RE-THINKING IEM IN PURSUIT OF THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS

The narrative underpinning the intention of the SDGs is to remind us that society and economies are directly dependent on a functional biophysical environment. This includes vital ecosystems and ecological support areas that provide important ecosystem services and ecological infrastructure. The 2019 report on the progress towards achieving the SDGs, indicates that weaknesses exist on environmental sustainability safeguards on areas of biodiversity, clean energy, and social inclusion. The progress towards some SDGs, like economic growth, industry and infrastructure development, sustainable cities, service delivery, can be drivers of poor environmental performance if we are not vigilant. For this reason, Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) has an important role to play in South Africa’s pursuit of the SDGs, given IEM’s ability to deal with the complexities of decision-making and trade-offs between social, economic, and environmental impacts and benefits. We need to be concerned about biodiversity loss as evidenced by various assessments, both locally and globally. In addition to this, crises like the Covid-19 pandemic highlight the importance of effective collaboration in complex problems in a changing environment. We need interventions that ensure sustainable ecosystems through protection mechanisms, promotion, and rehabilitation measures. Biodiversity and ecosystems have a critical role in enhancing resilience and reducing vulnerability to the impact of climate change. Consequently, we need to ask ourselves what can IEM do better and differently to have the desired social, ecological, and economic impact?

The former Department of Mineral Resources published regulations under the Mineral and Petroleum Development Resources Act, 2002 entitled “Regulations for Petroleum Exploration and Production” in June 2015. These regulations were set aside in June 2018 by the Supreme court of Appeal on the basis that only the Minister responsible for environment was empowered to make regulations on environmental matter. As there are several Departments who must provide authorisations for hydraulic fracturing, the redrafting of these regulations under the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (NEMA) provides a unique opportunity to pilot an integrated approach to environmental authorisation of such operations. Such an integrated process is to be achieved through the preparation of a “Minimum Information Requirements for the the Submission of Applications for an Authorisation or License under NEMA or a SEMA for the Onshore Exploration and production of Shale Gas”. It is intended that this Minimum Information Requirement will contain the requirements of all government departments who are required to authorise a hydraulic fracturing activity, which will lead to one assessment report, will allow for an integrated public participation process and as far as is possible, an integrated authorisation process.

Many folks have become discouraged around the possibility of EIA processes supporting “sustainable development”, let alone “conservation”.
This talk outlines a model which has successfully provided “boots on the ground” for in situ conservation as triggered through NEMA and the EIA process.
To frame this discussion within the SDG’s is difficult, but the most obvious would be SDG 15: Protect, restore… halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. I choose this option as it is true that the exceptionally high biodiversity value of the vegetation type in the very first project of this nature, was the initial driver. For the other two sites in this story, the high biodiversity value did secure them as sites worthy of restoration, and protection for future generations.
This talk will highlight the key elements necessary for the implementation of this model. It will explain the mechanism based on three sites that have provided resources for conservation for more than 10 years.
We showcase this mechanism as it is much more than SDG 15. Most importantly, it supports SDG 8: growing the green economy, which ties to SDG 1 (no poverty) and wraps in SDG 3: healthy lives. And the cherry on top: all four sites support SDG 4: inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning opportunities.
As you will hear, it is possible, in certain instances, for the EIA process to create jobs and provide an ongoing funding stream for conservation.
That said, it is probably fair to conclude that this model flies or falls around SDG17: implementation through partnerships for sustainable development.
It is our hope that this talk will inspire others to think about similar approaches to unlock resources for conservation.

Climate change is, impacting the hydrogeological cycle. Although the longer-term centennial predictions remain unclear, with future models suggesting both a drier or wetter Western Cape, what is clear is that mean annual rainfall has reduced over the last three decades, Also noted, is that the frequency of rainfall events has decreased (less rain days measured), resulting in more intense and episodic rain. Exacerbating the problem, the rising temperature of the Western Cape causes a consequential increase in evaporation/evapotranspiration reducing the net water storage in our dams. On the backdrop of climate change impacts the additional responsibility of the burgeoning population of the Western Cape, with an inward migration places demands on water resources. While it is exceedingly unlikely that future dam construction is feasible, the challenge is therefore that water planning, security and sustainability in the Western Cape, and South Africa as a whole, until now unduly reliant on surface water storage, needs to look for new solutions to solve the dilemma. In the face of a changing climate, our reliance on these sources of water will be insufficient to meet the SDG 6.4 – “Water Use and Scarcity”. To this extent, Umvoto Africa has been working closely with the City of Cape Town and the Overstrand Municipality to achieve sustainable usage of water resources, by combining sustainably managed groundwater resources to their water use supply systems. By incorporating groundwater into the supply, service providers can better manage their supplies of water, and essentially use groundwater as a giant underground reservoir for the storage of water through Managed Aquifer Recharge. Groundwater is also less susceptible to evapotranspiration and groundwater levels can be accurately monitored to avoid over-abstraction and allow for recharge, either naturally or through Managed Aquifer Recharge.

