1

2

PLEASE NOTEPLEASE NOTEPLEASE NOTEPLEASE NOTEPLEASE NOTE

This document is intended as an aid only and cannot take the place ofThis document is intended as an aid only and cannot take the place ofThis document is intended as an aid only and cannot take the place ofThis document is intended as an aid only and cannot take the place ofThis document is intended as an aid only and cannot take the place oflegal advice in a specific situation governed by legislation.legal advice in a specific situation governed by legislation.legal advice in a specific situation governed by legislation.legal advice in a specific situation governed by legislation.legal advice in a specific situation governed by legislation.

All enquiries should be addressed to:Director: Environmental Planning and Impact Management

Department of Environmental Affairs and TourismPrivate Bag X447

Pretoria0001

Fax: (012) 310-3688

This document is also available on the DEAT web site: http://www.environment.gov.za

No part of this document may be reproduced in any mannerwithout full acknowledgement of the Department.

Issued by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

Date: February 2000

ISBN 0-621-29925-1

3

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis document has been prepared by the CSIR in partnership with the Department of Environmental Affairsand Tourism (DEAT). This project was undertaken with the support of funds made available by DEAT and theCSIR.

The Guidelines were compiled by Michelle Audouin and Paul Lochner of the CSIR, with contributions fromJessica Rich, Engela Brink, Patrick Morant, Stuart Heather-Clark, Nigel Rossouw, Francois van der Heydenand Alex Weaver of the CSIR. Furthermore, Keith Wiseman is acknowledged for the work he undertook indeveloping Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in South Africa.

This document would also not have been possible without the valuable written comments and inputs from thenumerous interested parties who participated in the discussions and workshops leading to this guidelinedocument. These contributors, which include government organisations, industry, interest groups andpractitioners involved in SEA, are all gratefully acknowledged.

Written contributions were received from:

ChairmanKleinmond Nature ConservationSociety

Danny WalmsleyWalmsley Mzuri Consultants

Desiree ShepherdPlanning, Environment and HousingCape Metropolitan Council

Keith WisemanEnvironmental Management DeptCape Metropolitan Council

P M M JonasUmgeni Water

Dr P HanekomDepartment: Agriculture,Conservation and EnvironmentGauteng Provincial Government

Dr Jane TurpiePercy FitzPatrick Institute ofAfrican OrnithologyUniversity of Cape Town

Dr C J SchefferDepartment of Arts, Culture, Scienceand Technology

Gerhard VisserHelderberg Metropolitan LocalCouncil

Nelia HeydenrichDevelopment Bank of South Africa

Mr G BoschOuter West Local Council

Richard HillDepartment of Environmentaland Geographical ScienceUniversity of Cape Town

ACK KannenbergThe Association of ConsultingTown and Regional Planners:South Region

Angela AndrewsLegal Resources Centre

Mr M NadelPretoria Metro

Paul E N BrittonCape Peninsula National Park

Marie-Lou RouxHabitat Council

Dr Piet E ClaassenP E Claassen Trp (SA)

F J BothaSasol Technology (Pty) Ltd

Dr S W WaltersKobio

Leila MahomedWildlife and EnvironmentSociety of SA

H F PienaarGreater Johannesburg NorthernMetropolitan Local Council

A S BerrisfordDepartment of Land Affairs

T MoffettLocal Government and HousingKwaZulu-Natal ProvincialGovernment

Alida CroudaceThe Red Hill Conservation Group

Dr P BaylissMuseum of Natural History

Dr Ina PlugMuseum of Natural History

J M Fourie

Carolyn KerrDurban Metro

J S Freeron behalf of MINTEK and theSouth Afircan Institute of Miningand Metallurgy

Nozipho ZikalalaSustainable DevelopmentPlanningJohannesburg MetropolitanCouncil

Dr John RaimondoAfrican Environmental Solutions

Andrew DonaldsonDepartment of Finance

A BurgerSRK Councilling

5

S U M M A RS U M M A RS U M M A RS U M M A RS U M M A R YYYYYStrategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is becoming an accepted and widely used instrument for integratingenvironmental issues into the formulation of plans and programmes. Several SEAs have recently been undertakenin South Africa, or are currently in progress. However, these studies have been done in the absence of anagreed understanding and methodology for SEA. This gave rise to the need for guidelines which promote acommon understanding of SEA in South Africa and assist in the development of best practice in SEA.

These Guidelines apply to environmental assessment at the planning and programme level. Although SEA canalso be applied at a policy level, current experience both locally and internationally relates primarily to SEA atthe planning and programme level. It is also becoming apparent that the application of SEA to policies issignificantly different to that for plans and programmes. SEA methodologies at the policy level are thereforedeveloping separately.

SEA aims to ensure that environmental issues are addressed from an early stage in the process of formulatingpolicies, plans and programmes, and incorporated throughout this process. The Guidelines describe the mainbenefits of SEA and the contribution that SEA can make to guide development within sustainable limits.

It is intended that SEA, at its current stage of development, should be a pro-active management instrument.This means that no particular body has legal responsibility for undertaking or approving an SEA. Initiationof an SEA should arise from the benefits that it provides to a decision-maker.

Ten principles are proposed for SEA in South Africa. These principles are the fundamental premises underpinningSEA methodologies in South Africa and provide the theoretical base for the development of local SEA processes.The Guidelines also describe the essential elements of an SEA and indicate how these elements can becombined into a SEA process. SEA is context-specific, and this process would need to be refined and adaptedto suit the context in which it is applied. Recommendations are provided for integrating the key elements andprinciples into existing processes for plan and programme formulation, or for developing a separate SEAprocess, depending on what the context requires.

In conclusion, the continued development of SEA in South Africa is important for the integration of the conceptof sustainability into the social, economic and biophysical goals of this country. These Guidelines aim toprovide a basis on which context-specific, integrated and sustainability-led processes for SEA may be formulated.Each specific SEA process will vary depending on the situation in which it is developed and the purpose forwhich it is undertaken.

These Guidelines are based on a variety of experiences in SEA in South Africa and internationally. However,they need to be tested and refined to reflect a common, evolving understanding of SEA nationally. Thisdevelopment of SEA will assist in practically implementing sustainability and moving towards a true integrationof economic, social and biophysical goals.

6

TTTTTABLE OF CONTENTSABLE OF CONTENTSABLE OF CONTENTSABLE OF CONTENTSABLE OF CONTENTSSUMMARSUMMARSUMMARSUMMARSUMMARY ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................GLOSSARGLOSSARGLOSSARGLOSSARGLOSSARY ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................Y ..............................................................................................................................

1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................1.1 Objectives and benefits of SEA ..............................................................................1.2 Legislative and policy context for SEA ....................................................................1.3 Role of SEA within Integrated Environmental Management ........................................1.4 Development of the SEA Guidelines ........................................................................1.5 Purpose of the SEA Guidelines ..............................................................................1.6 Structure of this document .....................................................................................

2 .2 .2 .2 .2 . KEY CONCEPTS UNDERPINNING SEA KEY CONCEPTS UNDERPINNING SEA KEY CONCEPTS UNDERPINNING SEA KEY CONCEPTS UNDERPINNING SEA KEY CONCEPTS UNDERPINNING SEA GUIDELINESGUIDELINESGUIDELINESGUIDELINESGUIDELINES ............................................................... 13 ............................................................... 13 ............................................................... 13 ............................................................... 13 ............................................................... 132.1 Context-specific ....................................................................................................2.2 Integrative .............................................................................................................2.3 Sustainability-led ..................................................................................................

3 .3 .3 .3 .3 . PRINCIPLES FOR SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ............................................................................ 14PRINCIPLES FOR SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ............................................................................ 14PRINCIPLES FOR SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ............................................................................ 14PRINCIPLES FOR SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ............................................................................ 14PRINCIPLES FOR SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ............................................................................ 143.1 Description of the Principles ................................................................................... 14

4 .4 .4 .4 .4 . KEY ELEMENTS OF A SEA PROCESS ................................................................................... 14KEY ELEMENTS OF A SEA PROCESS ................................................................................... 14KEY ELEMENTS OF A SEA PROCESS ................................................................................... 14KEY ELEMENTS OF A SEA PROCESS ................................................................................... 14KEY ELEMENTS OF A SEA PROCESS ................................................................................... 144.1 Identify broad plan and programme alternatives ........................................................4.2 Screening ............................................................................................................4.3 Scoping ...............................................................................................................

4.3.1 Formulate a vision .......................................................................................4.3.2 Identify significant strategic issues ................................................................

4.4 Situation Assessment ...........................................................................................4.4.1 Prepare a resource inventory ........................................................................4.4.2 Identify sustainability objectives, criteria and indicators ...................................4.4.3 Identify environmental opportunities and constraints ........................................

4.5 Formulate sustainability parameters for the development of the plan or programme .....4.6 Develop and assess alternative plans and programmes .............................................

4.6.1 Adjust or develop the plan or programme in terms of the assessment ...............4.6.2 Identify environmental substitutes or trade-offs ................................................

4.7 Decision-making ....................................................................................................4.7.1 Review ........................................................................................................4.7.2 Record of decision .......................................................................................

4.8 Develop a plan for implementation, monitoring and auditing .......................................4.8.1 Prepare implementation strategy ...................................................................4.8.2 Plan monitoring and auditing .........................................................................

4.9 Implementation .....................................................................................................4.9.1 Implement the proposal ................................................................................4.9.2 Monitor and audit .........................................................................................

.5 .5 .5 .5 .5 . CURRENT ISSUES AND CHALLENGES TO THE IMPLEMENTCURRENT ISSUES AND CHALLENGES TO THE IMPLEMENTCURRENT ISSUES AND CHALLENGES TO THE IMPLEMENTCURRENT ISSUES AND CHALLENGES TO THE IMPLEMENTCURRENT ISSUES AND CHALLENGES TO THE IMPLEMENTAAAAATION OF SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ..... 23TION OF SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ..... 23TION OF SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ..... 23TION OF SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ..... 23TION OF SEA IN SOUTH AFRICA ..... 23

5.1 Links between SEA and the IDP process ................................................................5.2 Capacity building and training .................................................................................5.3 Information needs ..................................................................................................5.4 Coordination between various institutional structures ................................................

6 .6 .6 .6 .6 . CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 25CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 25CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 25CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 25CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 25

5555588888

1 01 01 01 01 0101012131313

14171717172020202021212222222222222223232323

23242525

131414

7

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 27APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 27APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 27APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 27APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 27APPENDIX A: IEM principles ..............................................................................................APPENDIX B: NEMA principles ..........................................................................................APPENDIX C: Case studies ...............................................................................................

(1) Durban South Basin SEA ............................................................................................(2) SEA for the Somchem Krantzkop Site, Wellington .......................................................(3) SEA for water uses in South Africa ..............................................................................(4) Northern Metropolitan Local Council SEA .....................................................................(5) Baralink Node Development Framework SEA ................................................................(6) SEA of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic Bid .....................................................................

FIGURESFIGURESFIGURESFIGURESFIGURESFigure 1: The difference between EIA and SEA ............................................................................Figure 2: Example of a tiered approach to SEA and project-level EIA in South Africa .....................Figure 3: SEA process .............................................................................................................Figure 4: Integrating the IDP process and elements of SEA .........................................................

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 26REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 26REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 26REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 26REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 26

272830313233343536

11121824

8

G L O S S A RG L O S S A RG L O S S A RG L O S S A RG L O S S A R YYYYYAffected environment - “Those parts of the socio-

economic and biophysical environmentimpacted on by the development” (DEAT, 1998).

