decisions of the local and DM can alter the situation. This

cannot necessarily be predicted.

5.4.4 Spatial aspects of the population

This section investigates how the population of the municipality is distributed and in what type

of areas people live. This helps to visualise the data presented previously in this section. The

figure below shows the population per enumerator Area type in the municipality.

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

2001 2011 2015 2020 2025


Figure 11: Population per Enumerator Area type

The data shows that the municipality’s population is largely formal in nature with little informal

and traditional population.

5.4.5 Economic profile

Economic drivers relate to the way in which people make a living and the economic activities

within that society. The employment rate and general living standard are good indicators of

the community’s economic wellbeing.

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

99565

17386

29470

207 1813 582 144 210

No Traditional residence and Small holdings reported


Figure 12: Examples of economic activity in MLM

In the analysis of the labour and employment situation in municipal areas, it is necessary to

focus attention on the size and spatial distribution of the labour force. Secondly, the

characteristics of the labour market should be analysed. To this end, it is necessary to examine

the supply of labour, which is derived from figures on the economically active population in a

municipal area. The demand for labour, on the other hand, is an indication of employment

opportunities, which are determined by the economic structure of an area along with the level

and growth in economic activities. Unemployment, and in a sense transfrontier commuting,

provides an indication of the difference between supply and demand and implies that

equilibrium in the labour market necessitates both expansion of economic activity and the

curtailment of population growth.


Table 1: Labour force analysis of MLM

Table 1 describes the labour force of the MLM that will be directly affected by the proposed

development. According to the 2011 the MLM has 64 560. From the data is can be seen that

the majority of the population are employed, with the majority of the employment in the formal

sector. It should however be noted that the values can be slightly skew since the size of the

informal sector, which includes subsistence agriculture that is highly applicable in the

concerned municipal areas, is difficult to establish with a reasonable degree of accuracy and

can easily be under-estimated. One reason for this is that people involved in informal activity

often classify themselves as unemployed. Obtaining the participation rates, involves

calculating the labour force or the economically active population relative to the potential

labour force, (i.e. the population in the age group 15 to 64 years). These rates reflect the

percentages of the said population that are actually economically active. Unemployment

rate of MLM significantly lower than other local municipalities in GS district, with 20.80%

compared to 39.24%, and 47.57% of the Albert Luthuli and Mkhondo local municipalities

respectively.

5.4.6 Employment per sector

Figure 13 below shows the employment/workforce per economic activity for the MLM over a

16-year interval. The structure of employment and the extent of the link between employment

and the level of economic activity are important, especially in terms of a socio-economic

impact analysis for a major new development.

LABOUR FORCE

Includes the employed, the unemployed, and the people active in the informal sector

Msukaligwa local municipality (2011)

Economically active: 64 560

FORMAL EMPLOYED

Includes the persons in paid employment in the formal sector of the economy .

Total formal: 26 104

Formal - highly skilled: 4 402

Formal - skilled: 10 739

Formal - semi and unskilled: 10 963

FORMAL EMPLOYED

Includes the persons in paid employment in the formal sector of the economy .

Total formal: 26 104

Formal - highly skilled: 4 402

Formal - skilled: 10 739

Formal - semi and unskilled: 10 963

INFORMAL EMPLOYMENT

Includes all persons active in the informal sector of the

economy.

Informal: 10 867

INFORMAL EMPLOYMENT

Includes all persons active in the informal sector of the

economy.

Informal: 10 867

UNEMPLOYMENT

Includes persons actively looking for a job but who are

not in any type of paid employment.

Unemployed: 9 707

Unemployment rate: 20.8%

UNEMPLOYMENT

Includes persons actively looking for a job but who are

not in any type of paid employment.

Unemployed: 9 707

Unemployment rate: 20.8%


Figure 13: Employment per economic activity from 1995 – 2011

The most noticeable is the differential growth rates in employment creation between the

economic activities. In MLM there has been a decrease in employment in the agriculture

economic activity. The implication is important since these workers are jobless and have to

leave farms. They usually end up in informal settlements on the urban periphery.

From Figure 13 it can be seen that the overall employment figures for the MLM remained

relatively constant over the past 16 years. There are however a few aspects that need to be

discussed.

The MLM has seen a large decrease in overall primary sector employment. All of the other

employment sectors have however indicated an overall growth and it is assumed that most of

the people who lost their jobs in the primary sector got employed in the secondary and tertiary

sector, which showed strong increases, with the exception of the construction industry. There

is however a slight decrease in overall employment.

Employment is not a static issue and changes in employment are very important, and can

shed light on the development of the municipalities over the past few years. The tables below

give a comparison between the employment situation in 1995 and in 2011 for each of the local

municipalities under consideration.

Figure 14 shows the proportional employment distribution per economic activity in 2011. These

figures are expressed in terms of the distribution of employment across the economic activities.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

1995 2001 2005 2011

Agriculture

Mining

Manufacturing

Utilities

Construction

Trade

Transport

Business

Community

servicesGeneral

Linear

(Agriculture)


Figure 14: Proportionality in employment per economic activity in 2011

The most noticeable aspect is that the largest economic activities are not necessarily the

biggest contributors to employment creation. Trade reported the highest employment

proportion with 32%, followed the general category (15%), agriculture (11%), business (7%) and

Transport with 7%. Mining as economic activity employs only 4% of the employed people in the

MLM area.

5.4.7 Changes in employment

The primary sector of the economy involves changing natural resources into primary products.

Most products from this sector are considered raw materials for other industries. Major

businesses in this sector normally include agriculture, agribusiness, fishing, forestry and all mining

and quarrying industries.

The secondary sector generally takes the output of the primary sector and manufactures

finished goods or where they are suitable for use by other businesses, for export, or sale to

domestic consumers. This sector is often divided into light industry and heavy industry. The

sector is made up of manufacturing, electricity, gas, water, and construction.

The tertiary or services sector consists of the "soft" parts of the economy, i.e. activities where

people offer their knowledge and time to improve productivity, performance, potential, and

sustainability. The basic characteristic of this sector is the production of services instead of end

products. Businesses in this sector include wholesale and retail trade, catering and

accommodation, transport, storage, communication, finance, insurance, real estate, business

services, community, social and personal services, and general government.

Agriculture, 11%

Mining, 4%

Manufacturing,

4%

Utilities, 2%

Construction,

5%

Trade, 32%

Transport, 6%

Business,

7%

Community

services

4%

General, 15%


Figure 15: Percentage growth per sector per annum, from 1995 – 2011

It is this clear from the figure above that the growth in primary sector declined significantly

compared to the secondary and tertiary sectors. This might also be a contributing factor in the

decline in employment in the mining and agriculture economic activities from 1995 to 2011.

5.5 Institutional and governance framework

Institutional and legal governance refer to the role and efficiency of the local authority and

other service providers in terms of their capacity to deliver a quality and uninterrupted service

to local communities. Job creation and social development are priorities according to GSDM

Socio-Economic Profiles (March 2015), and the GSDM Intergated Developmen Plan (IDP) 2012-

2013 to 2016-2017. Specific challenges stipulated are (i) high proportion of population aged 0-

34 years (youth); (ii) basic service delivery challenges – concern about electricity, water

(access, quality & waste water services) and housing; (iii) relatively high poverty rate and

inequality; (iv) relatively low economic growth, and (v) reduce unemployment, poverty and

inequality (MEGDP & NDP).

Recommendations to alleviate these concerns that are related and could be stimulated by

the CDR development are for instance:

Resources channelled to youth development – importance of skills development and

creation of jobs.

Implementation of a job creation strategy targeting youth, women and people with

disabilities.

Faster roll-out of basic services and municipal infrastructure.

Importance of poverty strategy – emphasis on job creation - impact positively on

reduction of poverty.

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

Primary sectorSecondary sector

Tertiary sector

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Primary sector Secondary sector Tertiary sector

Percentage growth -2.48 6.78 4.04


Importance of attracting new businesses through an investment strategy & active

Business/LED forum.

Identification of key industries/sectors to drive the economy sustainably into the future.

The MLM has however no jurisdiction over the administration and granting of mineral rights to

stimulate economic development, job creation and the development of people. The MLM

does have nevertheless the right to be consulted on each application that will affect it (Spatial

Planning And Land Use Management Act, 16 of 2013). The municipality is however also obliged

to facilitate economic and mining development processes by building networks and

promoting good working relationships in the sector. The GSDM IDP 2012-2013 to 2016-2017

stipulates that 140 000 additional jobs in mining should be created by 2020, and 200 000 jobs

by 2030, not counting the downstream and side stream effects.

