Environment
By Tina Costas, Garlicke & Bousfiled Photo David Caravias Waves of change
millions of people. Te White Paper on Sustainable Coastal Development recorded that the direct and indirect benefits provided by our coast are worth about R302 billion annually, and coastal ecosystem services were estimated to be worth the equivalent of about 35% of GDP. Te interconnection of land, air and sea at the coast gives rise to varying climatic conditions, ecosystems and rich resources which atract a cross-section of people who engage in diverse and oſten competing activities. Historically, management
S 32
of this precious resource has been unsuccessful, resulting in
outh Africa’s 3 000km long coastline is home to at least a third of South Africa’s population, sustaining
rapid deterioration of the coastal environment. Te National Environmental Management : Integrated Coastal Management Act 24 of 2008 (ICMA) commenced on December 1, 2009, and is the legislative tool which will be used to effect integrated coastal management. ICMA focuses partly on
protection of the environment. Section 58 obliges identified parties to take reasonable measures to prevent and minimise adverse effects on the coastal environment in accordance with the duty of care created by Section 28 of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). Tis duty of care requires every person who causes, has caused or may cause significant pollution or degradation of the environment to take reasonable measures
to prevent it from occurring, continuing or recurring, unless otherwise expressly authorised, to minimise and rectify the damage. Section 58 prescribes that the definition of “significant pollution or degradation of environment” in NEMA be read to include “an adverse effect” on the environment. NEMA does not define an adverse effect, but ICMA provides a detailed definition that focuses on impairment of the environment that is not “trivial or insignificant.” Te persons to whom this duty of care applies have been extended to include users of coastal property, owners of persons in charge of vessels, aircraſt or structures at sea, operators of pipelines that end in the coastal zone and persons who produce or discharge a substance that may cause an adverse effect.
Section 58(2) is also
innovative in that it prescribes that for purposes of the duty of care, the Minister may determine that an impact or activity described in the notice must be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to result in an adverse effect. While section 58 is
necessary to ensure protection of our coast, practical difficulties are anticipated. How will decision makers determine what is more than ‘trivial or insignificant’ without standards and guidelines? Without these it will be difficult to achieve consistent decision- making or to hold decision-makers accountable for poor decisions. In the absence of practical guidelines, we have to await guideline decisions – let’s hope the decisions made advance sustainable coastal development.
September/October 2011
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100