Search Climate Insights Directory

The National Water Resource Strategy (NWRS2) outlines a comprehensive plan to manage South Africa's scarce water resources sustainably and equitably. It prioritizes water allocation reform to redress historical imbalances, emphasizes water conservation and demand management (WCWDM) to reconcile supply and demand, and proposes a significant institutional realignment, including the establishment of nine Catchment Management Agencies and Regional Water Utilities. The strategy addresses critical challenges such as climate change, water pollution, and infrastructure backlogs, while estimating a total sector investment requirement of R700 billion over ten years.

The National Water Resource Strategy 2 (NWRS2) addresses South Africa's status as a water-stressed country by prioritizing equitable water allocation, sustainable resource protection, and the implementation of water conservation and demand management (WCWDM). It proposes a shift from traditional engineering solutions toward a 'water mix' including groundwater, desalination, and water re-use to meet growing demands from the energy, mining, and agricultural sectors. The strategy details a significant institutional realignment, including the establishment of nine Catchment Management Agencies (CMAs) and Regional Water Utilities, and estimates a total sector investment requirement of R700 billion over ten years.

Minister Edna Molewa's 2013 budget speech focuses on a 'decade of equity and redistribution' for South Africa's water sector. Key initiatives include the R4.334 billion Interim Water Supply Programme for rural backlogs, a projected R670 billion infrastructure need over ten years, and the gazetting of the National Water Resource Strategy (NWRS-2). The speech details several major dam and pipeline projects, such as the De Hoop and Mzimvubu projects, and reports on efforts to combat illegal water use and acid mine drainage.

The Centre for Environmental Rights is urging the Minister of Mineral Resources to clarify her intentions for the Chrissiesmeer Biodiversity Site and to formally prohibit prospecting and mining there for at least 20 years under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002.

The document outlines a proposed carbon tax for South Africa, starting at R120 per tCO2-eq in 2015 with annual increases of 10% through 2019. It argues that a carbon tax is more suitable than an emissions trading system (ETS) in the short term due to the oligopolistic nature of the domestic energy sector. The design includes a basic tax-free threshold of 60%, with additional allowances for trade-exposed and process-emission sectors, and the possibility of using carbon offsets to reduce tax liability. Economic modelling suggests the tax would have a largely neutral impact on GDP and employment if revenues are recycled effectively through tax shifting or government investment. The paper also details complementary flagship programmes in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and public transport to support a just transition.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing groundWork, the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA), and the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance (VEJA), submitted comments on 16 April 2013 regarding the draft 2012 National Framework for Air Quality Management in South Africa. The CER argues that the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) failed to follow prescribed review processes, ignored legislative obligations from the 2007 Framework, and provided insufficient support to municipalities for air quality management.

The Centre for Environmental Rights criticises the draft Infrastructure Development Bill for omitting references to sustainable development and imposing a strict 250-day authorisation timeline for special infrastructure projects (SIPs). The author contends that these fast-tracked processes bypass necessary scientific assessments and public consultations, potentially violating constitutional rights to a healthy environment and just administrative action. The document warns that inadequate environmental planning for projects like mines and power stations will lead to long-term state liabilities and disproportionately affect vulnerable communities.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted comments on 27 March 2013 regarding the draft Infrastructure Development Bill, 2013. The CER argues that the Bill is vulnerable to Constitutional challenge because it disregards national environmental policies, undermines the functions of provincial and local governments, and conflicts with the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (PAJA). While supporting the goal of streamlined approvals, the CER asserts that the Bill's proposed fast-tracking of infrastructure projects risks bypassing essential environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and public participation processes.

