Great Kei Wind Energy Facility
SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Prepared for: Great Kei Wind Power (Pty) Ltd
Prepared by:
Coastal & Environmental Services EAST LONDON 16 Tyrell Road, Berea East London, 5241 043 726 7809 Also in Grahamstown, Port Elizabeth, Cape Town and Johannesburg www.cesnet.co.za
June 2014
COPYRIGHT INFORMATION This document contains intellectual property and propriety information that are protected by copyright in favour of Coastal & Environmental Services (CES) and the specialist consultants. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of CES. This document is prepared exclusively for submission to Great Kei Wind Power (Pty) Ltd and is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets, rules intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.
Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
This report should be cited as follows: CES. 2014: Great Kei Wind Energy Facility: Socio-economic Impact Assessment. East London.
Coastal & Environmental Services i Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 5 1.1 Social Impact Assessment ...... 5 1.2 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility SIA ...... 5 1.3 Terms of Reference ...... 6 1.4 The Study Team ...... 6 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 9 3 PROJECT LOCALITY ...... 11 3.1 Site Description ...... 11 4 METHODOLOGY ...... 13 4.1 Research methodology: integration of quantitative and qualitative approaches ...... 13 4.2 Methodology for assessing the significance of impacts ...... 14 5 SOCIO- ECONOMIC SETTING ...... 19 5.1 The Eastern Cape Province ...... 19 5.2 Amathole District Municipality ...... 19 5.3 Overview of the Great Kei Local Municipality ...... 19 5.4 Employment ...... 20 5.5 Education and Literacy ...... 21 5.6 Health ...... 22 5.7 Housing ...... 22 5.8 Water ...... 23 5.9 Sanitation ...... 24 5.10 Electricity ...... 24 5.11 Waste Management ...... 24 5.12 Roads ...... 24 5.13 Land-Use ...... 25 6 ECONOMIC PROFILE ...... 26 6.1 Agriculture ...... 28 6.2 Tourism ...... 30 6.3 Mariculture ...... 31 6.4 Municipal budget ...... 32 7 ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ...... 33 7.1 Issues and Impacts ...... 33 Issue 1: The Local Economy ...... 33 Issue 2: The Retail Market ...... 36 Issue 3: Loss of Land ...... 36 Issue 4: The Tourism Industry ...... 36 Issue 5: The Housing Market ...... 38 Issue 6: Social Change ...... 39 Issue 7: Health and Safety ...... 40 Issue 8: Quality of Life ...... 44 8 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ...... 47 8.1 No-Go Option ...... 47 9 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ...... 49 10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 53 1 OBJECTIVE ...... 61 2 SCOPE ...... 61 3 OBJECTIVES ...... 61 4 RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 61 5 PROCEDURE STATEMENTS ...... 61 6 FLOWCHART ...... 65
Coastal & Environmental Services ii Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Preliminary Layout of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility, the affected land/farm portions are indicated with a blue outline...... 9 Figure 3.1: Location of the proposed site ...... 12 Figure 5.1: Location of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility within the Eastern Cape administrative boundaries...... 20 Figure 5.2: Sources of water in the Great Kei Local Municipality (Stats SA, 2011)...... 23 Figure 6.1: Sectoral production of the ADM economy 2011 ...... 27 Figure 6.2: Economic growth (%) of ADM constituent local municipalities during 2002 (ADM, LED Report, 2003) ...... 27
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Criterion used to rate the significance of an impact ...... 15 Table 4.2: The severity rating scale ...... 16 Table 4.3: The rating of overall significance ...... 17
Coastal & Environmental Services iii Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 LIST OF ACRONYMS
ACRONYM ACRONYM MEANING EPWP Expanded Public Works Programme I&APs Interested and Affected Parties IAIA International Association for Impact Assessments IDP Integrated Developed Plan GKLM Great Kei Local Municipality MW Megawatts ADM Amathole District Municipality PAC Project-affected community PPP Public Participation Process SAPS South African Police Service SDF Spatial Development Framework SIA Social Impact Assessment SMME Small, Medium and Micro Businesses ToR Terms of Reference GGP Gross Geographic Product SAWS South African Weather Service REIPPP Renewable Energy Independent Producer Procurement
Coastal & Environmental Services iv Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Social Impact Assessment
According to IAIA guidelines, social impact assessment (SIA) involves a “process of analysing, monitoring and managing the intended and unintended social consequences, both positive and negative, of a planned intervention” (Social Impact Assessment: International Principles; IAIA Special Publication Series No 2; May 2003). Social impacts can be understood as consequences of public or private actions that “alter the ways in which people live, work, play, relate to one another, organize to meet their needs, and generally cope as members of society” (Burdge and Vanclay 1995:59). Included under the umbrella of social impacts, cultural impacts involve “changes to the norms, values, and beliefs of individuals that guide and rationalize their cognition of themselves and their society” (ibid), and associated changes in practices.
Social impacts occur in a number of different dimensions. Gramling and Freudenburg (1992) identify six systems of the human environment in which social impacts materialise: biophysical and health, cultural, social, political/legal, economic, and psychological systems (see Vanclay 2002).
It is important to make clear that the social impacts produced through development projects may emerge as a direct impact, but may also initiate various social processes which may lead to further, often indirect, impacts. Social impacts are also not felt uniformly: a particular impact, such as the introduction of wage labour, may have different impacts on various groups within the project affected population. If wage labour becomes available to able-bodied men, this may benefit them through an increase in cash income, while simultaneously resulting in an increased workload for women and children, who may have to substitute the labour formerly contributed by these men in other areas, such as cultivation. The introduction of cash income to a certain group of men may alter existing social structures, or result in the disadvantaging of disabled or elderly men relative to the youth, etc. Social impacts are thus felt in different dimensions, at different levels (as individuals, families, particular groups, communities, etc.), and through time (impacts may be short or long term). Social impacts may be associated with different stages of a project: the construction, operation and closure phases of a project may on each occasion have a set of particular impacts.
The aim of the SIA process is to identify and assess any (predominantly likely) social changes that may be caused by a particular activity; this analysis and evaluation of the potential impacts may then be used to inform project planning and operation to facilitate the appropriate mitigation of negative impacts and enhancement of positive impacts through proposed mitigation measures. The SIA process should further include the affected and interested public, alerting them of the nature and likelihood of potential impacts, and obtaining their participation in the identification of impacts.
SIA is limited due to the complexity and dynamism of processes of social change, and an inescapable degree of subjectivity in the identification and the weighting of the significance of accompanying social impacts
1.2 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility SIA
The major function of this social impact assessment (SIA) is to alert the developer to the most relevant and critical potential impacts of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility project, and to make suggestions for their mitigation and management. This issues-based approach will assist in ensuring that project impacts are socially acceptable, bearing in mind local residents‟ abilities to deal with and adapt to change, and their limitations in this respect.
The SIA aims to ascertain the nature, extent, duration, probability, significance and status of the identified impacts that may result from the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility project. Based on these criteria, various social impacts are identified and assessed on two core dimensions – the degree of severity or benefit of the impact, and its likelihood of emerging. Each impact is described, mitigation measures are suggested and an assessment, initially without mitigation and subsequently with mitigation, is provided.
Coastal & Environmental Services 5 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 It should be borne in mind, however, that the implementation of mitigation measures is not the sole responsibility of Great Kei Wind Power. Relevant government departments will need to ensure some of the impacts identified and mitigation measures for those impacts are implemented.
1.3 Terms of Reference
This report must consider the socio-economic impacts associated with the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility project. The project is anticipated to impact directly upon the people living in the study area and upon those in the wider Great Kei Local Municipality. The terms of reference for this study required the study team to examine, contextualise, and then assess the socio-economic impacts of the project in terms of the following items:
• Impact on the local economy • Retail market impact • Loss of land - Impact on tourism • Impact on housing market • Impact on Social Issues • Impact on health and safety of the neighbouring communities: • Impact on the quality of life
Also included in the brief was the requirement that recommendations for mitigation of assessed impacts be provided.
In order to fulfil the brief, the report examines the macro socio-economic environment, the affected communities and municipality context and then looks at the way in which households will be directly affected by the project. The report then assesses impacts in terms of their significance in terms of a ranking methodology (discussed in section 4.2 below), and provides recommendations as to mitigation and management strategies that might be applied to deal with the impacts.
Further to the above, the Great Kei WEF ascribes to the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Standards, and requires that this assessment be aligned to the equator principles as well as the prescribed Environmental, Health and Safety Standards of the IFC. In particular, the following documents should be considered:
The General Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines The Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines: Wind Energy
These guideline documents are useful technical references, and provide general and industry-specific examples of Good International Industry Practice (GIIP) as it is defined in the IFC Performance Standard 3: Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention (IFC, 2013).
1.4 The Study Team
CES has considerable experience in terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecology, the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process, and state of environment reporting (SOER), Integrated Waste Management Plans (IWMP), Spatial Development Frameworks (SDF), public participation, as well as the management and co-ordination of all aspects of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes. CES has been active in all of the above fields, and in so doing have made a positive contribution to towards environmental management and sustainable development in the Eastern Cape, South Africa and many other African countries.
Dr Alan Carter Is a Director at CES and holds a PhD in Marine Biology and is a certified Public Accountant, with extensive training and experience in both financial accounting and environmental science disciplines with international accounting firms in South Africa and the USA. He has 15 years‟ experience in environmental management and has specialist skills in sanitation, coastal environments and industrial waste. Alan is registered as a Professional Natural Scientist under the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP) and is a Certified Environmental Assessment Practitioner (CEAPSA).
Coastal & Environmental Services 6 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Dr Cherie-Lynn Mack, (Principal Environmental Consultant), holds a PhD and MSc (with distinction) degrees in Environmental Biotechnology, with a BSc degree in Microbiology and Biochemistry. She has postgraduate research experience in industrial and domestic wastewater treatment technologies, with particular emphasis on the coal and platinum mining industries. Her interests lie in the water sector, with experience in ecological reserve determination and water quality monitoring and analysis. She has experience in water quality analysis and industrial wastewater treatment research. She currently manages and provides environmental input into a number of renewable energy projects, including wind and solar energy facilities.
Mr Lungisa Bosman is a Senior Environmental Consultant and public participation specialist within CES. He holds a Bachelor of Social Science (1993) from U.C.T, with majors in Public Administration & Sociology, and a Post Graduate Diploma in Organisation and Management. Over the past ten years Lungisa has gained considerable experience in social facilitation and community education. He is currently involved in a number Environmental Impact Assessments conducting Social Impact Assessments. He has been particularly involved in the co-ordination and facilitation of public participation processes, and stakeholder engagement and management. Some of the projects in which he has been conducting Social Impact Assessment are the Lurio Green Resources Forest Plantation, Nampula Mozambique, Syrah Balama Graphtime Mine, Mozambique, Jatropha Biofuel Estate in Buzi District, Mozambique; Corridor Sands Limitada in Chibuto District, Mozambique; Malawi Monazite Mine EIA, and numerous EIAs and scoping studies. His mother tongue is Isi-Xhosa.
Countries of work experience: South Africa, Mozambique, Malawi.
Ms Nande Suka, an Environmental Consultant. Nande holds a BSc degree with majors in Botany and Zoology, as well as a BSc (Hons) in Botany, majoring in Environmental Management, both obtained from the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) in Port Elizabeth. She conducted two major research projects at honours level. Firstly, the effect of sea level rise on the marine environment and secondly she conducted an EIA and ecological specialist study for the Weston (Eastern Cape) Packaged Sewage Treatment Plant, under the supervision of Public Process Consultants in Port Elizabeth. Other courses in honours include Environmental Management, Conservation Biology, Ecology and basics in Statistics. Nande is interested in environmental conservation research, management and practise. She is currently employed in the East London Office of Coastal & Environmental Services (CES).
Some of the wind energy EIAs that CES have been involved in are listed below. These examples pertain only to the Eastern Cape. A number of additional wind energy EIAs have been completed, or are in progress, in other provinces within South Africa.
Project Name Site Size Grassridge Wind Farm Coega 60 MW Kariega Wind Farm Southwell 30 to 48 MW Peddie Wind Farm Peddie 50 MW Waainek Wind Farm Grahamstown 24 MW
Grahamstown Wind Farm Grahamstown 54 to 81 MW Cookhouse/Golden Cookhouse Wind Farm 300 MW valley Haverfontein Wind Farm Haverfontein 99 MW Grahamstown/ Makanaone Wind Farm 140 MW Riebeeck East Middleton Wind Farm Middleton 140 MW Nanagha Hills Wind Farm Eastern Cape 370 MW Great Kei Wind Farm Great Kei 23MW Thomas River Wind Farm Thomas River 80MW Nqamakwe Wind Farm Ngqamakwe 39MW
Coastal & Environmental Services 7 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Ncora Wind Farm Ncora 36MW Qunu Wind Farm Qunu 12MW Qumbu Wind Farm Qumbu 70MW
Coastal & Environmental Services 8 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The wind farm will host approximately forty three (43) turbines with a potential power output of approximately one hundred and forty (140) Megawatts (MW), as indicated in Figure 2.1. As with all projects of this nature being developed by Independent Power Producers (IPP‟s), the electricity will be fed into the national ESKOM grid. Other infrastructure associated with the proposed wind farm will include:
Concrete foundations to support the wind towers; Approximately 6 m wide internal access roads to each turbine; A 80 meters supervision wind monitoring mast; Underground cables connecting each turbine to the other and an overhead power line connecting the on-site switching station to the Eskom substation; and A small building to house the control instrumentation and interconnection elements, as well as a storeroom for maintenance equipment.
Figure 2.1: Preliminary Layout of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility, the affected land/farm portions are indicated with a blue outline.