5.6 Summary

The key socio-economic findings as a result of the study conducted on MLM, as well as the

greater GSDM indicate that it is, compared to other local municipalities functioning well in

terms of growth, comparatively lower unemployment, reducing cases of HIV and TB. The shift

in the employment of people from the primary to the secondary sectors is significant, with a

clear decrease in employment in the mining and specifically the agriculture sectors. Job

creation as well as economic growth of the District as well as the Municipality has been

identified as priorities by the Local Government. The recommendations made by the Local

authority could be complemented by the CDR development.

The above trends form a brief overview of the receiving socio-economic environment, and

are by no means exhaustive. This documented status quo, as well as previous CDR research

published, serves as baseline data against which the projected impact will be measured.

These changes to the receiving environment will either be deemed positive or neutral, or will

have to be managed and/or mitigated as a result of any negative impact.

Figure 16: The Gert Sibande District Municipality forms part infrastructure in MLM


SECTION 2: SEIA DRIVERS & PRESSURES

The purpose of this section is to confirm the socio-economic issues relevant to the proposed

CDR, in reference to the Scoping Report (2015); the PPP; the site visit and interviews.

1. Defining the Scope of the Study

As per the terms of reference, the study includes the following key sections:

Methodology used in determining the significance of potential impacts (Figure 4 and

5);

An assessment of the nature and significance of direct, indirect and cumulative

impacts (SECTION 3);

Recommendations regarding mitigation measures and practical actions for inclusion

in the Environmental Management Programme (EMP) (SECTION 4).

In the approach to the SEIA study, the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and

Development Planning Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment (February 2007) is referenced

and applied as a best practice. These guidelines are based on international best practice and

capture the broad definition and purpose of the SEIA:

“The process of analysing and communicating the intended and unintended

consequences on the human environment of planned interventions and any

social change processes invoked by those interventions so as to bring about a

more sustainable and equitable biophysical and human environment.”

(Vanclay, 2002, p.183).

Figure 17: Methodological approach to SEIA

1. Obtaining an understanding of the proposed intervention (type, scale, location), the stakeholders likely to be affected, in order to

determine the SEIA SCOPE

2. Collecting data on the current social environment and historical social trends, using scientific, primary and secondary research through

a DESKTOP STUDY

3. Collecting primary data on the social variables and change processes related to the proposed intervention through SITE VISITS &

INTERVIEWS

5. Assessing and documenting the significance of SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS associated with the proposed project

6. Identifying alternatives and MITIGATION and management measures as part of an integrated EMP


Figure 18: Phases of the EMP

In this regard, primary research was conducted, but not limited to, a site visit during April 2016,

as well as interviews with various stakeholders. Secondary sources included, but were not

limited to:

Data from the 2011 Census Survey

IDP 2012-2013 to 2016-2017 of GSMD

GS Municipal District Council (SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILES, MARCH 2015)

Review of relevant planning and policy frameworks for the area;

Research from similar projects.

2. Salient Findings

The following is a summary of the key findings as a result of the assessment done on the CDR

development:

1. The most important economic sectors of the surrounding area are trade, employing

32% of employed people in MLM, followed by 14% in community services and 11% in

agriculture. It seems however these sectors have not reached their full potential in the

area.

2. The demographic profile presents a hurdle for economic growth of the municipality, as

growth is stimulated through a growing industrial expansion, yet skills and education

levels are not aligned to the employment opportunities presented.

ConstructionConstruction

•Provides management principles for the construction phase

•Includes environmental actions, procedures and responsibilities

•Specifications to form part of the contract documentation which governs contractors and sub-contractors to comply, with sign-off from the Project Manager and the Environmental Control Officer

OperationsOperations

•Provides management principles for the operations phase

•Includes environmental actions, procedures and responsibilities within the operations phase

DecommissioningDecommissioning

•Provides a brief framework of management principles for the decommissioning phase

•This section of the EMPr will require an update at the time of decommissioning to take prevailing situation into context

•For the CDR development, this is out of scope of workOUT OF

SCOPE


3. The low levels of education and skills are reflected in low levels of income, which is

reflected in a high dependency on social grants.

4. HIV/AIDS and alcohol abuse are key health concerns, as are petty crimes

5. The economic growth, reduction in unemployment as well as the development skilling

of people in MLM and the development of mining in the municipality, district and

province has been identified as a priority.

6. The CDR development is not directly opposed by the stakeholders consulted in the

initial PPP process (See CRR from PPP).

2.1 Cumulative Impact

Locally the coal seams occur within the Vryheid Formation of the Ecca Group of which the

Pietermaritzburg and Vryheid Formations are found in the Ermelo Coalfield. The Ermelo

Coalfield stretches from Carolina to Standerton and Wakkerstroom in the Mpumalanga

Province. Coal qualities in mineable seams are generally good.

The De Roodepoort Mining Right Area falls on the boundary of the Ermelo Coalfields. The

western part of MLM area has abundant coal reserves and coal mining has been an important

sector in the local economy for many years. Increased international and local (Eskom)

demand for coal has provided a huge impetus to the South African coal mining industry and

Msukaligwa is no exception. Plans are, since 2010 and even earlier, in the pipeline for a number

of new coal mines in the vicinity of Ermelo, according to the Msukaligwa SDF (2010). These

developments will have a significant positive impact on the local economy, not only directly

through the creation of more jobs, but also indirectly through the stimulation of other economic

sectors such as transport, construction, etc. The Camden power station falls within the

Msukaligwa Municipality less than 20km from the proposed site, and thus the mining right is

ideally situated to supply coal to the power station.

It should however be mentioned that coal mining may have a number of negative

environmental impacts which may affect other sectors of the economy (e.g. tourism) and

which will need to be managed carefully into the future.

2.2 No-Development Option

The no-go option will result in the protection of the environment as is and the continued use of

the land for agricultural purposes. However, maintaining the status quo in terms of land

utilisation (agriculture) in the area will result in the sterilisation of the coal resource. This would

reduce coal resources for power generation which is currently a major issue in South Africa,

and which at present has no viable base load power generation alternatives. The no-go option

would also prevent the socio-economic benefits, including the need for job creation,

increased socio-economic activity and social development.

2.3 Summary of Issues and Concerns from the PPP

The EIA process affords the public various opportunities to participate throughout the

environmental authorisation process. The SEIA study and the PPP are often confused by the

public, as both processes include connecting with the affected stakeholders. The following

sections intend to clear up some of the issues.


2.3.1 Public participation process (PPP)

The publication of the SEIA study is running concurrently with the PPP. A summary of the issues

raised by I&AP as received from the Comments and Response Register (CRR) is included in the

SEIA Summary of this report. As part of the SEIA scope, relevant comments are addressed in

this study. Also, as part of this assessment, the raised issues from the PPP will act as a filter to the

SEIA tables, and where appropriate, mitigation action will be raised for inclusion in the EMP.

2.3.2 Stakeholder analysis

From an ethical perspective it is critical to identify the stakeholders, in order to focus the study

on those who may be most affected during and after the development.

This study aimed to include multiple perspectives (Figure 6), of which three main constituent

parties involved in mining have their own, often competing, opinions:

National Government seek tangible economic benefits from mineral development.

These benefits start with direct taxation and royalties and extend to injections of capital

into infrastructure development. Local beneficiation is a focus through value-chain

development and the multiplier effect this has for job creation, as are demands for

direct social spend. The primary metric for governments tends to be GDP per capita,

although tax revenues, job creation, and human development indicators are also

important.

Local communities seek to limit the disruption that mineral development will cause to

their economic, social, and cultural context, and want access to the opportunities

presented by mining developments. Community expectations relate to employment

creation and improvements to community infrastructure, as well as education and skills

training. The primary metric for this group tends to be quality of life, broadly measured

by income and access to (or quality of) services.

Mining companies want to optimise levels of production, maximize revenues, and

manage costs. Crucial to their continued operation is that they be granted a license

to operate for the duration of the life of mine. The primary metrics for this tend to be

output and profitability.

The nature of the development, combined with the PPP highlighted some important

stakeholders to the CDR development. It does however not exclude any person/s that did not

have the opportunity to respond, as the PPP is still in progress.


Figure 19: Stakeholder Influence Analysis


SECTION 3: SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The purpose of this section is to assess the nature and significance of the social and economic

environment as a result of the CDR development.

In this context, the study is structured as follows:

Potential impacts in Construction & Operations phases

Tables impact matrix

Confidence in impact assessment

Cumulative impacts

1. Background Context

As the CDR development involves obvious economic benefits i.e. jobs, tax etc., the social and

environmental costs need to be weighed against the related benefits, as well as finding

synergy with the local and national development frameworks.