Alternatives - “A possible course of action, in placeof another, that would meet the same purposeand need (of the proposal)” (DEAT, 1998).

Cumulative Impact - “An action that in itself is notsignificant but is significant when added to theimpact of other similar actions” (DEA, 1992).

Development - “The act of altering or modifyingresources in order to obtain potential benefits”(DEAT, 1998).

Environment - “Environment means the surroundingswithin which humans exist and that are made up of -

i. the land, water and atmosphere of theearth;

ii. micro-organisms, plant and animal life;iii. any part or combination of (i) and (ii) and

the inter-relationships among andbetween them; and

iv. the physical, chemical, aesthetic andcultural properties and conditions of theforegoing that influence human healthand well-being.” (National EnvironmentalManagement Act No. 107 of 1998).

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) - “Adetailed study of the environmentalconsequences of a proposed course ofaction. An environmental assessment orevaluation is a study of the environmentaleffects of a decision, project, undertaking oractivity. It is most often used within anIntegrated Environmental Management (IEM)planning process, as a decision support toolto compare different options” (DEAT, 1998).

Environmental Implementation Plans andEnvironmental Management Plans - Interms of the National EnvironmentalManagement Act (No. 107 of 1998), these plansare to be prepared by provincial and nationalgovernment departments. The purpose ofenvironmental implementation andmanagement plans is to coordinate theenvironmental policies, plans and programmesand decisions of various governmentdepartments at a local and provincial level,which exercise functions which affect theenvironment. The aim is to minimise theduplication of procedures and provideconsistency in the protection of the environment

across the country as a whole.

Environmental Management System - A systemwhich provides a structured process forcontinual improvement and which enables anorganization to achieve and systematicallycontrol the level of environmental performancethat it sets itself. In general, this is based on adynamic cyclical process of “plan, implement,check and review”.

Environmental Resources - Goods, services orenvironmental conditions that have the potentialto enhance social well-being.

Impacts - “The outcome of an action, whetherconsidered desirable or undesirable” (DEA,1992).

Integrated Development Plan - IntegratedDevelopment Planning is a process throughwhich a municipality can establish adevelopment plan for the short, medium andlong term. It integrates planning acrossdifferent government sectors and identifies andsets priorities for delivery. The LocalGovernment Transition Act (No. 97 of 1996)requires all local governments to produce anIntegrated Development Plan, and is bindingin all nine provinces.

Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) -“A philosophy which prescribes a code ofpractice for ensuring that environmentalconsiderations are fully integrated into allstages of the development process in order toachieve a desirable balance betweenconservation and development” (DEA, 1992).

Interested and affected parties (I&APs) -“Individuals and groups concerned with oraffected by an activity and its consequences.These include the authorities, localcommunities, investors, workforce, customersand consumers, environmental interest groups,and the general public.” (DEAT, 1998).

Land Development Objectives (LDO) - LandDevelopment Objectives are developed in termsof the Development Facilitation Act (No. 67 of1995). LDOs provide for a new system of urbanmanagement at local government, which isaimed at transforming the systems andprocedures and facilitate integrated, efficientand coordinated service delivery. The LDOswill essentially link public expenditure to a newdevelopment vision and strategies that have

9

been prioritised in conjunction withcommunities and other major stakeholders(Greater Johannesburg TransitionalMetropolitan Council, 1996).

Plan - “A purposeful, forward-looking strategy ordesign, often with coordinated priorities, optionsand measures that elaborate and implementpolicy” (CSIR, 1997).

Policy - “A general course of action or proposed overalldirection that is being pursued and whichguides ongoing decision-making” (CSIR, 1997).

Precautionary Principle - This involves applying a“risk-averse and cautious approach thatrecognises the limits of current knowledgeabout the environmental consequences ofdecisions or actions” (White Paper onEnvironmental Policy for South Africa, 1998).

Programme - “A coherent, organised agenda orschedule of commitments, proposalinstruments and/or activities that elaborate andimplement policy” (CSIR, 1997).

Scoping - “A procedure for narrowing the scope ofan assessment and ensuring that theassessment remains focused on the trulysignificant issues or impacts” (DEA, 1992).

Screening - “The classification of proposals” (DEA,1992).

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) - Thereis no universal definition for SEA, however, it isreferred to in the White Paper on EnvironmentalManagement Policy for South Africa (1998),as “a process to assess the environmentalimplications of a proposed strategic decision,policy, plan, programme, piece of legislationor major plan.” A notable problem with thisdefinition is that it could imply that SEA isseparate from the policy, plan and programmeformulation process. Furthermore, this definitionfocuses on the impacts of the environment ondevelopment. However, the principle ofevaluating the opportunities which theenvironment offers to development and theconstraints which it imposes, should beincluded in the definition of SEA.

A more proactive approach to SEA is reflectedin Tonk and Verheem’s (1998) definition of SEAas “a structured, proactive process tostrengthen the role of environmental issues instrategic decision making.” Sadler (1995)states that SEA aims to integrate environmental(biophysical, social and economic)

considerations into the earliest stages of policy,plan and programme development. In theseGuidelines, SEA is defined as a process ofintegrating the concept of sustainability intostrategic decision-making.

Sustainability - Refer to Box 1 in the document for adefinition and discussion on sustainability.

ABBREVIAABBREVIAABBREVIAABBREVIAABBREVIAT IONST IONST IONST IONST IONS

DEA - Department of Environment AffairsDEAT - Department of Environmental Affairs and

TourismEIA - Environmental Impact AssessmentEIP - Environmental Implementation PlanEMP - Environmental Management PlanEMS - Environmental Management SystemIDP - Integrated Development PlanIEM - Integrated Environmental ManagementLDO - Land Development ObjectiveSABS - South African Bureau of StandardsSEA - Strategic Environmental Assessment

10

1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . INTRODUCT IONINTRODUCT IONINTRODUCT IONINTRODUCT IONINTRODUCT ION

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) isbecoming an accepted and widely used instrumentfor integrating environmental issues into theformulation of plans and programmes. Several SEAshave recently been undertaken in South Africa, or arecurrently in progress. However, these studies havebeen done in the absence of an agreed understandingand methodology for SEA. This gave rise to the needfor Guidelines which promote a commonunderstanding of SEA in South Africa and assist inthe development of best practice in SEA.

These Guidelines apply to environmental assessmentat the planning and programme level. Although SEAcan also be applied at a policy level, current experienceboth locally and internationally relates primarily toSEA at the planning and programme level. It is alsobecoming apparent that the application of SEA topolicies is significantly different to that for plans andprogrammes. SEA methodologies at the policy levelare therefore developing separately.

1 . 11 . 11 . 11 . 11 . 1 Objectives and benefits of SEAObjectives and benefits of SEAObjectives and benefits of SEAObjectives and benefits of SEAObjectives and benefits of SEA

SEA aims to ensure that environmental issues areaddressed from an early stage in the process offormulating plans and programmes, and incorporatedthroughout this process.

The main benefits of SEA are that it:

n pro-actively informs the development ofplans and programmes;

n identifies the opportunities and constraintswhich the environment places ondevelopment;

n provides guidelines to ensure thatdevelopment is within sustainable limits;

n has the ability to integrate across areas,regions or sectors;

n improves the way in which cumulative effectsare dealt with in environmental assessments,for example, through the use of thresholdsand limits of acceptable change; and

n focuses on the maintenance andenhancement of a chosen level ofenvironmental quality, rather than onminimising individual impacts.

The approach of assessing the effect of theenvironment on development is an important benefitof SEA (Figure 1). This is one of the differencesbetween SEA and EIA, as EIAs focus on the effect ofdevelopment on the environment. In some countries,an EIA-based approach to SEA is followed, where

SEA is used to assess the impacts of a plan orprogramme on the environment. However, anintegrative approach is proposed in these Guidelines.This approach considers the opportunities andconstraints which the environment places on the planor programme.

The fundamental benefit of SEA is that it aims tointegrate the concept of sustainability into theformulation of plans and programmes. Box 1 containsthe definition of sustainability used in theseGuidelines.

1 . 21 . 21 . 21 . 21 . 2 Legislative and policy context for SEALegislative and policy context for SEALegislative and policy context for SEALegislative and policy context for SEALegislative and policy context for SEA

There are currently no legislative requirementsspecifically for SEA in South Africa. However, theNational Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (No.107 of 1998) makes provision for the development ofassessment procedures that aim to ensure that theenvironmental consequences of policies, plans andprogrammes are considered. This provision indicatesa need, within legislation, for the use of SEA.

A number of policy initiatives also address the needfor SEA, for example, the White Paper onEnvironmental Management Policy for South Africa(1998). Furthermore, SEA is a means of implementingthe principle of sustainability, which is central to thenew planning and environmental legislationpromulgated in South Africa. The opportunity thereforeexists for SEA to provide an approach for integratingsustainability into the implementation of recentlegislation. For example, SEA could be applied inconjunction with the following processes required byplanning and environmental legislation:

n Land Development Objectives (LDOs) requiredin terms of the Development Facilitation Act(No. 67 of 1995);

n Environmental Implementation Plans (EIPs) andEnvironmental Management Plans (EMPs)required in terms of the National EnvironmentalManagement Act (No. 107 of 1998); and

n Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) requiredin terms of the Local Government TransitionAct (No. 109 of 1993).

It is intended that SEA, at its current stage ofdevelopment, should be a pro-active managementinstrument. This means that no particular body haslegal responsibility for undertaking or approving a SEA.Initiation of a SEA should arise from the benefits which

11

it provides to a decision-maker, as described inSection 1.1 of these Guidelines. The initiator of anSEA may be, for example, an industry whichintends making a strategic decision concerningtheir future business direction; or a governmentbody that requires a process to enhance strategicdecision-making relating to the management of a

FIGURE 1: THE DIFFERENCE IN FOCUS BETWEEN EIA AND SEA (Source: CSIR, 1996)

particular sector or region.

Similarly, at present there is no legislativeresponsibility for government to review an SEA.However, reviews should be built into the process, forexample, through independent peer review andfeedback from interested and affected parties.

BOX 1. SUSTAINABILITY

The concept of sustainability relates to the maintenance and enhancement of environmental,social and economic resources, in order to meet the needs of current and future generations.The three components of sustainability are:

l Environmental sustainability: which requires that natural capital remains intact. This meansthat the source and sink functions of the environment should not be degraded. Therefore,the extraction of renewable resources should not exceed the rate at which they are renewed,and the absorptive capacity to the environment to assimilate wastes should not be exceeded.Furthermore, the extraction of non-renewable resources should be minimised and shouldnot exceed agreed minimum strategic levels.

l Social sustainability: which requires that the cohesion of society and its ability to worktowards common goals be maintained. Individual needs, such as those for health and well-being, nutrition, shelter, education and cultural expression should be met.

l Economic sustainability: which occurs when development, which moves towards social andenvironmental sustainability, is financially feasible

(Source: Gilbert, Stevenson, Girardet, Stren,1996).

ENVIRO NM ENT

DEVEL OPM EN T

En viro nm e ntal Im p actAs ses sm e nt (E IA)

S tra te gic En viro nm e ntalAs ses sm e nt (SEA )

Biophys ica l

Econom ic

Socia l

12

1 . 31 . 31 . 31 . 31 . 3 Role of SEA within Integrated EnvironmentalRole of SEA within Integrated EnvironmentalRole of SEA within Integrated EnvironmentalRole of SEA within Integrated EnvironmentalRole of SEA within Integrated EnvironmentalManagementManagementManagementManagementManagement

Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) providesthe overarching philosophy for the integration ofenvironmental management principles into decision-making in South Africa. These principles are describedin NEMA (Appendix B) and embrace the SEAprinciples described in Section 3 of these Guidelines.