On May 30th, 2017, a Section 30A Directive in terms of NEMA (Act 107 of 1998) was issued to the City of Cape Town (CCT) by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. The Directive was issued in line with the declaration of the Western Cape as a Disaster Zone (Disaster Management Act No. 57 of 2002) due to prolonged drought conditions (2015/18). The Directive allowed the CCT to carry out listed activities in terms of NEMA EIA regulations (2014 as amended), without the need to apply for an Environmental Authorisation. As such, site-specific method statements were produced, allowing all aspects of the environment to be considered and protected as necessary. The Directive called for the development of a Water Supply Emergency Intervention Plan. Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) is the purposeful recharge of treated water into an aquifer for subsequent recovery thereof. MAR in conjunction with abstraction, as a conjunctive use tool, ensures that over-abstraction of the Cape Flats Aquifer does not occur and that pressure is taken off the CCT’s dams, while clean water and sanitation are provided (Qu. 1, SDG 6). This intervention is an IEM tool that engages and effectively collaborates with various stakeholders (state departments: environmental affairs and water resources) and specialist involvement (water specialists, biodiversity, and heritage specialists). MAR as an IEM tool also achieves the conservation of Cape Town’s water supply as well as restoring and rehabilitating degraded land (e.g., natural, and constructed wetlands) that further protects biomes and endangered species (Qu. 2, SDG 15). Ongoing monitoring by means of a monitoring committee liaising with the necessary specialists ensures the sustainability of abstraction and MAR. This IEM tool delivers the desired mitigation of impacts to restore the ecological integrity of the CFA (Qu. 3). Groundwater development and MAR of the CFA therefore support achieving SDG 6 and SDG 15 as an IEM tool.

South Africa is a water-stressed country with effects of climate change projected to exacerbate drought conditions such as those recently experienced between 2015/18 in the Western Cape. To build resilience against the effects of climate change, the City of Cape Town (CoCT) launched the New Water Programme (NWP), a fundamental part of the CoCT water strategy. This strategy responded to priorities set by local Government within the National Development Plan (NDP) and National Water Act which supports sustainable groundwater development. The objectives of the NWP include the refurbishment of the Atlantis Water Resource Management Scheme (AWRMS). The AWRMS is recognized as one of the first large-scale managed aquifer recharge (MAR) schemes in the world, supplying water to the town of Atlantis. It was implemented during the 1970s and has operated to varying degrees of success for almost 40 years. However, since the early 2000s it has been operated on limited capacity with surface-water becoming the main water source. AWRMS is a key example of sustainable water (SDG 6) use that closes the water system, allowing for wise water use, reuse, and recycling. Prior to NWP, the AWRMS was able to supply ~5 million litres per day to the Atlantis region. The goal of the refurbishment and expansion is to produce up to 40 million litres per day in extreme emergencies and allow water to be reticulated to the coastal village of Melkbos – effectively increasing the reach and resilience offered by the AWRMS. A key component to the refurbishment of the scheme has been to establish a robust monitoring network to ensure the long-term sustainability of the groundwater abstraction and MAR components and to offer an early warning system aimed at water resource protection (SDG 13).

Umvoto Africa has provided the Overstrand District Municipality with groundwater consultancy services for almost two decades and supports the wellfield management since 2009. The central town of Hermanus services a growing population, currently just under 100 000, which is projected to grow by ~5% annually. Coupled with population growth and the uncertain but negative consequences of climate change on water availability, the small town of Hermanus was not excluded from the 2015/18 water crisis in the Western Cape. This presentation seeks to illustrate the water supply and demand ratios in the past, present and future, to suggest the interventions to mitigate the water shortfall and to describe groundwater abstraction and wellfield development in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A brief overview of the hydro-geology explains the source and flows of groundwater, while hydro-climatology will look at past and future rain scenarios. An overview of the development of three major wellfields on the outskirts of the town illustrates how groundwater is abstracted and incorporated into the water treatment works as part of a conjunctive usage system alongside surface water. Prior to groundwater abstraction, Hermanus was reliant on surface water only, but now receives on average 30% of its potable drinking water from the aquifer reducing the dependency on the De Bos Dam. While water touches on each of the 17 SDGs, the presentation highlights its specific relationship to SDG 6 “clean water and sanitation for all” under Sub-theme 1, to illustrate that this initiative is preserving resources and life on land and in rivers through decreased, sustainable surface water and groundwater usage, conserving water resources and contributing to the conservation of life in rivers and ultimately contributing to the restoration of the wider natural environment through the decreased reliability on surface water resources in the area.

