The efficiency of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) in South African renewable energy projects

Abstract

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) determines the social impacts that a development could have on the environment, including social and cultural impacts on communities involved, and it suggests mitigation measures to minimize the negative impacts that a proposed development might hold. Section 24 of South Africa's Constitution highlights human rights in a sustainable environment and it became evident in order to gain the trust of affected communities, as well as minimize adverse impacts on surrounding communities. The amount of time that an SIA process will take to identify these impacts is known as the efficiency of the process. South Africa is fast-tracking sustainable renewable projects, like solar and wind energy, placing increased focus on the efficiency of SIAs. The efficiency of SIA in the renewable energy sector has not received much attention in South Africa, presenting a research gap. Therefore, this study has aimed to investigate the efficiency of SIAs in the renewable energy sector of South Africa. To reach this aim, five research objectives were set: (i) To explore the practice of SIA in South Africa aiming to determine what constitutes good SIA; (ii) to determine the efficiency of SIAs by means of a timeline for conducting SIAs in both solar and wind energy projects; (iii) to evaluate the efficiency of a sample of SIA reports from renewable energy projects; (iv) to explore the perceptions of SIA practitioners and EAPs on the efficiency of SIA in South Africa; and (v) to provide recommendations for SIA practice and future research. This study followed a mixed methods research approach by firstly conducting a literature review, and secondly through an empirical investigation of the efficiency of the SIA process in a sample of thirty EIA reports, followed by an online survey questionnaire that explored the perspectives of a sample of nineteen SIA practitioners. The literature review demonstrated an increase in the need for renewable energy resources worldwide. Because of the fast growing population, South Africa has been trying to move away from non-renewable ways to produce energy. Two of the most popular renewable energy sources for the country is solar and wind energy, due to the high radiation index as well as wind prospects. To involve communities, by using SIAs in the planning and development of these renewable energy projects, can create jobs as well as improve communities' quality of life. It was also revealed that there is a difference between good and best SIA practice, where good SIA practice indicates what is appropriate and expected and this provides a model for best SIA practice. Although there are guidelines to determine good SIA practice, it was clear from the literature that SIA practice in South Africa is in a neglected state due to several factors that have a negative influence on the process, including less focus on social aspects due to emphasis on biophysical aspects, a shortage of trained SIA specialists, and the insufficient timeframes allowed to conduct SIAs.

The empirical investigation revealed that, in the majority of the EIA reports investigated, the EIA process is not handled efficiently and that processes such as the public participation and scoping phases are often delayed. It was evident that if delays occur in these phases, the SIA process will also be inefficient. The responses of the SIA practitioners support the finding that the SIA process in South Africa is not performing efficiently because of problems preventing the process from reaching its purpose with maximum efficiency. Problems with efficiency include: the practitioners are untrained in SIA and lack experience; developers do not want to waste money or time on the SIA process because it is not explicitly regulated by law; and that the time allowed for an SIA process is not adequate. Recommendations on how the efficiency of SIA could improve include: improved training for practitioners; the SIA process should be seen as separate from the EIA process; more time allowed for bigger, more complex projects; and that it needs to be regulated more explicitly by law.