Typically the development of a wind farm is divided into various phases. These phases and a brief description of their characteristic activities are outlined below: Pre-feasibility: Conduct surveys to identify obvious issues surrounding the project that might impact on the progress and the final acceptance of the project. This includes visits to the local authorities, civil aviation authorities, interaction with local communities, wind resource evaluation from existing data, grid connectivity, environmental impact assessment, logistical and project phasing requirements.
Coastal & Environmental Services 9 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Feasibility: Carry out thorough investigations to establish the actual costs, and economic viability of the project by designing a financial model, verifying wind resources by onsite measurement, planning the establishment of an economical and feasible grid connection within the timeframes of the project, and applying for different land related authorisations. Once the feasibility studies are complete, Great Kei Wind Power will plan the construction phase of the project. Wind Measurement: Prior to the establishment of the facility, it will be necessary to erect a number of wind measurement masts to gather wind speed data, which will be correlated with other meteorological data in order to produce a final wind model of the proposed project site. A measurement period of at least 12 months is necessary to ensure that accurate (bankable) data is obtained. This data will contribute to the micro-positioning of the wind turbines.
The implementation of a wind farm is divided into three phases, namely: Civil works phase: An area of 60m X 40m, per turbine needs to be established during the construction phase. This is the area within which construction machines (bulldozers, trucks, cranes etc.) and workers involved in the construction activities can operate. Construction phase: This involves the laying of foundations, erection of towers and turbines, and electrical connections. Operational phase: During the operational period of the turbines, only minimal access to the turbines is required by small crews that carry out routine maintenance. These crews require only light vehicles to access the site. Only major breakdowns would necessitate the use of larger cranes and trucks.
Timing Estimation: Preliminary phase (construction / civil works) = 8 months (including 8 weeks to let the foundation concrete set). Erection of wind turbines = 4 days per turbine (in good low wind weather conditions) Commissioning and electrical connection = 1 week per turbine. Refurbishment and rehabilitation of the site after operation: o Current wind turbines are designed to last for over 25 years and this is the figure that is used to plan the life span of a modern wind farm. o If refurbishment is economical, the facility life span could be extended by another 25 years.
Decommissioning of the wind energy facility at the end of its useful life will be undertaken in agreement with the landowners and according to the land use agreement.
Coastal & Environmental Services 10 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
3 PROJECT LOCALITY
3.1 Site Description
Great Kei Wind Power (Pty) Ltd proposes the construction of 43 turbines in the vicinity located east of Komga (a small farming town) in the Great Kei Local Municipality (GKLM) in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. The total potential output of the wind farm is estimated at 140 MW. The proposed sites fall within privately owned commercial farmlands in ward 2 and 5 of the GKLM.
Current infrastructure found on the proposed development area and surrounds include:
Roads: The N2 from East London to Mthatha will be used as the main access road. Three access roads branching off the N2 can be used to access the WEF sites located east of the N2, and five access roads can be used to access the WEF sites located west of the N2 from East London to Mthatha. Some of the access roads are quite informal and narrow; they would require upgrade to accommodate the abnormal vehicles to and from the WEF sites.
Water Supply: Water supply during construction and operation of the WEF must still be secured with the Department of Water Affairs (construction water will be abstracted from the Great Kei River), and from the Amathole District Municipality (for drinking water only).
Waste Management: The proponents will need to collect all solid waste and transport it to the closest licenced landfill site. This would be either the regional waste site at Butterworth, or the Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipal waste site in Berlin.
Coastal & Environmental Services 11 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Great Kei Wind Energy Facility
Figure 3.1: Location of the proposed site
Coastal & Environmental Services 12 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 Research methodology: integration of quantitative and qualitative approaches
Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (EIAs and SIAs) are closely related in as far as they examine the interrelated impacts of particular development-related change processes. However, the methodological approaches used in compiling EIAs and SIAs contrast.
Christenson and Krogman (2012), paraphrasing Flyvbjerg (2001), state that “the natural sciences are strong on cumulative, explanatory, and predictive theory”. Ellis et al. (no date) note the influence of positivism in much research practice (such as in the separation of facts and values, the pursuit/claim of value neutrality, and a dominant emphasis on empirical proof) in compiling EIAs. Christenson and Krogman (2012) contrast the approach of the natural sciences used in preparing EIAs to that of social science theory, the strengths of which are identified as including reflexive analysis and discussion of experiences, values, and interests.
Quoting Flyvbjerg further, Christenson and Krogman (2012) note that the qualities and strengths inherent in social science theory/research methodology form “the prerequisite for an enlightened political, economic, and cultural development in any society” (Flyvbjerg 2001:3) and function as important qualities in social impact assessment. Positivist natural sciences approaches fall short in facilitating adequate analysis of complex social issues, and in capturing/reflecting the insights of ordinary citizens and in expressing socially-derived explanations.
The EIA process developed, and operates, under the influence and logic of the natural sciences – the EIA process, and the environmental significance scale utilised in EIAs, thus typically adopts a technocratic rationality which places emphasis on measuring and quantifying impacts, and ascribes legitimacy to that which is (and can be) objectively measured. It is clear that EIAs, in conforming largely to the scientific perspective, may exclude or fail to properly incorporate qualitative concerns relating to social issues, such as „quality of life‟, and further struggle to manage the tension between objective and subjective perspectives and interests. It is also clear that SIAs cannot be appropriately conducted relying entirely on such a scientific perspective.
It is important that SIAs provide for comprehensive consideration and analysis of social concerns – including the nature of social relationships and identities, values and meanings held relating to the community and change processes, and various interests relating to such processes, on the basis of both quantitative and qualitative data and in terms of „social science‟ perspectives.
As noted by Flyvbjerg (2001:3), social constructions of experiences, values and interests at play in complex social situations are critical components of political, economic and cultural dimensions of development processes, and must be understood and explicitly dealt with in order for these processes to be engaged with an “enlightened” manner, recognising and protecting the full range of human experience and rights within social change processes. It is important to note that the use of qualitative research methods and data, and the use of social science analytical approaches in the consideration of social issues, which often deal with subjective perceptions and constructions, produces data and analysis that is both relevant and valid.
Coastal & Environmental Services 13 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
The consideration of interests is an important dimension of comprehending social concerns relating to complex and dynamic processes of social change. Communities are not homogenous entities, and contain within them various groups, often with differing and even competing interests. Project impacts are likely to affect such groups, and interests, in different ways. The social composition of communities and existing social dynamics, including power relations, thus comprise an important part of SIA.
From the discussion above, it is evident that the assessment of social impacts is best undertaken through taking qualitative data, and data analysis processes into account. For this reason, the environmental significant scale used in this analysis is informed and complemented by the use of qualitative data.
Qualitative and quantitative data from published sources was used to inform the SIA. This included the 2001 South African National Census data, 2007 South African Community Survey and the 2011 National Census Data, as well as various other documents and publications such as the Integrated Developed Plan (IDP) for GKLM. A site visit was conducted from the 27th to 29th January 2014 for the purpose of collecting data. This was done via focus group meetings with workers in the affected farms and surrounding farms. One-on-one interviews were also held with the principal of Waterfalls Farm School and the Professional Nurse at Great Kei Clinic. A focus group meeting was also held with councillors of the affected wards and one municipal official (Director of Planning) and the chief whip were present at the meeting. Minutes of the meetings are attached as appendix 1.
4.2 Methodology for assessing the significance of impacts
In attempting to understand the direct, indirect, cumulative or residual nature of social change processes and impacts and how best to manage them, a SIA has to take into account the extent, duration, intensity and probability of occurrence that a potential impact might have on the social environment. Impacts can either be negative, neutral or positive. Impacts can be categorised according to the various project stages, i.e. pre-construction, construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning.
To minimise the influence of subjective evaluations on the part of the authors, and to facilitate comparison between various specialist studies, a standard rating scale (utilised by CES for the ESHIA process) has been used as a guideline to provisionally quantify and assess and the identified impacts. This assessment methodology has been developed mindful of the different parameters, and complexity, of social impacts. Given that the nature of many social impacts may be difficult to quantify, this rating scale is used as a guideline, rather than rule, in identifying social impacts.
The significance ranking methodology used is outlined below.
1. Relationship of the impact to temporal scales - the temporal scale defines the significance of the impact at various time scales, as an indication of the duration of the impact.
2. Relationship of the impact to spatial scales - the spatial scale defines the physical extent of the impact.
3. The intensity of the impact- this scale is used in order to evaluate the intensity of impacts - how severe potential negative impacts would be, or how beneficial potential positive impacts would be on a particular affected system (for ecological impacts) or a particular affected party or social system.
Coastal & Environmental Services 14 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
The severity of impacts can be evaluated both with and without mitigation; the contrast between these serves to demonstrate the significance of the impact when nothing is done about it.
4. The likelihood/probability of the impact occurring - the likelihood of impacts taking place as a result of project actions differs between potential impacts. There is no doubt that some impacts would occur (e.g. loss of vegetation), but other impacts are not as likely to occur (e.g. vehicle accident), and may or may not result from the proposed development. Although some impacts may have a severe effect, the likelihood of them occurring may affect their overall significance.
The environmental significance scale is an attempt to evaluate the importance of a particular impact through integrating each of the criteria listed above. This evaluation needs to be undertaken in the relevant context, as an impact can either be ecological or social, or both. The evaluation of the significance of an impact relies heavily on the values of the person making the judgment. For this reason, impacts of especially a social nature need to reflect the values of the affected society.
Negative impacts that are ranked as being of “VERY HIGH” and “HIGH” significance must be investigated further to determine how the impact can be minimised or what alternative activities or mitigation measures can be implemented. These impacts may also assist decision makers i.e. lots of HIGH negative impacts may bring about a negative decision.
For impacts identified as having a negative impact of “MODERATE” significance, it is standard practice to investigate alternate activities and/or mitigation measures. The most effective and practical mitigations measures will then be proposed.
For impacts ranked as “LOW” significance, no investigations or alternatives will be considered. Possible management measures will be investigated to ensure that the impacts remain of low significance.
It is important to note that the concept of „mitigation‟ involves the avoidance of negative impacts as far as possible, and, where such impacts are realised, action beyond „compensation‟ to ensure containment and remedy. The optimization of beneficial impacts involves planned action to enhance the benefits. Mitigation or optimization must be practical, technically feasible and economically viable.
Table 4.1: Criterion used to rate the significance of an impact
Significance Rating Table
Temporal Scale (The duration of the impact) Short term Less than 5 years (Many construction phase impacts are of a short duration). Medium term Between 5 and 20 years.
Long term Between 20 and 40 years (From a human perspective almost permanent). Permanent Over 40 years or resulting in a permanent and lasting change that will always be there. Spatial Scale (The area in which any impact will have an affect)
Coastal & Environmental Services 15 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Individual Impacts affect an individual.
Localised Impacts affect a small area of a few hectares in extent. Often only a portion of the project area. Project Level Impacts affect the entire project area.
Surrounding Areas Impacts that affect the area surrounding the development
Municipal Impacts affect either the Local Municipality, or any towns within them.
Regional Impacts affect the wider district municipality or the province as a whole. National Impacts affect the entire country.
International/Glob Impacts affect other countries or have a global influence. al Will definitely Impacts will definitely occur. occur Degree of Confidence or Certainty (The confidence with which one has predicted the significance of an impact) Definite More than 90% sure of a particular claim/assertion. Should have substantial supportive data. Probable Over 70% sure of a particular finding/claim, or of the likelihood of that impact occurring. Possible Only over 40% sure of a particular finding/claim, or of the likelihood of an impact occurring. Unsure Less than 40% sure of a particular finding/claim, or of the likelihood of an impact occurring.
Table 4.2: The severity rating scale Impact severity (The severity of negative impacts, or how beneficial positive impacts would be on a particular affected system or affected party) Very severe Very beneficial An irreversible and permanent change to A permanent and very substantial benefit to the affected system(s) or parties which the affected system(s) or parties, with no real cannot be mitigated. For example the alternative to achieving this benefit. For permanent loss of land. example the vast improvement of sewage effluent quality. Severe Beneficial Long term impacts on the affected A long term impact and substantial benefit to system(s) or parties that could be the affected system(s) or parties. Alternative mitigated. However, this mitigation would ways of achieving this benefit would be be difficult, expensive or time consuming, difficult, expensive or time consuming, or some or some combination of these. For combination of these. For example an increase example, the clearing of forest vegetation. in the local economy. Moderately severe Moderately beneficial Medium to long term impacts on the A medium to long term impact of real benefit to affected system(s) or parties, which could the affected system(s) or parties. Other ways
Coastal & Environmental Services 16 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 be mitigated. For example constructing the of optimising the beneficial effects are equally sewage treatment facility where there was difficult, expensive and time consuming (or vegetation with a low conservation value. some combination of these), as achieving them in this way. For example a „slight‟ improvement in sewage effluent quality. Slight Slightly beneficial Medium or short term impacts on the A short to medium term impact and negligible affected system(s) or parties. Mitigation is benefit to the affected system(s) or parties. very easy, cheap, less time consuming or Other ways of optimising the beneficial effects not necessary. For example a temporary are easier, cheaper and quicker, or some fluctuation in the water table due to water combination of these. abstraction. No effect Don’t know/Can’t know The system(s) or parties are not affected In certain cases it may not be possible to by the proposed development. determine the severity of an impact.