The City of Cape Town (CCT) initiated the Table Mountain Group (TMG) Aquifer Project in 2001. The study, which continued until 2013, focused on determining the potential yield from three main groundwater target areas, namely Theewaterskloof, Wemmershoek and Kogelberg-Steenbras. During 2013 the CCT decided to undertake an extended Exploratory Phase, thereby delaying the Pilot Phase, in the three main target areas. The conventional implementation process of the TMG Aquifer groundwater scheme was disrupted in 2017, when a severe drought occurred in the Western Cape; dam levels were dangerously low, and ‘Day Zero’ loomed for the CCT. A National Disaster was declared under section 41(1) of the Disaster Management Act, 2002 (Act 57 of 2002), the CCT initiated their New Water Programme (NWP) and a Section 30A Directive was issued in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), Act 107 of 1998. This meant that a conventional Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process was not required for specific listed activities in terms of the NEMA before the implementation of approved water augmentation schemes, provided that the CCT comply with the conditions of the Section 30A Directive. Implementation of the first TMG Aquifer wellfield commenced in the Steenbras area, which included borehole drilling, pipelines, power supply and water treatment works. The project required a truly #allhandsondeck approach where the client, regulatory authorities, stakeholders, engineers, landowners, environmental practitioners, specialists, and contractors. All stakeholders had to work together with the aim of balancing secure water supply and resilience and environmental protection. The project provided valuable opportunities to test, model and adapt environmental protection measures and aquifer management principles, and some useful lessons were learnt, which will be shared as part of the presentation.

Globally, biodiversity and ecosystems are threatened. The ongoing loss of biodiversity together with the complicating effects of climate change place increasing demands on dwindling resources and are key challenges to sustainable development. In South Africa, pressure for economic growth and the additive effects of development pose a threat to the remaining biodiversity through the destruction and fragmentation of natural habitat, introduction of alien invasive organisms and pollution, amongst other impacts. Transformation of natural areas, in most cases, cannot be restored to what it was before transformation. This places an ever increasing and cumulative pressure on natural resources and ecosystem services in two ways. The first is the consumptive use of biodiversity (e.g. commercial fishing), and the second is the competition for physical space required for development (landscape transformation). It is increasingly acknowledged that Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as a tool cannot address the cumulative impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services at landscape scale. EIA aims to find the ‘best practicable environmental option’, invariably allowing some loss of biodiversity in each instance. The additive effects of these numerous minor losses of biodiversity means that, at ecosystem or landscape scale, biodiversity continues to decline, as do our ecosystem services. South Africa is thus increasingly putting itself into an undesirable state of ecological deficit. Regulatory and other interventions are needed to stop and reverse ecosystem degradation. Biodiversity offsets are seen as one possible method of mitigating the current trends in biodiversity and ecosystem services loss in the country. However, for offsetting to succeed in practice, a number of barriers will have to be overcome. This panel discussion will give an overview of the policy developments in South Africa. It will then look at the role that biodiversity plays in promoting the achievement of the SDGs (ecosystem services, Green Economy, etc.), and the role that biodiversity offsets can play, through the mitigation hierarchy, achieving national and international biodiversity targets.

The renewable energy sector is becoming an ever more viable alternative to coal-fired power plants, with technology rapidly developing and improving, the cost of renewable power dropping and the environmental impacts of fossil fuels no longer acceptable. Several renewable power plants (RPPs) have been developed, or are currently being developed, in terms of Eskom’s Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers Procurement Programme (REIPPPP), introduced in 2011 with the aim of installing 17.8GW of renewable energy generation capacity by 2030, and which is now in its fifth bid window. Apart from the RPPs, smaller-scale renewable power generation has also been gaining traction and is anticipated to grow even faster now that the NERSA licensing threshold for independent power producers is set to be raised from the current 1MW to 100MW. With the development of more RPPs, it has also become clear that although RPPs are relatively “green” as compared to fossil fuel power plants, they can still lead to significant environmental impacts. One impact that has garnered much attention in South Africa relates to bird and bat mortalities associated with wind farms, an aspect which now requires exhaustive investigation as part of EIAs for such projects. As renewable energy looks set to replace coal-fired plants over time, it is crucial that the environmental impacts of RPPs be thoroughly understood, and effective impact mitigation measures be developed. To this end, are the current assessment and application processes sufficient or should they be adjusted to better suit the requirements of this industry? Is there a need to introduce an industry-specific set of procedures, and if so, what will these look like? Expert panellists specialising in different aspects of the renewable energy sector will tackle these issues.