At a local level, the MLM social- and economic development focus is conducive to economic-

and social development as stipulated in the GSDM IDP 2012-2013 to 2016-2017, as well as GS

Municipal District Council (SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILES, MARCH 2015).

The nature of the CDR activities results in certain predetermined social- and environmental

impacts, which are inherent to mining. The development of a new mine means that

communities / individuals located in the vicinity may be exposed to health and environmental

risks previously geographically removed from them. There are other coal mines in the area, but

none of them as close to where the local community live.

Coal extraction involves environmental degradation as the landscape is stripped (although

the CDR will utilise a box-cut to access the underground, and the approximate area of surface

disturbance is only 130ha) and blasted to create the box-cut. Health hazards are posed by

the use of toxic substances that are necessary to process the coal, and social problems, (such

as: HIV/AIDS, prostitution, economic inequality etc.) can arise with the large-scale in‐migration

of miners into local communities.

All of these upheavals in the local community will lead to exposure to social risks for the CDR.

How well the company meets these challenges, addresses stakeholder concerns and is able

to ensure stakeholder awareness regarding the benefits as well as the potential risks of the

project, is a measure of the effectiveness of its approach to the management of social risk.

(Aucamp, 2012)

2. Potential impacts during the construction and operations phase

Mining imposes many external costs on its surroundings and the people who live in proximity to

the project. Some of these can be quantified by estimates, others are difficult to estimate. It is

by nature disturbing and destructive to the environment as it removes large volumes of soil


and rock overburden to get to the workable seams, and destroys regional aquifers. Mining

produces large mountains of solid waste. Mining also has serious social consequences: on the

movement of people, on people’s health and the environments they live in.

The following information was obtained from the Centaur De Roodepoort (Pty) Ltd: De

Roodepoort Colliery Scoping Report (dated February 2016) and is approximations at the time

of compiling the study, taking into consideration current information at hand, and the fact that

some information may change based on further specialists inputs as part of the EIA process:

It is anticipated that construction activities will take approximately 1 year, the life of mine

during operations is expected to be 20 years, followed by 3 years for decommissioning and

closure activities.

Thus the EA and waste management license are being sought for a period of 24 years. The

estimated capital expenditure (CAPEX) required to establish the proposed CDR development,

including the supporting infrastructure, was not available when this report was drafted. It is

however anticipated that a total of approximately 325 permanent staff and approximately 12

contracted employees (Table 2) will be employed.

Table 2: Proposed employment summary CDR

CDR Classification Number / Costs No. Jobs

%

Construction & Operations phase

Number of people employed All

Not available 325 permanent

Not available 12 contract

Breakdown of number of people

employed in terms or low skilled,

semi-skilled and skilled

Higher (Band NQF)

Not available

23

Middle (Band NQF) 150

General (Band NQF) 164

Total annual wage bill estimate for

operations phase All Not available Not available

The baseline socio-economic status compiled in this study was done in conjunction with the

De Roodepoort SLP (1 March 2016) which should provide input for a Community Development

Action Plan (CDAP), as required by the MPRDA.


3. Indicators for a cost-benefit analysis

An environmental cost-benefit analysis overcomes market shortfalls by attributing

monetary values to naturally occurring goods which are related to the value

society bestow upon them. The relevant criteria when looking at a decision-

making process become the cost of a project, the benefits of a project, and the

total economic value that is created or destroyed by the development.

(http://enviroliteracy.org/environment-society/economics/cost-benefit-

analysis/)

For the proposed CDR, this study included the assumptions on the capital expenditure. The

environmental cost and benefit was derived from the De Roodepoort SLP (1 March 2016);

Scoping Report (February 2016) which included various specialist inputs, the PPP and site visit

concluded in April 2016.

The DEA&DP guidelines on economic specialist input to EIA processes which are broadly based

on a cost-benefit approach to assessment (van Zyl et al., 2005) will inform the EIA process.

These guidelines stipulate the appropriate level of detail required for the assessment, in order

to be adequate for informing decision-making. While these guidelines were developed as part

of a Western Cape government initiative, they are equally applicable to other parts of South

Africa and were endorsed at a national level by the then Department of Environment Affairs.

Without having the final quantifiable numbers at time of publication (cost of managing

pollution; roads infrastructure etc.), or access to the other specialists’ final reports, the following

costs and benefits were observed and/or documented.

Costs:

- The environmental impact (pollution etc.)

- Impact on agriculture & tourism sectors through affecting the land use and

sense of place

- Health and safety risks associated with open cast coal mining and major

developments in general

- Impact on current agricultural activity, neighbouring and on site, as well as the

affected farm related jobs (4 in total according to the farm owner)

- Increase in traffic and the impact on the roads infrastructure

Benefits:

- Support to national and regional IDP, by supporting SA economic development

- Supply of coal for local power generation and international distribution

- Direct benefit of employment through the implementation of the SLP

- Multiplier effect and benefit to local business

Bt - Ct - Et (1 + r) - t ≥ 0 or < 0,

When ≥ 0 (greater or equal to zero) positive impact; and when <0 (smaller than zero) then

negative impact


Bt is the benefit in time t

Ct is the cost in time t

Et is the environmental damage done by the project (if there is an environmental

improvement, the -E is replaced by +E)

t is the referred timeframe

r is the discount rate (suggested at 8%)

In order to show a positive cost-benefit impact, the equation should result in a greater than 0

value, and with the indicators currently at hand, the result favours the negative. The cost-

benefit analysis is however inconclusive as the benefits value cannot offset the perceived

costs, which have not been finalised at the time of publication of this study.

4. Impact Model

The summary of all the impacts during the different phases are listed below. The detail on the

rating system is attached in Appendix A: MEASUREMENT CRITERIA. For some context, the

following formula was used throughout to calculate the significance of the impact:

S = (E+D+M+R) x P

The significance weightings for each potential impact are as follows:

1-20 points: Low (i.e. where this impact would not have a direct influence on the

decision to develop in the area);

21-40 points: Moderate to Low;

41-60 points: Moderate (i.e. where the impact could influence the decision to develop

in the area unless it is effectively mitigated);

61-80 points: Moderate to High;

81-100 points: High (i.e. where the impact must have an influence on the decision

process to develop in the area).

NOTE: The impact tables represent the CDR development as the total receiving

environment from a socio-economic perspective, and takes into consideration a

cumulative effect, where applicable.

5. Summary

Table 3 contains a summary of the assessment significance of the socio-economic impacts for

this project. The assessment shows the impact rating after it has been mitigated.


Table 3: Summary of impact significance

Social Issue Impact Type Assessment

1 Air quality (including dust & pollution) Health Impact Moderate to Low (Negative)

2 Noise pollution (including blasting &

vibration) Health Impact

Moderate to Low (Negative)

3 HIV/Aids, Cholera, Flu mutations,

Tuberculosis, Sexually transmitted infections Health Impact Moderate to Low (Negative)

4 Close proximity to adjacent agricultural

property Health & Safety Impact

Moderate to low (Negative)

5 Impact on land use and resulting land value Economic Impact Moderate (Negative)

6 Employment opportunities Economic Impact Moderate (Positive)

7 Local/ regional business industry Economic Impact Moderate (Positive)

8 Aesthetic and ‘sense of place’ i.e. tourism

and lifestyle Socio-cultural Impact

Moderate to Low (Negative)

9 Perceptions & attitudes towards the CDR Social Impact Moderate to low (Negative)

10 Impact on roads infrastructure Traffic impact Moderate to Low (Negative)

11 Impact on MLM planning & development

(SDF)

Socio-economic

Impact

Moderate to low (Positive)

6. SEIA Impact Tables

Impact tables 4-5 have a bearing on the general health and safety status of the impacted

communities and stakeholders from a social perspective. 3 Occupational injuries and ill-health

have huge social- and economic implications for individuals, their families and their

communities. They also have economic impacts in the form of direct and indirect costs for

society as a whole.

As from 19 May 2014, i.e. the date of commencement of the National Environmental

Management: (Air Quality Amendment Act 20 of 2014 – to date), the following table refers:

Table 4: Socio-economic impacts related to air quality

AIR QUALITY (DUST & POLLUTION)

Nature of the impact:

The impact on the health status of the adjacent farmers as well citizens within the MLM area, due to

air pollution as a result of coal mining’s fugitive emission of particulate matter and gases. The mining

operations like drilling, blasting, movement of the heavy earth moving machinery on haul roads,

collection, transportation and handling of coal, screening, sizing and segregation units are the major

sources of such emissions. The fact that the operations will be mined via underground methods is

considered in this assessment.

3 Impact Table aimed to be complementary to other specialist studies, which often investigate

the technical impact, whilst this social perspective looks at the resulting effect on humans.


