INTRODUCTION

Land use is central to development in Africa; as such, it should be regarded as an issue of public interest and not something to be determined solely by the landowner. Commitment to sustainable development dictates that land and its fruits should be conserved, and one of the most important conservation tools is environmental impact assessment (EIA). This chapter is concerned with the law and practice of EIA in South Africa and makes observations that, it is hoped, may inform the way EIA is practiced in other developing countries.

From my observation of the operation of environmental impact assessment in South Africa, it can be boiled down to four interrelated components beginning with P – the four Ps: provisions, process/procedure, people, and politics. These components are pivotal to the EIA process. There are, however, many aspects to the four Ps that can raise obstacles to the successful operation of EIA, many of which can be observed from the South African experience.

This chapter will commence by examining the way in which EIA has been implemented thus far in South Africa. This initial analysis will be followed by an examination of the four Ps and their subcomponents, using examples from South Africa to illustrate. Current EIA practice in South Africa, as will be revealed, suffers from several flaws. The South African government's proposed amendments to the system will be scrutinized to illustrate how effective they will be in solving these problems.

Introduction

Gorilla distribution and taxonomy

Gorillas are found discontinuously in the tropical forests of equatorial Africa (Fig. 9.1) (for more detailed discussion of the distribution of gorilla populations see Groves, 1970b, 1971; Hall et al., 1998; Omari et al., 1999; Plumptre et al., this volume). The largest discontinuity in gorillas' distribution is between the gorillas from West Africa (Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Congo, and Central African Republic) and those from East/central Africa (eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda).

The taxonomy of gorillas (as well as the other great apes) is currently under debate. During the past two decades most authors have used a “one-species–three-subspecies” taxonomy (e.g., Groves, 1986; Fleagle, 1988; Uchida, 1996). Recently, however, not only are gorillas increasingly being considered as two separate species (i.e., Gorilla gorilla and Gorilla beringei: e.g., Groves, 1996, 2001, this volume Sarmiento and Butynski, 1996), but the exact number of recognized subspecies is also undergoing revision (Sarmiento and Butynski, 1996; Sarmiento et al., 1996; Oates et al., 1999, this volume; Groves, 2001, this volume; this volume; Stumpf et al.,). For the purposes of this discussion (and to avoid confusion), gorillas from West Africa (G. g. gorilla and G. g. diehli) and from East/central Africa (G. g. graueri and G. g. beringei, or G. b. graueri and G. b. beringei if two species of gorillas are recognized) will be referred to here simply as “western gorillas” and “eastern gorillas”, respectively.