Table 4.3: The rating of overall significance Overall Significance (The combination of all the above criteria as an overall significance) VERY HIGH NEGATIVE VERY BENEFICIAL These impacts would be considered by society as constituting a major and usually permanent change to the (natural and/or social) environment, and usually result in severe or very severe effects, or beneficial or very beneficial effects. Example: The loss of a species would be viewed by informed society as being of VERY HIGH significance. Example: The establishment of a large amount of infrastructure in a rural area, which previously had very few services, would be regarded by the affected parties as resulting in benefits with VERY HIGH significance. HIGH NEGATIVE BENEFICIAL These impacts will usually result in long term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as HIGH will need to be considered by society as constituting an important and usually long term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. Society would probably view these impacts in a serious light. Example: The loss of a diverse vegetation type, which is fairly common elsewhere, would have a significance rating of HIGH over the long term, as the area could be rehabilitated. Example: The change to soil conditions will impact the natural system, and the impact on affected parties (such as people growing crops in the soil) would be HIGH. MODERATE NEGATIVE SOME BENEFITS These impacts will usually result in medium to long term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as MODERATE will need to be considered by society as constituting a fairly important and usually medium term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are real but not substantial. Example: The loss of a sparse, open vegetation type of low diversity may be regarded as MODERATELY significant. LOW NEGATIVE FEW BENEFITS These impacts will usually result in medium to short term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as LOW will need to be considered by the public and/or the specialist as constituting a fairly unimportant and usually short term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are not substantial and are likely to have little real effect. Example: The temporary change in the water table of a wetland habitat, as these systems is adapted to fluctuating water levels. Example: The increased earning potential of people employed as a result of a development
Coastal & Environmental Services 17 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 would only result in benefits of LOW significance to people who live some distance away. NO SIGNIFICANCE There are no primary or secondary effects at all that are important to scientists or the public. Example: A change to the geology of a particular formation may be regarded as severe from a geological perspective, but is of NO significance in the overall context. DON’T KNOW In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the significance of an impact. For example, the primary or secondary impacts on the social or natural environment given the available information. Example: The effect of a particular development on people‟s psychological perspective of the environment.
4.2.1 Assumptions
The following assumptions inform the SIA: Information received from the developer, and from relevant stakeholders, including community members is accurate. Any interpretation and translation of interviews and discussions accurately reflect the meaning of interviewee‟s responses. No substantial changes will take place in the study area between the data collection and the submission of the Social Impact Assessment report. The identified project area is a technically suitable site on which to establish of a wind energy facility.
Coastal & Environmental Services 18 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014
5 SOCIO- ECONOMIC SETTING
The aim of this chapter is to describe the socio-economic conditions of the potentially affected areas. A brief discussion of the socio-economic setting of the Eastern Cape Province is provided in order to contextualize that of the Amathole District, and the Great Kei Local Municipality (GKLM). The key socio- economic features of the GKLM are then discussed and these features assessed in terms of their relevance to and potential impact on the proposed development.
5.1 The Eastern Cape Province
The Eastern Cape Province is the second largest province in South Africa, covering approximately 169 580 square kilometres, or 13.9% of South Africa‟s total land area. With more than six million people, the Eastern Cape has the third largest provincial population. It is also one of the poorest provinces in the country, with a largely rural composition and a significant backlog in basic service provision.
The economy of the Eastern Cape has grown faster than the national economy over the past few years, although this has been off a low base. Economic growth has been led by the government, finance and manufacturing sector which accounts to about 60% of the province growth (Eastern Cape Development Indicators: 2012: ECSEC). According to Stats SA Quarterly Labour Force Results the Eastern Cape experienced increase in employment between the last quarter 2012 and the first quarter of 2013. In line with the national trend the formal sector is the highest employer in the Eastern and there has been a constant decrease in employment in this sector from the second quarter (i.e. Apr- June) of 2012 to first quarter (i.e. Jan- Mar) 2013 (Stats SA Quarterly Labour Force Results). For example there were 877 000 people employed in the formal sector between April and June 2012 and there were 812 000 employed between Jan- Mar 2013.
The mining sector is the lowest employer in the province with only about 2000 people employed in this sector in between Jan – Mar 2013. The community and social service sector is the highest employer with about 320 000 people employed in this sector between Jan – Mar 2013 (Stats SA Quarterly Labour Results Quarter1 2013)
5.2 Amathole District Municipality
The area of the Amathole district municipality includes seven local municipalities, of which the GKLM is one. It is likely that the proposed development will have direct and indirect socio-economic impacts on the municipal area and its population. Accordingly the discussion that follows provides a brief socio- economic profile of the local municipal area.
5.3 Overview of the Great Kei Local Municipality
The Great Kei Local Municipality covers an area of approximately 1400 km2 in the Eastern Cape Province. According the Census 2011 the GKLM has a population of about 38 991 people, 93% of which are black. According to Stats SA 2011 there are 10 310 households with average household size of 3.4 people in the Great Kei Municipality. The GKLM falls within the Amathole District Municipality (Figure 5.1). It is bounded by the coastline between Kwelera and Kei Mouth in the South East, by the Great Kei River and Mnquma Local Municipality in the East, by the Buffalo City Municipality in the West and the Amahlathi Municipality to the North. The municipality is divided into seven wards; notable small towns in the municipality include Komga, Kei Mouth, Chintsa East, Haga Haga, Mooiplaas and Kwelera. The majority of the municipality can be characterised as rural and consists of farm land areas. The proposed Great Kei WEF is located in the farm land areas of the municipality. Regional access to the municipality is along the N2 from East London to Butterworth, with two provincial road connections i.e. the R63 Komga and King Williams Town via Bhisho and the N6 connecting Komga and Stutterheim.
The municipal area is characterised by a small population, low population density, predominance of employment in agriculture, lack of development in rural areas, and most importantly, the dominance of a single urban centre in the region (Komga). As a result, there is a significant disparity between the rural
Coastal & Environmental Services 19 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 and urban areas, which presents a unique challenge to the continued economic growth and development of the region.
Great Kei Wind Energy Facility
N2
Figure 5.1: Location of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility within the Eastern Cape administrative boundaries.
5.4 Employment
According to Stats SA there has been decline in levels of unemployment within the economically active group in GKLM from 39.7% in 1996 to 29.9% in 2011 (Stats SA; 2011). While this is a significant decrease in unemployment within the economically active group the current status quo of 29% is still high. The Great Kei Municipal Integrated Development Plan (IDP) (2012- 2017) states that 39% of the people within the employable age (i.e. between the ages of 15 – 64) are employed within the formal sector.
While unemployment rate remains high at 29.9% there has been a significant decrease in unemployment in the municipality from 50.3% in 2001 to 29.9 % in 2011 (Stats SA 2011) Employment in the GKLM is dominated by the agricultural sector which employs more than 35% and provides almost a third of the total opportunities for employment within the municipal area, although this dominance has declined in recent years.
Major growth areas for employment have included the service sector; social, personal, financial and business services. The growth in the tourism industry has also translated to greater numbers of employment opportunities. The employment and economic opportunities that will be created by the proposed Great Kei WEF will go a long way in further reducing unemployment in the municipality. For example, dividends from the project that will be given to the trust can be used in creating employment opportunities in the municipality. There will also be other spin-offs such as road construction and maintenance that will be created as result of the proposed project.
Coastal & Environmental Services 20 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 5.5 Education and Literacy
The Great Kei Municipality IDP states there are three (3) secondary schools within the GKLM, located at Mooiplaas, Icwili and Eluqolweni, eight (8) schools cater for both primary and secondary education, and thirty four (34) primary schools cater for the education of children under the age of 13. According to Stats SA there has been improvement in basic educational levels attained in the municipality between 1996 and 2011. For example, there were 26 089 people with no schooling in 1996 and there were 14861 people with no schooling in 2011. This shows a significant reduction in the number of people with no schooling in the municipality.
There is a notable deficiency in secondary school educational opportunities, which results in the need for students to go outside of the municipal area to obtain secondary school education. More often than not, students moving out of the area for secondary and tertiary schooling do not return to the municipality. This trend has a significant negative impact on the high illiteracy rate of the GKLM when compared to the rest of the country. This rate (approximately 25 %) can be ascribed to three main factors: low provision of higher education facilities, a low demand for literacy within the local economic sector, and the continual loss of literate youth to other centres outside of the municipal area in search of employment.
According to the principal at Waterfall Farm School (Ms Mafana) there are a number of challenges facing education in the municipality. For example, there are only three teachers at the school which offers Grade 1 to Grade 7. This means that each teacher has to teach more than one class at a time. The main cause for the shortage of teachers at the school is the number of learners - 110 learners are currently enrolled at the school and the government policy with regard to the student to teacher ratio does not allow for the school to have more teachers as the current student:teacher ratio is 36 learners per teacher.
The principal also stated that support is needed with regards to computer training for the school as the school has computers that were sponsored by Telkom but cannot use them as the staff members lack the necessary computer skills. The principal suggested that some of the teachers required basic computer training in order to be able to teach computer skills to the learners at the school. The benefits from the trust that will be established as a result of the Wind Energy Facility could help in supporting the school by providing for training the teachers or hiring someone to teach the learners basic computer skills.
Waterfall Farm School
Coastal & Environmental Services 21 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 5.6 Health
There is one community health centre in Komga, and five (5) clinics in the GKLM area. These facilities are predominantly located in more urban areas which results in limited access to health facilities for the rural communities. According to the Great Kei Annual Report for 2011 almost 58% of the population travels more than 5 Km to access the nearest health facility and only 1% of the population have access to medical benefit funds. According to Ms Warren (Professional Nurse at Komga Clinic) there were previously mobile clinics servicing the rural areas of the municipality but these mobile clinics are no longer operating and this means that most people leave farms and come and stay in urban areas such as Komga to be closer to health facilities.
In 1997 the Department of Housing and Local Government indicated that the total capacity of hospital and clinics in the municipal area is only 20 beds. At that time, this statistic translated to 0.5 beds per 1000 people. This figure was much lower than the national average of 5.1 beds per 1000 people in 1997. This was confirmed by Ms Warren during the site visit. She mentioned that there is a shortage of beds at the Komga Hospital and that some of the not so serious patients come to the hospital for treatment on a daily basis as they cannot be accommodated at the hospital.
Some of the challenges mentioned by the nurse at Komga clinic are: Staff shortages; the nurse mentioned that each nurse sees about 50 - 60 patients per day. Lack of staff accommodation. There is no longer an outreach programme since all mobile clinics are dysfunctional. Serious problems with giving out ARV medication as there are more than 1000 patients on ARVs and there is a long list of people awaiting access to treatment.
Komga Hospital and Clinic
5.7 Housing
The GKLM has a diverse housing requirement, ranging from traditional homesteads in the Mooiplaas and Kwelerha area, to formal serviced dwellings in the major towns. According to Stats SA; 2011 there 10 310 households in Great Kei municipality with 64% of those being formal houses. There is a need to provide low cost, serviced housing for workers in the coastal towns of Kei Mouth, Morgan‟s Bay, Haga Haga, etc. There is also a need to increase the number of formal houses in the Komga area. In an attempt to address this problem the municipality has made applications to the provincial department of housing for 3400 units in Komga, 300 units in Haga Haga and 250 units in Cefane.
More than half of the households within the municipal area reside in traditional homesteads (57%), and only 35% live in formal residences.
Coastal & Environmental Services 22 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 The in-migration of people to urban areas has manifested in the formation of informal settlements on the periphery of towns and small urban centres. The number of informal settlements in the GKLM is growing due to the lack of formal housing and there is increasing demand for low-cost, serviced housing in the municipal area. The majority of farm workers interviewed during the site visit have registered for houses in Komga but are still on waiting lists and live in informal houses in Komga. Most of the farm workers left the farms out of their own will.
Low income housing projects near Komga
5.8 Water
Water services are provided by the Amathole District Municipality. Bulk water is obtained from a number of sources, including the Great Kei River, springs and boreholes. The area is often constrained by low water supplies, and alternative water sources will need to be found in order to accommodate future demand.
Information from the Statistics SA (2011) indicates that approximately 65% of all water supplies at GKLM are provided by regional/local water schemes, which are operated by the municipality or other service providers. Other significantly used water sources include boreholes, rain water tanks, dams, pools, stagnant water, rivers/streams and water tankers. Less significantly used water sources include water vendors and springs (Figure 5.2). There are four water treatment plants in the GKLM: at Komga, Chintsa East, Kei Mouth, and Morgan‟s Bay.
Figure 5.2: Sources of water in the Great Kei Local Municipality (Stats SA, 2011). .
Coastal & Environmental Services 23 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
5.9 Sanitation
Similar to the water services supply, the district municipality is responsible for sanitation services. Only the Komga area is serviced with a fully waterborne sewerage system. All other areas have a range of alternative solutions and the majority of the population still do not have access to sanitation services. According to Stats 2011 only 34.8% of the population have access to flush toilets and the majority of the population have pit or no toilet facilities. The results of the 2011 census indicate a trend of improvement in the provision of sanitation in the municipality. For example the number of households with bucket toilets decreased from 1018 in 2001 to only 85 houses as captured in the 2011 census. There has been an increase in the number of houses having flush toilets from 2466 in 2001 to 3767 in 2011.
5.10 Electricity
As in all areas, electricity in the area is provided by Eskom in accordance with its Rural Electrification Programme. Street lighting is provided to all urban neighbourhoods, with high mast lighting provided in some of the townships. According to the Community Survey (2007), more than three quarters of the population has access to electricity, at least for lighting requirements (Figure 5.4). The 2011 Survey conducted by Stats SA also confirms these findings.
According to the Census 2011 results 8 264 out of 10 310 households in the municipality have access to electricity for lighting. This represents more than 80% of the households in the. Whilst there has not been a significant increase in the number of households using electricity for heating since the 2001 Household Survey there has been a significant increase in the number of households using electricity for cooking (Census 2011 Municipal report, Eastern Cape, Report 03-01-50). For example, in 2001 there were 2 344 households using electricity for heating and the number increased to 3 718 in 2011. This equates to 36% of the household in the municipality having access to electricity for heating. On the other hand there were 2 707 households using electricity for cooking in 2001 and 6 571 households in 2011. This implies that 60% of the households in the municipality have access to electricity for cooking.
