The impact of marine spatial planning legislation on environmental authorisation, permit and licence requirements in Algoa Bay

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 79-121
Author(s):  
Denning Metuge
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Environmental Management ◽  
Air Quality ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Area ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
The Impact ◽  
National Environmental

With a focus on Algoa Bay, this article considers the potential conflicts that may arise between South Africa’s marine spatial planning (MSP) legislation and the environmental authorisations, permits and licencing requirements provided under specific environmental management Acts (SEMAs). The legislation for MSP in South Africa is the Marine Spatial Planning Act, 2018 (MSPA). It provides that ‘[a]ny right, permit, permission, licence or any other authorisation issued in terms of any other law must be consistent with the approved marine area plans’. What is more, where there is a conflict between the MSPA and any other legislation ‘specifically relating to marine spatial planning’, the provisions of the MSPA prevail. Particular attention is given to the principle of sustainability that the MSPA incorporates into MSP and its impact on environmental authorisation, permit and licence requirements issued in terms of three SEMAs: the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (NEM:BA), the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (NEM:PAA) and the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (NEM:AQA). The article concludes by summarising the potential impact the MSPA will have on the discussed SEMAs when it comes into operation and makes recommendations to prevent the occurrence of potential conflicts.

scholarly journals Assessing fishery footprints and the trade-offs between landings value, habitat sensitivity, and fishing impacts to inform marine spatial planning and an ecosystem approach

2012 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 1053-1063 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Jennings ◽  
J. Lee ◽  
J. G. Hiddink
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Marine Protected Areas ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Ecosystem Approach ◽  
Fishing Effort ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Fishing Impacts

Abstract Jennings, S., Lee, J., and Hiddink, J. G. 2012. Assessing fishery footprints and the trade-offs between landings value, habitat sensitivity, and fishing impacts to inform marine spatial planning and an ecosystem approach. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 69: 1053–1063. European and national policy commitments require further integration of fisheries and environmental management. We measured fishery footprints and assessed trade-offs between landings value, habitat sensitivity, and beam trawling impacts in UK territorial waters in the southern and central North Sea where marine spatial planning is underway and a network of Marine Protected Areas has been proposed. For fleets (UK and non-UK) and years (2006–2010) considered, total trawled area included extensive ‘margins’ that always accounted for a smaller proportion of total fishing effort and value (proportions investigated were ≤10, 20, or 30%) than their proportional contribution to total habitat sensitivity and trawling impact. Interannual and fleet-related differences in the distribution and intensity of trawling activity, driven by location choice and fisheries regulations, had more influence on overall trawling impacts than the exclusion of beam trawlers from a proposed network of Marine Protected Areas. If reducing habitat impacts is adopted as an objective of fisheries or environmental management, then the direct management of fishing footprints, e.g. by defining fishing grounds that exclude existing margins, can disproportionately reduce trawling impacts per unit effort or value.

From plate to plug: The impact of offshore renewables on European fisheries and the role of marine spatial planning

2022 ◽  
Vol 158 ◽  
pp. 112108
Author(s):  
V. Stelzenmüller ◽  
J. Letschert ◽  
A. Gimpel ◽  
C. Kraan ◽  
W.N. Probst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Spatial Assessment of the Potential Impact of Infrastructure Development on Biodiversity Conservation in Lowland Nepal

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roshan Sharma ◽  
Bhagawat Rimal ◽  
Nigel Stork ◽  
Himlal Baral ◽  
Maheshwar Dhakal
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Habitat Quality ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
Remotely Sensed Data ◽  
Buffer Zones ◽  
Ecological Sites ◽  
Key Species ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Anthropogenic Threats ◽  
The Impact

Biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate with infrastructure development being one of the leading causes. New infrastructure, such as roads, provides new access and results in increased land clearing and wildlife hunting. A number of large infrastructure projects, including new roads and rail, are being planned in Nepal. We show the application of readily available remotely sensed data and geospatial tools to assess the potential impact of these future developments on habitat quality under three protection-level scenarios. Our findings reveal that there is currently large spatial heterogeneity in habitat quality across the landscape as a result of current anthropogenic threats, and that three areas in particular could have up to 40% reduction in habitat quality as a result of the planned infrastructure. Further research is required to determine more precisely the impact on key species. Strengthening protected areas and buffer zones will contribute to mitigating degradation to some degree, however, large areas of biologically significant areas outside protected areas will be affected without new controls. Our geographic information systems (GIS) based methodology could be used to conduct studies in data poor developing countries, where rapid infrastructure development across ecological sites are ongoing, in order to make society, policy makers, and development planners aware.

scholarly journals Public Interest Environmental Litigation: Recent Cases Raise Possible Obstacles

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Michael Kidd
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Environmental Management ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
The Republic ◽  
History Books ◽  
National Environmental

Despite the broadening of locus standi in environmental cases by both Section 38 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, and Section 32 of the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998, two recent cases suggest that the pre-constitutional approach to locus standi still holds sway in our Courts.  Moreover, failure to recognise the environmental right in Section 24 of the Constitution may be an impediment to applicants' ability to bring an interdict application successfully.  Correct use of the relevant constitutional provisions ought to obviate such problems, but alternatives are suggested.  In the course of the article, it is suggested that the rule in Patz v Greene is no longer relevant and should be consigned to the history books.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE TWIN PROVISIONS OF SECTION 48 OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: PROTECTED AREAS ACT AND SECTION 48 OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, IN RESPECT OF “PROTECTED AREAS”

Obiter ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clive Vinti
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Petroleum Resources ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
National Environmental ◽  
Resources Development

This note examines the interplay between the twin provisions of section 48 of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act (57 of 2003) (NEMPA Act) and section 48 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (28 of 2002) (MPRDA), in respect of the concept of a “protected area”. In essence, section 48(1) of the NEMPA Act read with section 48(1) of the MPRDA, prohibit “prospecting” in “protected areas”. However, section 48(1)(b) of the NEMPA Act and section 48(2) of the MPRDA, permit “prospecting” in “protected environments” and in any land “reserved in terms of any other any law”, if written authorisation is acquired under specific strict conditions. “Prospecting” is defined as intentionally searching for any mineral through any method which disturbs the surface or subsurface of the earth, including any portion of the earth that is under the sea or under other water; or in or on any residue stockpile or residue deposit, in order to establish the existence of any mineral and to determine the extent and economic value thereof; or in the sea or other water on land (s 1 read with s 17 of the MPRDA). This issue of the relationship between section 48 of the NEMPA Act and section 48 of the MPRDA has yet to be appropriately adjudicated on by the courts and thus, this paper will assess the implications of their inevitable interaction and suggest an approach that the courts could take in the assessment of a prospecting licence granted in respect of a “protected area”.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document