IEM incorporates several instruments for environmentalassessment and management. These can be appliedat different levels of environmental impactmanagement. SEA has been identified as anappropriate instrument, both locally and internationally,to incorporate environmental aspects into the higher

FIGURE 2: EXAMPLE OF A TIERED APPROACH TO SEA AND PROJECT-LEVEL EIA IN SOUTH AFRICA

level planning processes of a more strategic nature.The relationship of these IEM instruments to levels inthe development cycle is shown in Figure 2. It is notintended that SEA should replace EIA, but rather thatit should complement project-level assessment, byproviding an effective instrument for environmentalassessment at the plan and programme level. SEAmay form the context for lower levels of planning andprovide input into higher, more strategic levels.

There are several instruments developed forenvironmental impact management which can be usedwithin the SEA process. For example, life cycleassessment, cost-benefit analysis and othereconomic and monitoring instruments.

Implementationand

Monitoring

Projects

P lans and

Programmes

S E A

S tra teg icE n v ironm enta l

M an agem ent P lan

P ro jec t E IA s

E n v ironm enta l M anagem en t P lans

STA GE S IN TH E D EV ELOPM EN T

C YC LE

C OM PON EN TSOF IE M

Feed

back

to h

ighe

r lev

els

of p

lann

ing

and

deci

sion

mak

ing

Increasing levels of deta il

13

1 . 41 . 41 . 41 . 41 . 4 Development of the SEA GuidelinesDevelopment of the SEA GuidelinesDevelopment of the SEA GuidelinesDevelopment of the SEA GuidelinesDevelopment of the SEA Guidelines

The SEA Primer (CSIR, 1996) provided a first step inthe development of SEA as an accepted tool forenvironmental planning and management in SouthAfrica. The need for SEA was identified, indicatingthe limitations of an Environmental ImpactAssessment (EIA) approach for plans andprogrammes.

After a number of SEAs had been commissioned andexperience in SEA had grown, it was possible toproduce a Protocol for Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment (CSIR, 1997). This provided a foundationfrom which key principles and approaches to SEAcould be developed. Thereafter, the draft principlesand early versions of the Guidelines were distributedfor comment to authorities, practitioners and otherparties involved in SEA in South Africa. Early versionsof the Guidelines were also tested againstinternational trends and experiences.

Based on the above process, draft Guidelines for SEAin South Africa were produced in March 1999. TheseGuidelines were widely distributed by the Departmentof Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) tointerested and affected parties for their comment. Thiswas accompanied by a series of workshops held inMay 1999 in Cape Town, Pretoria and Durban wherethe Guidelines were presented and feedback obtained.

1 . 51 . 51 . 51 . 51 . 5 Purpose of the SEA GuidelinesPurpose of the SEA GuidelinesPurpose of the SEA GuidelinesPurpose of the SEA GuidelinesPurpose of the SEA Guidelines

The purpose of these Guidelines is to:

n Promote the development of best practice inSEA;

n Assist role-players in contributing to andreviewing SEA processes;

n Provide a generic approach to SEA which isapplicable to the South African context; and

n Provide the foundation for the possible futuredevelopment of SEA legislation in South Africa.

1 . 61 . 61 . 61 . 61 . 6 Structure of this documentStructure of this documentStructure of this documentStructure of this documentStructure of this document

This document is divided into the following sections:

n Key concepts underpinning SEA;n Principles for SEA in South Africa;n Key elements for an SEA process;n Current issues and challenges in the

implementation of SEA; andn Conclusions.

The key concepts outline the theoretical approach toSEA. Thereafter, the principles underpinning SEA inSouth Africa are summarised. Questions relating toeach principle are also included. These questionsformed the basis for the development of key elementsand related actions which provide the structure for aSEA process. Finally, some current issues andchallenges facing the implementation of SEA arehighlighted.

2 .2 .2 .2 .2 . KEY CONCEPTSKEY CONCEPTSKEY CONCEPTSKEY CONCEPTSKEY CONCEPTSUNDERPINNING SEA UNDERPINNING SEA UNDERPINNING SEA UNDERPINNING SEA UNDERPINNING SEA GUIDELINESGUIDELINESGUIDELINESGUIDELINESGUIDELINES

The approach to SEA adopted in these Guidelines iscontext-specific, integrative and sustainability-led.Each of these characteristics is described below.

2 . 12 . 12 . 12 . 12 . 1 Context-specif icContext-specif icContext-specif icContext-specif icContext-specif ic

The process for a SEA should be informed by thecontext (e.g. the political, institutional, social andbiophysical environment) in which the plan orprogramme is being developed. The focus is on theidentification of key elements for SEA, to be integratedinto context-specific processes for plan andprogramme formulation (e.g. processes for theformulation of Integrated Development Plans). SEAis therefore adapted to local requirements for decision-making. The aim is not to develop a new and separateprocess for SEA. However, the key elements mayalso be used as a guide in developing a separateSEA process if the context requires this. Such anapproach also allows for flexibility in developing tailor-made SEA procedures, which respond to localconditions.

2 . 22 . 22 . 22 . 22 . 2 Integrat iveIntegrat iveIntegrat iveIntegrat iveIntegrat ive

The integrative approach to SEA aims to avoid theduplication of processes. The focus is on adding valueto existing procedures and minimising the need foradditional human and financial resources. This isparticularly important in South Africa’s diverse rangeof social, economic, biophysical, legislative andadministrative conditions. Therefore it is not proposedthat there be a single SEA process to be applied inall circumstances; but rather that there be principlesand key elements that should be integrated intocurrent procedures for the formulation of policies, plansand programmes. This integration should assist inmoving towards sustainability at the strategic level.

14

2 . 32 . 32 . 32 . 32 . 3 Sustainability-ledSustainability-ledSustainability-ledSustainability-ledSustainability-led

A sustainability-led approach to SEA goes beyondthe extension of project-specific EIA procedures tothe plan and programme level. It provides for theinclusion of the concept of sustainability into plan andprogramme formulation. SEA may then be a practicalmeans of implementing much of the new legislationin South Africa. Examples of legislation which referto sustainability in development are: The ConstitutionAct (No. 108 of 1996); the White Paper onEnvironmental Management Policy in South Africa(1998), the National Environmental Management Act(No. 107 of 1998) and the Development FacilitationAct (No 67 of 1995). This approach to SEA aims tofacilitate local definitions of sustainability; as well asthe formulation and implementation of strategies toachieve this.

SEA strives for continuous learning and improvement.This means that lessons learnt from one SEA shouldbe captured, and incorporated into other SEAprocesses to improve their effectiveness. Throughimplementing an integrative and sustainability-ledSEA, objectives for sustainability are defined andstrategies to achieve them are implemented andmonitored. These objectives and strategies areupdated as more information about developmentprocesses and the environment is obtained.

3 .3 .3 .3 .3 . PRINCIPLES FOR SEA INPRINCIPLES FOR SEA INPRINCIPLES FOR SEA INPRINCIPLES FOR SEA INPRINCIPLES FOR SEA INSOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICA

The principles are the fundamental premisesunderpinning SEA methodologies in South Africa.They provide the theoretical base for the developmentof local SEA processes. The principles can assist inthe integration of SEA into other planning andenvironmental processes and in the evaluation of theeffectiveness of SEA methodologies.

3 . 13 . 13 . 13 . 13 . 1 Description of the PrinciplesDescription of the PrinciplesDescription of the PrinciplesDescription of the PrinciplesDescription of the Principles

Table 1 contains the principles for SEA in South Africa,their implications for SEA Guidelines, and questionsto assist in the development and evaluation of a SEA.The principles are consistent with those underpinningIEM (Appendix A), but were formulated specificallyfor the development of an agreed approach to SEA inSouth Africa. The SEA principles and processguidelines are also set within the context of NEMA(Appendix B). Examples of principles within NEMAwhich SEA can address include:

“(3) Development must be socially, environmentallyand economically sustainable” (p 10); and“4) (e) Responsibility for the environmental health andsafety consequences of a policy, programme, project,product, process, service or activity exists throughoutits life cycle” (p 12).

In the following table, the substantive principles (1 -3) relate to the content of the SEA and the proceduralprinciples (4 - 10) to the process.

4 .4 .4 .4 .4 . KEY ELEMENTS OF A SEAKEY ELEMENTS OF A SEAKEY ELEMENTS OF A SEAKEY ELEMENTS OF A SEAKEY ELEMENTS OF A SEAP R O C E S SP R O C E S SP R O C E S SP R O C E S SP R O C E S S

This section describes the essential elements of SEAand indicates how these elements can be combinedinto a SEA process. SEA is context-specific, andthis process would need to be refined and adapted tosuit the context in which it is applied.

If a SEA is undertaken as a stand-alone process,then the process presented in this section should befollowed. If, however, SEA is being integrated intoanother planning process, then certain elements inthis section can be incorporated into planning asneeded.

The key elements of a SEA process are shown inFigure 3 and listed below:

n Identify broad plan and programme alternatives;n Screening;n Scoping;n Situation Assessment;n Formulate sustainability parameters for the

development of the plan or programme;n Develop and assess alternative plans and

programmes;n Decision-making;n Develop a plan for implementation, monitoring

and auditing; andn Implementation.

4 . 14 . 14 . 14 . 14 . 1 Identify broad plan and programmeIdentify broad plan and programmeIdentify broad plan and programmeIdentify broad plan and programmeIdentify broad plan and programmealternat ivesal ternat ivesal ternat ivesal ternat ivesal ternat ives

Broad plan or programme alternatives should beidentified. These should indicate the physical andadministrative boundaries, the level of planning andthe type of plan or programme (e.g. sectoral orregional) to be undertaken. These alternatives will berefined or changed as the plan or programme isdeveloped. As an example, the conceptualdevelopment options for the SEA of an industrialcomplex near Wellington are presented in Box 2.

15

TTTTTABLE 1: PRINCIPLES, THEIR IMPLICAABLE 1: PRINCIPLES, THEIR IMPLICAABLE 1: PRINCIPLES, THEIR IMPLICAABLE 1: PRINCIPLES, THEIR IMPLICAABLE 1: PRINCIPLES, THEIR IMPLICATIONS AND KEY QUESTIONS FORTIONS AND KEY QUESTIONS FORTIONS AND KEY QUESTIONS FORTIONS AND KEY QUESTIONS FORTIONS AND KEY QUESTIONS FORSTRASTRASTRASTRASTRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTTEGIC ENVIRONMENTTEGIC ENVIRONMENTTEGIC ENVIRONMENTTEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (SEA)AL ASSESSMENT (SEA)AL ASSESSMENT (SEA)AL ASSESSMENT (SEA)AL ASSESSMENT (SEA)

IMPLICATIONS KEY QUESTIONPRINCIPLE

How can the conceptof sustainability beintegrated intodifferent levels ofdec is ion-mak ing,within the spatialcontext of the plan orprogramme?

The focus of SEA is on integrating the concept of sustainabilityinto the objectives and outcomes of plans and programmes.

Sustainability objectives are applicable to the level, scale andsector of the plan or programme; as well as to the environmentalresources to be sustained. The sustainability objectives shouldbe developed with the participation of interested and affectedparties.

Targets and measurement tools are defined to guidedevelopment towards sustainability.

1. SEA is driven by theconcept ofsustainability.

The environmental resources needed to achieve thesustainability objectives are identified. These resources aremaintained and enhanced through the plan or programme. Theresources are prioritised through effective participationprocedures.