The Census 2011 results show a serious increase in electricity consumption in the municipality and the proposed Wind Energy Project will help to ensure better supply of electricity to the municipality. Considering the current backlog of housing in the municipality mentioned during the site visit (pers. comm. with Cllr Mali and Mr. Mbongisa; Waterfall Farm) and the future population growth the proposed Great Kei Wind Energy Facility will play an important role in improving electricity supply in the municipality.
5.11 Waste Management
The management of solid waste in the GKLM is faced with a number of challenges. Although the urban areas and some villages are served with a weekly waste collection service, the scale and remoteness of many settlements and small communities makes refuse removal at these locations almost impossible. According to Census 2011 there has been a decrease in the number of household using communal or own refuse dump and also those with no rubbish disposal facility at all. The number of houses that have access to refuse collection services by the municipality has increased since 2001 survey. In the 2001 census there were only 20.8% households in Great Kei Municipality having access to weekly refuse removal and this has increased to 33.6% by 2011.
There are no registered solid waste sites within the GKLM (IDP, 2012), but a number of unlicensed sites are operating. The closest regional waste site is at Butterworth, and is a District Municipality facility.
5.12 Roads
The road network within the Great Kei Municipality consists of 729.6 kilometres of surfaced and unpaved road. Unpaved roads are defined as gravel roads as well as non-gravelled roads and tracks i.e. identified access or minor roads that have not been upgraded in any way. The major challenge facing road infrastructure in the municipality is maintenance. According to one municipal official (Ms Vuyelwa Mavuso pers. comm.) the key challenges relate to the functional status and limited equipment for
Coastal & Environmental Services 24 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 maintenance. For example, some of the equipment, only one bulldozer services the entire municipality, and is not currently functioning. This results in poor maintenance of municipal roads. The proposed project may result in improvement of some local roads as delivery trucks will have to use these roads when bringing equipment to site.
5.13 Land-Use
Of the 1421 km2 municipal area, a significant proportion (96%) is set aside for private agriculture. Of this, approximately 77% is reserved for extensive veld management for livestock production.
The urban service centres of Komga and Kei Mouth account for approximately 57 km2 (4% of the municipal area), with Komga serving as the dominant rural service centre to the surrounding agricultural areas as well as adjacent parts of the Mnquma Local Municipality. The coastal settlements of Kei Mouth, Morgan‟s Bay, Haga Haga and Chintsa are predominantly tourism and holiday destinations, having only a small permanent population.
Environmental conservation purposes account for approximately 0.5% of the municipal area; this area is predominantly located within the coastal forest reserve. Within the project areas there are also cultural and recreational land uses to be considered in the planning process. According to workers at Amberdene Farm there are areas where they practise initiation and a grave site within the farm.
Coastal & Environmental Services 25 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
6 ECONOMIC PROFILE
The ADM has the third largest economy in the province after the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality and Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality (BCMM), contributing 12% to the provincial economy. While BCMM is no longer part of the ADM economy, it remains the regional economic hub and has significant economic spin-offs for the GKLM in terms of tourism, markets for agriculture products, and access to services not available in the GKLM such as medical and banking services, availability of consumer goods, etc.
The major towns in the GKLM include Komga, Kei Mouth and Chintsa; it is here that economic activity is concentrated. These towns also function as centres of economic activity for their surrounding areas and smaller communities, and have limited manufacturing, trade, finance and community services sectors.
Outside of these towns, economic activity in the rest of the GKLM is mainly comprised by private agricultural production and subsistence agriculture practised by some rural communities within an extremely poor rural economy. There is a substantial need for investment in social and economic infrastructure throughout the ADM and GKLM.
According to data from Statistics SA 2011, 9512 people (of 38, 991 total population) are economically active (employed or unemployed but looking for work), and of these, 29.8% are unemployed. Approximately 39.7% of the total population of GKLM is unemployed (Stats SA, 2011). Of the 4313 economically active youth, approximately 39.7% are unemployed.
Some of the main economic activities in the GKLM include: Commercial agriculture, which includes citrus, pineapples and vegetables. Subsistence agriculture, consisting primarily of small stock such as goats, and maize cultivation in areas such as in Mooiplaas Tourism and resorts, particularly in coastal areas such as Kei Mouth, Morgan Bay, Haga-Haga, Chintsa and the Glenns. Game farming and hunting, particularly along the Kei River and northwest of Komga.
The following economic features of the ADM are also typical of the GKLM: The economy is dominated by the community services sector which contributed 44% to the Gross Geographic Product (GGP) of the ADM in 2011. This sector is also the major employer in the District as it accounted for 43% of all jobs in 2011. The second most important sector is the finance and business services sector which contributed 19% to the GGP of the District Municipality in 2010. However this sector is not labour intensive as it contributed only 4 % of the formal jobs in the District in 2010. The third most important contributor to the GGP of the ADM is the manufacturing sector, which accounted for 14% of the ADM‟s GGP in 2010. This sector is also a major employer as it contributed 23% of ADM formal jobs in 2010
Coastal & Environmental Services 26 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Figure 6.1: Sectoral production of the ADM economy 2011
The ADM is also characterized by significant levels of underdevelopment, especially in the Eastern side of ADM. This is the result of very little, if any, investment in these areas.
The figure below shows economic growth of the ADM constituent local municipalities in 2002. The GKLM rates the lowest in terms of economic growth, and in fact shows negative growth.
1.50 Buffalo City Mnquma 1.00 Nkonkobe 0.50 Nxuba Mbashe Amahlati Ngqshwa 0.00
-0.50 Great Kei
-1.00
Figure 6.2: Economic growth (%) of ADM constituent local municipalities during 2002 (ADM, LED Report, 2003)
To improve this situation, the ADM has initiated a process of identifying catalytic projects, which if implemented can improve the economic situation of the inhabitants of the District. The identified projects were packaged and sold to investors via an investment conference held on 25-26 April 2012. More investment means more jobs and an improvement in the socio economic problems like poverty and unemployment that face the people of the District.
At the Investor Conference IDP Action Programme 2013-2017, the following IDP Sectors were prioritized: agriculture (grain production, citrus, pineapple) agro-processing tourism aqua culture forestry renewable energy manufacturing
Coastal & Environmental Services 27 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 land planning and agrarian reform infrastructure
Local economic development (LED) is vital to the future development of the GKLM and its inhabitants. According to the ADM, LED Report (2003), the following key challenges prevailed in the GKLM and they have an impact on local economic development, these include: The structural profile (small population, large area and resultant low population density) of the GKLM limits access to facilities, services and employment; Disparity exists between development in urban and rural areas within the municipality; Rural areas have seen a decline in investment; High levels of unemployment; A concentration of employment opportunities (75%) in agriculture and community/ government services; Developmental role of LED stakeholders and principles of LED are not clearly understood; LED and institutional arrangements within the GKLM is currently not in place because there is no LED Strategy;
Possible causes of some of these challenges include: Low levels of investment Lack of opportunities Lack of skills, education and support Regional influences
6.1 Agriculture
The GKLM IDP Report (2012- 2017) identifies agriculture as a key development issue in the municipality. According to the ADM LED report, the GKLM coastal belt has high agricultural potential and is suitable for a wide variety of vegetable, fruit and nut production. Dairy production has been introduced successfully. However, the potential contribution of agriculture to the overall economy of the GKLM is possibly not fully realized.
Commercial agriculture The GKLM IDP identified the (commercial) agricultural sector as the second largest employer and GDP contributor and the largest employment sector within the area. However, the strength of the agricultural economy has declined in the face of global competition, poor safety and security and economic downturn.
The decline in the importance of (commercial) agriculture in the area is reflected by the 2001 census data where in terms of employment numbers, agriculture and other related employment has declined from 29% in 1996 to 23% in 2001 to 3% in 2011.
The decline in the agricultural sector (mainly livestock and dairy) has been attributed to a number of causes, including: Increased crime and stock theft Changing attitudes of labour Competition from multinational dairying
The potential for crop production is considerably reduced due to the poor soil base of the GKLM area and theft, fires and jackals. Farming in general has suffered due to the unavailability of suitably skilled individuals.
Problems associated with realising the potential agricultural production of this area have been stated as: High irrigation cost owing to the broken terrain of the area; High cost of security; Low level of interest in pursuing long term intensive agricultural practices; and thereby Inability to conclude supply contracts with interested agro-industries.
Coastal & Environmental Services 28 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Irrigated vegetable crops near Kwelera area
Irrigated citrus crops near Kwelera area
Pineapple farm along the Kei Mouth road. Thatching is a widely used building material
The recent upsurge in the appearance of hydroponic tunnels in the GKLM has been dramatic and appears to be contrary to the declining trend in commercial agriculture. No detailed information on the magnitude of the tunnel industry is available, but it has been suggested that the contribution to the economy of the area is significant.
The proliferation of these growing tunnels is particularly evident along the Kei Mouth Road, Kwelera and Chintsa areas.
Coastal & Environmental Services 29 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Hydroponic tunnels near Kwelera Hydroponic tunnels along the Kei Mouth Road
6.2 Tourism
It is the current view that tourism and associated activities could be the most significant catalyst for economic development in the GKLM area. This is borne out by the unprecedented recent interest in the area.
Private game farms and nature reserves A further economic trend in the GKLM is a move towards the establishment of private game farms (e.g. Inkwenkwezi) and nature reserves (e.g. Cape Morgan, Double Mouth). There has been a noticeable proliferation of game fences throughout GKLM in the past 10 years. Some of the less well known but significant (in the area) private reserves are located along the Kei River and not readily accessible to the public.
Double Mouth Nature Reserve Viskop private nature reserve on the Kefani River
Coastal residential and tourism development Tourism is growing into a significant economic component of the GKLM, particularly along the coastline. The precise contribution of tourism to job creation and skills development, and to the broader GKLM economy is not known.
The GKLM area encompasses several significant natural attractions, which make it a popular tourist destination. The beaches, river estuaries and indigenous forests in particular contribute to the attractive environment. These include the coastal nature reserves between Morgan Bay and Haga Haga and at Kwelera River Mouth.
Coastal & Environmental Services 30 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Examples of the stunning GKLM coastline near Kefani (left) and Double Mouth (right)
Several tourism products have been established to cater mainly for domestic tourism and a small proportion of foreign tourism (mainly comprised of backpackers and small adventure/eco independent tourism groups). These products include: Hotels at Kei Mouth, Morgan Bay, Bulugha and Haga Haga Backpacker accommodation at Chintsa, Kei Mouth and Arena Holiday homes Restaurants Hiking trails (The Strandloper Trail is managed as a coastal eco-tourism trail from Kei Mouth to Gonubie with overnight huts at reasonable distances for moderate hikers. The Wild Coast Meander involves a coastal trail from Kei Mouth in an easterly direction utilizing existing hotels on the Wild Coast for accommodation) Private guest farms Nature Reserves (Inkwenkwezi is a recently established game reserve which provides a cluster of tourism facilities including game viewing, conferencing and entertainment/function venues). Safari/Game farms Heritage and Cultural Centres (There is one registered heritage site; the Ocean View Farm and a cultural village – Kaya La Bantu). Two conference centers at Chintsa East and at Bulugha Inn.
6.3 Mariculture
The GKLM IDP report did not cover the potential for mariculture in the area. Due to its proximity to the coast, GKLM offers great potential for mariculture. Although mariculture initiatives have been limited, an abalone culturing operation located near Marshstrand is achieving some success.
It is currently believed that mariculture is a sector that could be expanded, provided appropriate locations along the coastline can be identified. However, the current market value of coastal land could be prohibitive to mariculture in the area.
Coastal & Environmental Services 31 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 6.4 Municipal budget
As an indication of the scale of the activities in the GKLM, the following municipal budget is provided, which reflects a general low level of economic activity in terms of rates and taxes and other revenues. This reflects the weak nature of the municipal economy.
EXPENDITURE 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/2014 TYPE Operating 3 647 404 42 739 538 42 908 956 43 166 410 Capital 12 172 187 14 119 262 16 449 126 17 256 061 Total R 48 819 591 R 56 858 800 R 59 358 082 R 60 422 470
Coastal & Environmental Services 32 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
7 ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON THE SOCIO- ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
The development of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility will result in a range of positive benefits and a few negative impacts on the local socio-economic environment of the project affected areas and the GKLM as a whole. This section of the report assesses the significance of these impacts and provides mitigation measures and recommendations to enhance benefits and reduce negative impacts.
It should be noted that the socio-economic environment is a cross-cutting issue and will link to a number of other specialist studies. Social impacts are also not static and change with time and their perception is, to a degree, subjective.
The Energy Research Centre at the University of Cape Town compiled a Socio-economic Community Development Potential Study for the Chaba Wind Energy Facility, situated in close proximity to the Great Kei facility; the study took the form of a desktop review of available information regarding the GKLM, and a number of discussions with residents and stakeholders. These discussions identified a number of topics of concern. Below is a list of suggested possible community interventions that emanated from that study.
7.1 Issues and Impacts
Issue 1: The Local Economy
Impact 1.1: Direct contribution to the local economy
Cause and Comment As has been indicated above, the current GKLM economy is not very buoyant and is mostly limited to agriculture, game farming and tourism products.
The proposed Great Kei WEF could contribute significantly to the local GKLM economy. In addition to the above, other local economic spin-offs will include the possibility of securing local service providers for various activities/services such as: Hardware and materials Security Maintenance (electrical, access roads, etc.) Financial services Coastal & Environmental Services 33 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Significance Statement Consequently, this impact will definitely be very beneficial to local people in the surrounding wind farm area over the short-term to medium-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as HIGHLY BENEFICIAL significance to the municipal area.