Without Mitigation With Mitigation

Extent Local (2) Local (2)

Duration Medium term (3) Medium term (3)

Magnitude Moderate (3) Slight to Moderate (2)

Reversibility Reversible (3) Completely Reversible (1)

Probability Highly Probable (4) Probable (3)

Significance Moderate (44) Moderate to Low (24)

Status (+/-) Negative

Can impacts be mitigated? Yes

Mitigation:

Refer to Air Quality Specialist assessment report re mitigation

Use dust abatement techniques on unpaved surfaces to minimise airborne dust and during

earthmoving activities, prior to clearing, before excavating, backfilling, compacting, or

grading, and during blasting

Post and enforce speed limits to reduce airborne fugitive dust from vehicular traffic

Re-vegetate disturbed areas as soon as possible after disturbance. This should include

interim re-vegetation along road beds once heavy construction is completed and heavy

mining equipment has been moved in.

Keep soil and coal refuse moist while loading into dump trucks

Minimise drop heights when loaders dump soil and coal refuse into trucks

Cover dump trucks before traveling on public roads

Cover construction materials, stockpiled soils, and stockpiled coal refuse if they are a source

of fugitive dust

Train workers to handle construction materials and debris to reduce fugitive emissions

Cumulative Impacts:

According to the MLM reports, pollution is already a concern in the area, which will be further

compounded by the proposed development.

Residual Impacts:

The residual impact of health related risks cannot be reversed to the status quo after the construction

or decommissioning of the mine has taken place.

It should be noted that, due to the standard format of the impact rating system, it is not possible to

accurately reflect the irreversibility or residual impact on the health status of affected individuals.

With Mitigation the significance rating is: Moderate to Low

Noise exposure is a widespread problem in mining because of the use of heavy equipment;

drilling and rock breaking; transferring, sorting and milling of rock. Available data for noise

exposure for South African miners suggest that nearly half the workforce is exposed to

deafening noise, and approximately R75 million was paid out in compensation annually since

2004. These medical costs are often shifted from the mines onto the state as miners and

affected stakeholders are not properly informed of what their rights and remedies are.

(http://www.saimm.co.za/journal/v107/)

Table 5: Socio-economic impacts related to noise

NOISE POLLUTION (INCLUDING BLASTING & VIBRATION)


The impact on the health status of neighbouring farmers, workers, farmsteads and other infrastructure

as well as miners due to the proximity of the mine’s activities, which include blasting, movement of


heavy earth moving machines, drilling and coal handling plants.




Magnitude Moderate (3) Slight to Moderate (2)

Reversibility Reversible (3) Completely Reversible (1)





Mitigation:

Refer to Noise & Blasting Specialist Assessment reports re mitigation

Continuously measure and monitor noise levels

Creating artificial noise barriers through earth mounds or walls or a greenbelt which includes

the plantation of trees could assist to manage noise levels

Engineering noise controls which include the removal of hazardous noise from the workplace

by means of education; surveillance; the enclosure of equipment, dampening of noise

vibrations, the redesign of equipment, and remotely controlled operations

Limit noisy activities (including blasting applicable to the construction phase) to the least

noise-sensitive times of day (weekdays only between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.)

All equipment should have sound-control devices which are more effective than original

equipment. Muffle and maintain all construction equipment used

Notify nearby residents in advance when blasting or other noisy activities are required

To the extent feasible, route heavy truck and rail traffic supporting mining activities away

from residences and other sensitive receptors

Cumulative Impacts:

No cumulative impact could be identified.

Residual Impacts:






Tuberculosis (TB) and HIV/AIDS are significant health risks in SA mining because these diseases

have been found to be related to the living and working conditions of miners; such as

migrant labour, single sex hostels, undiagnosed active TB and dense living arrangements.

Integrated health statistics are not readily available as HIV/Aids and TB also often mask the

fact that lung diseases are the result of working in the mining sector. This is already relevant in

MLM and will continue to be so, in line with future development plans.

http://www.saimm.co.za/journal/v107/)

Table 6: Socio-economic impacts related to disease

HIV/AIDS, CHOLERA, FLU MUTATIONS, TUBERCULOSIS, SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED INFECTIONS


The impact on the health status of the local community due to an increase in male migrant workers.

As HIV/AIDS, Cholera, Flu mutations, Tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections and alcohol related

http://www.saimm.co.za/journal/v107/


diseases are already on the district’s radar due to its high occurrence; migrant workers without family

structures may increase this health risk.


Extent Provincial (4) Local (2)

Duration Permanent (5) Long term (4)

Magnitude Moderate to High (4) Moderate (3)

Reversibility Irreversible (5) Reversible (3)

Probability Probable (3) Possible (2)




Mitigation:

The CDR should appoint a service provider or local NGO to develop, implement and

manage a “Health & Safety Orientation Programme” which include information on HIV/AIDS,

TB, and alcohol abuse prevention, with all temporary and permanent workers on the site

This includes encouragement to connect with local community programmes and NGO’s,

health training and information which can be provided on-site to workers at the start of the

project

Ensure workers have information available and sign a “code of conduct” at the start of

employment which gives an overview of acceptable behaviour and information regarding

health & safety on the site

Cumulative Impacts:

As alcohol abuse and related risky behaviour which may impact HIV infections is already prevalent in

the area, the cumulative impact during the construction phase may be increased.

Residual Impacts:




accurately reflect the irreversibility or residual impact of infection (negative impact) once it has

occurred alongside the implementation of an effective HIV/AIDS prevention plan.


The next table refers to concerns raised in the CCR regarding the health and safety impact of

mining activities on persons and animals within close proximity to the CDR development.

Table 7: Socio-economic impacts related to adjacent agriculture property

CLOSE PROXIMITY TO ADJACENT AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY


The impact on the health and safety status of the neighbouring farmers and their workers (residential

area ±5km away from proposed development), due to close proximity to mining activities (also see

table 1 & 2 above).



Duration Long term (4) Long term (4)

Magnitude Moderate (3) Moderate (3)

Reversibility Irreversible (5) Irreversible (5)



Significance Moderate to High (56) Moderate (42)



Mitigation:

Refer to Blasting Specialist assessment report re mitigation activities

The buffer zone of 100m to be adhered to for all mining related activities, and 500m for

blasting (applicable to the construction phase only)

All mitigation practices as outlined in previous tables are relevant

CDR to continuously engage with affected communities regarding mitigation practices

Should any of these activities prove ineffective, and in the case of scientifically proven

health and safety risks, an option would be to negotiate a settlement with affected residents

Cumulative Impacts:

No current cumulative impact identified.

Residual Impacts:





With Mitigation the significance rating is: Moderate

Table 8: Socio-economic impacts related to property

IMPACT ON LAND USE AND RESULTING LAND VALUE


The impact on the way the land is used and the value it creates, specifically agricultural property, due

to the proposed mining activities.




Magnitude Moderate to High(4) Moderate to High (4)

Reversibility Irreversible (5) Irreversible (5)

Probability Highly Probable (4) Highly Probable (4)

Significance Moderate (60) Moderate (60)


Can impacts be mitigated? No

Mitigation:

Should CDR decide to negotiate a buyout of affected properties as part of a mining housing scheme,

this concern would effectively be managed. This option has however not been raised by any of the

parties involved and as such, no mitigation measures are presented.

Cumulative Impacts:

The current positive market forces impacting property owners may be altered by the proposed mine’s

proximity to specifically impacted agricultural areas. The current average property value of

neighbouring agricultural property will most likely be negatively affected.

Residual Impacts:

The residual impact on specific neighbourhoods bordering the proposed development will be in a

permanently altered state. The economic impact cannot be reversed to the status quo after

decommissioning of the mine has taken place.



This employment creation opportunity must be seen against the backdrop of the CDR

capital intensive method (underground bord and pillar method) vs. other labour intensive

mining practice.

At a local level, the farming activities on the local site currently employs 4 farm workers and

their families, which will be impacted and will have to be reduced as the farming activities

are decreased.

Most significantly, the CDR development should enable the SLP, resulting in social

improvement in the area in general. The implementation of the SLP will also benefit

employees through training and bursary programmes, as well as providing funds to various

social development projects.

Table 9: Socio-economic impacts related to employment

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES


The contribution to the employment status and income levels of the local Msukaligwa population due

to the creation of 325 permanent and 12 contract jobs during the construction and operation phases

of the project.