The need for a ‘just transition’ to an inclusive green economy, to ensure that vulnerable stakeholders are better off through the transition process, or at least not negatively impacted by it, will be introduced. The three key dimensions of a just transition (procedural, distributive, and restorative justice) will be unpacked. Highlighting that a wide range of understanding (and ambition) exists among stakeholders, the presentation will discuss the various conceptions of a just transition. Principles for an ambitious just transition will be defined in the process. Then, the policy toolbox available to foster each dimension of transitional justice will be discussed, while also unpacking key issues which must be addressed in the process of defining and implementing a just transition. Finally, this conceptual framework will be applied to the coal value chain in South Africa.

For many, Change may induce a myriad of conflicting feelings. Change can be seen as good and as bad, as progressive and regressive and even exhilarating or daunting. Another word for change that is finding itself in our daily vocabulary is Transition. These mixed feelings described here can be applied to the transition we face in the electricity sector as a country and as an organisation. To see the benefits of positive change we often need to be open to new information and novel experiences. It is clear that the transition to a new pathway for the country is inevitable. It is a change that will bring about sustainable electricity supply, decoupled from emissions; a healthier environment and society; opportunities for new and exciting career paths and a thriving economy. This is change, daunting at first but with the promise of an exhilarating future. Eskom has developed a comprehensive JET strategy to detail how this can be achieved, together with the requisite financing for implementation of such a plan. These plans will be shared with the conference.

In 2016, nations ratified a global agreement on climate change, the Paris Agreement, committing to ambitious efforts to keep global average temperature rise to well below 2 ̊C above pre-industrial levels, and to pursue efforts to limit temperature rise to 1.5 ̊C. The Paris Agreement also commits to increasing the resilience of countries to the impacts of climate change. C40's aim is that every city should have developed and begun implementing a climate action plan before the end of 2020, which will deliver action consistent with the objectives of the Paris Agreement – an integrated and inclusive plan that addresses the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to the impacts of climate change, and deliver wider social, environmental and economic benefits.
This presentation highlights how C40 cities are ensuring that cities in Africa are developing solid climate action plans that do not leave anyone behind. The C40 Inclusive Climate Action recognises that climate change is inextricably linked to the challenge of creating a more equal world. Climate actions bring economic and environmental benefits, such as better air quality, low-cost renewable energy, and employment opportunities. It is critical that these benefits and opportunities are shared equitably, and that cities achieve a ‘just’ transition by, for example, ensuring that workers in the fossil fuel industry can access the new green jobs that will be created. This is even more important for a green and just recovery from the COVID 19 pandemic.

South Africa as a signatory to UN resolutions is obligated to produce a SDG country report. In the past the country produced the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals saw the number of indicators that countries are expected to report on increasing exponentially. During the previous MDGs and SDG reporting, South Africa, through Statistics South Africa as a national coordinator to produce the country report, established structures to guide the reporting process. Sectoral Working Groups (SWGs) were established along SDGs (social, economic, environment and governance) to review the indicators, collect indicators values and metadata. The SWG also domesticated some of the indicators. Further, a report drafting team was constituted to guide the reporting process. These structures were accountable to a National Coordinating Committee (NCC). To ensure national ownership of the report, there was extensive consultations across sectors. Stakeholders across different sectors were invited to serve on the SWG, NCC and Expanded Report Writing Team. Statistics South Africa served as the secretariat for the SDG. Experience of international reporting reveal that there is still a shortage of data to report on the indicators. As a result of this, Statistics South Africa embarked on a process of defining the demand for statistics in the country. This resulted in the development of the Integrated Indicators Framework (IIF). The IIF is a compendium of national and international indicators. This framework will ensure ease of both national and international reporting.

Circular economy has become the latest term in the sustainability space and seems to be getting a similar amount of attention as to when the term Sustainable Development was coined. The circular economy is not a new concept though. It has been repackaged in a very clever way, a way that we can use to leverage real change, more so than terms previously used. Why is it so different? An integral part of circular economy is systems thinking. To understand something properly, the parts must be understood in relation to the whole. This is very rarely done in practice, especially as the current economy is built on a linear trajectory of extraction, manufacture, consume, dispose in simple terms. Very rarely is the whole system considered. We have come to accept the existence of waste as an inevitable consequence of our economy. The core principles of the circular economy as outlined by the Ellen Macarthur Foundation include designing out waste and pollution; keeping products and materials in use; and regenerating natural systems. What do these mean in an African context and how do we implement circularity? Can we use circularity to rebuild South Africa taking into account the diverse and many socio-economic challenges not to mention the devastating impact that Covid-19 has had on the economy and livelihoods? Understanding the intention of circularity and the principles will assist to outline the variety of opportunities and benefits of transitioning to a circular economy. It is necessary to demystify what circular economy is not.