Recommendations and Mitigation Measures The project proponent must ensure that proper structures and procedures are in place to ensure that the benefits that accrue to the BBBEE Community Trust are distributed equitably and fairly and that benefits accrue to the wider GKLM community, particularly marginalised communities. These processes should be developed with the participation of community representatives. The same goes for the SED and ED contributions. Policies and procedures must be put in place to ensure that the directly affected people (i.e. farm workers) receive direct benefits from the Trust. For example, if there are any bursaries allocated from Trust funds, children of directly affected farm workers should receive priority. Once again, applicable policies and procedures should be developed by Great Kei Wind Power and the Community Trust in collaboration with community representatives. People still living on affected and adjacent farms should also be represented in the Trust and/or a strategy developed to ensure that they get benefits from the funds. The principle of community participation applies in this instance also.
Impact 1.2: Employment Generation
Cause and Comment While the Great Kei WEF will not generate numerous employment opportunities during the operation phase of the project, a reasonable number of jobs will be created during the construction phase. Great Kei Wind Power has indicated their intention to maximise the number of employment opportunities provided to local residents through preferential employment practices for local communities.
Significance Statement Consequently, this impact will definitely be very beneficial to local people in the surrounding wind farm area over the short-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as being of MODERATELY BENEFICIAL significance to the municipal area.
Recommendations and Mitigation Measures The proponent‟s recruitment strategy must make clear the mechanisms by which local labour recruitment will be prioritised. Recruitment policies should be explicitly gender equitable. The proponent should ensure that contractors also prioritise locals in their recruitment strategy. The proponent is committed to empower local residents and individuals with no formal employment. The proponent must outline clearly the mechanisms by which this empowerment and capacity building will be achieved. Specific initiatives in this regard might include the provision of scholarships for local students to attain further education or training in areas which will enable them to fulfil required skilled and semi-skilled positions, as well as the provision of direct training and apprenticeships. This commitment should be extended to include all contractors where applicable, and particularly to local and small scale contractors. Capacity-building support in this instance may include support to contractors in establishing useful economic linkages, skills transfer or mentorship programmes, etc. It is recommended that the recruitment strategy is clearly and regularly communicated to the local population in order to minimise the risk of unduly elevated expectations or misunderstandings in relation to employment opportunities.
Impact 1.3: Increase in Indirect Employment and Income-Earning Opportunities
Cause and Comment
Coastal & Environmental Services 34 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 In addition to new employment opportunities generated by the wind farm, there are likely to be many indirect employment opportunities linked to the provision of services to the wind farm. This will benefit businesses in the area of Komga and its surroundings as some of the materials that will be used during construction will be sourced locally. Businesses as far away as East London will also benefit as some of the materials will be sourced there (given that Komga is a small town and is not likely to be able to supply all the required materials).
Significance Statement This impact will definitely occur and will be moderately beneficial to regional businesses in the surrounding area over the short-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as being of MODERATELY BENEFICIAL significance to the local municipal area.
Recommendations and Mitigation Measures As far as reasonably possible, the proponents and their contractors must use local and regional suppliers and service providers preferentially as far as possible. This will be particularly significant in sourcing construction materials, and in contracting hospitality services (such as accommodation and catering). Where materials are not locally available and external suppliers are used, local delivery services should be used as far as possible. Procurement protocols must be developed to codify and guide this process. The local municipality should be involved in the process so as to identify local contractors and to ensure that opportunities are equally distributed. The proponent may consider establishing a training and support programme to encourage local small enterprise development.
Impact 1.4: Skills Development and Training
Cause and Comment Local residents will be given priority in terms of training and skills development. There is, however, the risk of a mismatch of skills and education for the types of employment opportunities offered by the wind farm, as well as the risk of heightened expectation and high demand among the local community for training opportunities. This can be expected as a result of the extremely limited job opportunities, coupled with low education and high unemployment rates in the area; competition among the unemployed population eager to access and capitalise on training opportunities with the hope of receiving employment on the project is likely to be high.
Significance Statement A skills development programme should definitely be implemented as part of the proponent‟s SED activity. This will have a beneficial impact on the communities of the area. As such, the impact would be SIGNIFICANTLY POSITIVE. In addition, the implementation of a training and education programme will definitely also be beneficial for individuals in the long-term. The overall significance of the education programme would thus be BENEFICIAL.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations A skills and training development programme should be developed as part of any Social Investment Programme developed by the proponent, or jointly by the proponent and the Community Trust. Such a programme could involve the sponsorship of local individuals to receive further education or training in areas which will enable them to fulfil required skilled and semi-skilled positions at the wind farm, as well as the provision of direct training and apprenticeships to community members. To ensure that youth from the affected farm areas benefit from the skills development there should be a process of identifying people with the relevant skills in these areas. Developing the skills of the children of these farm workers will go a long way in ensuring improvement of the lives as in most cases working children support the families. It should be acknowledged that education and skills will be a limiting factor in the short-term. Skills development should be seen as a long-term investment and critical to the sustainability of the proposed development and supportive of the proponent‟s further social investment objectives.
Coastal & Environmental Services 35 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 It will be important to manage community expectations with clear and regular communication about the availability of training and employment, and about the nature of training. Involvement of the Community Trust, or community representatives, should assist in this communication and management of expectations.
Issue 2: The Retail Market
Impact 2.1: Contribution to Local and Regional Business
Cause and Comment There are many industries, both local and regional, that stand to benefit from developments such as this, especially during the projects‟ construction phase. Prior to and during construction, builders and artisans are amongst those who will enjoy benefits, while local retailers stand to benefit the most. Benefits during construction are likely to be of relatively short duration and more localised. For example, there will be more buying power from local people and a reliable electricity supply for businesses in the area as result of the proposed activity.
Significance Statement A significant amount of money will be spent during the construction phase of the project. This will ensure a definite and moderately beneficial impact of MODERATE significance. The benefits from the development will cause the people of the area to have more buying power, which will have a beneficial impact on local businesses over the short-term. It is therefore possible that there will be a slight to moderately beneficial contribution of LOW to MODERATE significance to local businesses.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations Great Kei Wind Power should implement a policy of using and buying local products first to ensure that local businesses benefit. Where possible, local contractors and artisans should be employed in all activities. Opportunities should be given to informal businesses e.g. vegetable sellers and car washing businesses. Procurement procedures should provide for the procurement of goods and services from local formal and informal service providers and businesses. It may be useful to develop, with the assistance of local municipal and community representatives, a list of relevant service providers and businesses.
Issue 3: Loss of Land
The estimated total land to be transformed by the WEF (35 ha) constitutes less than 1 % of the total land available within the WEF boundary (5114.57 ha). This is considered to be a very low impact in terms of loss of land.
Issue 4: The Tourism Industry
The effect of wind farms on eco- and nature-tourism in South Africa or the GKLM is not known. However, studies conducted in Europe and Australia has shown that wind farms in comparable landscapes have not had a detrimental effect on tourism (Frantál & Kunc 2010).
In the GKLM, most of the tourism activities are located along the coastline, at towns such as Kei Mouth, Morgan Bay, Haga-Haga, Chintsa and the Glenns, who are located about 50 km from the proposed Great Kei WEF. As a consequence, the effects of the Great Kei WEF are likely to have no impact on coastal tourism.
However, some of the farms surrounding the turbines include private game farms, either for hunting purposes or to attract eco-tourism, and sensitive visual receptors may include tourists and scenic viewpoints. However, none of the known game farms are located immediately adjacent to the Great Kei WEF and none of the neighbouring farm owners objected to the Great Kei WEF during the comprehensive stakeholder engagement process.
Impact 4.1: Increased tourism due to the operation of the Great Kei WEF Coastal & Environmental Services 36 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
Cause and Comment It is likely that the novelty of the WEF in the area may temporarily boost day tourism from the surrounding areas into the project area and surrounds (including Komga itself). This interest will potentially continue indefinitely, and should be harnessed as an opportunity for the municipal area. The Visual Impact Assessment Specialist Study suggests that an Information Centre, etc. be constructed in the area in order for interested parties to learn more about the benefits of wind power, etc.
Significance Statement There is currently insufficient evidence within the context of South Africa for a judgement to be made in terms of assessment of this impact. Thus it is NOT KNOWN what the significance of this impact would be.
It is currently impossible to evaluate the impact but information will be collected in this regard once the project is operational. This will result in a deeper understanding of the impact of the wind farm industry on all aspects of tourism in the area.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations An information centre and trails along the wind farm can enhance the project by educating the public about the need for and benefits of wind power. „Engaging school groups can also assist the wind farm proponent, as energy education is paramount in developing good public relations over the long term. Instilling the concept of sustainability, and creating awareness of the need for wind farm developments, is an important process that can engage the entire community‟ (Johnston 2001). This has also been borne out by a more recent study on the effect of wind farms on tourism in which respondents said they would visit wind farms as long as there was an information centre (Frantál & Kunc 2010).
Impact 4.2: Decreased eco-tourism due to the operation of the Great Kei WEF
Cause and Comment There is currently much speculation regarding the impact of operational WEFs on eco-tourism. There are a number of private game reserves and hunting safari venues in the general area surrounding the Great Kei WEF, the nearest being Mpotshane Safaris, approximately 3km from the nearest turbine. The turbines will not be visible from the lodge buildings (according to a viewshed analysis performed as part of the Visual Impact Assessment Specialist Study), and the lodge itself is located such that the view is to the north, i.e. in the opposite direction to the WEF.
As yet there have been no definitive studies on the impact of wind farms on tourism published in South Africa. At an international level, one of the most comprehensive studies undertaken on the impact of wind farms on tourism was completed in March 2008 for the government of Scotland. Glasgow Caledonian University was commissioned in June 2007 to assess whether Government priorities for wind farms in Scotland were likely to have an economic impact on Scottish tourism. This study found that the negative impact of wind farms on tourism at national level is small and any resulting reduction in employment in tourism will be less than the numbers directly employed in the wind power industry.
The overall finding of the research study indicated that if the tourism and renewable energy industries work together to ensure that suitably sized wind farms are sensitively sited, whilst at the same time affording parts of Scotland protection from development, then the impacts on anticipated growth paths are expected to be so small that there is no reason to believe that Scottish Government targets for both sectors are incompatible.
This is however, at a national scale. The study made no conclusions regarding the impact at a local level. It is possible that embracing the WEF as an environmentally acceptable alternative to fossil fuels and actively marketing the facility as an attraction could minimize the potentially negative sentiments of tourists and tourism brokers alike.
Significance Statement
Coastal & Environmental Services 37 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 There is currently insufficient evidence within the context of South Africa for a judgement to be made in terms of assessment of this impact. Thus it is NOT KNOWN what the significance of this impact would be.
It is currently impossible to evaluate the impact but information will be collected in this regard once the project is operational. This will result in a deeper understanding of the impact of the wind farm industry on all aspects of tourism in the area.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations An information centre and trails along the wind farm can enhance the project by educating the public about the need and benefits of wind power. „Engaging school groups can also assist the wind farm proponent, as energy education is paramount in developing good public relations over the long term. Instilling the concept of sustainability, and creating awareness of the need for wind farm developments, is an important process that can engage the entire community‟ (Johnston 2001). This has also been borne out by a more recent study on the effect of wind farms on tourism in which respondents said they would visit wind farms as long as there was an information centre (Frantál & Kunc 2010). Collaboration should also be developed between Great Kei WEF and the surrounding tourism places to look at possibility of linking the wind farm with these tourist attraction places. For example, pamphlets can be made available at the lodge at Mpotshane Safari giving information about the Great Kei WEF.
Issue 5: The Housing Market
The proposed wind farm may result in an influx of people coming to the project areas in search of possible employment, or in order to become beneficiaries of the proposed Community Trust, or benefit from the social development initiatives undertaken by the Trust or generated through the multiplier effect of the project‟s contribution to the local economy. This process of in-migration from surrounding villages is likely to take place both during the construction phase (job-seekers) and during the operational phase of the project (those seeking to benefit from the operation of the Community Trust). Such in-migration is likely to result in an increase in a number of people looking for housing plots in the area and in neighbouring villages.
Impact 5.1: Shortage of housing for unskilled workers
Cause and Comment A major challenge to the GKLM at present is the provision of housing to its current population. An influx of job seekers from the more rural areas into the Komga area will only further exacerbate this problem, and will potentially result in a further increase in the size of informal settlements in the area.
Significance Statement In the medium-term, there will possibly be a moderately negative impact on living conditions in the project areas. This can result in conflict between those who are currently awaiting a housing allocation and new people arriving. The significance of this impact is therefore rated as MODERATE NEGATIVE significance to the project area.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations While management of any potential housing shortage resulting from project related population influx is NOT within the scope of Great Kei Wind Power or their contractors, Great Kei Wind Power should take reasonable steps to minimise the risk or extent of in- migration and thus demand for housing through implementing preferential employment of locals, and managing of expectations related to benefits associated with the project. This will require consistent and clear communication between the proponent and relevant communities.
Impact 5.2: Shortage of Housing for skilled workers
Cause and Comment
Coastal & Environmental Services 38 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 During the construction period, project engineers and other professionals associated with the project may require housing in close proximity to the site. There are some private housing developments in the Komga area which may be able to provide this, but it is highly likely that these professionals may opt to stay in East London and commute the 40km to the site every day.
Significance Statement In the short term, there will possibly be a slight positive impact on the housing market in the project area. The significance of this impact is therefore rated as of SLIGHT BENEFICIAL significance to the project area.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations This is NOT within the scope of Great Kei Wind Power or their contractors to manage. While it is possible that most of these professionals will want to stay in East London there is a possibility that some will want to rent houses in Komga and surrounding areas. This should be explored as it will benefit local property owners.