Extent Regional (3) Provincial (4)


Magnitude Moderate (3) Moderate to High (4)

Reversibility Reversible (3) Reversible (3)

Probability Probable (3) Highly Probable (4)

Significance Moderate to Low (39) Moderate (60)

Status (+/-) Positive


Mitigation:

Implementing a ‘local first’ recruitment policy will ensure that the positive impact is mostly

ring-fenced for locals and SA residents. This will need integration from a provincial

perspective to ensure that the right skills are being developed to supply the right people

who are ready to take up this opportunity

Ensure that the benefit is equitable and that the principles underpinned by Black Economic

Empowerment Act of 2003 is honoured

Also that the local jobs created are linked to a skills development programme for

permanent employment as per the SLP

Cumulative Impacts:

The impact is measured as a result of direct employment creation for the construction and operations

phases of the project. The indirect effects on employment creation, the multiplier effect on local

business, as well as the subsequent phases will increase the cumulative positive impact on the

employment status, contributing to the provincial and national employment creation initiatives.

Residual Impacts:

From a socio-economic perspective, the residual impact will be the end of the job opportunities on

which locals may have become dependent, unless skills development and training enable permanent

employment. The establishment of a community trust by CDR for alternative skills development will


have to take this into account.


At a national level, the multiplier effect has proved its potential to double the direct economic

benefit. This holds true by adding the indirect and induced impacts, should the supply of

material be sourced mostly locally.

Table 10: Socio-economic impacts related to local industry and business

LOCAL/ REGIONAL BUSINESS INDUSTRY


The impact on local and regional industry due to the multiplier effects. The investment in the area will have

a multiplier effect on local industry and businesses, resulting in a wider indirect positive economic impact

than the jobs directly anticipated for the mine. Areas most positively affected may be transport,

consumables and construction materials.


Extent Regional (3) Provincial (4)


Magnitude Slight to Moderate (2) Moderate(3)

Reversibility Completely reversible (1) Reversible (3)

Probability Possible (2) Probable (3)

Significance Low (20) Moderate (42)


Reversible Yes


Mitigation:

CDR to adopt a preferential procurement policy towards local suppliers and distributors

Ensuring that principle of ‘local first’ when procuring consumables, construction materials etc.

Cumulative Impacts:

The scale, extent and proximity of similar developments in the District and Province will result in a positive

increase in the cumulative linkage effect.

Residual Impacts:

The proposed development is of such a nature that the status quo could be the result after

decommissioning the mine.


Although the character or Msukaligwa has already been inherently altered with the growing

mining and energy sectors, the importance of the agricultural sector to the economy of the

area is projected to continue to grow into the future. This is likely to be related to the expansion

of the industrial operations and the related business. Agriculture is one potential economic

activity which has the potential to regain its place in the local economy. MLM has been

blessed with natural resources that give it a competitive and comparative advantage in

Mining, Energy, and Agriculture. Both social and economic infrastructure indicators show that

much must still be done to improve the quality of life of the people of Msukaligwa. GSDM Socio-

Economic Profiles (March 2015).


Table 11: Socio-economic impacts related to lifestyle

AESTHETIC AND ‘SENSE OF PLACE’ I.E. TOURISM AND LIFESTYLE


Impact on the aesthetic and ‘sense of place’. The proposed site is surrounded by agricultural land, which

creates a specific landscape and culture. The impact should be considered in the context of the study

area as a whole, as the impact will also depend on a number of variables, such as the visual impact, the

biodiversity impact, the related activities on the surrounding land, etc.


Extent Regional (3) Local (2)


Magnitude Moderate (3) Moderate (3)


Probability Probable (3) Probable (3)

Significance Moderate to Low (39) Moderate to Low (36)



Mitigation:

Implement mitigation measures detailed in the Visual Impact Assessment

The impact on quality of life in the area should be monitored and evaluated before and during

the mining operations

Cumulative Impacts:

The presence of other such infrastructure has already altered the sense of place. The CDR development

will further alter the people who stay and work in the close proximity’s way of life and their sense of place.

Residual Impacts:

The impact on sense of place can be reversed to a certain extend (discard dump to be cladded and

rehabbed) after decommissioning, provided that rehabilitation is done to a satisfactory level.


The CDR PPP information and resulting CRR, as well as site visit and interviews with various

stakeholders refer:

Table 12: Socio-economic impacts related to perceptions towards the development

PERCEPTIONS & ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE DEVELOPMENT


Perceptions and attitudes towards the CDR development, vary between positive (economic opportunity)

and negative (health & safety concerns, risk to property and way of life). The PPP is still on-going, but

comments and feedback received thus far from stakeholders are overall neutral.


Extent Regional (3) Regional (3)



Reversibility Irreversible (5) Reversible (3)


Significance Moderate to High (64) Moderate to Low (39)

Status (+/-) Positive or Negative


Reversible Yes

Irreplaceable N/A


Mitigation:

Ensure that the PPP includes stakeholders directly affected as listed in the CRR (close neighbours

and the local community, MLM, SANRAL etc.)

Following due process as stipulated during the PPP (NEMA Chapter 5), but also the nuanced

intention of the law, which is to continuously engage, aim to strike consensus, invite participation

and create shared understanding

Address impacts which have been determined to adversely affect, or cause a disproportionate

effect on stakeholders, through appropriate measures, specific to the impact

Develop and implement focused public information campaigns to provide technical and

environmental health information directly to most affected stakeholder groups or to local

agencies and representative groups

Ensure that health & safety procedures are followed, monitored and communicated

Cumulative Impacts:

The significance of this impact is rated moderate, but due to the number and proximity of other related

industries in the area, the cumulative impact affecting the general sentiment around mining developments,

and specifically this development, may change.


This table should be seen as complementary to the Traffic Impact Specialist Assessment report.

Table 13:Socio-economic impacts related to roads

IMPACT ON ROADS INFRASTRUCTURE


The local roads and associated infrastructure will be affected by the increase in heavy vehicles and traffic

to the site. As SANRAL is also planning road infrastructure improvements in the area through their engineers

at AECOM, the impact will be compounded.


Extent Regional (3) Local (2)








Mitigation:

Refer to Traffic Impact Assessment report for mitigation measures

Preference should be given to rail transport where ever possible

Part of the construction phase needs to include the continuous maintenance of the road to be

able to handle the increase in traffic and excessive dust and noise as a result of the gravel roads

Limit traffic to roads indicated specifically for the project

Instruct and require all personnel and contractors to adhere to speed limits to ensure safe and

efficient traffic flow

Limit mine-related vehicle traffic on public roadways to off-peak commuting times to minimize

impacts on local commuters


Cumulative Impacts:

National road, especially in the Mpumalanga’s Highveld are already carrying heavy traffic in terms the

transportation of coal and other raw materials. Cumulative effect could be mitigated through the use of rail

transportation of coal.


According to the Constitution (sections 152 and 153), Local Government is in charge of the

development and planning processes in municipalities. The constitutional mandate to relate

its management, budgeting and planning functions to its objectives, give a clear indication of

the intended purposes (below) of municipal integrated development planning:

To ensure sustainable provision of services;

To promote social and economic development;

To promote a safe and healthy environment;

To give priority to the basic needs of communities;

To encourage involvement of communities.

The Development Facilitation Act and Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, also

refers, with specific spatial development principles such as:

Integrated and liveable settlements;

Compact towns and cities (instead of urban sprawl);

Maximum use of existing infrastructure and services (rather than duplication);

Equal consideration of formal and informal settlements.

As important stakeholders in the proposed CDR development, the support of both the MLM

and GSDM will contribute to enabling a positive social impact. The table below captures the

Msukaligwa SDF Final Report (2010) and MLM interviews as input.

Table 14: Socio-economic impacts related to future local development

MLM FUTURE PLANNING


Impact on MLM’s future planning & development framework refer. The proposed CDR development aligns

with the SDF of MLM, taking cognisance of the focus on supporting the mining sector but also protecting

the agricultural- and tourism corridors. Comments raised during the interview with the MLM included a

positive expectation regarding the proposed CDR support of the social development agenda. Concerns

refer to the alignment to MLM local development needs (LEDP) with CDR’s SLP.


Extent Regional (3) Regional (3)


Magnitude Low to Moderate (2) Low to Moderate (2)


Probability Possible (2) Probable (3)

Significance Moderate to Low (22) Moderate to Low (33)




Mitigation: Ensure continuous alignment between MLM and the proposed development through

collaboration and ongoing integration of various development plans (SLP and LEDP).

Cumulative Impacts:

Although there are 3 other mines within the MLM, no cumulative impact could be identified for this locale.

Residual Impacts:

The proposed development is of such a nature that the mine will leave an indelible impact on the social

structure of the area and as such, the status quo would probably never be completely regained after

decommissioning.