The Centre for Environmental Rights is seeking clarification from Minister Susan Shabangu on why a mining right application from Duiker Mining (Pty) Ltd was accepted for the Chrissiesmeer Biodiversity Site, despite previous ministerial assurances that mining in this ecologically sensitive area was prohibited. The Centre notes that while the Minister claimed the process was complete, no formal declaration under section 49(1) of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) has been published in the Government Gazette. They urge the Minister to formally prohibit prospecting and mining in the site for at least 20 years to ensure ecological sustainability and provide certainty to stakeholders.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) published this March 2013 report to provide comparative context for recommendations made in a previous report titled 'Unlock the Doors'. The document examines how corporate disclosure levels vary across different jurisdictions based on domestic and international legal requirements.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted comments on the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill, 2012, arguing that while the application of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) to mining is welcome, the Bill fails to ensure adequate community consultation and transparency. The CER criticizes the proposed administrative penalty system for lacking an independent tribunal and warns that the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) lacks the capacity to act as the competent environmental authority. The document further advocates for the reinstatement of joint and several liability for company directors and the removal of state immunity from criminal liability.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting on behalf of groundWork, the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA), and the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance (VEJA), submitted comments on 5 February 2013 regarding the draft National Dust Control Regulations published on 7 December 2012 under the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (AQA). The submission argues for stronger protections for vulnerable populations, more rigorous monitoring standards, and the inclusion of government entities in enforcement.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) reports on its efforts to use the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) to obtain environmental records from government and private entities in South Africa as of February 2013.

The report finds a decline in the actual disclosure of environmental records in South Africa during 2012, despite a decrease in requests being ignored. While public bodies showed more active engagement with PAIA requests, active refusals increased and full grants dropped. Private companies shifted from ignoring requests to actively refusing them, often challenging the legal right of non-governmental organisations to monitor environmental compliance. Significant non-compliance was noted regarding PAIA Manuals and statutory reporting to the South African Human Rights Commission, particularly within the Department of Mineral Resources.

The document motivates the declaration of the Mabola Protected Environment, a 8,772-hectare area in southern Mpumalanga, South Africa. It highlights the area's critical biodiversity, including endangered ecosystems and threatened species, and its role as a high-yielding water catchment. The proposal aims to integrate biodiversity conservation with sustainable agriculture and eco-tourism, while mitigating threats from mining activities.

The document lists criminal offences and penalties for mining activities under several South African legislative frameworks, including the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act, the National Environmental Management Act, the National Water Act, and the Mine Health and Safety Act. It details specific violations such as operating without environmental authorisations, polluting water resources, and failing to ensure employee safety, alongside the corresponding fines and imprisonment terms.

The Mining and Biodiversity Guideline establishes a framework for the South African mining industry to minimize ecological impacts through six core principles: applying the law, using best available biodiversity information, engaging stakeholders, employing best practice Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), applying the mitigation hierarchy, and ensuring effective implementation of Environmental Management Programmes (EMP). It categorizes biodiversity priority areas into four risk levels (A to D), ranging from legally prohibited mining zones to areas of moderate risk. The guide emphasizes a 'risk-based approach' to protect natural capital and maintain a 'social licence to operate', detailing specific requirements for each stage of the mining life cycle: reconnaissance, prospecting, production, and decommissioning/closure.

The CER evaluates the draft NWRS2 against its previous 'Stop Treading Water' report, supporting goals to improve Department of Water Affairs (DWA) stability and the establishment of Catchment Management Agencies (CMAs). However, it criticizes the draft for lacking specific timeframes and financial details, failing to afford legal status to Catchment Management Forums (CMFs), and omitting necessary reforms for the Water Tribunal. The CER specifically warns that proposed revisions to the 'Reserve' for economic development may complicate its implementation and threaten ecosystems.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing groundWork, the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA), and the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance (VEJA), submitted comments on August 22, 2012, regarding the review of the National Framework for Air Quality Management. The submission criticizes the lack of a systematic review of the 2007 Framework, the absence of a current State of the Air Report, and significant gaps in air quality monitoring and public access to information. The CER advocates for more stringent emission standards, mandatory reporting for data holders, and a more inclusive, transparent review process.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) calls for the publication of an expert task team report and the holding of public hearings before the Minister of Mineral Resources decides on shale gas fracking licences in the Karoo. The CER criticizes the current process for its secrecy, the refusal of access to information requests by the Department of Mineral Resources and the Department of Environmental Affairs, and the exclusion of vulnerable communities. The CER opposes any fracking technology that contaminates aquifers, introduces pollutants, increases carbon-intensive energy dependence, or hinders South Africa's carbon emissions targets. They demand a 90-day moratorium and public consultation period following the report's release, and insist that any future authorizations include stringent regulation under the National Environmental Management Act and the National Water Act.