The concept of the Anthropocene is now just more than a decade old, and the recommendations made by the authors appear not to have been taken seriously by society as a whole. If they had, it is likely that the dynamics responsible for the Covid-19 pandemic might have been better managed thus preventing the pandemic and its associated impacts. However, this has not been the case and we are now well beyond a year of living with the pandemic. It may be safely assumed that many in society long for a return to what they knew, or business as usual. This will be particularly true for those most severely impacted on from a business and/or livelihoods perspective. The reality is though that we simply cannot afford to return to a ‘business-as-usual’ way of life. Much has been written since the outbreak of this pandemic that calls very clearly for a ‘new normal’ where nature is recognised as underpinning societal resilience. This paper will discuss some of this work and illustrate how critical is it for society at large to recognise and invest in securing and restoring the integrity of natural areas, be these terrestrial, fresh water and/or marine. It will end with making the case for environmental management decision-making processes to strongly embrace this reality to enhance the value of the discipline and the contribution we make to societal resilience.

Tourism is one of the world’s largest economic sectors, creating sustainable jobs, driving exports, and supporting the sustainable livelihoods of many individuals and households across the world. Tourism is a labour-intensive industry, making a significant contribution to employment sector of South Africa, with the sector directly supporting 726,500 jobs (4.5% of total employment) in 2017. While tourism is one of the main driving forces behind economic growth it can also have serious negative environmental impacts, especially with regard to water resources. The water demand of the tourism sector can have serious implication to the water consumption and availability of regions, particularly in areas where water is scarce and in areas, which experience an influx of tourists during peak season. Although the tourism sector is a highly responsive and flexible industry, adapting to demand, activities, and markets, as well as economic, social, ecological, and technological changes and challenges. Water security and restrictions, due to drought, pose a distinct challenge to the tourism sector. The tourism industry will in future, experience difficulties in efficiently managing scarcer and less reliable water resources while serving more guests - they must do more with less. The sector will need to explore innovative solutions, re-imagining the way water is used (and reused) to improve water use efficiency. The tourism industry will need to consider recent technology advances for the provision of water and sanitation that are more effective and efficient, while being simple, low-cost, and having limited energy dependence. This paper analyses the impact of the tourism industry on water consumption and wastewater generation in South Africa, identifying innovative solutions based on best-practice outcomes that will support sustainable economic growth in the sector.

Responsible Tourism (RT) implies that all parties involved in the tourism sector are responsible for making sure that all activities taking place are of a sustainable nature, and that consideration is given to environmental conservation, economic growth, and social integrity. IEM instruments such as “EIA and sustainable tourism initiatives aspire to contribute to sustainable development” by “creating a better life for all people” through achieving the goals of sustainable development. The Kruger National Park (KNP) and the South African National Parks (SANParks) are key role-players in the tourism and conservation sectors in South Africa and have acknowledged and started to implement Responsible Tourism practices into their strategic model. As stakeholders play a key role in RT, this study aimed to determine management perceptions of RT development in the KNP, to assist SANParks achieve their RT goals and as an Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) approach to aid in achieving the SDG’s. A qualitative methodological approach was applied for achieving the objective through semi-structured interviews with seven KNP managers to measure perceptions against SANS 1162:2011 criteria. The interviews with employees revealed that there are some RT aspects that are considered to a greater extent than others. It was also found that, despite generally good performance regarding RT aspects, employees find that there are two major stumbling blocks that are hindering SANParks from implementing RT practices in the parks. For SANParks to reach their RT goals, they can consider addressing these gaps, as the core of RT is that of behaviour and actions taken. Emphasis must be on how all those involved in the KNP and SANParks can alter their behaviour to “make better places for people to live in, and better places for people to visit”.

The Mpumalanga Province provides the majority of South Africa’s coal for energy production, where over 60% of the surface area is subject to mining rights or prospecting right applications. As productive land tends to coincide with high concentrations of coal reserves, Mpumalanga also accounts for almost half of South Africa’s high potential arable land. Food security is under threat by both operative coal mining activities as well as derelict and ownerless mines, leaving soil highly disturbed. Water use for mining-, agriculture- and energy production in this province is also becoming increasingly strained. The water-energy-food-ecosystem (WEFE) nexus provides a framework through which to evaluate resource security in a holistic manner, which could aid in contributing to integrated environmental management (IEM). In this study, the interconnectedness of water, energy, food, and ecosystems, with their resultant trade-offs, is assessed for Mpumalanga to motivate for a just transition to affordable and clean energy, particularly in the case of disturbed and abandoned lands. Using the WEFE nexus framework, the potential of renewable energy is investigated with a focus on sustainable mine closure initiatives.

The iron and steel industry is a major global industry that consumes vast quantities of energy and causes environmental degradation through greenhouse gas emissions and industrial waste generation, treatment, and disposal. There is a need to manage complex iron and steel industrial waste in Africa, which requires a system engineering approach to zero waste management as informed by multi-criteria decision-making. The purpose of the current study was to develop a hybrid four-step multi-criteria decision-support model, the i-ZEWATA (Industrial Zero Waste Tiered Analysis). I-ZEWATA acts as a road map to understand, design, assess, and evaluate the iron and steel industrial waste systems with the ultimate objective of moving towards and achieving a zero-waste footprint. The results demonstrate that iron and steel waste can be identified, visualized, prioritized, and managed to promote zero waste by applying a system-engineered approach. Additionally, relationship patterns to environmental, social, operational, and economic aspects with system behavioural patterns and outcomes were identified. It was clear from the case study in South Africa that, although technology and solution investment is essential, waste management, valorization, and treatment components require a concerted effort to improve industrial waste operational management through effective zero-waste decision-support towards a circular economy.

To meaningfully contribute towards addressing the problems of ‘poverty’ and ‘zero hunger’ in our world, we may need to first focus on ourselves. As practitioners we must increase our ability to recognise and better understand how projects or our actions can affect those at the very bottom of the economic pyramid. These are not those who may receive the jobs promised during construction, nor the community representatives we engaged with at the community meeting. These are the easily overlooked food insecure households on the fringes of the community and even individuals within a single household. These are the affected parties who often have livelihood strategies which are precarious, easily disrupted and set back without anyone noticing or raising the alarm. How do our assumptions, the data we collect and present, and the mitigation measures we design, affect these livelihoods and what can we change to increase their resilience and economic well-being?

Once draft policy or legislation is published for public input it is often difficult for the average citizen to ascertain the legislature’s perspective on the methods of achieving improved governance and social justice. Many of the 17 SDGs are linked to work done in the integrated environmental management field. Reducing inequality - in various forms – is part of that package deal and is identified as an important focus point in the SDGs. Lack of achieving social justice, especially in the South African context, can undo any progress made towards improved IEM governance. SDGs create an ideal opportunity to link the realities of the average citizen to the aim of proposed IEM policy and legislation. Sustainable development can only be realised if the regulated community understands how individual laws and regulations intend to achieve water security, address climate change impacts, sustainable and responsible energy development, mining, etc. The DFFE is tasked with ensuring the achievement of sustainable development against the backdrop of the Constitution, the National Development Plan and now the internationally adopted SDGs. This presentation will focus on recent policy and legislative developments to reflect how the DFFE aims to enable sustainability through improved governance measures.

For decades the mining industry has been the backbone of the South African economy through extraction of minerals for export and secondary industries. The mining industry has been providing inputs for other industrial sectors vital for sustaining the wellbeing of society and the economy. Notwithstanding the economic benefits, legacy mining has resulted in abandoned mine shafts and residues, that were primarily left unrehabilitated thus causing negative social and environmental impacts, through dust and pollution of water resources among others for host towns and their communities. The mining industry attracted labourers from rural areas within South Africa and neighbouring countries looking for economic opportunities, thus resulting in rapid population growth in mining cities and towns. This rapid population growth led to the creation of both formal and informal settlements near legacy mine sites that were not rehabilitated and prepared for sustainable development. Some informal settlements are living virtually on these legacy mine areas, exposing them to health and safety dangers. This phenomenon is prevalent in mining towns such as Johannesburg, Kimberly, Welkom, etc. Legacy mine areas continue to pose limitations on spatial planning and services provision by local municipalities in old mining towns. The mining sector has extracted huge profits from breaking virgin grounds while neglecting future development needs in these areas post mining. In excuse, mining companies cited the lack of environmental impact assessment requirements in past legislations. The need for environmental impact assessment were for the first time introduced into legislation in the Minerals Act, 1991 (Act No 50 of 1991) where mines were required to carry out mine environmental management for future development needs post mine closure. Subsequently, the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (MPRDA) strengthened sustainable development as a requirement for all prospecting and mining projects to be planned and executed in a manner to ensure environmental, social, and economic benefit for both current and future generations. The MPRDA recognised the need to promote host communities and rural development through social upliftment of communities local to mining operations and reaffirmed equitable benefit to the country’s mineral and petroleum resources. As a result, mining houses are required to develop Social and Labour Plans to empower host and affected communities for sustainable development resultant from the extraction of these mineral resources. Mining houses are required to conduct needs assessments in the host communities to establish local economic development projects to uplift such communities. This is done in line with global best practices and guidelines and should be incorporated in the local Municipalities’ Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) in pursuit to align with sustainable development objectives.

The legislated public participation process (PPP) and specialist social impact assessment are considered two distinct processes within South African Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The shortfalls of the “tick-box” PPP approach and lack of alignment with local social context can result in crucial engagement aspects being overlooked, often resulting in distrust and opposition. Integrating PPP and social assessment through applying a “Social Engagement” approach could help bring social sustainability of communities to the forefront of the EIA process. Social Engagement incorporates two key goals. Firstly, to generate a clearer understanding of the local social context, and secondly to ensure inclusive engagement of stakeholders to add value to the practical and legal aspects of the EIA. There are three components of the Social Engagement Process. Firstly, to undertake Strategic Stakeholder Engagement to ensure comprehensive and co-operative consultation with key stakeholders. This should provide a robust foundation (and “social permission”) for public participation and social assessment. Secondly, to fulfil the legislated requirements for PPP. And thirdly, to undertake a Social Impact Assessment (or socio-economic) specialist study. The interconnection between these three components from the outset of planning and the EIA process is critical. This integration will identify critical stakeholders early on, ensure that stakeholders understand the project and process, and that there is close cross-reference between public engagement and social analysis. The Social Engagement approach, whether used for large complex projects or scaled down to achieve specialist efficiencies, could increase transparency, reduce distrust by stakeholders, and develop more sustainable social and environmental relationships.

The practice and roles of toxicology and chemical risk assessment (CRA) in sustainable development (SD) are discussed, especially the protection of public and workers in South Africa. Sustainable development is defined as development that meets the needs of the present generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. From an environmental management perspective, SD is better achieved through holistic and integrated environmental management (i.e., integrated environmental management (IEM)). In that regard, several principles of the Agenda 21, a United Nations (UN) blueprint for SD, as well as the 2015 UN SD goals deal directly or indirectly with toxicology and CRA. For example, Principle number 4 recognizes the indispensable role of environmental protection in SD, while Principle number 8 discusses the issue of unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. Furthermore, Principle number 11 states to enact effective indigenous environmental legislation and standards (occupational and environmental). Lastly, Principle number 17 promotes the use of environmental impact assessment (EIA) for proposed activities that can negatively affect the environment. Similarly, SD goal number 8 aims to promote sustainable economic growth and decent work for all, while SD goal number 12 ensures sustainable consumption and production patterns, which involve safe use of hazardous substances. In all these selected Agenda 21 and SD goals, toxicology and CRA features prominently by their roles in the derivation of health-based criteria such as Acceptable Daily Intakes (ADIs), reference dose (RfD) and occupational exposure limits (OELs). The presentation discusses the roles of toxicology and CRA in Agenda 21 principles 4, 8, 11 and 17, SD goals 8 and 12, as well as the challenges that hamper the practice of toxicology and risk assessment in South Africa and other developing economies.

The study of ecosystem services and the valuation of their contribution to human well-being is a growing field of interest among scientists and decision-makers. There is often limited knowledge and information about the ecosystem services and valuation at the local scale, particularly in rural areas under the jurisdiction of traditional authorities. This study aimed to assess ecosystem services and economic valuation in a critical biodiversity area under the jurisdiction of the Mphaphuli Traditional Authority in South Africa. The Co$ting Nature Policy Support System V3 was used to identify and undertake economic valuation of services provided by ecosystems. The ecosystem services valuation process was based on the default values of the valuation matrix made available in Co$ting Nature V3 software. No external datasets were used during the model simulation stage because pre-processes and preloaded data were comprehensive and useful to achieve the study's objectives. The 2018 land-cover map for South Africa was used to summarise the aggregate economic values. The aggregate value of the services flowing from ecosystems was found to be US$528 280 256. The resulting ecosystem services value shows the importance of maintaining a functioning ecosystem, especially in the impoverished community, which relies heavily on ecosystem services for their livelihoods. Rural communities should be appraised on the importance and value of these ecosystem services, especially as these relate to some income that these communities could derive from such ecosystems. Keywords: biodiversity, economic valuation, ecosystem services, LULC, rural development and livelihoods.