Issue 6: Social Change
Impact 6.1: Increase/Decrease in Alcohol Consumption and Abuse
Cause and Comment Alcoholism is a significant problem among the poor communities in the project area, a situation which is especially prevalent among the youth. This has been linked to high levels of unemployment in the area, and compounded by a lack of recreational activities. Effects related to an increase in employment opportunities and consequently income levels are two-fold and counterbalance each other. An increase in income may result in some people consuming more alcohol. On the other hand, employment and improved economic opportunities may offer people hope for the future and alleviate the drinking problems. The problem of alcohol and drugs in the area was also highlighted by the professional nurse at Komga Clinic. She mentioned that with a new project in the area and number of outsiders working in the project there has been an increasing in alcohol consumption and crime in the area. The development of drinking problems such as alcoholism would be considered a long-term impact.
Significance Statement Alcohol-related issues associated with economic developments are considered uncertain. Thus it is NOT KNOWN what the significance of this impact would be.
It is currently impossible to evaluate the impact but information will be collected in this regard once the project is operational.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations Job security, better wages and opportunities for training, combined with support groups and alcohol awareness campaigns could contribute to the reduction/prevention of alcohol consumption by workers. Community leaders should be made aware of organisations focused on alcohol abuse and addiction, such as SANCO or AA, which could be invited to address workers or establish support groups in the area. A „no alcohol policy‟ should be drafted for employees on site during construction and operations. This will include mechanisms for random alcohol testing. It is also suggested that workers and community input into such policies are sought (for example, communities may request that wage payments are not made on Fridays so as to reduce the likelihood of excessive drinking over weekends, etc.). The proposed Community Trust could develop a Social Responsibility Plan that prioritises the establishment of recreational activities such as sport centres to occupy people in the area and therefore reduce the levels of alcohol consumption.
Impact 6.2: Increase in Crime within the Project Area
Cause and Comment
Coastal & Environmental Services 39 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Crime patterns in the area generally seem to reflect crime patterns across South Africa. This is largely attributed to unemployment, lack of recreational activities, poor education and alcohol abuse. The development of the wind farm and resulting increases in buying power (either due to wages gained through employment or through business generated by the wind farm) may result in an increase in alcohol abuse, as more people will be able to buy alcohol. The latter may exacerbate alcohol consumption in the area, and correspondingly, also incidences of alcohol-related crime. To aggravate this situation, local police services in these areas are lacking and have considerable capacity shortages.
Significance Statement The development of the Great Kei WEF may possibly lead to an increase in crime levels in the surrounding area over the long-term. The significance of this impact is, however, LOW NEGATIVE. The adoption of the following mitigation measures may reduce any negative impacts.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations The proposed Community Trust could develop a Social Responsibility Plan prioritising the development of more recreational activities, such as sport centres, to occupy people in the area and therefore reduce the levels of alcohol consumption. The Community Trust will not be operational during the construction phase, and so will have no mitigatory impact on construction phase issues. The allocation and provision of resources for a community policing forum would also provide employment in addition to lowering crime incidents. The proponent, possibly in partnership with the SAPS, should support the development of such a forum. Changes in crime patterns will need to be monitored in consultation with the local police and community policing forums.
Issue 7: Health and Safety
The proposed development may result in an increase in crime and insecurity for the people in the project area. Increases in employment (such as can be expected to occur during the construction phase, and beyond, al beit to a smaller extent) often coincides with a spike in alcohol consumption which typically results in a higher number of incidents of violence and crime. Furthermore, the development of the wind farm might also coincide with an influx of social offenders or even criminals in search of theft opportunities, given the anticipated increase of cash earnings. The proposed development could also result in a higher accident rate as there will be an increase in traffic volumes in these areas. Theft of cables from the wind farm is also possible, and likely to cause safety problems.
Impact 7.1: Increased Security Risks Due to Influx of New People
Cause and Comment A significant increase in employment opportunities and the increased traffic volumes (due to construction, staff movements and visitors) are expected to lead to an increase in security risks for people. The increased traffic will also increase the risks of livestock losses due to accidents, particularly as the land surrounding and in which the project will be located is used for grazing. This is expected to be more significant during the construction period as there will be more traffic during this period.
An increase in buying power resulting from employment opportunities created by the project may lead to greater amounts of alcohol being consumed in the short-term, which in turn may increase crime levels as well. Currently alcohol (and unemployment) is the leading cause of assault and other crimes in the project area.
Significance Statement Consequently, this impact may occur and will have a moderate negative impact at the project level in the short-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as LOW NEGATIVE significance to those residing in the project areas.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations Possible mitigation measures to reduce the security risks for neighbouring villages include improved fencing along the access routes and the construction of cattle grids at road crossings.
Coastal & Environmental Services 40 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 The creation and provision of resources for a community policing forum would also provide employment as well as lower crime incidents. This could be achieved via the Community Trust structures. Construction vehicles should drive at 40 km/h at the site and along access routes in order to avoid any collisions with pedestrians. A road safety policy should be developed by the proponent, and surrounding communities made aware of the anticipated increase in traffic in the project area. As far as possible, Construction vehicles should travel during daylight hours; this will reduce the chances of any collisions with pedestrians and livestock. A Livestock Compensation policy should be instituted by the proponent, in which it undertakes to compensate owners for any loss of livestock through development activity in the area, and through which it is responsible to hold contractors accountable to similarly compensate such losses. Should the mitigation measures be adopted, the significance of the impact could be reduced, although it will remain at a LOW NEGATIVE level.
The development of the activity will be a powerful agent for social change in the communities. This change may contribute to improved welfare and development of the area. The development can also encourage relevant departments such as the Department of Health and Education to improve health and education services in the area.
Impact 7.2: Increase in Health Problems and Pressure on Local Health Services
Cause and Comment The influx of job-seekers (including contractors) and increased income levels are usually associated with an increase in transactional sex and incidences of sexually transmitted diseases. This risk is most likely to materialise during the construction phase. While no prostitution activities are noticeable in the area per se, specialist workers attracted to the area during the construction phase might encourage such practices which are often fuelled by promiscuous sexual relationships, usually driven by financial incentives. This may result in an increase in sexually transmitted diseases. This was confirmed by staff at the Komga Clinic when they sated that they are already experiencing a similar problem with an influx of outsiders working in the electricity project in the area. Ms Warren mentioned that the majority of the people working in the project are from KwaZulu/Natal and girls in the area are attracted to them because they earn salaries. According to Ms Warren this causes of lot of sexually related infections and because these people are from outside the clinic does not have a history of their health status. It therefore becomes difficult to monitor treatment because as soon as they leave no follows up are possible (Pers. Comm. Ms Warren; Professional Nurse; Komga Clinic).
The local health system is unlikely to cope with any additional pressure on current resources from the immigration of job-seekers. In addition, this may also result in the deterioration of living conditions. According to the senior nurse at Komga Clinic there is staff shortage and staff at the clinic cannot cope with incoming patients currently. She mentioned that each nurse see about 50-60 patients per day. The situation has been made worse by the closure of mobile clinics that previously visited rural and farm areas; now all those people previously serviced via mobile clinics come to Komga for health services.
Significance Statement A challenge to people‟s health and to the provision of healthcare is a short to medium-term problem that extends beyond the project itself. The immigration of job-seekers will increase demand on local services in the municipality, and it is probable that such an impact would be moderately severe. As such, the overall significance of this impact is considered as MODERATELY NEGATIVE. The adoption of mitigation measures is possible.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations The predominant hiring of local labour during the construction phase will reduce the rate of in- migration and the attendant risk of an increase in transactional sex and other health problems. Health and HIV/AIDS awareness educational programmes should be provided to all construction and operation employees of the Great Kei WEF.
Coastal & Environmental Services 41 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 The proponent must be committed to facilitate capacity building and the upgrading of local clinics and health services via the Community Trust structures in consultation with the local authorities and the health department.
Impact 7.3: Increase in Ambient Noise
The results of the Noise study indicate that the following conclusions can be drawn:
There will be a short term increase in noise in the vicinity of the site during the construction phase as the ambient level will be exceeded. The impact during the construction phase will be difficult to mitigate. The impact of low frequency noise and infra sound will be negligible and there is no evidence to suggest that adverse health effects will occur as the sound power levels generated in the low frequency range are not high enough to cause physiological effects. The SANS 10103:2008 night time noise limit guideline will be exceeded at most noise sensitive areas as indicated in the results table, however the impact may be mitigated by the factors as explained in Section 7.2. Furthermore, the current ambient night time ambient noise already exceeds SANS 10103: 2008 guideline. The day/night time noise limit of 45dBA will be exceeded at two noise sensitive areas at the higher wind speeds as indicated in the results table. The higher wind speeds will however provide a masking effect. The SANS rating limits are for planning purposes only. If a complaint is received, the actual ambient noise at the complainant‟s location is compared to the noise under consideration and if the difference is more than 7dB(A), a disturbing noise is present according to the Environment Conservation Act (Noise Control Regulations). The likelihood of a disturbing noise at the noise sensitive areas is unlikely. The construction noise will have little impact on the surrounding community as it will most likely occur during the day when the ambient noise is louder and there are unstable atmospheric conditions.
Impact 7.4: Threat of damage to property and human life from blade throw
Cause and Comment According to a report compiled by Tetra Tech (2007), blade throw is an extremely rare occurrence, with past events being the result of design defects, poor maintenance, gusting winds exceeding the maximum design load capacity of the turbine structure, or lightning strikes. Significant advances in the technology have been made since 2007, and mandatory safety standards during design, fabrication and installation, as well as frequent maintenance have already resulted in a significant decrease in such events, worldwide. The turbines proposed for the project has automatic shut-down capabilities at high wind speeds, as well as mechanisms to cease operation if significant vibration or rotor blade stress is sensed by the blade monitoring system. As a result, the risk of blade failure is minimal.
Significance Statement It is unlikely that any blade throw events will threaten neighbouring land owners, etc. as the area is not heavily populated, however, the N2 highway is a heavily utilized road, which may increase the likelihood of passing motorists being impacted in the unlikely event of a blade mechanical failure. Should this occur, it would be highly negative impact. In the long term the impact would be highly negative for residents of the area and for passing motorists, but any such incidence is highly unlikely. It is therefore rated as LOW NEGATIVE significance, which can be sustainably achieved by abiding by the suggested mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations The proponent MUST follow the manufacturer‟s recommendations on frequency and detail of maintenance on the turbine structures. A blade monitoring system must be standard in the turbine technology used in the project. Coastal & Environmental Services 42 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Establish safety setbacks, and design / site wind farms such that no buildings or populated areas lie within the possible trajectory range of the blade. This safety setback range is unlikely to exceed 300 meters, although the range can vary with the size, shape, weight, and speed of the rotor, and with the height of the turbine. Equip wind turbines with vibration sensors that can react to any imbalance in the rotor blades and shut down the turbine if necessary; Regularly maintain the wind turbine; Use warning signs to alert the public of risk; A safety setback must be established for turbines located along the N2.
Impact 7.5: Threat of damage to property and human life from gearbox failure
Cause and Comment According to Luke (2012), there are three main reasons why wind turbine gearboxes fail:
Micropitting: This is a form of surface fatigue which can result in the formation of micro-crack and pits. This can, in extreme cases, result in entire teeth falling off individual gears. Bearing failure. Bearings in gearboxes can fail for a number of reasons, including working beyond the original design specification in terms of speed, load and temperature. Foaming. High speeds and loads experienced in the turbine gearboxes can cause the introduction of air into the gearbox oil. This reduces the effectiveness of the oil as a lubricant.
The dry climate in the area in the winter months may pose an additional complication to this threat, in that the area is prone to runaway fires.
Significance Statement It is unlikely that gearbox failure events will threaten neighbouring land owners, etc. as the area is not heavily populated. Should this occur, it would be highly negative impact.. Given the unlikely nature of In the long term the impact would be highly negative for residents of the surrounding area, but any such incidence is highly unlikely. It is therefore rated as LOW NEGATIVE significance, which can be sustainably achieved by abiding by the suggested mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations The proponent MUST follow the manufacturer‟s recommendations on frequency and detail of maintenance on the turbine structures, particular reference is made to the regular maintenance of the gearbox and associated machinery. Fire-fighting equipment MUST be kept on site and in proper order to enable immediate responses to fires on site. People living and working in the areas along the turbines should be made aware of the dangers of fire and of appropriate fire responses.
Impact 7.6: Risk to aircraft navigational safety
Cause and Comment If located near an airport or along a navigational pathway, the tall turbines pose a potential collision risk with aircraft. Furthermore, the constant movement of the blades can interfere with ground and aircraft radar equipment.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations The Great Kei WEF will have to obtain approval from the South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) to locate the WEF in the proposed area. The SACAA will provide Great Kei Wind Power with a list of requirements in order to satisfy the safety requirements for all air traffic in the area. This approval will be subject to an in house SACAA safety assessment, and is not considered in this report.
Impact 7.7: Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)
Cause and Comment
Coastal & Environmental Services 43 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Wind turbines can cause television, radio and microwave interference by blocking and / or causing part of the signal to be delayed.
Significance Statement It is unlikely that EMI will impact on neighbouring land owners, etc., as the area is not heavily populated. In the long term the impact would be slight for residents of the surrounding area. It is therefore rated as LOW NEGATIVE significance. Approval still needs to be secured from the South African Weather Service SAWS and Telkom.
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations Accurate siting of wind turbines in the planning and design phase should reduce these effects. If complaints are received from surrounding landowners regarding this issue, the developer must investigate and mitigate these issues to the best of their abilities. Suggested mitigations would include the following: o For Telecommunications . Install a directional antenna; . Modify the existing aerial; . Install an amplifier to boost the signal o For Television . Install higher quality or directional antenna; . Direct the antenna toward an alternative broadcast transmitter; . Install an amplifier; . Relocate the antenna; . If a wide area is affected, consider the construction of a new repeater station.
