You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to download our app instead?
Moneyweb Android App Moneyweb iOS App Moneyweb Mobile Web App
Join our mailing list to receive top business news every weekday morning.

Why a South African community mistrusts big industry

And what needs to change.
Image: Shutterstock

For most of the 20th century, manufacturing, mining and other industries in South Africa developed without many legal restrictions. This resulted in industrial risks such as environmental pollution, contamination and health impacts. The fact that industrial development took place close to poor communities wasn’t considered important.

Unfortunately, the post-apartheid geographic landscape hasn’t changed much. There are many examples of South African communities and environments exposed to industrial risks.

Since the country’s democratic transition in 1994, important regulations and legislation have been developed about the impact of industry on the environment and society. But air pollution, environmental contamination and health risks still occur.

One explanation is that the government focused on large-scale industrial development to strengthen the economy. With increased industrial development, the rate of economic growth has more than doubled on average since 1994. This has also led to increased risks to communities.

For example, Zamdela is a polluted community neighbouring a large refinery run by petrochemical giant Sasol in the Free State province. Residents complain of air pollution and asthma. Sasol is South Africa’s second largest polluter. It’s one of the 100 fossil fuel companies linked to 71% of global industrial greenhouse gas emissions since 1988.

This shows lack of enforcement and political will to hold corporations accountable. It also indicates disregard for vulnerable communities that live next to polluters and bear the greatest risks.

Similarly, the South Durban Industrial Basin in KwaZulu-Natal is situated alongside residential areas. It’s one of the most polluted regions in Africa for persistent organic pollutants. The main emissions sources in the basin are two petroleum refineries, as well as a pulp and paper manufacturing plant.

The research

South Africa hasn’t successfully developed institutional capacity and the government skills to regulate and manage industrial risks. The state tends to rely on industrial expertise to inform its decisions and enforcement. This creates a lack of trust from communities towards industry and government alike.

Considering the potential environmental and health risk hazards posed by industries, genuine engagement and communication between industries, government and local communities is important.

Our research examined how industrial scientific expertise worked with surrounding communities and civil society to inform scientific decisions. We wanted to understand why there was poor engagement between industries and the community and how this could be improved.

We looked at the South Durban Industrial Basin and interviewed civil society informants. A few government officials and one person working at a small-scale private company agreed to be interviewed.

We found that members of the Merebank and Wentworth communities affected by industrial operations generally mistrusted the scientific expertise. This is because the industries didn’t share key environmental information such as pollution emission levels. Industries didn’t engage local communities and civil society in decision making.

This lack of transparency was perpetuated by poor governance, inadequate enforcement and a lack of political will. Industries didn’t view local communities as being able to contribute anything to the institutionalised forms of scientific knowledge. This blocked the process of mutual learning and deliberation to inform scientific knowledge. It also perpetuated a lack of trust from civil society towards industry.

Some communities in other parts of South Africa have fought back. For example, on 14 September 2020, the North Gauteng High Court ruled that affected communities have a right to see applications for industrial operations and mining licences in particular. Previously it wasn’t easy to secure these from the Department of Mineral Resources.

Many research projects and policy documents argue that the best way to get public trust is to open industrial developments and environmental risk assessments to greater public involvement and scrutiny. Researchers believe that if more voices and perspectives are included, their impact won’t be perceived as biased.

Progress was previously seen in South Durban when the Multi-Point Plan was launched in November 2000 by civil society to address pollution issues. The plan aimed to provide an improved and collective decision-making structure for air pollution management.

Despite some concerns about unequal power dynamics between industry, the government and the communities, the plan led to some successes. These included an improved air quality monitoring network and the extension of sampling for other pollutants. The government, community and industry constructively worked together.

But since 2010, the plan and its multi-stakeholder process has fallen away. A new crop of local government leaders didn’t take it forward.

Unfortunately, issues of transparency and communication continue to be a challenge in South Durban. The actual status of air quality in the area is unknown. The municipality hasn’t updated air quality data and many of the monitoring stations in the area don’t function.

Risk communication by industry and government must be viewed as a process for mutual learning and deliberation to inform scientific knowledge. If different knowledge systems aren’t integrated, industry will continue to create environmental risks and pose social and environmental hazards.The Conversation

Llewellyn Leonard, Professor Environmental Science, University of South Africa

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.


Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in to comment.


Aagh no worries Lwellyn. The South African economy has contracted for the last 5 years and we do not have the money to afford any “industrial” expansions.

The lack of trust in government as well as lack of skills will surely lead to the population living in harmony with nature and no more BIB BUSINESS that interfere with their lifestyle.

They can also go back to starting their cooking fires by rubbing two sticks together!

Aagh Lwellyn – no worries.

The South African landscape is changing with an ever increasing de industrialization over the last 5 years expected to continue until nothing is left.

There is no money or trust in government to invest and overseas investors are leaving in droves. Basic infrastructure like electricity, water, sanitation roads etc are falling apart and cannot support any growth.

This will lead to no worries as the peeple can live in harmony with nature in future.

Until nothing is left but the left. Can’t wait for that to happen.

You are actually regulating the nutritional value of food and health of the babies and children indirectly when you regulate the business that employes, or could have employed their parents.

All the restrictions, regulations, taxes, labour laws and local beneficiation requirements on private enterprise flow through the business, and ends up in the community, where it consumes the employment opportunities, wages, lifestyle and nutritional value of the food of the child in that community.

Any individual who is blessed with fairly average cognitive ability will understand that all government intervention in the free market restricts the availability of precious nutrients for babies and young children.

This is the law of unintended consequences that allows naive and ignorant socialists to kill children through their lack of understanding. We need regulations to restricts these ignorant socialist fools from using laws to kill babies. The road to hell is paved with good intention… and ignorance.

Complete agree Sensei and well said.

Consider a Highway which is built using tax payer money and then the users are regulated by the laws of the elected.

Once these laws are created they are either acceptanced willingly if they are deemed justified by the users or they are rejected if deemed unjustified.

The users both Business and Public use the road in accordance with the prescribed laws, businesses will create vehicles which consumers will purchase.

Neither of the users (busines or public) may exceed the laws which govern the use of the highway, for if they do a they will have a punishment enforced on them.

Using the above narrative of the above article, consumers might dislike the businesses which operate near them but they should point their frustrations at the Goverment which they elected.

If the general public does not have the cognitive ability to elect and hold their elective responsible for their performance then their society will allow for the Natural Law to take over their daily lives.

According to natural law theory, all people have inherent rights, conferred not by act of legislation but by “God, nature, or reason.

This essentially results in a fight for survival, we clearly see this with the 2000+ protests which take place last year and the minimum set at half that of a slaves wage.

Which came first? The industries or the illegal settlements? I suspect it’s almost always the settlements that spring up later. So it’s back to the old issue; overpopulation.

Mostly true about informal settlements mushrooming later but Durban South , Bluff, Isipingo, Merebank, and others are not informal settlements.

“So it’s back to the old issue; overpopulation.”

South Africa doesn’t have a particularly high population growth rate (it’s lower than some first world countries, for example).

“Which came first? The industries or the illegal settlements? I suspect it’s almost always the settlements that spring up later.”

People were forced by apartheid into the Durban South Basin’s townships (not illegal settlements), and the refineries came at the same time, or shortly afterwards.

So apart from those factual inaccuracies, you are absolutely correct.

End of comments.





Follow us:

Search Articles:Advanced Search
Click a Company: