Impacts

There are both positive and negative impacts of the recent political changes and the development and implementation of new environmental policies. These are summarised below:

Positive impacts:

• Greater Political Will;
• Wider Public Awareness;
• Greater Civil Participation in Policy Making;
• Redirection of Science & Technology Development;
• Enhanced Environmental Management.

Negative impacts:

• Too many institutions dealing with environmental issues making coordination difficult;
• Numerous policies, but limited human and financial resources to implement these, leading to a lack of credibility and the public perception that there is a lack of political will.

Positive impacts:   

Democratic governments with fixed terms of office must demonstrate to the people that their needs are being met. The shift to democracy in South Africa has been followed by a number of new policies pertaining to the environment, the institution of the Constitutional Court, and increases in funding for certain environmental activities. However, funding and staff shortages could be interpreted as less political will than policy development suggests.

Greater public awareness of environmental rights means that more environmental problems are brought to the attention of politicians or the media. Public action in the long-term will do more to discourage behaviour that is harmful to the environment than any law can do by itself.

Public participation in rural communities has become a very high priority in the development of a policy.

Greater participation by civil society in policy making creates a culture of ownership. Where people can see their inputs making an impact, they are more willing to participate.

The signing of certain International Conventions and subsequent national policy development has assisted South Africa to access international expertise and funds. In particular actions for biodiversity and climate change can now be funded through the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). For instance the Table Mountain Fund received R30 million for conservation projects in the Cape Peninsula. (Source: Our Living World, WWF, 1999)

New policy and legislation will enable minimisation of negative impacts on the environment through better management systems and enforcement. For example the application of EIAs already affects the way in which development projects are undertaken ensuring that environmental considerations are taken into account and in so doing, prevent projects that are detrimental to the biophysical and social environment from going ahead. The possibility of directly intervening in development projects did not exist before.

Negative impacts:   

Coordination:

Some issues, for example pollution, are listed in many policies, and responsibility for action lies with several government departments and authorities, as well as with the private sector, and NGOs as a watchdog. Confusion regarding responsibilities could lead to duplication of effort and therefore a waste of resources, or neglect of duties.

Institutional pressures are also evident. There are now nine provinces, about 800 local authorities, and other line Departments such as the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), Department of Minerals and Energy Affairs (DMEA), Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), Department of Land Affairs (DLA) and the National Department of Agriculture (NDA) which also have functional responsibilities over certain sectors of the environment. Also, within each province, there is little consistency as to Departmental responsibilities regarding the environment. This complex arrangement of institutions at national, provincial and local levels makes co-ordination and integration of environmental programs difficult. The National Environmental Management Act (1998) attempts to address this problem by making it compulsory that all government agencies involved in environmental management should produce environmental management plans.

Policies exceed capacity:

Given the rapid rate at which policies have been generated, policy implementation may be constrained by capacity, support staff and training. For example, implementation of the EIA regulations has been seriously delayed at provincial and local government levels due to a shortage of staff, and numerous applications, exceeding the capacity to process. This has in some cases jeopardised the progress of various development projects creating tension and conflict. (Fakir, S Target Group Analysis for Environmental Capacity Building Programme DEA&T).

The signing of International Conventions has also increased the workload of the government rather than diminished it. Many of these International Conventions require that government staff spend a lot of time traveling and attending various meetings regionally and internationally to put forward South Africa's position. Many Conventions also require that our government submit national reports to the secretariats managing the various international conventions. Having re-entered the international arena, South Africa is now also obliged to make financial contributions and pay membership fees to international organisations. Membership fees amount to R3,2 million per annum while financial contributions amount to R 1,3 million per annum.

Institutional transformation has also been affected in the last four years by the loss of experienced staff, no real growth in the environmental budget and the need for greater public participation in environmental policy making and implementation. This has made policy development and implementation more difficult and more time consuming, again taking up greater proportions of limited resources.

>     Political Environment: Responses

There is also information about the Political Environment in the following reports:
Metropolitan reports:
	Cape Metropolitan Council (1998 edition)		Durban Pilot Study
	Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan Council (1999 edition)		Greater Pretoria Metropolitan Council (1999 edition)