The environmental resources form the basis for the identificationof opportunities and constraints, which guide the formulation ofplans and programmes.

What are the environ-mental resourceswhich should bemaintained and/orenhanced in the planor programme?

What is the level ofacceptable changeof the environ-mental resourcesidentified?

The levels of acceptable change of the environmental resourcesare determined. This process reflects public views and scientificinformation.

The plan or programme is developed in such a way as tomaintain and enhance the level of environmental quantity andquality of these resources. This includes an iterative process ofdeveloping alternatives and predicting whether the resourceswill be maintained and enhanced.

Management programmes are identified. These areimplemented should the limits of acceptable change of theenvironmental resources be exceeded, or are threatened to beexceeded.

PROCEDURAL PRINCIPLES

SEA is integrated into existing processes for plan andprogramme formulation and implementation.

There is not one SEA process to be used in all contexts, butdifferent processes for various contexts and strategic tasks.

The focus is on understanding the context-specific decision-making and plan or programme formulation procedure. Theobjectives of sustainability are then integrated into this processat key decision points, throughout the various levels and scalesof plan and programme development. The SEA consistentlyinteracts with the plan and programme procedure in an iterativeway.

SUBSTANTIVE/CONTENT PRINCIPLES

2. SEA identifies theopportunities andconstraints which theenvironment placeson the developmentof plans andprogrammes.

3. SEA sets thecriteria for levels ofe n v i r o n m e n t a lquality or limits ofacceptable change.

4. SEA is a flexibleprocess which isadaptable to theplanning and sectoraldevelopment cycle.

How can sustain-ability objectives beintegrated effectivelyinto existing context-specific processesfor plans andprogrammes?

16

IMPLICATIONS KEY QUESTIONPRINCIPLE

PROCEDURAL PRINCIPLES

SEA introduces sustainability objectives at the earliest stage inthe plan or programme process; from conceptualisation throughto the many stages of decision-making.

5. SEA is a strategicprocess, whichbegins with theconceptualisation ofthe plan or pro-gramme.

SEA addresses higher levels of decision-making in order toprovide the context for lower levels (Figure 2).

Linkages are established between the various levels of decision-making.

What are the political,socio-economic, andbiophysical pro-cesses influencingthe maintenanceand enhancement ofthe environmentalr e s o u r c e sidentified?

Participation processes are adapted to the specific socio-political context of the plan or programme.

The public participation process should inform and enhancethe entire SEA process, in particular the scope and sustainabilityobjectives of the SEA.

What level and type ofparticipation is mostappropriate to enableroleplayers to engagein the process at alevel that is appro-priate to their needsand resources?

A risk-averse and cautious approach is applied, whichrecognises the limitations of current knowledge about theconsequences of decision-making. This approach should belinked to a commitment to continuous learning andimprovement. This link between a cautious approach andcontinuous learning contributes to an increasing understandingof sustainability for a region or sector.

SEA must lead to a process for:l monitoring and continuous improvement;l improvement of baseline information; andl understanding of sustainability objectives.

6. SEA is part of atiered approach toe n v i r o n m e n t a lassessment andmanagement.

7. The scope of anSEA is defined withinthe wider context ofe n v i r o n m e n t a lprocesses.

8. SEA is a par-ticipative process.

9. SEA is set withinthe context ofalternative scenarios.

10. SEA includes theconcepts of pre-caution and con-tinuous improvement.

SEA is not limited to a particular site, but considers significantlocal, regional, national and international linkages.

Scenarios, visions and alternative plan and programme optionsare developed in a participatory way.

Alternative plans and programmes are evaluated in terms oftheir ability to maintain and enhance the environmental resourcesidentified.

How can sustain-ability objectives beintegrated into theplan or programme,starting from thestage of concept-ualisation?

What are the plans orprogrammes whichinfluence themaintenance andenhancement of thee n v i r o n m e n t a lresources identified?

What plan andprogramme alter-natives will mosteffectively maintainand enhance thee n v i r o n m e n t a lresources identified?

What mechanism forthe monitoring andevaluation of sus-tainability should beintegrated into theplan or programme?

17

BOX 2: EXAMPLES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

In the SEA for the Somchem industrial complex at Krantzkop near Wellington, seven potentialdevelopment options were identified:l Maintenance of the status quo;l Optimal use of the existing land and facilities by Somchem;l Development of an industrial park;l Use of land for agriculture;l Use of the land for conservation;l Selling of the property; andl Closure.

(Source: CSIR, 1998b: 3.5)

4 . 24 . 24 . 24 . 24 . 2 ScreeningScreeningScreeningScreeningScreening

This stage involves identifying the overarching purposeof the plan or programme and deciding whether a SEAis required. This decision may be determined bylegislation, policies, local requirements or an identifiedneed. Context-specific screening criteria would assistin determining whether a SEA should be undertaken.For example, these criteria could include a checklistcategorising plans and programmes which could havea significant impact on the environment, a list ofimportant ecological processes, or a spatialrepresentation of environmentally sensitive areas.

4 . 34 . 34 . 34 . 34 . 3 ScopingScopingScopingScopingScoping

The aim of Scoping is to determine the nature andextent of the SEA. This involves formulation of a visionand identification of significant strategic issues to beaddressed in the SEA. This stage should be informedby effective participation procedures which areapplicable to the particular context of the plan orprogramme. It is suggested that Scoping is initiallyundertaken by a group of key interested and affectedparties which plays a coordinating role, for example,through a steering committee. This committee couldinclude authorities, specialists, non-governmentalorganisations, business and community

organisations. This group should ensure that theScoping process, which includes a wider range ofinterested and affected parties, focuses on strategicissues.

It is important that the public involvement processenables and supports interested and affected partiesto engage in the process at different levels, in a waythat is appropriate to their resources and needs. Theselevels of involvement could range from being informedof the SEA process, to providing inputs or to beingactively involved in influencing the process. The publicparticipation process should be designed in such away that it enhances the entire SEA process.

4.3.1 Formulate a vision

The vision is the overarching statement of what theplan or programme is aiming to achieve (Box 3). Theeffectiveness of the plan or programme is determinedby the extent to which it achieves that vision.

4.3.2 Identify significant strategic issues

Significant strategic issues relating to the broad planor programme alternatives should be identified (Box4). These are overarching concerns which relate to

BOX 3: EXAMPLE OF A VISION

The overall vision for the development of the Somchem industrial complex at Krantzkop nearWellington:

“.... is to develop and manage the Krantzkop site in a manner that is consistent with the objectivesof sustainable development and local and regional planning initiatives.”

(Source: CSIR, 1998b: 3.1)

18

FIGURE 3: SEA PROCESS

Ident ify b road p lanand program m e

alternat ives

Ident ify b road p lanand program m e

alternat ives

Screen ingId en tify o v er-a rch in g p u rp o se

o f th e p ro g ram m e o r p lan an d d e t e rm in ew h et h er an S E A is req u ire d

Screen ingId en tify o v er-a rch in g p u rp o se

o f th e p ro g ram m e o r p lan an d d e t e rm in ew h et h er an S E A is req u ire d

Scoping• S co p in g b y in te res te d an d a ff ec ted p arti es• I d en ti fy v is i o n• I d en ti fy s t ra teg ic issu e s

Scoping• S co p in g b y in te res te d an d a ff ec ted p arti es• I d en ti fy v is i o n• I d en ti fy s t ra teg ic issu e s

Situa t ion assessm ent• P rep are d e t a iled reso u rce in v en to ry• I d en ti fy su sta in ab il ity o b jec ti v es, c r it e r iaan d in d ic a to rs• I d en ti fy en v iro n m en ta l o p p o r tu nitie san d co n stra in ts

Situa t ion assessm ent• P rep are d e t a iled reso u rce in v en to ry• I d en ti fy su sta in ab il ity o b jec ti v es, c r it e r iaan d in d ic a to rs• I d en ti fy en v iro n m en ta l o p p o r tu nitie san d co n stra in ts

Su sta inab ility Param eters• F o rm u la te p a ram e te rs / g u id e lin e sfo r th e d ev e lo p m en t a nd as sessm en to f th e p lan s an d p ro gr am m es

Su sta inab ility Param eters• F o rm u la te p a ram e te rs / g u id e lin e sfo r th e d ev e lo p m en t a nd as sessm en to f th e p lan s an d p ro gr am m es

Develop and assess alterna tiveplans and program m es

•A d j u st th e p lan s an d p ro gr am m esin te rm s o f th e asse ssm en t• I d en ti fy en v iro n m en ta l su b st itu teso r trad e- o ffs

Develop and assess alterna tiveplans and program m es

•A d j u st th e p lan s an d p ro gr am m esin te rm s o f th e asse ssm en t• I d en ti fy en v iro n m en ta l su b st itu teso r trad e- o ffs

Decis ion -m aking• R ev ie w• R eco rd d e c is io n

Decis ion -m aking• R ev ie w• R eco rd d e c is io n

Develop a p lan fo rm onito ring andaudit ing•P lan m o n ito r in g a n d au d itin g•O b t a in co m m i tm en t toim p le m en ta tio n o f m o n ito r in g an dau d i tin g

Develop a p lan fo rm onito ring andaudit ing•P lan m o n ito r in g a n d au d itin g•O b t a in co m m i tm en t toim p le m en ta tio n o f m o n ito r in g an dau d i tin g

Im p lem enta tion• I m p le m en t p ro p o sa l• M o n ito r an d a u d it

Im p lem enta tion• I m p le m en t p ro p o sa l• M o n ito r an d a u d it

19

BOX 4: EXAMPLES OF STRATEGIC ISSUES

The following are examples of strategic issues which were addressed in a Draft Port DevelopmentFramework for Saldanha:

the proactive guidance and management of smaller,more incremental decisions. These issues influencethe wider social, economic and biophysical systemand have implications for a range of spatial andtemporal scales. Furthermore, strategic issues relateto the higher (upstream) more general level of decision-making in plans and programmes, rather than thespecific (downstream) decisions made in projectplanning and implementation. For example, concernsrelating to the location of tourist facilities in a regionare strategic, whereas those concerning a change inland use of a site for tourist facilities are project relatedand not strategic.

The aim of Scoping is to focus the assessment onsignificant and strategic issues. This may result incertain concerns raised by interested and affectedparties being excluded from the SEA. However, itshould be clearly explained which issues wereexcluded and the reasons for this. Various publicparticipation methods may be used to identify which

issues are significant and to prioritise issues.

The strategic issues identified may relate to directimpacts (e.g. water pollution), the cause of impacts(e.g. coal burning) or a general concern (e.g. decreasein security). In an EIA, these issues are translatedinto impacts of development on the environment.However, in a SEA the focus is on the opportunitiesand constraints of the environment on development.It is therefore suggested that strategic issues betranslated into social, economic and biophysicalresources which provide opportunities to enhance orconstrain the development of the human population.It is important that the focus on significant issues isnot lost through this translation into opportunities andconstraints. These opportunities and constraints arethen used to inform the development of the plan orprogramme. In summary, the product of the Scopingphase is an agreed, focused set of issues andalternatives.

(Source: CSIR, 1998a: 1.3)

Strategic Issue Comment

Short-, medium- and long-term

demands on port facilities

If the Port of Saldanha is to play an efficient and

effective role in unlocking the economic potential of

the West Coast region, it is important that the short-,

medium- and long-term port demands are estimated

and planned for.

Land-use planning for future

port expansion

For the port to meet future demands it will require the

development of additional land for expansion, close to

existing port facilities. It is important that such land

should be identified and planned for future port

expansion.