7. Confidence Level

7.1 Probability rating

Most of the impacts identified and assessed in this report have been rated as highly probable

(60% to 85% chance of occurrence). Within the socio-economic arena very few results can be

regarded as definite (greater than 85% of occurrence) as this would underestimate a systems

ability to transform and adapt to a new environment. In most (if not all) of the scenarios, people

are able to continue with their lives even if it will be in an altered way.

Most social impacts are based on a ‘worst case scenario’ as it is deemed more important to

overestimate an impact rather than underestimate it. Furthermore, the interviews, site visit and

comments from the PPP confirmed that an individual cannot represent the views of an entire

community, and to consult with-, and consider the views of every individual in a community

would not be possible.

7.2 Ethical consideration

In assessing the overall confidence level in the impact assessment, the purpose of the ethical

consideration is to consider the proposed development from a perspective of “doing the right

thing”. The Velasquez’s (1985) ethical framework uses a values driven, holistic approach to

assess the development, to ensure that the qualitative and quantitative measurements are

weighted. The four questions posed, require a positive answer to ensure confidence in

motivating for the development to go ahead. Negative outcomes either require serious

mitigation or a no-go option to be considered.

Do the social and environmental benefits outweigh the

costs?

Yes Current information does show that

benefits outweigh the costs from a

socio-economic perspective.

Does the development respect the rights of

stakeholders?

Yes This PPP and SEIA form part of the

process of acknowledgement of

rights of identified stakeholders.

Do the rewards from the development extend to

marginalized stakeholders?

Yes The intention of CDR is to create

employment opportunities which will

extend to vulnerable and

marginalised communities.

Is a measurable degree of care shown towards the

environment and identified stakeholders?

TBC This will only be determined once

development is approved and CDR

commences with operations.


The above questions are indicative of the complexity of understanding the benefit and need

for economic growth, whilst showing due care to humans and the environment.

7.3 Cumulative Impacts

The cumulative impact on a development can enhance- and/or even override the initial

assessments. In this case, due to the environment already being exposed to most of the social

risks associated with mining activities (an already buoyant mining and energy sector), this is

very relevant. No impact identified in this study proved to change the significance rating as a

result of the cumulative effect.

7.4 SEIA Summary

Based on due care taken with available stakeholder feedback and based on the above

impact tables, which on average shows a Moderate/Moderate to Low impact rating, as well

as the concern regarding the balance between social and environmental costs and benefits

(some detail not available at time of publication), the SEIA is deemed to be a fair

representation of the CDR development’s projected impacts.


SECTION 4: SOCIAL RESPONSE & MITIGATION

The social response is the last section of the Driver-Pressure-State-Impacts-Response (DPSIR)

model.

1. Mitigation Measures

Regarding environmental sustainability, NEMA requires mines to develop an EMP, containing

adequate provision for financial guarantees for rehabilitation, and arrangements for monitoring

and auditing. It should also contain a closure plan which is out of scope for this study, including a

financial provision which should be available at the onset, during the life of the mine and at

closure.

An extensive literature review showed that there are not many publications that quantify social

impacts, partly because of the constraints in methodologies and partly because the costs

associated with mitigation are also strongly determined by the location and type of mining. In

addition, there is a stronger trend towards costing environmental- rather than social impacts.

Environmental concerns can often be ‘solved’ with technical interventions such as soil

rehabilitation, pollution control works, etc. whilst the resulting social implications requires

continuous engagement without any hard measures of success.

This section outlines the social mitigation measures for managing the anticipated social impacts

as outlined in this report (summarised in Table 16). The social mitigation measures are applicable

to the construction, and operations phases for the total CDR development.

Table 15: Summary of SEIA Pressures & Drivers

Social Variable Mitigated Assessment Rating Mitigated

Rating

1 Air quality (including dust & pollution) Moderate to Low

(Negative)

-44 -24

2 Noise pollution (including blasting & vibration) Moderate to Low

(Negative)

-48 -27

3 HIV/Aids, Cholera, Flu mutations, Tuberculosis,

Sexually transmitted infections

Moderate to Low

(Negative)

-54 -24

4 Close proximity to adjacent agricultural property Moderate to Low

(Negative)

-56 -42

5 Impact on land use and resulting land value Moderate (Negative) -60 -60

6 Employment opportunities Moderate (Positive) +39 +60

7 Local/ regional business industry Moderate (Positive) +20 +42

8 Aesthetic and ‘sense of place’ i.e. tourism and

lifestyle

Moderate to Low

(Negative)

-39 -36

9 Perceptions & attitudes towards the CDR Moderate to Low

(Negative)

+/-64 +/-39

10 Impact on roads infrastructure Moderate to Low

(Negative)

-56 -36

11 Impact on MLM planning & development Moderate to Low

(Negative)

+22 +33


-20 points Low

21-40 points Moderate to Low

41-60 points Moderate

61-80 points Moderate to High

81-100 points High

Figure 20: Summary of SEI outcomes

33

56

64

39

20

39

60

56

54

48

44

22

36

39

36

42

60

60

42

24

27

24

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Impact on MLM planning & development(SDF)

Impact on roads infrastructure

Perceptions & attitudes towards the CDR

Aesthetic and ‘sense of place’ i.e. tourism and lifestyle

Local/ regional business industry

Employment opportunities

Neighbouring agricultural property value

Close proximity to adjacent agriculturalproperty

HIV/Aids, Cholera, Flu mutations,Tuberculosis, Sexually transmitted infections

Noise pollution (including blasting & vibration)

Air quality (including dust & pollution)

Summary of SEI

After mitigation Before mitigation


Apart from Neighbouring agricultural property value (-); Employment opportunities and Local/

regional business industry (+) - moderate impact, the assessment is characterised by moderate to

low ratings post-mitigation.

All mitigation measures and recommendations contained in this section of the SEIA are for

inclusion as part of the EMP, and should be implemented and monitored accordingly. Remedial

action should be taken where CDR fails to comply with the EMP.

2. Environmental Management Plan

NEMA sets out a number of principles, to guide environmental management in South Africa. These

variables relate to the social dimension of sustainable development and public process

requirements, such as transparency, accountability, democracy and environmental justice.

“Environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of

its concern, and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and

social interests equitably.” http://www.eia.org.za/

2.1 2014 EIA Regulations

Under the much anticipated ‘One Environmental System’ released on 2 September 2014, the

requirements for financial provision for the environmental impacts of mining operations will be

regulated by NEMA and no longer the MPRDA. These Regulations include a number of provisions

to provide for the transition of the environmental regulation of mining from the MPRDA to NEMA

and the introduction of the One Environmental System Environmental risks assessments and

annual rehabilitation plans will now be required, with prescribed contents, and must be audited

annually.

According to the new regulations the Minister of Mineral Resources will be authorised to appoint

Environmental Mineral Resource Inspectors, who will have the same power as Environmental

Management Inspectors under NEMA to enforce environmental legislation at mines.

2.2 The Social EMP

Table 16 provides mitigation measures that must be considered for social impact management.

This must also be read in line with the De Roodepoort SLP (March 2016), which aims to integrate

the SLP into the MLM LEDP.


Table 16: Mitigation measures

OBJECTIVE: Mitigate the possible Socio-economic impacts associated with the CDR development

Project component/s Development site and surrounding area

Potential Impact Socio-economic impact from CDR and related activities

Activity/risk source Potential impact on stakeholders – refer to Impact Tables ≥ -60 rating

Mitigation: Target/Objective Manage the (negative) impact on health and safety; quality of life and

socio-economic sustainability of stakeholders, thus promoting a general

acceptance to, and compliance with EIA outcomes

Activity 1:

Manage health status of employees on site (HIV/Aids, Cholera, Flu mutations, Tuberculosis, Sexually

transmitted infections)

Mitigation: Action/Control Responsibility Timeframe

Appoint a health service provider

or local NGO to develop,

implement and manage a

”Health & Safety” programme,

focussing on HIV/AIDS, TB and

alcohol abuse prevention, in

partnership with local

government programmes and

initiatives.

CDR Throughout construction and

operational phases.

Monitoring To be undertaken by the Management Forum of the CDR and the

appointed Environmental Control Officer (ECO) who will ensure

compliance to health and safety specifications.

Performance Indicator - Health & Safety orientation and educational programmes

- Reports on above indicators

- A well-managed development which respects the socio-

environmental context of the immediate stakeholders will ensure all

stakeholders working together to the benefit of all

Activity 2:

Close proximity to adjacent agricultural property

Mitigation: Action/Control Responsibility Timeframe

Establishment of a Community

Management Forum with

representative stakeholders from

tribal, state, and local agencies

and local government

departments.