Issue 8: Quality of Life
Impact 8.1: Change in Visual Outlook (Assessed as part of the Visual Impact Assessment Specialist Study)
The Great Kei WEF covers a large area of land which is visible up to 10km away. Most of the visual points are at least 6km away from any of the proposed development. Generally, the development has been positioned in such a way that the structures are sheltered by natural vegetation of the topography of the landscape. Depending on the where about of the view point, the overall visibility and sensitivity may vary from LOW to MODERATE, none of the turbine points were regarded HIGH from any of the sensitive visual receptors.
However, overall, it is concluded that for all viewpoints, the impact is: LOW/MEDIUM, where the impact should have an influence on the decision unless it is mitigated.
The assessment of these impacts was undertaken in terms of the following visual assessment criteria: • Visibility of the project; • Visual exposure; • Visual sensitivity of the area; • Visual sensitivity of receptors; • Visual absorption capacity; and • Visual intrusion.
The following receptors were identified: • Permanent: o Komga o Kayalabantu Cultural Village o Mandela Top Village o Mtobeni Village
Coastal & Environmental Services 44 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 o Ziphunzana Village o Dambile Village o Mcgogo Village o Lusasa Village o Chicargo Village o Manqukela Village o Mpotshane Safari Lodge • Temporary: o N2 Road users
In assessing the direct impacts to visual resources, it has been recognised that, although the lifespan of the project is likely to extend for a number of decades, most of the superstructure can be removed on decommissioning. This means that although the proposed facility will undoubtedly have an impact on the visual resources of the area, it does not represent a completely irreversible loss of scenic resources.
The following mitigation measures are recommended: • Lighting: o Sub-stations and other facilities should, where practical, be situated off the ridgelines so as to minimise the view catchment of the lighting; o All lighting should be fitted with deflectors to avoid light spillage and minimise visual impact of lights at night. The developer should specifically plan the type, placement and direction of lighting to ensure that light pollution is minimised. • Visual Intrusion in the Landscape o Increase the visual absorption capacity of the landscape around villages in closest proximity to the development by supporting tree-planting programmes.
The development will undoubtedly be imposing and dominate the visual landscape for those in close proximity. However, • Based on the assessment of significance in this report; • Given that the superstructures are technically removable on decommissioning; • Given certain mitigation recommendations in this report; • Given an understanding that although there are local losses, there are also other local, regional and national environmental, social and economic gains; and • Given authentic efforts to ensure certain benefits accrue to those in close proximity to the development;
It is concluded that potential losses of scenic resources are not sufficiently significant to present a fatal flaw to the proposed project.
Impact 8.2: Improvement of Living Conditions
The development of the activity will be a powerful agent for social change in the communities in the project area. This change may contribute to improved welfare and development of the area.
Cause and Comment The increase in employment and the benefits from the wind farm project will potentially result in an improvement in some of the people‟s living conditions in the area. More people will be able to upgrade their houses and, with increased buying power, will be able to improve their living conditions. Community development initiatives undertaken by the Community Trust (See Impact 1.1 for details regarding the Community Trust) and the additional contributions from the project turnover that have been earmarked for both socio-economic and enterprise development in the area, can be expected to improve the living conditions of community members.
Significance Statement It is definite that any significant employment will lead to an increased improvement of living conditions over the long-term. The impact would be beneficial for residents of the project areas in the municipal area. It is therefore rated as being BENEFICIAL, which can practically be enhanced.
Coastal & Environmental Services 45 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Mitigation Measures and Recommendations The proponent should adopt a preferential recruitment strategy for local residents which will ensure income earning opportunities for local residents, especially people from affected farms and farms surrounding the project site. The proponent can stimulate community development through the operation of its Social Responsibility Plan, the operation of the Community Trust, and through cooperation with community representative bodies in relation to matters of community development and the improvement of living standards.
Coastal & Environmental Services 46 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014
8 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
8.1 No-Go Option
The farms to be developed are currently used as a grazing area for livestock farming. If no development occurs in the area, the landowners will continue to utilize the land as is the current status quo. The No- Go option would have negative impacts on the potential benefits to the local communities that would accrue based on the success of the WEF.
Impact 1: Potential Job Losses
Cause and Comment It is estimated that the Great Kei WEF will generate a number of employment opportunities during construction and a few during operation. Currently, there are few employment opportunities created in the area. If the development does not proceed, these potential employment opportunities, and their resultant contributions to the stimulation of the local economy and improvement of living conditions, will be lost.
Significance Statement Consequently, this impact will definitely be negative to the local people in the surrounding areas over the short-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as being of MODERATELY NEGATIVE significance to the municipal area.
Recommendations and Mitigation Measures The only mitigation measures to reduce this impact will be to have an alternative development that will have a similar capacity in terms of employment and income generation as the proposed wind farm.
Impact 2: Potential Loss of Business Opportunities
The proposed wind farm has a potential to create business opportunities for local business in the area and the GKLM. The No-Go option will mean that these opportunities, and their resultant contributions to the stimulation of the local economy and improvement of living conditions, will be lost.
Significance Statement Consequently, this impact will definitely be negative to the local people in the surrounding project area over the short-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as being of MODERATELY NEGATIVE significance to the regional area.
Recommendations and Mitigation Measures The only mitigation measures to reduce this impact will be to have an alternative development that will have a similar capacity in terms of employment and income generation as the proposed wind farm or alternatively allow for the activity to occur.
Impact 3: Potential Loss of Infrastructure Development Opportunities
During the construction of the proposed wind energy facility a number of local roads leading to the site and turbine location will have to be upgraded to cater for trucks and traffic that will be using the roads during both construction and operation. The No-Go option will mean that these opportunities, and their resultant contributions to the stimulation of the local economy and improvement of living conditions, will be lost.
Significance Statement Consequently, this impact will definitely be negative to the local people in the surrounding project area over the short-term. The overall significance of this impact is therefore rated as being of MODERATELY NEGATIVE significance to the regional area.
Coastal & Environmental Services 47 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Recommendations and Mitigation Measures The only mitigation measures to reduce this impact will be to have an alternative development that will have a similar capacity in terms of employment and income generation as the proposed wind farm or alternatively allow for the activity to occur.
Coastal & Environmental Services 48 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014 9 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS
Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Temporal Spatial Scale Likelihood Certainty Severity Significance Significance Scale Issue 1: The Local Economy Impact 1.1: Direct Short/Medium VERY contribution to Municipality Definite Definite Very Beneficial BENEFICIAL term BENEFICIAL the local economy Impact 1.2: VERY Employment Short term Municipality Definite Definite Very Beneficial BENEFICIAL BENEFICIAL Generation Impact 1.3: Increase in MODERATE Short-term Municipality Definite Definite Very Beneficial BENEFICIAL Indirect BENEFICIAL Employment Impact 1.4: Skills Long-term Individual Probable Definite Slightly beneficial BENEFICIAL BENEFICIAL Development and Training Issue 2: The Retail Market Impact 2.1: Contribution to Moderately SOME BENEFITS – local and Short-term Regional Definite Definite BENEFICIAL beneficial BENEFICIAL regional businesses Issue 3: Loss of Land Impact 3.1: Loss of Assessed in the Agriculture and Soils Specialist Report Agricultural land Issue 4: The Tourism Industry
Coastal & Environmental Services 49 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Temporal Spatial Scale Likelihood Certainty Severity Significance Significance Scale Impact 4.1: Increased tourism due to Medium-term Municipal May Occur Unsure Unknown UNKNOWN UNKNOWN the operation of the Great Kei WEF Impact 4.2: Decreased eco- tourism due to Surrounding Long-term May Occur Unsure Unknown UNKNOWN UNKNOWN the operation of areas the Great Kei WEF Issue 5: The Housing Market Impact 5.1: Shortage of Surrounding MODERATE MODERATE housing for Medium-term May occur Possible Moderate sever Area NEGATIVE NEGATIVE unskilled workers Impact 5.2: Shortage of Surrounding Short-term May occur Possible Slightly beneficial FEW BENEFITS FEW BENEFITS housing for areas skilled workers Issue 6: Social Change Impact 6.1: Increase/ Long-term Municipality May Occur Unsure Unknown UNKNOWN UNKNOWN decrease in alcohol abuse Impact 6.2: Increase in Long-term Localised May Occur Possible Unknown LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE crime within project areas Issue 7: Health and Safety
Coastal & Environmental Services 50 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Temporal Spatial Scale Likelihood Certainty Severity Significance Significance Scale Impact 7.1: Increase in Moderately safety risks due Long-term Individual May Occur Probable LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE severe to influx of new people Impact 7.2: Increase in Health Moderately MODERATE Problems and short-term Municipality May Occur Probable LOW NEGATIVE severe NEGATIVE Pressure of Local Health Services Impact 7.3: Increase in Assessed as part of the specialist Noise Impact Assessment. Ambient Noise Impact 7.4: Threat of damage to Long-term Localised Unlikely Probable Severe LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE property and human life from blade ice throw Impact 7.5: Threat of damage to MODERATE Long-term Localised Unlikely Unsure Severe LOW NEGATIVE property and NEGATIVE human life from gearbox failure Impact 7.6: Threat of damage to property and Long-term Localised Unlikely Unlikely Severe LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE human life from ice throw
Coastal & Environmental Services 51 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Temporal Spatial Scale Likelihood Certainty Severity Significance Significance Scale Impact 7.7: Surrounding Electromagnetic Long Term May occur Possible Slightly negative LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE areas Interference Issue 8: Quality of Life Impact 8.1: Will be assessed as part of the Specialist Visual Impact Assessment Change in
Visual Outlook Impact 8.2: Improvement of Moderately VERY Long term Municipal Definite Definite BENEFICIAL Living beneficial BENEFICIAL Conditions
No-Go Alternative
Impact 1: Potential Moderately MODERATE loss of job Long-term Municipality Definite Possible MODERATE NEGATIVE severe NEGATIVE opportunities Impact 2: Potential Moderately MODERATE loss of business Long-term Municipality Definite Possible MODERATE NEGATIVE severe NEGATIVE opportunities Impact 3: Loss of infrastructure MODERATE Long-term Municipality Definite Possible Severe MODERATE NEGATIVE development NEGATIVE opportunities
Coastal & Environmental Services 52 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014
10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
While this development has impacts (both negative and positive) associated with it, provided that the mitigatory measures and recommendations are followed, the negative impacts will be negligible. According to this report, there are two „moderate‟ and seven low „negative impacts‟, which can be reduced to one „moderate negative‟ and eight „low negative‟ impacts through implementing recommended mitigation measures. Six positive impacts are identified, comprising of four „beneficial‟ impacts, one impact with „some benefits‟ and one with „few benefits‟. With mitigation, these positive impacts can be enhanced to reflect three „very beneficial‟ impacts, two „beneficial‟ impacts and one impact with „few benefits‟.
Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Significance Significance Impact 1.1: Employment BENEFICIAL VERY BENEFICIAL Generation Impact 1.2: Increase in BENEFICIAL VERY BENEFICIAL Indirect Employment Impact 1.3: Education BENEFICIAL BENEFICIAL and Training Impact 2.1: Contribution to local SOME BENEFITS - BENEFICIAL and regional BENEFICIAL businesses Impact 5.2: Shortage of housing for skilled FEW BENEFITS FEW BENEFITS workers Impact 8.3: Improvement of living BENEFICIAL VERY BENEFICIAL conditions
Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Significance Significance Impact 3.1: Loss of
Agricultural land Impact 4.1: Increased tourism due to the UNKNOWN UNKNOWN operation of the Great Kei WEF Impact 4.2: Decreased eco-tourism due to the UNKNOWN UNKNOWN operation of the Great Kei WEF Impact 5.1: Shortage of MODERATE MODERATE housing for unskilled NEGATIVE NEGATIVE workers Impact 6.1: Increase/ decrease in alcohol UNKNOWN UNKNOWN abuse Impact 6.2: Increase in crime within project LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE areas Impact 7.1: Increase in safety risks due to LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE influx of new people
Coastal & Environmental Services 53 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Significance Significance Impact 7.2: Increase in Health Problems and MODERATE LOW NEGATIVE Pressure of Local NEGATIVE Health Services Impact 7.4: Threat of damage to property LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE and human life from blade throw Impact 7.5: Threat of damage to property LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE and human life from gearbox failure Impact 7.6: Threat of damage to property and human life from ice LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE throw
Impact 7.8: Electromagnetic LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE Interference
Without Mitigation With Mitigation Impact Significance Significance Impact 4.1: Increased tourism due to the UNKNOWN UNKNOWN operation of the Great Kei WEF Impact 4.2: Decreased eco-tourism due to the UNKNOWN UNKNOWN operation of the Great Kei WEF Impact 6.1: Increase/ decrease in alcohol UNKNOWN UNKNOWN abuse
The slight majority of the impacts associated with the proposed activity, taking mitigation into account‟, are „low negative‟ impacts. However, these are more than compensated for by strongly positive and beneficial impacts, with the result that the total impact of the project can be said to be positive. As noted above, the report has identified six positive impacts associated with the proposed development, some of which can be enhanced to become „very beneficial‟ if proper planning is done for this during all the phases of the project, i.e. the planning, construction and operational phases. It should be noted however that while some of the impacts identified as positive/beneficial, without appropriate communication or agreements being reached before implementation, may result in negative impacts. For example, if no proper procedures are established to ensure the prioritisation of locals in company recruitment, this could result in conflicts and unnecessary in-migration and therefore have severe negative impacts for the same people it was meant to benefit. Similar cautions apply to the establishment of the Trust: if proper and participatory procedures are not put place and clearly communicated to all parties, this could cause conflicts within the beneficiary communities.