Integration of port with

surrounding land- and water-

uses

Integration of the port operations with surrounding

land- and water-uses such as recreational, residential,

mariculture and tourism facilities is essential for the

balanced and sustainable development of the bay.

It is important to ensure that future port development

does not jeopardise future alternative uses of the bay.

Protection of the marine

environment

There is a need to protect the marine environment in

such a way that future alternative opportunities to use

the natural resources are not compromised in any way.

Cumulative impacts must be considered.

20

social, economic and biophysical context of the planor programme. The criteria are typically based onlimits for acceptable change within the environmentand may be quantitative or qualitative. These may bereflected in existing standards (e.g. SABS standards)and legislation, or developed through specialistresearch and public participation. The SEA processitself may not determine limits or set new criteria,however, these may be obtained from other sourcessuch as national and city State of the EnvironmentReports.

Measurable sustainability indicators may then beidentified to determine whether the criteria are beingmet. For example, in an ecologically sensitive area,the criteria could be the maintenance andenhancement of the number of plant species in aparticular wetland; whereas in a highly built-up areathe criteria might be the maintenance andenhancement of specific cultural heritage sites.Sustainability criteria and indicators may be used tocompare alternatives and monitor the implementationof the plan or programme.

4.4.3 Identify environmental opportunities andconstraints

The opportunities and constraints which thebiophysical and socio-economic environment placeon the plan or programme can then be identified.Where sustainability criteria are already met, anopportunity exists for development which maintainsor enhances the environmental resources, e.g.decreases the amount of waste flowing into a river, orincreases the quality of community facilities (Box 5).However, constraints to the plan or programme will

4 . 44 . 44 . 44 . 44 . 4 Situation AssessmentSituation AssessmentSituation AssessmentSituation AssessmentSituation Assessment

4.4.1 Prepare a resource inventory

A resource inventory must be prepared which:

n Identifies the social, economic and biophysicalresources which should be maintained and/orenhanced;

n Identifies the social, economic and biophysicaltrends on all relevant scales, which willinfluence the maintenance and enhancementof these resources; and

n Identifies the existing institutions, legislation,policies, plans and programmes, which willinfluence the maintenance and enhancementof the environmental resources.

4.4.2 Identify sustainability objectives, criteria andindicators

This involves formulating objectives which are basedon the concept of sustainability (sustainabilityobjectives) and translating these into context-specificcriteria and indicators. These objectives, criteria andindicators should relate to the environmentalresources identified in the Scoping phase and to thenature and scale of the plan or programme. Theobjectives are generic, commonly recognisedrequirements for the sustainability of resources. Theyrelate to a particular area, scale and level of decision-making.

The sustainability objectives may then be translatedinto sustainability criteria. These should reflect the

BOX 5: EXAMPLES OF ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

Examples of environmental opportunities and constraints identified in the SEA for theSomchem industrial complex at Krantzkop near Wellington:

Opportunities Constraints

l Water supply currently availablefor industrial usage, as Krantzkoponly uses 25% of its permitted4 000 000 m3 per annum waterallocation.

l Potential usage of good qualitygroundwater.

l The R44 is identified as a scenicroute and offers opportunities tosupport ecotourism growth.

l Possible limited pollution risk to shallowgroundwater and stream if appropriatemanagement actions are not taken.

l Total SO2 emissions from the site may in a

“worst case” scenario exceed levels which willensure protection of sensitive receptors nearthe site.

l The ability of existing transportation routes inthe area to sustain further demand, in particularbetween the site and the R44 - SoetendalRoad intersection.

(Source: CSIR, 1998b)

21

exist where the sustainability criteria are not met, orare at risk of not being met, e.g. ambient air qualityexceeds the threshold described in the sustainabilitycriteria.

4 . 54 . 54 . 54 . 54 . 5 Formulate sustainability parameters for theFormulate sustainability parameters for theFormulate sustainability parameters for theFormulate sustainability parameters for theFormulate sustainability parameters for thedevelopment of the plan or programmedevelopment of the plan or programmedevelopment of the plan or programmedevelopment of the plan or programmedevelopment of the plan or programme

Sustainability parameters can then be formulated toguide the outcome of the plan or programme towardsachieving the objectives for sustainability. These maybe written in the form of principles or guidelines, asshown in Box 6. The sustainability parameters shouldinclude recommendations on how the plan orprogramme may address the environmentalconstraints and enhance the opportunities. Theseparameters may be quantitative (e.g. set levels forsulphur dioxide emissions), qualitative (e.g. promotethe use of alternative low-sulphur sources of fuel inindustry to minimise sulphur dioxide emissions) orspatially based (e.g. maps indicating zoning ofactivities including conditions for “no-go” areas).

The nature of the sustainability parameters would alsobe influenced by the level of the plan or programme.For example, at a municipal level, the use of buffer

BOX 6: EXAMPLES OF SEA GUIDELINES FOR PLAN AND PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT

Listed below are examples of guidelines to improve public communication and promote socio-economicdevelopment, identified in the Draft Port Development Framework for Saldanha.

Guidelines for improved public communication

There are a number of ways in which Portnet can improve its communication with the public, localauthorities and key stakeholders. These include the following:

l constitution of port-focused stakeholder forums;l regular press releases or newsletters;l fliers which can be distributed to a wide range of stakeholders within the community; andl attendance of established forums such as the Saldanha Bay Water Monitoring Forum and

the Saldanha Steel Community Forum.

Guidelines to promote socio-economic development

l Portnet should give preference to the employment of local labour and companies wherethese comply with the job requirements;

l Portnet should contract local companies to undertake maintenance, planning andconstruction contracts where possible;

l Portnet should investigate the possibility of adult educational courses and of supportinglocal schools; and

l Portnet should expand the present health monitoring programme and improve the existingPort clinic facilities.

(Source: CSIR, 1998a)

zones and corridors may be necessary to ensure thatmarginal habitats are not lost. However, at a regionallevel, the parameters would be broader, for example,to promote the conservation of biodiversity in a region.

Ensuring the sustainability of environmental resourcesmay require links to other levels of decision-makingand spatial scales. These links may be drawn throughrecommendations for environmental management andplanning at other levels and spatial scales. Forexample, recommendations may be made concerningassessments (e.g. Environmental ImpactAssessments and Risk Assessments), EnvironmentalManagement Systems, sectoral plans and monitoringprogrammes. These recommendations shouldbecome part of future plan, programme and projectformulation.

4 . 64 . 64 . 64 . 64 . 6 Develop and assess alternative plans andDevelop and assess alternative plans andDevelop and assess alternative plans andDevelop and assess alternative plans andDevelop and assess alternative plans andprogrammesprogrammesprogrammesprogrammesprogrammes

The sustainability parameters, objectives, criteria andindicators which have been developed in the previousstages, together provide a sustainability framework.This framework can be used in two ways: either toguide the formulation of new plans and programmes,

22

or to provide a measure against which existing plansand programmes can be assessed.

The most proactive use of the framework is to integratesustainability into the planning process, as early aspossible. In this case, key leverage points (e.g. thesetting objectives stage) in the decision-makingprocess may be identified, at which to integrate theconcept of sustainability. This involves evaluatingalternatives at each decision-point, in terms of thesustainability framework.

The preferred alternative is the one which is mostcompatible with the sustainability parameters. Shouldall the alternatives be compatible with all theparameters, the preferred alternative is that whichmost effectively fulfils their requirements (e.g. thealternative which could result in the greatest decreasein pollution levels).

It may be useful to develop the alternative plans andprogrammes within the context of various scenarios.National and regional forecasting may be used to guidethe formulation of these alternatives, which would thenapply to a range of future conditions. For example,variables in population numbers, income levels,pollution levels, energy consumption and traffic maybe used in scenario development.

The sustainability framework may also be used toevaluate plans or programmes which have alreadybeen developed. This will assist in determining theirsustainability, in terms of the context-specificobjectives and criteria for sustainability. In this case,the plan or programme may be divided into itscomponent parts and evaluated against thesustainability framework.

4.6.1 Adjust or develop the plan or programme interms of the assessment

Development of the plan or programme involves aniterative process of assessment and adjustment. Thisrequires regular interaction between the environmentalmanager and the planner. At key decision points, theenvironmental manager provides the planner withinformation on the environmental consequences of theplan or programme, while the planner provides theenvironmental manager with information about the planor programme which feeds into the assessment.Through this iterative process, the plan or programmeis developed in a way which is aligned with thesustainability framework.

4.6.2 Identify environmental substitutes or trade-offs

There may be environmental resources, identified inthe Scoping stage, which are not maintained and/orenhanced in the plan or programme. In an EIA,

mitigation measures are identified to reduce oreliminate potential negative impacts as a result ofthe project. In a SEA, it may be possible to identifysubstitutes or trade-offs for the functions theseenvironmental resources provide. It is important thatnational priorities such as poverty alleviation and socialjustice are incorporated into this process of identifyingsubstitutes or trade-offs. Public involvement shouldinform decisions on substitutes or trade-offs.

4 . 74 . 74 . 74 . 74 . 7 Decision-makingDecision-makingDecision-makingDecision-makingDecision-making

4.7.1 Review

The purpose of review is to evaluate the positive andnegative aspects of the framework for sustainabilityand the final draft of the plan or programme. Thereview process must be guided by a terms of referenceas determined at the beginning of the SEA process.Reviewers could include relevant authorities,specialists and interested and affected parties. Interms of IEM, a review is undertaken to ensure that:there is sufficient interested and affected partyinvolvement; there is sufficient information to make adecision; and legislative, administrative and otherrequirements have been complied with. In addition,the review should ensure that the SEA was effectivelyundertaken and that the sustainability requirementsare incorporated in the plan or programme. At presentthere are no legislated responsibilities for governmentauthorities to review a SEA (refer to sections 1.2 and5.2).

4.7.2 Record of decision

The initiator of the SEA decides on whether theenvironmental consequences of the plan or programmehave been adequately considered in planning.Amendments may have to be made before finalacceptance. A statement of the decision, indicatinghow SEA requirements were taken into account,should be drawn up. This stage of decision-making isusually part of established processes for plan orprogramme approval.

Decision-making may occur throughout the plan andprogramme formulation process. A record of thesedecisions should be kept and made available asnecessary.

4 . 84 . 84 . 84 . 84 . 8 Develop a plan for implementation,Develop a plan for implementation,Develop a plan for implementation,Develop a plan for implementation,Develop a plan for implementation,monitoring and auditingmonitoring and auditingmonitoring and auditingmonitoring and auditingmonitoring and auditing

4.8.1 Prepare implementation strategy

A strategy for the implementation of the plan or

23

programme should be clearly described. This maybe integrated with the implementation strategiesrequired in terms of other legislation (e.g. DevelopmentFacilitation Act (No. 67 of 1995)). Where appropriate,the implementation strategy may include:

n mechanisms for implementation andmanagement (e.g. legislation, institutionalarrangements, strategic plans, local plans,environmental management systems andenvironmental assessment);

n roles and responsibilities for various levels ofgovernment and other organisations;

n financial and human resource requirements;n phasing and time-frames for implementation;

andn a communication strategy.

4.8.2 Plan monitoring and auditing

Resources should be monitored and audited toproactively identify any threat of non-sustainable useand allow for measures to restore sustainability. Thesustainability indicators formulated in the assessmentstage are useful tools in monitoring whether thesustainability criteria are being met and theparameters (or guidelines) being adhered to. Aprogramme for monitoring and auditing of the plan orprogramme is therefore required. The informationobtained from the monitoring and auditing should befed back into the baseline information used for SEAs,in order to promote continual improvement.