The purpose of which will be to

develop community monitoring

programs that will be sufficient

to:

- Identify and evaluate socio-

economic impacts resulting from

coal mining

- Monitor programs which collect

data reflecting economic, fiscal,

and social impacts of the

development at the tribal, state,

and local level.

- Evaluate parameters, which

could include impacts on local

employment and housing

CDR & stakeholders Commence pre-construction and

manage throughout development

lifetime (Suggest quarterly

meetings).


markets, local consumer product

prices and availability, local

public services (e.g., police, fire,

and public health), and

educational services.

- Programs could also monitor

indicators of social disruption

(e.g. crime, alcoholism, drug use,

and mental health) and the

effectiveness of community

welfare programs in addressing

these problems.

Performance Indicator - Quarterly engagements

- Reports availability on above indicators

- A well-managed development which respects and enhances the

socio-economic context of the immediate stakeholders will ensure all

stakeholders working together to the benefit of all

Activity 3:

Impact on MLM planning & development (SDF)

Engagement between CDR and

MLM in order to establish a

conclusion to:

Ensure that the SLP is approved

and shared to enable

implementation and regular

reporting. The results are to be

presented to local government

to create linkages to skills

development and social

programmes.

MLM & CDR Throughout construction and

operational phases.

Monitoring Continuous engagement on services, opportunities for collaboration

and general good governance through the Community Management

Forum, as well as meetings between MLM and CDR.

Performance Indicator Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 establishes

the MLM as the final authority of land use planning. Each province will

have a provincial land use tribunal and appeal tribunal that will be land

use regulators in specified situations. Nationally the Minister will be a land

use regulator of last resort, only acting in cases where there has been

neglect or flouting of the national principles and norms.

2.3 Out of Scope for the CDR SEIA

Elements which are critical even in the planning phase for mining development and which were

either not yet available or out of scope for this study include:

Projected Financial indicators required for the CBA

Decommissioning

Financial Provision & Closure Regulations


3. Recommendations and Conclusion

The socio-economic risks of mining in South Africa have been emerging for some time now, and

have been brought into sharp relief by recent events in the platinum sector. The slow pace of

social upliftment in the country has led to widespread social unrest with consequent calls for

different forms of mitigation and social response. Fundamentally, the key stakeholders are not

fully aligned, and although they are engaging in some instances, the bridge in perspectives

prohibits productive outcomes.

Measuring social impact, deploying inclusive solutions and engaging effectively with

stakeholders are three ways in which mining companies can mitigate this risk (see EMP).

It is therefore recommended that should CDR receive environmental approval, it be subject to

the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and environmental

management actions contained in this, and other specialist reports.

Based on the salient SEIA findings, which can be summarised as, -

1. Projected benefits are mainly of an economic nature (job creation and stimulant to local

economy) and as such stand in stark contrast to the social-and environmental costs,

which are proved to be moderate or moderate to low.

2. This is supported by the Cost Benefit Analysis and the Ethical Framework.

3. As no alternative site options are available due to the extent of the mining rights being

applied for by CDR, the close proximity to adjacent agricultural property, are critical

issues which will create ongoing social response, requiring constant engagement (as

supported by the CRR from the PPP).

4. The scale of the CDR development is still to be finalised and will impact the number of

employment opportunities actually realised.


Appendix A: MEASUREMENT CRITERIA

Assessment of Impacts

Direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the issues identified through the scoping study, as well

as all other issues identified in the EIA phase must be assessed in terms of the following criteria:

The nature, which shall include a description of what causes the effect, what will be

affected and how it will be affected.

The extent, wherein it will be indicated whether the impact will be local (limited to the

immediate area or site of development) or regional, and a value between 1 and 5 will be

assigned as appropriate (with 1 being low and 5 being high):

The duration, wherein it will be indicated whether the lifetime of the impact will be of a

very short duration (1–2 years) to permanent which will be assigned a score of 5;

The magnitude, quantified on a scale from 1-5, where 1 is small and will have no effect on

the environment, and 5 is high and results in complete destruction of patterns and

permanent cessation of processes.

The reversibility refers to the ability to rehabilitate the effect on the environment.

The probability of occurrence, which shall describe the likelihood of the impact actually

occurring. Probability will be estimated on a scale of 1–5, where 1 is very improbable

(probably will not happen), 2 is improbable (some possibility, but low likelihood), 3 is

probable (distinct possibility), 4 is Highly Probable (most likely) and 5 is definite (impact will

occur regardless of any prevention measures).

The significance, which shall be determined through a synthesis of the characteristics

described above and can be assessed as low, medium or high; and

The status, which will be described as either positive, negative or neutral.

The significance is calculated by combining the criteria in the following formula:

S = (E+D+M+R) x P

S = Significance

E = Extent

D = Duration

M = Magnitude

R = Reversibility

P = Probability

The significance weightings for each potential impact are as follows:

1-20 points: Low (i.e. where this impact would not have a direct influence on the decision

to develop in the area),

21-40 points: Moderate to Low

41-60 points: Moderate (i.e. where the impact could influence the decision to develop in

the area unless it is effectively mitigated),

61-80 points: Moderate to High

81-100 points: High (i.e. where the impact must have an influence on the decision process

to develop in the area).


Nature and Status

Include a brief description of the impact of environmental parameter being assessed in the context of

the project. This criterion includes a brief written statement of the environmental aspect being

impacted upon by a particular action or activity. Current status can be positive, negative or neutral.

Extent

This is defined as the area over which the impact will be expressed. Typically, the severity and

significance of an impact have different scales and as such bracketing ranges are often required. This

is often useful during the detailed assessment of a project in terms of further defining the reach.

1 Site The impact will only affect the area within the site

boundary

2 Local Will affect the local area immediately beyond the site

3 Regional Will affect the region

4 Provincial Will affect the entire province or larger

5 National Will affect the entire country

Reversibility

This describes the chance of occurrence being completely reversible to the current status quo.

1 Completely reversible Reverses with minimal rehabilitation & negligible residual

affects

3 Reversible Requires mitigation and rehabilitation to ensure

reversibility

5 Irreversible Cannot be rehabilitated completely/rehabilitation not

viable

Probability

This describes the chance of occurrence of an impact.

1 Unlikely The chance of the impact occurring is extremely low

(Less than 15% chance of occurrence).

2 Possible The impact may occur (Between 15% to 40% chance of

occurrence).

3 Probable The impact will likely occur (Between 40% to 60% chance

of occurrence)

4 Highly Probable Impact will certainly occur (Greater than 60% to 85%

chance of occurrence).

5 Definite Impact will definitely occur (Greater than 80% chance of

occurrence).

Duration

This describes the duration of the impacts on the environmental parameter. Duration indicates the

lifetime of the impact as a result of the proposed activity

1 Short term The impact and its effects will either disappear with

mitigation or will be mitigated through natural process in

a span shorter than the construction phase (0 – 2 years),

or the impact and its effects will last for the period of a

relatively short construction period and a limited

recovery time after construction, thereafter it will be

entirely negated.

2 Short to Medium term The impact and its effects will continue or last for some

time after the construction phase but will be mitigated

by direct human action or by natural processes


thereafter (2 – 5 years).

3 Medium term The impact and its effects will continue or last for the

entire operational life of the development, but will be

mitigated by direct human action or by natural

processes thereafter (6 – 25years).

4 Long term The impact and its effects will continue or last for the

entire operational life of the development, but will be

mitigated by direct human action or by natural

processes thereafter (26 - 45years).

5 Permanent The only class of impact that will be non-transitory.

Mitigation either by man or natural process will not occur

in such a way or such a time span that the impact can

be considered transient (Longer than 46 years).

Magnitude

Describes the severity of an impact

1 Low Little effect – negligible disturbance/benefit.

2 Low to Moderate Impact alters the quality, use and integrity of the system/

component but system/ component still continues to

function in a moderately modified way and maintains

general function.

3 Moderate Effect is observable – impact reversible with

rehabilitation.

4 Moderate to High Extensive effects – irreversible alteration to the

environment.

5 High Extensive permanent effect with irreversible alterations

Significance

Significance is determined through a synthesis of impact characteristics. Significance is an indication

of the importance of the impact in terms of both physical extent and time scale, and therefore

indicates the level of mitigation required. This describes the significance of the impact on the

environmental parameter. The calculation of the significance of an impact uses the following formula:

(Extent + Duration + Magnitude + Reversibility) x Probability = Significance

The summation of the different criteria will produce a non-weighted value. By multiplying this value with

the probability, the resultant value acquires a weighted characteristic which can be measured and

assigned a significance rating.