Final Recommendations Social issues related to both negative and positive impacts from the proposed development should be disclosed and discussed with the PACs in order to raise awareness of possible problems and challenges, as well as to consider the means by which these can be mitigated.
An influx of people and increase in traffic volumes will bring with it an increased security risk to those living near the wind farm. To mitigate this, local policing should be assisted by community members where Coastal & Environmental Services 54 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – June 2014 possible. The creation of a community policing forum would greatly assist in lessening security risks and theft, especially if there are incentives offered for arrests made and property recovered. Such a community policing forum would also provide additional employment opportunities.
In-migration into the project area will result in an increased demand for municipal services and healthcare provision. Capacity constraints, especially with regard to healthcare facilities, are likely to result in the deterioration of living conditions in the Komga area. Support to health care service provision should be strongly considered as a priority intervention by the proponent in their SED work, as well as through the Community Trust.
Construction suppliers and businesses will experience an increase in demand and prices. Skills training programmes will be needed to maximise opportunities for disadvantaged persons and to facilitate the beneficiation and participation of Small, Medium and Micro Businesses (SMMEs).
The development will bring beneficial economic spin-offs in an area that currently has a limited amount of employment and income-generating opportunities. Employment on the wind farm will allow local people to purchase more for their families, as well as provide them with money to pay for other needs. By supporting local SMMEs and allocating training and skills opportunities to employees, the wind farm will enable many local people to improve their families‟ living conditions. A rise in wages will also ensure many spin-off effects for the local economy. The wind farm could maximise these benefits by examining such needs during the operational phase to ascertain what could be provided locally, and informing their skills training programme and enterprise development activities on this basis.
Of greatest significance to the area will be the benefits realised from the financial contributions of the project to the area. These will take the form of the Community Trust, which will invest a portion of the dividends from the WEF into community-based projects.
Finally the No-Go alternative will not bring any positive impacts to the communities of Komga as it will result in a loss of income opportunities and prospects for improved living conditions.
Coastal & Environmental Services 55 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014
REFERENCES
Burdge, Rabel J and Frank Vanclay (1995), “Social impact assessment: state of the art”, Impact Assessment, 14(1), pages 57–86; also in Vanclay and Bronstein (editors) (1995), Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK) pages 31–65; and in Burdge (1998). Gipe, Paul. 2007. Worldwide Wind Energy Development 2007. Accessed November 2007 at http://www.wind-works.org/articles/WorldwideWindEnergyDevelopment2007.html. Great Kei Municipality Integrated Development Plan, 2012-2017 IAIA (2003) „Social Impact Assessment: International Principles‟, IAIA Special Publication Series No 2; May 2003 International Finance Corporation. 2007. Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines: Wind Energy. http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/IFC+Sustainability/ Sustainability+Framework/Environmental,+Health,+and+Safety+Guidelines/ International Finance Corporation. 2007. Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines: General Guidelines. http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/IFC+Sustainability/ Sustainability+Framework/Environmental,+Health,+and+Safety+Guidelines/ Luke, D. 2012. Changing a Gear: Gearbox Lubrication and Its Impact on Wind Turbine Lifespan. Castrol Industrial. www.Renewable energy world.com NYSERDA (New York State Energy Research Development Authority). 2005. Public Health and Safety. Report by Global Energy Concepts. Accessed November 2007 at http://www.powernaturally.org/Programs/Wind/toolkit/18_publichealthandsafety.pdf. StatsSA. 2007. Community Survey 2007 Basic Results. Pretoria: Government Printers. Vanclay, F. (2002) “Conceptualising social impacts” Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22: 183– 211
Coastal & Environmental Services 56 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility Great Kei Wind Energy Facility – March 2014 APPENDIX A
Coastal & Environmental Services 57 Great Kei Wind Energy Facility
GREAT KEI WIND ENERGY FACILITY
GREAT KEI WIND POWER (PTY) LTD
GRIEVANCE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Coastal & Environmental Services EAST LONDON 2 Marine Terrace, Hampton Court East London, 5201 043 742 3302 Also in Grahamstown www.cesnet.co.za
February 2014
58
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 OBJECTIVE ...... 61 2 SCOPE ...... 61 3 OBJECTIVES ...... 61 4 RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 61 5 PROCEDURE STATEMENTS ...... 61 5.1 STEP 1 - RECEIVING AND RECORDING GRIEVANCES ...... 62 5.1.1 Grievance Registration ...... 62 5.1.2 Recording the Grievance into the Grievance Log ...... 62 5.2 STEP 2 – GRIEVANCE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 62 5.3 STEP 3 - DEVELOPING RESPONSE AND ACTIONS ...... 62 5.3.1 Grievance Response Consideration ...... 62 5.3.2 The Formal Written Response ...... 62 5.3.3 Assigning Project Actions to Resolve Grievance ...... 63 5.4 STEP 4 - RESPONDING BACK TO THE COMPLAINANT ...... 63 5.5 STEP 5 - IF A RESPONSE IS REJECTED ...... 63 5.6 STEP 6 - COMPLETING ACTIONS AND GRIEVANCE CLOSE-OUT ...... 64 5.7 MONITORING THE GRIEVANCE PROCESS ...... 64 6 FLOWCHART ...... 65
59
ABBREVIATIONS
TERM DESCRIPTION Grievance Grievance is a concern or complaint raised by an individual or a group within communities affected by company operations. Arbitration Process of conciliation whereby parties to a dispute agree to refer to issue to an independent and impartial third party to decide the matter and to make an award which they accept as final and binding upon them. Great Kei Shall mean Great Kei Wind Power (Pty) Ltd (the “operator”) Wind Power Great Kei Shall mean Great Kei Wind Energy Facility (the “operation”) WEF
GRF Grievance Response Form: A written response to the Grievance Form (GF) GF Grievance Form
60
1 OBJECTIVE This procedure is intended to enable the surrounding communities affected by the operation of the Great Kei Wind Energy Facility (WEF), to express and channel their concerns regarding important issues which directly or indirectly impact on the company‟s operations, as well as to create an effective communication, problem solving and feedback mechanism between the communities and Great Kei Wind Power (Pty) Ltd.
2 SCOPE This document is applicable to all Great Kei WEF employees and contractors, who by the nature and scope of their responsibilities may put them in direct contact with members of local communities, community leadership and local authorities. This procedure applies to the concerns or grievances of the surrounding communities affected by the operation of the Great Kei WEF, including their local authorities, local associations and local interests groups. Management may also deal with exceptional cases not contemplated by this procedure in such a manner as may be deemed fair and appropriate. 3 OBJECTIVES The objective of this procedure is to ensure that formal grievances from the affected communities, local authorities or interest groups are promptly heard, analysed, answered and managed. In doing so, it may be necessary to detect causes, to determine what events, actors or incidents could interfere with local community and adversely affect the relationship with these communities and their leaders which may which could affect the company‟s interests and to take appropriate preventive actions
4 RESPONSIBILITIES
POSITION TITLE ROLE DESCRIPTION OF TASK Great Kei WEF Project Develop and provide The CPM is responsible for procedure development Manager (CPM) (1) community training on and for ensuring that all employees, community this document leaders and concerned parties understand the Review, amend and contents of this Procedure. implement the content The Project Manager is responsible for procedure of this document review, amendment and for ensuring full implementation of its content. All Employees and Adherence All employees are responsible to adhere to this contractors (2) procedure.
5 PROCEDURE STATEMENTS This section sets out the process that will be followed by Great Kei WEF for receiving, processing and resolution of community grievances that have been formally lodged by the community through its community leaders.
61
5.1 STEP 1 - RECEIVING AND RECORDING GRIEVANCES
5.1.1 Grievance Registration
Any Grievance should be lodged either via registered mail, email or fax. This information will be available on a signboard at the entrance to the Great Kei WEF site. Complaints can also be hand delivered to the Great Kei WEF Site Office.
The Grievance may in the first instance be lodged in writing or verbally.
5.1.2 Recording the Grievance into the Grievance Log
On receipt of the Grievance Form, the CPM will record the details of the Grievance Form into the Grievance Log. A Grievance Log is a database for entering information about each grievance registered on a Grievance Form, for purposes of keeping track of the grievance trends. The database will include information provided on the form and other information pertaining to Great Kei WEF actions and associated documentation. The Grievance Log will be managed and maintained by the CPM who has the responsibility for ensuring the records are up to date and accurate. A receipt document should be given to complainant detailing the date when the complaint was lodged and who received the complaint in the absence of Camp Manager.
5.2 STEP 2 – GRIEVANCE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
The CPM will review all Grievances Forms for completeness of information and make a preliminary recommendation for resolving each grievance. The CPM may, if appropriate, consult the Farmers Association and/or Municipal Ward Councillors regarding the grievance in formulating preliminary recommendations, as well as other Great Kei WEF employees, if necessary.
5.3 STEP 3 - DEVELOPING RESPONSE AND ACTIONS
5.3.1 Grievance Response Consideration
The CPM must develop a formal written response within 21 days of the date on which the Grievance Form was lodged and recorded in the Grievance Log. The formal written response will include the rationale behind the response and next steps and actions, if any, to be taken by Great Kei WEF to resolve the Grievance. The response will take into consideration the preliminary recommendations of the CPM, Great Kei WEF Policies and Procedures, feedback from external consultations, current issues, past experience, and potential outcomes. The CPM will be responsible for preparing the formal written response for submission to the Complainant.
5.3.2 The Formal Written Response
Both verbal and written formal responses will be recorded into the Grievance Log.
62
Formal Written Response Not Requiring Action: If the written formal grievance response developed by the CPM does not require any further action by Great Kei WEF, this decision and supporting rationale, will be documented using the Grievance Response Form (GRF) and recorded into the Grievance Log by the CPM. Formal Written Response Requiring Action: If the formal grievance response developed by the CPM does require action by Gret Kei WEF in order to resolve the grievance, the CPM will record the formal response, action required to implement the response, and the consideration leading to the response and agreed action into the Grievance Log.
5.3.3 Assigning Project Actions to Resolve Grievance
If the formal grievance response developed by the CPM requires action, and the action required is within the CPM‟s responsibility, the CPM will be responsible for completing the action. The CPM will draft an Action Log to record the steps and deadlines to sign-off the grievance.
5.4 STEP 4 - RESPONDING BACK TO THE COMPLAINANT
The verbal and written grievance response will be provided to the Complainant. The reasons for the response will be explained to the Complainant If the Complainant accepts Great Kei WEF‟s Formal response, this decision will be documented with the Complainant‟s signature on the GRF. In this case, the GRF will be returned to the CPM for recording into the Grievance Log. If the Complainant rejects the response, then section 5.5 of this procedure then applies.
5.5 STEP 5 - IF A RESPONSE IS REJECTED
If the Complainant rejects the formal response, the CPM will consult InnoWind's senior management to review the merits of the rejection and determine whether other avenues could be approached by Great Kei WEF together with the Complainant, such as third party conciliation or consultation with community or other stakeholder groups. If the Complainant rejects Great Kei WEF‟s formal response, he/she may consult with the Local Farmers Association or Municipal Ward Councillor or any other person or body which is relevant to the specific issue raised. If, after such consultation with both the Complainant and Great Kei WEF regarding the GRL, the GRL is formally (in writing) rejected, the matter will be addressed at a formal meeting of Community Leaders, local authorities, and other stakeholder representatives, together with the Complainant and the Great Kei WEF representative. The objective of the meeting will be to reach an agreement that can be accepted by all parties. Formal notes documenting the meeting will be issued and signed by the attending representatives. The outcomes of this meeting will be recorded, and if agreement is reached between Great Kei WEF and the Complainant, the agreement will be captured on the Grievance Form with the signature of the Complainant. If no agreement can be reached, then the Complainant can pursue other avenues (such as administrative or legal) at his/her discretion. The CPM will proceed to Section 5.6 of this procedure for close-out.
63
5.6 STEP 6 - COMPLETING ACTIONS AND GRIEVANCE CLOSE-OUT
Following the completion of actions specified in the GRF, photos and/or other documentary evidence will be collected by the CPM to form a comprehensive record of the grievance and how it was resolved. Where the formal written response identified action that needed to be taken to resolve the grievance, the Complainant will confirm the work has been completed by signing the GRF. The CPM will record the completion of the actions and the date of the signature of the Complainant into the Grievance Log. If no agreement can be reached with the Complainant the Grievance Form will include the rationale for close-out and will be signed by the CPM. The CPM will record the rationale and close-out decision into the Grievance Log.
5.7 MONITORING THE GRIEVANCE PROCESS
In the event of grievances being recorded, the CPM will produce (on a quarterly basis) a summary grievance report to determine if there are any recurring grievances that point to a need for changes in Great Kei WEF policies, procedures or activities. InnoWind‟s senior management will periodically review the adequacy of the grievance process procedure and agree modifications following consultation with the CPM.
64
6 FLOWCHART
Written Registration and Analysis and Grievance recording into Recommendations Form Grievance Log
Response Grievance Consideration and Complainant Response Form Written Response
Issue NO Decision Issue Closed? Review Closed?
YES NO
YES
End External Resolution
65
REFERENCES
International Finance Corporation. 2007. Good Practice Note: Addressing Grievances from Project- Affected Communities – Guidance on Designing Grievance Mechanisms
66
APPENDIX B
67
Full Name of the Grievant______
ID Number ______,
Place and Date Grievance Occurred ______, ____/____/ 20____
Statement of Complaint / Grievance (Brief description of the facts; provide name(s) of person(s) involved, time, date and location of incident. Names of witnesses must be included. Attach additional sheets if necessary):
Expected action and personal justification (use attachment if necessary):
______Grievant Signature Date
Grievance received by: ______, Date: ____/____/20____
68