Monitoring and auditing also allows for adjustment ofthe sustainability framework and the nature of the planor programme. The monitoring and auditingprogramme should be applicable to the context inwhich the plan or programme is developed. Thisimplies that the programme may be integrated intoother monitoring and auditing schemes required byexisting legislation (e.g. the Minerals Act (No. 50 of1991)). Alternatively, the monitoring and auditingprogramme could be formulated specifically for theplan or programme being developed. Typically, themonitoring programme will include objectives formonitoring and a description of where, how, when andby whom monitoring will take place. Details on thefinancing of the programme should also be included.

At this stage, a statement should be made on thecommitment to the implementation, monitoring andauditing.

4 . 94 . 94 . 94 . 94 . 9 ImplementationImplementationImplementationImplementationImplementation

4.9.1 Implement the proposal

After acceptance of the plan or programme, it is

implemented. The conditions of acceptance mayrequire that an environmental management systembe prepared and implemented, and that anenvironmental committee be established to guide themonitoring and auditing process.

4.9.2 Monitor and audit

Monitoring and auditing should be undertakenaccording to the programme prepared in the planningand assessment stage. The sustainability frameworkmay be used as an input into:

n Monitoring the condition of the environmentalresources affected by the plan or programme,and;

n Auditing the effectiveness of the plan orprogramme, in the light of implementation.

The sustainability framework and the plan orprogramme should then be altered in terms of theresults of monitoring and auditing.

5 .5 .5 .5 .5 . CURRENT ISSUES ANDCURRENT ISSUES ANDCURRENT ISSUES ANDCURRENT ISSUES ANDCURRENT ISSUES ANDCHALLENGES TO THECHALLENGES TO THECHALLENGES TO THECHALLENGES TO THECHALLENGES TO THEIMPLEMENTIMPLEMENTIMPLEMENTIMPLEMENTIMPLEMENTAAAAATION OFTION OFTION OFTION OFTION OF SEA IN SEA IN SEA IN SEA IN SEA INSOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICASOUTH AFRICA

There are a number of challenges to theimplementation of an integrated and sustainability-led approach to SEA. These include:

n Developing links between SEA and theIntegrated Development Planning (IDP)process;

n Facilitating capacity building and training;n Providing baseline information; andn Improving coordination between various

institutional structures.

5 . 15 . 15 . 15 . 15 . 1 Links between SEA and the IDP processLinks between SEA and the IDP processLinks between SEA and the IDP processLinks between SEA and the IDP processLinks between SEA and the IDP process

SEA should not be separate to the IDP process butrather integrated into it. SEA can add value to theIDP process by providing the means of integratingthe concept of sustainability into planning. In theSEA process, limits of acceptable change aredefined, which indicate the ability of the environmentto sustain development. These limits may thereforebe used as a guide in planning, to ensure thatdevelopment does not degrade or depleteenvironmental resources. Environmental

24

opportunities, which may be enhanced throughappropriate planning, are also identified in the SEAprocess. The purpose of SEA is therefore tocomplement the planning process, by providing theinformation necessary to ensure that developmentmaintains and enhances environmental resources.This is a practical means of implementing the conceptof sustainability in planning.

The SEA process should be adapted to the specificplanning process which is being undertaken. This canbe accomplished by identifying the elements of SEAwhich will add value to the planning process andtherefore should be incorporated into it. An exampleof how SEA may be integrated into the IDP processis provided in Figure 4. This figure is a simplistic

illustration of the IDP process, which indicates whichkey elements of SEA may be incorporated into theIDP process and which elements are already includedand need not be repeated through SEA.

5 . 25 . 25 . 25 . 25 . 2 Capacity building and trainingCapacity building and trainingCapacity building and trainingCapacity building and trainingCapacity building and training

At present SEA is not a regulatory instrument andtherefore does not impose any additional legislativeresponsibility on government authorities. SEA shouldbe undertaken on a voluntary basis by governmentand other interested and affected parties, as a meansof ensuring that sustainability is integrated intoplanning. The nature and extent of the SEA shouldtherefore be matched with the financial and human

FIGURE 4: INTEGRATING THE IDP PROCESS AND ELEMENTS OF SEA

W O R K P L A N

V I S IO N

D E V E L O P M E N TF R A M E W O R K

D E V E L O P M E N TS T R AT E G IE S

O P E R AT I O N A LP L A N N IN G

M O N I T O R IN G ,E VA L U A T IO N

& R EV IE W

T h is ID P s t a g e in c or po ra t es t he fo llo w ing e le m e n t s o f th e s c o p in g p h as e of S E A :

T h e S E A c a n a dd v a lue to t he ID P t hro u g h t he S i tu a tion A s s e s s m en t w h ic h inc lu d e s :

- id e n ti fic a t io n o f s u s t a in a bi l i ty o b je c t iv e s , c r it er ia a n d in d ic a to rs

- id e n ti fic a t io n o f e nv i ron m e n ta l o p p or tu n it ie s a n d c o ns t ra in ts

T h e S E A c a n a ls o a d d v a lu e t o t he I D P th ro u g h th e d e v e lo p m e nt o f g u id e l in e s fo r s us t a in ab i li t y o f th e f ra m e w o rk .

T h e g uid e lin e s f o r s u s ta in a b il i ty c a n b e u s e d a s a to o l to a s s is t in t he ev a lu at io n o f a l te rn a tiv e d e v e lo p m e n t s tr a t e g ie s

T h is ID P s t a g e in c or po ra t es th e f o l low in g e lem en t s of S E A :

T h is ID P s t a g e in c or po ra t est he fo llo w ing e le m e n t o f S E A :

im p le m e n ta t io n o f t h e p la n o r p ro g ra m m e

T h is ID P s t a g e in c or po ra t es th e f o l low in g e lem en t o f S E A :

Stages in the ID P process

Elem ents of SEA, which can add v alue to the IDP proc es s

The IDP process adequ ate ly incorporates these e lements of SEA

KEY

25

resources of those initiating and coordinating theprocess.

Training in SEA could be undertaken by DEAT inpartnership with institutions involved in planning andenvironmental education. It is proposed that sectionsrelating to SEA should also be included in existingenvironmental management and planning courses atuniversities and other educational institutions. ThisGuideline Document and the growing body of casestudies, may be used as material for SEA trainingand capacity building. It is essential that this trainingshould cut across various sectors and spheres ofgovernment, to improve the understanding and use ofSEA in planning and environmental managementprocesses.

5 . 35 . 35 . 35 . 35 . 3 Information needsInformation needsInformation needsInformation needsInformation needs

There is a growing body of existing information sourcesand processes that can contribute towards meetingthe information needs of an SEA. A SEA can, inturn, contribute to this body of information. Examplesof information sources resulting from recent legislationand planning processes are listed below:

n Environmental Implementation Plans andEnvironmental Management Plans, which arerequired in terms of NEMA (No. 107 of 1998),are to be prepared by provinces and nationaldepartments;

n Catchment Management Strategies, requiredin terms of the National Water Act (No. 36 of1998), are to be prepared by the catchmentmanagement agencies for the water resourceswithin their management areas;

n National and cities State of the EnvironmentReports, have been prepared as part of SouthAfrica’s Local Agenda 21 programme andinclude the cities of Johannesburg, Pretoria,Durban and Cape Town;

n Environmental Management ProgrammeReports, required in terms of the Minerals Act(No. 50 of 1991), include supporting baselineinformation; and

n Environmental Impact Assessments, requiredin terms of sections 21, 22 and 26 of theEnvironment Conservation Act (No. 73 of 1989),also provide baseline information on theenvironment affected by developmentproposals.

Depending on the extent and scale of the baselineinformation needed for the SEA, the nationalEnvironmental Potential Atlases (ENPAT) and otherenvironmental spatial data maintained by DEAT andother Departments can also provide valuable

information. In return, these databases may alsobenefit from information generated by SEAprocesses.

5 . 45 . 45 . 45 . 45 . 4 Coordination between various institutionalCoordination between various institutionalCoordination between various institutionalCoordination between various institutionalCoordination between various institutionals t ruc turess t ruc turess t ruc turess t ruc turess t ruc tures

One of the main challenges facing the implementationof a sustainability-led approach to SEA is the needfor integration across institutional structures.Historically, planning and decision-making has beendivided along sectoral lines. However, a strong trendin much of the recent legislation is to establishcooperative governance through coordinatingmechanisms. Examples of such mechanisms includethe Committee for Environmental Coordinationestablished in terms of NEMA to promote theintegration and coordination of environmental functionsby the relevant organs of state; and catchmentmanagement agencies established under the NationalWater Act. The IDP process also provides a planningmechanism which coordinates the needs of severalgovernment departments. It is recommended that aSEA process should be linked to existing forums andintegrative processes in order to make best use ofavailable resources.

6 .6 .6 .6 .6 . CONCLUS IONCONCLUS IONCONCLUS IONCONCLUS IONCONCLUS IONThe continued development of SEA in South Africa isimportant for the integration of the concept ofsustainability into the developmental objectives of thiscountry. These guidelines aim to provide a basis onwhich context-specific, integrated and sustainability-led processes for SEA may be formulated. Eachspecific SEA process will vary depending on thesituation in which it is developed and the purpose forwhich it is undertaken. However, key elements areidentified to guide the formulation of the process,according to the principles of IEM and those identifiedfor SEA in South Africa. It is suggested that thesekey elements and principles be integrated into existingprocesses for plan and programme formulation.However, they may be used to develop a separateSEA process, if that is what the context requires. Anumber of SEAs have been undertaken in this country,which could also assist in the formulation of context-specific SEA processes.

These guidelines are based on a variety of experiencesin SEA in South Africa and internationally. However,they need to be tested and refined to reflect acommon, evolving understanding of SEA. Thedevelopment of SEA will assist in practicallyimplementing sustainability and moving towards a trueintegration of economic, social and biophysical goals.

26

REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCES

CSIR (1996). Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): A Primer; CSIR Report ENV/S-RR 96001;Stellenbosch.

CSIR (1997). A Protocol for Strategic Environmental Assessment in South Africa: Draft Discussion DocumentCSIR Report ENV/S-I 97043C; Stellenbosch.

CSIR (1998a). Draft Port Development Framework for the Port of Saldanha; CSIR Report ENV/S-C 97152 B;Stellenbosch.

CSIR (1998b). Strategic Environmental Assessment for the Somchem Krantzkop Site, Wellington: DevelopmentFramework Report; CSIR Report ENV/S-C97158F; Stellenbosch.

Department of Environment Affairs (1992). Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series; Pretoria.

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (1998). EIA Regulations: Implementation of sections 21, 22and 26 of the Environment Conservation Act: Guideline Document; Pretoria.

Gilbert, R., Stevenson, D., Girardet, H. and Stren, R. (1996). Making Cities work. Earthscan publicationLimited, United Kingdom.

Greater Johannesburg Transitional Metropolitan Council (GJTMC) (1996). Composite Working Plan for theFormulation of Land Development Objectives (LDOs): Report to the Executive Committee; 17 September1996, Johannesburg.

Sadler, B. (1995). Strategic Environmental Assessment: Paper presented at the 15th Annual Meeting of theInternational Association of Impact Assessment (IAIA); Durban.

Tonk, J. and Verheem, R. (1998). Integrating the Environment in Strategic Decision-making: One Concept,Multiple Forms: Paper presented at the 18th Annual Meeting of the International Association of ImpactAssessment; Christchurch, New Zealand.

27

Appendix AAppendix AAppendix AAppendix AAppendix A

Principles of Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) (Department of Environment Affairs, 1992):The basic principles underpinning IEM are that there be:

l informed decision-making;

l accountability for information on which decisions are taken;

l accountability for decisions taken;

l a broad meaning given to the term environment (i.e. one that includes physical, biological, social, economic,cultural, historical and political components);

l an open, particpatory approach in the planning of proposals;

l consultation with interested and affected parties;

l due consideration of alternative options;

l an attempt to mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive aspects of proposals;

l an attempt to ensure that the ‘social costs’ of development proposals (those borne by society, ratherthan the developers) be outweighed by the ‘social benefits’ (benefits to society as a result of the actionsof the developers);

l democratic regard for individual rights and obligations;

l compliance with these principles during all stages of the planning, implementation and decommissioningof proposals (i.e. from ‘cradle to grave’); and

l the opportunity for public and specialist input in the decision-making process.

28

Appendix BAppendix BAppendix BAppendix BAppendix B

National Environmental Management Principles in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (No.107 of 1998) Chapter 1

CHAPTER 1

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES

Principles

2.(1) The principles set out in this section apply throughout the Republic to the actions of all organs of statethat may significantly affect the environment and

(a) shall apply alongside all other appropriate and relevant considerations, including the State’s responsibilityto respect, protect, promote and fulfil the social and economic rights in Chapter 2 of the Constitutionand in particular the basic needs of categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination;

(b) serve as the general framework within which environmental management and implementation plansmust be formulated;

(c) serve as guidelines by reference to which any organ of state must exercise any function when takingany decision in terms of this Act or any statutory provision concerning the protection of the environment;

(d) serve as principles by reference to which a conciliator appointed under this Act must makerecommendations; and

(e) guide the interpretation, administration and implementation of this Act, and any other law concernedwith the protection or management of the environment.

(2) Environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern, and servetheir physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably.

(3) Development must be socially, environmentally and economically sustainable.

(4) (a) Sustainable development requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:

(i) That the disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity are avoided, or, where theycannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied;(ii) that pollution and degradation of the environment are avoided, or, where they cannot be altogetheravoided, are minimised and remedied;(iii) that the disturbance of landscapes and sites that constitute the nation’s cultural heritage is avoided,or where it cannot be altogether avoided, is minimised and remedied;(iv) that waste is avoided, or where it cannot be altogether avoided, minimised and re-used or recycledwhere possible and otherwise disposed of in a responsible manner;(v) that the use and exploitation of non-renewable natural resources is responsible and equitable, andtakes into account the consequences of the depletion of the resource;(vi) that the development, use and exploitation of renewable resources and the ecosystems of whichthey are part do not exceed the level beyond which their integrity is jeopardised;(vii) that a risk-averse and cautious approach is applied, which takes into account the limits of currentknowledge about the consequences of decisions and actions; and(viii) that negative impacts on the environment and on people’s environmental rights be anticipated andprevented, and where they cannot be altogether prevented, are minimised and remedied.

(b) Environmental management must be integrated, acknowledging that all elements of the environment arelinked and interrelated, and it must take into account the effects of decisions on all aspects of theenvironment and all people in the environment by pursuing the selection of the best practicableenvironmental option.

29

(c) Environmental justice must be pursued so that adverse environmental impacts shall not be distributed insuch a manner as to unfairly discriminate against any person, particularly vulnerable and disadvantagedpersons.

(d) Equitable access to environmental resources, benefits and services to meet basic human needs andensure human well-being must be pursued and special measures may be taken to ensure accessthereto by categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination.

(e) Responsibility for the environmental health and safety consequences of a policy, programme, project,product, process, service or activity exists throughout its life cycle.

(f) The participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance must be promoted,and all people must have the opportunity to develop the understanding, skills and capacity necessary forachieving equitable and effective participation, and participation by vulnerable and disadvantaged personsmust be ensured.

(g) Decisions must take into account the interests, needs and values of all interested and affected parties,and this includes recognising all forms of knowledge, including traditional and ordinary knowledge.

(h) Community wellbeing and empowerment must be promoted through environmental education, the raisingof environmental awareness, the sharing of knowledge and experience and other appropriate means.

(i) The social, economic and environmental impacts of activities, including disadvantages and benefits, mustbe considered, assessed and evaluated, and decisions must be appropriate in the light of suchconsideration and assessment.

(j) The right of workers to refuse work that is harmful to human health or the environment and to be informedof dangers must be respected and protected.

(k) Decisions must be taken in an open and transparent manner, and access to information must be providedin accordance with the law.

(l) There must be intergovernmental co-ordination and harmonisation of policies, legislation and actionsrelating to the environment.

(m) Actual or potential conflicts of interest between organs of state should be resolved through conflictresolution procedures.

(n) Global and international responsibilities relating to the environment must be discharged in the nationalinterest.

(o) The environment is held in public trust for the people, the beneficial use of environmental resources mustserve the public interest and the environment must be protected as the people’s common heritage.

(p) The costs of remedying pollution, environmental degradation and consequent adverse health effects andof preventing, controlling or minimising further pollution, environmental damage or adverse health effectsmust be paid for by those responsible for harming the environment.

(q) The vital role of women and youth in environmental management and development must be recognisedand their full participation therein must be promoted.

(r) Sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores, estuaries, wetlands,and similar systems require specific attention in management and planning procedures, especiallywhere they are subject to significant human resource usage and development pressure.

30

Appendix CAppendix CAppendix CAppendix CAppendix C

Case studies of SEA’s recently undertaken in South Africa:

Case study 1: Durban South Basin SEA

Case study 2: SEA for the Somchem Krantzkop Site, Wellington

Case study 3: SEA for water uses in South Africa

Case study 4: Northern Metropolitan Local Council SEA

Case study 5: Baralink Node Development Framework SEA

Case study 6: SEA of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic Bid

31

petrochemical expansion and associateddownstream light industry and commerce. Thisshould be undertaken within a pro-active planningand environmental management framework inorder to ensure that regional benefits aremaximised and that local costs to the biophysical,economic and social environment are minimised.

n Recommended Resolution 3 was that, insupport of this policy, the relevant localauthorities should commit themselves toimplementing the strategic plan recommendedin the SEA. This requires that they:

l Establish dedicated institutionalstructures and project teams to addressplanning and management issues;

l Prepare a development plan for theDurban South Basin in accordance with therecommendations of the SEA and localIntegrated Development Plans; and

l Implement those projects and actionsthat have been identified by the SEA asrequiring priority attention, particularlyinfrastructural improvements and the need toreduce air pollution.

4. Innovative approaches to the study

Three sets of Guiding Principles have been identifiedby the SEA which address the issue of sustainabilityat global, regional and local levels. These include:

1. Principles of Sustainability as outlined by Agenda21 and interpreted for the Durban South Basinwhich must overarch all development. In terms ofthe South African context these indicate a needfor environmentally sustainable economicdevelopment.

2. Durban Metropolitan Development Principles, whichhave been developed from the Durban MetropolitanCouncil’s strategic vision for their future. These tendto focus on the needs of the Durban MetropolitanArea.

3. Community Development Objectives that wereestablished by the South Durban CommunityEnvironmental Alliance. These focus on the require-mentsof the communities in the Durban South Basin.

The use of principles developed at all three levels showwhere there is correlation and where decisions willhave to be made to make the best of trade offsituations. The development options were assessedagainst these principles.

(This case study was prepared by CSIR.)

Case Study 1Case Study 1Case Study 1Case Study 1Case Study 1

Durban South Basin StrategicDurban South Basin StrategicDurban South Basin StrategicDurban South Basin StrategicDurban South Basin StrategicEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental Assessment1. Need for the SEA

Apartheid planning has created the Durban South Basin’smix of heavy industry and residential land uses. Localcommunities have raised concerns over health and qualityof life, while industry seeks sanction for a number ofstrategically important developments in the area. The needfor the study was motivated by local communities in theDurban South Basin who, since the advent of democracy,have been mobilising around environmental issues. TheSouth Central Local Council and the Durban MetropolitanCouncil accepted their responsibility to resolve the conflictbetween industrial and local community needs that hadbeen created by apartheid planning. They undertook thisSEA as an integral part of their Local Agenda 21 programme.

2. Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study were to:

1. Produce a baseline assessment of the DurbanSouth Basin identifying opportunities andconstraints for future development;

2. Identify key strategic development criteria forcurrent and future development;

3. Evaluate various types of future developmentin terms of their sustainability; and

4. Develop a policy planning framework forsustainable development to guide managementand planning in the Durban South Basin.

In terms of this brief, five development options wereassessed. They were the Existing Situation, the MixedUse Option (combining housing and light industry), thePetrochemical Option, the Second Port Option andthe Combined Second Port and Petrochemical Option.

3. Outcomes and products

The study recommended resolutions that the DurbanMetropolitan Council, the South Central Local Counciland the South Local Council should accept, in orderto promote sustainable development in the DurbanSouth Basin and the Durban Metropolitan Area.

n Recommended Resolution 1 was that the futuredevelopment of the Durban South Basin shouldbe industrial.

n Recommended Resolution 2 was that the localauthorities promote industrial development in theDurban South Basin and build on developmentssuch as the proposed port development,

32

Somchem will use the SEA to guide their futuremanagement of the site, and the information will alsofeed into Denel’s higher level strategic decision-making with regard to the management of their sites,locally as well as nationally.

4. Innovative approaches used in the study

Conceptual development options, based on the overallvision for the site that was defined by all relevantstakeholders, were identified and evaluated in the lightof the information provided by specialists on theproject team. The client was presented with a listingof opportunities and constraints for each of theconceptual development options, as well as principlesand guidelines on which future decision-making,management and possible development of the siteshould be based. The specialists employed varioustechniques such as resource economics, socialassessment, air pollution modelling and ground waterquality assessment to inform the SEA. The biggestchallenge was to encourage specialists to think in anintegrative way whilst drafting their specialist reports- paving the way for the integration of the informationinto the Development Framework Report.

(This case study was prepared by CSIR.)

Case Study 2Case Study 2Case Study 2Case Study 2Case Study 2

Strategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalAssessment for theAssessment for theAssessment for theAssessment for theAssessment for theSomchem Krantzkop Site,Somchem Krantzkop Site,Somchem Krantzkop Site,Somchem Krantzkop Site,Somchem Krantzkop Site,WWWWWellingtonellingtonellingtonellingtonellington1. Need for the Study

The Krantzkop site is located north of Wellington inthe Western Cape and covers an area of approximately3200ha. It was established in the early 1980s and isoperated by Somchem, a division of Denel (Pty) Ltd,for the manufacture of specialist explosives andpropellant raw materials. Due to changes in thedemand of these products, Somchem identified a needto re-assess the Krantzkop site in terms of the role itplays in their organization and its suitability for furtherdevelopment. This led Somchem to investigate variousstrategic development options for the site. In order toensure that environmental issues are well understoodand inform future planning and decision-making, aSEA was undertaken.

2. Objectives of the study

The overall objective of the SEA was to provide a visionand framework for the management and potentialdevelopment of the Krantzkop site to ensure thatenvironmental issues are addressed in a pro-activemanner in the planning process. The SEA alsoprovided baseline information, which can be used infuture project-specific Environmental ImpactAssessments (EIAs). The public consultation in theSEA also laid the foundation for future publicconsultation which would be required if EIAs wereundertaken for specific development proposals.Opportunities and constraints that the environmentplaces on development were identified to inform futuremanagement and possible development of the site.

3. Outcomes and products

The vision and framework for the management andpotential development of the Kranzkop site wasprovided in the form of a Development FrameworkReport. This included identification and mapping ofopportunities and constraints, and the description ofprinciples and guidelines to be followed for sustainablemanagement and possible development of the site.A framework was also provided for a StrategicEnvironmental Management Plan (SEMP) which wasproposed to coordinate environmental managementon the site and link with existing quality and health,safety and environment management systems.

33

n An analysis of opportunities and constraints;n Scenarios for resource use;n A decision support system; andn Participation and sharing in information and

decisions.

The SEA offers support to regulators, planners andusers, with all information and outputs being availablepublicly. Users of the process and its products willinclude:

n The water management authorities - TheDepartment of Water Affairs and Forestry, theCatchment Management Agency andCatchment Committees;

n Environmental authorities;n Provincial and regional authorities;n Planners and developers; andn Users of the catchment and its resources.

4. Innovative approaches used in this study

The SEA will be used by the Catchment ManagementAgencies through its Advisory Committees. RegionalCouncils and all authorities responsible for local orintegrated planning will be able to draw on the context-providing approach and information offered by thisSEA. Typically, the SEA is facilitating the developmentof an environmental surface whereby the landscapeof entire provinces is classified in terms of its value tobiodiversity and the cost which will be borne shouldthat landscape be transformed. The needs of societyalong with economic costs and benefits, at bothimmediate and wider scale, together with theprospects for alternative forms of resources use, willall form part of the information mix used in makingdecisions as to the preferability of any particulardevelopment. The information provided by this SEAwill not be the preserve of the regulatory authority,but will be available to all interested parties, and thoseinterested in applying for development licences willhave a full knowledge of the opportunities andconstraints offered by the catchment. Developmentapplications involving land transformation will stillrequire EIAs. Many of the issues requiring attentionwill however been dealt with (or flagged) at a strategiclevel, considerably reducing the amount of inputdemanded at EIA level.

(This case study was prepared by the Department ofWater Affairs and Forestry's SEA team in the Sub-Directorate: Stream Flow Reduction Allocations.)

Case Study 3Case Study 3Case Study 3Case Study 3Case Study 3

Strategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalAssessment for WAssessment for WAssessment for WAssessment for WAssessment for WaterateraterateraterUses in South AfricaUses in South AfricaUses in South AfricaUses in South AfricaUses in South Africa1. Need for this SEA

Decisions regarding the amount of water used withincatchments, and the licencing of such use, have oftenlacked a strategic context. This was exemplified bythe decisions required for the permitting of forestry.This SEA was born out of the need to contextualisesuch decision-making (initially for forestry), and tobroaden the scope of aspects considered to includenot only water availability but also impact onenvironment and biodiversity, weighed against a bestunderstanding of social and economic cost andbenefit. The new National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998)requires that all forms of water use should be licenced,and allows for the establishment of WaterManagement Areas under the authority of CatchmentManagement Agencies. These agencies will need toplan and allocate water within the context of nationaland provincial needs, and will need to ensure that thebest possible use is made of land and water resources.Understanding of the catchment, its role and itsfunction is needed by the decision-makers and bythe people making use of catchment resources.

2. Objectives of the study

This Strategic Environmental Assessment is aimedat establishing the context for decision making withregard to land use and water issues withincatchments, and at providing the tools to all partiesto discuss and negotiate these decisions on the basisof best available information. It is a process andapproach which reviews the opportunities andconstraints for development in the context ofenvironmental, social and economic criteria.

3. Outcomes and products

The SEA for water use offers the following outputs:

n Information and maps describing catchmentresource use and activity;

n An understanding of the use of the waterresource and of issues arising;

n Information on what the use of resources willmean to people, along with the economicimplications;

n An understanding of the physical environmentand its value;

34

Assessment for the Northern Sector was prepared.This report collated all the specialist investigations,the public involvement programme and theinterpretation of this work. The interpretation of thework was linked to a Geographic Information System(GIS) database where the environmental opportunitiesand constraints of the area were digitally represented.This product fed into the Northern Strategic PlanningFramework which collated the results of all studiesthat were undertaken in this area.

4. Innovative approaches used in the study

This Strategic Eenvironmental Assessment wasprepared through continual interaction with theconsultants undertaking the other studies for thenorthern sector (social, economic and planning). Thisallowed for regular testing of ideas and proposals.Because this study was not undertaken in isolation,it enabled environmental concerns and needs of thenorthern sector to guide the development of thestrategic plan and the vision for the northern sector.

(This case study was prepared by SRK Consulting.)

Case Study 4Case Study 4Case Study 4Case Study 4Case Study 4

Northern Metropolitan LocalNorthern Metropolitan LocalNorthern Metropolitan LocalNorthern Metropolitan LocalNorthern Metropolitan LocalCouncil�s StrategicCouncil�s StrategicCouncil�s StrategicCouncil�s StrategicCouncil�s StrategicEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental Assessment1. Need for the SEA

The Northern Metropolitan Local Council ofJohannesburg has, through the development of itsLand Development Objectives, identified its northernsector as a zone of opportunity. “Opportunity” in thissense refers to economic, social and environmentaldevelopment.

The northern sector of the Northern Metropolitan LocalCouncil is characterised by:

n Large tracts of open space and undisturbedland;

n Many divergent activities; andn A diversity of communities.

As the first step towards guiding development in thisarea and encouraging the concept of a “sustainable”sector, the Northern Metropolitan Local Councildecided to embark on developing a strategic planningframework. As part of the framework, a StrategicEnvironmental Assessment (SEA) was undertaken toensure that environmentally sensitive and appreciatedareas are protected in the future and areas that areunsuitable for development identified. The SEA formedone of four other studies being undertaken for thisarea.

2. Objectives of the study

The objectives for the study were to:

n Develop a process which will collect theinformation required as input into the strategicdecision-making related to environmentalissues in the area;

n Ensure the acceptability of the approachthrough transparency and public involvement;

n Identify environmental opportunities andconstraints from the collected information; and

n Develop an acceptable and viable environmentalmanagement strategy for the northern sectorwhich can input into an overall managementstrategy for the area.

3. Outcomes and products

A report entitled Draft Strategic Environmental

35

Metropolitan Council to guide further development inthe Baralink area.

The SEA Report provided a synthesis of all baselineenvironmental data for the Baralink area. It alsopresented the environmental opportunities andconstraints and provided an assessment of thedevelopment options in relation to the environmentalopportunities and constraints. The EMG Reportprovided a set of environmental guidelines and astrategic environmental management plan to guidedevelopment.

4. Innovative approaches used in the study

The risk with SEA, as with most assessmentprocesses, is that they evaluate previously formulatedplans. As the study was undertaken as part of anurban planning exercise, it provided the opportunityto incorporate environmental issues throughout allstages of the planning process.

(This case study was prepared by SRK Consulting.)

Case Study 5Case Study 5Case Study 5Case Study 5Case Study 5

Baralink Node DevelopmentBaralink Node DevelopmentBaralink Node DevelopmentBaralink Node DevelopmentBaralink Node DevelopmentFramework StrategicFramework StrategicFramework StrategicFramework StrategicFramework StrategicEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentEnvironmental Assessment

1. Need for the SEA

In recognition of the investment potential of theBaralink area, the “Baralink Development Framework”was completed in 1995. This document provided aset of development options that could potentially guidedevelopment and investment in the area.

In 1997, a team of consultants were appointed toundertake a range of studies (strategic environmental,transportation, transportation related specifically torail, geotechnical, infrastructure and services, socio-economic, and planning and urban design). Thesewere undertaken to provide a detailed localdevelopment framework for the Baralink area.

The environmental study (SEA) was designed toevaluate the environmental impacts of the proposeddevelopment options produced in the “BaralinkDevelopment Framework”. The results of the studyprovided the Greater Johannesburg MetropolitanCouncil with relevant information which allowed it tomake strategic decisions regarding the environmentalacceptability of alternative development options.

2. Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study were to:

n Develop a process to collect the informationrequired to enhance the decision-makingprocess of the Greater JohannesburgMetropolitan Council;

n Ensure the acceptability of the approach bythe adoption of a transparent approach;

n Ensure the sustainable development of theBaralink area in the context of the value systemof the interested and affected parties; and

n Develop an acceptable and viableenvironmental management strategy for thearea.

3. Outcomes and products

The study produced two documents, a SEA Reportand an Environmental Management Guidelines (EMG)Report. These reports were incorporated into theBaralink Node Development Framework documentwhich was used by the Greater Johannesburg

36

Case Study 6Case Study 6Case Study 6Case Study 6Case Study 6

Strategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalStrategic EnvironmentalAssessment of the Cape TAssessment of the Cape TAssessment of the Cape TAssessment of the Cape TAssessment of the Cape Townownownownown2004 Olympic Bid2004 Olympic Bid2004 Olympic Bid2004 Olympic Bid2004 Olympic Bid1. Need for the SEA

The need for the SEA arose out of concerns expressedby members of the public and certain NGOs andcommunity-based organisations (CBOs) that thepotential implications of bidding for and hosting the2004 Olympic Games in Cape Town had not beenadequately assessed by the Olympic Bid Committee(OBC). Given that hosting of the games had a numberof potential social, economic and environmentalimpacts with local, regional and national implications,it was felt that a SEA was the most appropriate toolfor assessing the situation. The study was strategicin that hosting an event like the Olympic Gamesrequires a very large capital investment from the state.In a country like South Africa, this investment neededto be weighed up against other competing social andeconomic needs. At the same time it was alsorecognised that the games provides Cape Town andSouth Africa with a unique marketing opportunitywhich in turn had the potential to boost tourism andcreate job opportunities.

2. Objectives of the study

The objective of the study was to provide an integratedview of the long term social, economic andenvironmental consequences of preparing for andhosting the games in Cape Town in 2004. In thisregard the terms of reference for the SEA were to:

n Identify and evaluate the potential systemicimpacts of preparing for and hosting the 2004Games in Cape Town on specific economic,social and biophysical processes. Particularemphasis was placed on those longer termimpacts which could affect the development ofthe Cape Metropolitan Region and South Africaas a whole; and

n Identify specific proposals in the current planwhich might need to be reconsidered if the Bidwas successful.

3. Outcome and products

In total three reports were produced, consisting ofVolume 1: Main Report, Volume 2: BackgroundReading and Volume 3: Specialist Reports. It wasenvisaged that the SEA would be used by National

Government and the City of Cape Town to assess thecosts and benefits of hosting the 2004 Olympics inCape Town. If the findings indicated that the costsoutweighed the benefits, then Government would needto reassess their support to host the games.

The outcome of the SEA would have also been usedby the NGO and CBO sector to provide an independentassessment of the costs and benefits of hosting thegames in Cape Town in 2004. As indicated above,the aim of the SEA was also to assess specificproposals in the current plan that would need to bereconsidered if the Bid was successful.

In terms of existing processes, the SEA predatedthe Integrated Development Planning (IDP) legislation.The SEA was, however, informed by a number of sitespecific EIAs that had been carried out for some ofthe proposed venues and associated facilities.

4. Innovative approaches used in the study

The most innovative aspect of the SEA was in theestablishment of a social value system for identifyingthe key strategic issues that needed to be assessed.This approach was aimed at ensuring that the findingsof the SEA were based on an agreed upon and widelyaccepted set of social values and goals. To do this,the SEA involved a detailed assessment of the valuesand goals outlined in relevant South African legislationand policy documents, such as the RDP, GEAR andthe Environment Conservation Act. This informationwas in turn used to assess the statements containedin the Bid and the findings of the various specialiststudies.

(This case study was prepared by SRK Consulting.)