Over the past few decades social investment in mining communities has been driven by regulatory requirements and a needs-based assessment of perceived community needs. In recent years, evolving good practice from the international development community is challenging the success of a traditional approach to mining community development. These practices include intentional, incremental planning for social change using a theory of change as well as the use of appreciative inquiry as a method to identify and facilitate lasting social change in mining host communities. Theory of change provides a framework through which mining community development practitioners can consider enablers, implementers and influencers of change whilst incrementally planning interventions, outputs, outcomes, and impacts. To illustrate this in practice a case study of applying the theory of change to a sustainable livelihood programme in a mining community in the DRC is used. Despite the impact of COVID-19 and the visible dip in construction projects in South Africa, it is interesting to see how the mining, transport, energy, manufacturing, and government markets are focussing on inclusion and transparency. Innovative stakeholder engagement and community participation models that can be used to mitigate risks, minimize community unrest and conflict on projects are now needed more than ever. A combination of the Asset Based Community Development (ABCD) approach and Appreciative Inquiry(AI) as life-centric change processes are used as innovative approaches to bring out the best in everyone involved and to work with strengths, gifts, knowledge and assets to develop capacity and to use imagination to develop individual and collective destiny. To showcase how ABCD and AI can change perceptions and assist communities to use what already works, a case study will be presented where we use these approaches in a mining community for the Bonega Communities Trust and Ivanplats Mine in Mokopane in South Africa.

Traditional approaches to community development do little to create self-sustainable communities. Key paradigm shifts are required; notably the need to effect meaningful change that avoids perpetuating social injustice based on historical narratives and economic imbalance of power. The process of creating value involves focusing on longer term objectives and turning short-term ‘charity projects’ into self-sustaining enterprises that can help mining communities build their resilience. Social impact is an important focus of good practice throughout the mining lifecycle as a proactive process of concurrent social self-sustainable development can make communities more resilient. Social impact investment requires the development of measurable impact indicators at the planning phase. Social development programmes can be used as a preparatory mechanism for eventual transitioning to a post mining future. Impact indicators are essential to Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) investors and other potential commercial, public service and/or civic society partners. A theory of change mechanism allows for the systematic establishment of impact indicators and is used to monitor and evaluate the returns on social investment. It can also be tailored to meet the requirements of company specific policies and objectives as well as country-specific regulations. Another impact investment principle is the appreciate inquiry approach to social development. Appreciative inquiry is a well-documented community development approach where communities are viewed as a partner in development with existing initiatives and projects that are already working. This approach stands directly opposite to the needs-based approach, where communities are viewed as the recipients of projects based on what they do not have. By following these approaches, we can develop and adjust Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) practises to increase resilience and create an environment that fosters self-sustainable community development in mining communities.

It is easy to impact assessment practitioners to relate to the environmental pillar of the SDGs. Although it is common knowledge that there are a social and economic pillar as well, it is not always clear on how to integrate these pillars from an environmental perspective. The aim of this panel is to hear from practitioners that are implementing and researching socio-economic projects in the environmental field to share their experiences and tell some of their stories. Jules Newton will share her experiences as director of the The Green Business Value Chain, which seeks to catalyse South African society towards integrated approaches to building rural and urban economies in the green sector. Dr Gomotsegang Fred Molelekwa will share his vision and experience of assisting communities to create economically viable and environmentally friendly projects out of waste material such as invader plants. Justin du Toit will share his experience as an agricultural economist and agribusiness specialist. Lehman Lindeque will share his experience as manager of the Sustainable Land Management programme of the UNDP and give feedback on some of the small grant projects awarded to encourage sustainable land management. The panel will then discuss practical ways to put the SDGs in action in the field of integrated environmental management. Challenges, obstacles, and opportunities will be discussed.

Recent cases will be discussed that talk to the inclusion/consideration of SDGs in our SA IEM tools or unpacking the legal issues and how to bind SDGs into EIA’s. The panel will be chaired by Advocate Peter Kantor, Chairman of the ELA, and comprise of members of the Environmental Law Association. Each panel member will present on a recent court case dealing with a significant environmental law issue and this will be followed by a short discussion on the case. Peter Kantor will then guide a more general session on the key themes that emerge from the panel’s deliberations.

The aim of this panel discussion is to interrogate how existing legislation and institutions have improved environmental and social governance issues in South Africa. The panel will also focus on how institutions such as (DFFE), Environmental Assessment Practitioners Association of South Africa (EAPASA), SACNASP, IAIAsa etc, have managed the registration and regulatory aspects of practicing professionals. Focus will also be made on the public and media expectations with regards to governance and ethical considerations within the Environmental sector. A case study of EAPASA as the single legally constituted entity which is appointed under Section 24H of the National Environmental Management Act, Act No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA) and Section 24H Registration Authority Regulations as the only registration and regulatory body for professional Environmental Assessment Practitioners (EAPs) in South Africa will be used as the reference point. EAPASA has also been recognised by the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) as a Statutory Professional Body in terms of the NQF Act, Act 67 of 2008 (as amended, March 2018). The panel discussion will highlight key performance indicators that enabled the successful implementation of such legislation and related institutions as well as challenges and obstacles encountered along the way.