1-20 points Low

21-40 points Moderate to Low

41-60 points Moderate

61-80 points Moderate to High

81-100 points High


Appendix B: INFORMATION SOURCES

Bibliography

1. Burdge, Rabel J. and Vanclay, F (1995). Social Impact Assessment: State of the Art.

2. Christian Arnault Emini: A Financial Social Accounting Matrix for the Integrated

Macroeconomic Model.

3. DEA&DP Guideline for involving Economic Specialists in the EIA processes (2005).

4. De Roodepoort SLP: March 2016.

5. Eberhart, Anton: The Future of South African Coal (2011). Programme on Energy and

Sustainable Development, Stanford.

6. Centaur De Roodepoort Scoping Report dated February 2016.

7. Gert Sibande Municipal District Council (SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILES, MARCH 2015)

8. Guidelines for Social Assessment Specialists in EIA Processes. Department of

Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, Western Cape Province (2006).

9. Hamann, Ralph: Mining companies' role in sustainable development: The 'why' and 'how'

of corporate social responsibility from a business perspective. Pages 237-254, Published

online: 01 Jul 2010.

10. IDP 2012-2013 to 2016-2017 of Gert Sibande Municipal District

11. Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for South Africa (2010-2030).

12. Jose I. Huertas, Dumar A. Camacho, Maria E. Huerta, 20 January 2012 Roberts, J, 2009:

The Hidden Epidemic Amongst Former Miners. Silicosis, tuberculosis and the occupational

diseases in mines and works Act in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Health Systems Trust.

13. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Lane; R. Kamp: On-

line version ISSN 2411-9717: J. S. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. vol. 113 n.3 Johannesburg March

2013, CONFERENCE PAPERS.

14. Msukaligwa SDF Final Report 2010.

15. Navigating above-the-ground risk in the platinum sector, The Monitor Group,

Johannesburg, South Africa.

16. Pierce, D et al. (1989). Blueprint for a Green Economy. Earthscan Publications Limited.

17. Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, 16 of 2013.

18. StatsSA 2011.

19. Swart, E: The South African Legislative Framework for Mine Closure (Department: Minerals

and Energy, Pretoria).

20. The Employment Equity Act no. 55 of 1998.

21. The National Energy Act, 2008.

22. The National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA) – since amended.

23. The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2013.

ISSN 2225-6253. Paper presented at the 5th International Platinum Conference 2012, 18-

20 September 2012, Sun City, South Africa.

24. Town Planning and Townships Ordinance Act 15 of1986.

25. Velasquez, M. G. (1985). Ethics: Theory and Practice.

26. Vanclay, F. (2002). Conceptualising Social Impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment

Review.

27. Van Zyl, H.W., de Wit, M.P. & Leiman, A. 2005. Guidelines for DEA&DP for involving

Economic Specialists in EIA processes.


Internet sources

1. www.unep.org/pdf/NA_Indicators_FullVersion.pdf

2. http://www.nwu.ac.za

3. http://www.bothends.org

4. http://ia2dec.pbe.eea.europa.eu/knowledge_base/Frameworks/doc101182

5. http://www.saimm.co.za

6. https://collegegrad.com/industries/farmi03

7. http://enviroliteracy.org/environment-society/economics/cost-benefit-analysis

8. http://soer.deat.gov.za/dm_documents/Human_Settlement_-

_Background_Paper_iwTDC.pdf

9. http://www.eia.org.za/

10. http://www.coaltech.co.za/chamber%20databases%5Ccoaltech%5CCom_DocMan.nsf

/0/9F95002E17957FCC422574030033355F/$File/Task%207.14.1%20-

%20Capital%20&%20Labour%20Intensive%20Methods.pdf

Primary research sources consulted for SEIA (not exhaustive)

Telephonic and/or on site interviews:

1. Arnold Oosthuizen (Land owner - RE)

2. Mr. Daniel Maluleki (MLM - Municipal Manager)


Appendix C: CRR SUMMARY OF ISSUES ARISING FROM THE PPP

SOURCE RAISED BY DRIVERS & PRESSURES IMPACT

1 PPP & Interviews

Community residents

(See Issues & Response Table)

Air quality (dust & pollution)

Health Impact

2 PPP & Interviews

Community residents

(See Issues & Response Table) Noise pollution Health Impact

3 PPP & Interviews

Community residents


Blasting & vibration assessment

Safety Impact

4

PPP & Interviews Community residents


HIV/Aids, Cholera, Flu mutations,

Tuberculosis, Sexually transmitted

infections

Health Impact

5

PPP & Interviews

Farming community &

neighbours (See Issues &

Response Table)

Close proximity to adjacent farms Health & Safety

Impact

6 PPP & Interviews

Farming community (See Issues

& Response Table) Land use and land value

Economic

Impact

7 PPP & Interviews

Local community & neighbours

(See Issues & Response Table) Employment opportunity

Economic

Impact

9

PPP & Interviews

Farming community &

neighbours (See issues &

Response Table)

Sense of place Socio-cultural

Impact

10

PPP & Interviews

Farming community &


Response Table)

Aesthetics environment Visual Impact

11

PPP & Interviews

Farming community &


Response Table)

Change in land use and value

Soil, land use

and capability

Impact

13 PPP & Interviews

Community residents

(See Issues & Response table)

Perceptions & attitudes towards

the development Social Impact

14

PPP & Interviews

Community residents

AECOM & SANRAL

(Emails refer)

Impact on roads infrastructure Traffic impact


APPENDIX D: CV’s

ABBREVIATED CV – Anton Grobler

TELEPHONE NUMBER: +27 (0)82 725 4568

E-MAIL [email protected]

SKYPE antongrobler66

Career Profile

Professor Anton Grobler holds a Ph.D in Industrial Psychology from the North West University

(previously - PU for CHE). He is a qualified Industrial Psychologist, Master People Practitioner

and an International Affiliate to the Society of Industrial and Organisational Psychology. He

hold the position of Professor, and academic area head for Leadership and Organisational

Behaviour Before at the Unisa School of Business Leadership. Before that he was employed at

the University of South Africa as the Director: Organisation Development and Human Resource

Information Systems. Prior to his appointment in Unisa, he was the National Head of

Psychological Services (at the rank of Director / Brigadier) in the South African Police Services.

He also has vast consulting experience, also in his private capacity within large organisations.

He has an extensive academic and institutional research record with numerous publications

in accredited peer reviewed academic journals and has delivered papers at various national

and international conferences. His current research focuses primarily on the leadership,

organisational behaviour, ethical work behaviour, sustainability and corporate governance

and citizenship. His passion is to influence sustainable environmental development through

ethical practices. She joined the Zone Land Solution team in 2015, as one of the specialists

responsible for environmental Socio-Economic Impact Assessments (SEIA).

Educational Qualifications

B Comm (1987)

B Comm (Honours) - (1988)

M Comm (1991)

PhD (Industrial Psychology) – (2003)

Project Portfolio (See - www.zonelandsolutions.co.za)

mailto:[email protected]


ABBREVIATED CV – Anne-marie le Roux

TELEPHONE NUMBER: +27 (0)83 293 6615

E-MAIL [email protected]

SKYPE anne-marieleroux

LINKEDIN https://za.linkedin.com/pub/anne-marie-le-roux/19/919/69b

Career Profile

Anne-marie started her career in the Department of Agriculture in 1994, after achieving a BSc

(Hons) from the University of Pretoria. As the Assistant-Director responsible for Food Security, she

worked closely with communities in marginal social- and economic conditions. She completed

a MBA at the University of Stellenbosch Business School (USB), whist holding national executive

positions in the Financial Service sector in Sub-Saharan Africa. She became an independent

consultant in 2010, and as an experienced Change- and Project manager, has seen a number

of large, complex projects successfully implemented.

Highlights include leading the implementation of the National Credit Act (NCA) for Woolworths

in 2007 and an executive member of the joint venture team, designing the ABSA/Woolworths

merger in 2008.

She is currently lecturing as part time Faculty at USB (University of Stellenbosch Business School)

and GSB (Graduate School of Business Cape Town University), as well as an ICF registered

coach.

Her passion is to influence sustainable environmental development through ethical practices.

She joined the Zone Land Solution team in 2011, as the specialist responsible for environmental

Socio-Economic Impact Assessments (SEIA).

Educational Qualifications

BSc (Hons) University of Pretoria - (1994)

Diploma Institute of Bankers CAIB - (2001)

MBA Stellenbosch Business School - (2007)

Corporate Governance Wits Business School – (2008)

Project Portfolio (See - www.zonelandsolutions.co.za)

mailto:[email protected]

Date post:	20-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Socio Economic Impact Assessment - SAHRIS | SAHRA · Author/Reviewer: Anton Grobler / Anne-marie le...

Documents