Tilburg University The rediscovery of the trusteeship doctrine in South African environmental law and its significance in conserving biodiversity in South Africa Blackmore, Andy Publication date: 2018 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in Tilburg University Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Blackmore, A. (2018). The rediscovery of the trusteeship doctrine in South African environmental law and its significance in conserving biodiversity in South Africa. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. okt. 2021 THE REDISCOVERY OF THE TRUSTEESHIP DOCTRINE IN SOUTH AFRICAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN CONSERVING BIODIVERSITY IN SOUTH AFRICA PHD THESIS SCHOOL OF LAW UNIVERSITY OF TILBURG ANDREW CRAIG BLACKMORE The Rediscovery of the Trusteeship Doctrine in South African Environmental Law and its Significance in Conserving Biodiversity in South Africa PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan Tilburg University, op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. E.H.L. Aarts, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties aangewezen commissie in de Ruth First zaal van de Universiteit op dinsdag 27 maart 2018 om 10.00 uur door Andrew Craig Blackmore geboren op 25 februari 1964 te Harare, Zimbabwe i Promotor: Prof.dr. J.M. Verschuuren Copromotor: Dr. A. Trouwborst Overige leden: Prof.dr. C.J. Bastmeijer Prof.dr. A. Cliquet Prof.dr. L.J. Kotzé © Andrew Craig Blackmore, 2018 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any other means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without permission of the author. ii “Cease being intimidated by the argument that a right action is impossible because it does not yield maximum profits, or that a wrong action is to be condoned because it pays.” Aldo Leopold — A Sand County Almanac iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank Professors Jonathan Verschuuren and Arie Trouwborst for their patience, encouragement, supervision, and well-placed questions and valuable comments. Thanks goes to Lizanne Nel for her ongoing interest in the public trust doctrine and her ability to convey the findings of this research to government officials in a manner they can understand and apply in their official duties. Lizanne is also thanked for her insightful discussions on the future wildlife conservation in Southern Africa and the role of the public trust doctrine therein. Gratitude is also extended to my staff, and in particular Jenny, Irene, Dinesree, Magda, Dominic and Nerissa, and my colleagues Boyd, Craig, Ian, Joe, and Scotty, who have had to endure my distraction and single-mindedness during this degree. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Natalie Blackmore, who was always there to listen to my ramblings as I reasoned out the arguments in each of the articles, as well as her relentless proof reading skills. My children, Katherine and Jordan, are thanked for their understanding and support for the duration of the drafting and publishing of the articles and finalising this thesis. The supportive environment afforded by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, the Research Fellowship of the University of KwaZulu-Natal and the University of Tilburg is gratefully acknowledged. The ideas, arguments and opinions expressed in this thesis do not necessarily represent those of Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, the University of KwaZulu-Natal or the Tilburg University. iv PREFACE This thesis consists of seven articles, six of which have been published or accepted in refereed academic journals, and one that is currently in review. The pre-printing format or earlier draft version of the articles has generally been used to construct this thesis, save for that published in the South African Journal of Law and Policy for which a copy of the published article is used. As a result, the format of the articles may differ from those published in the respective journals. Permission, where necessary, was obtained from the Editor-in-Chief (or equivalent) to reproduce the article in this thesis. This permission has been appended hereto as “Appendix 1”. Articles comprising this thesis are:- 1. Rediscovering the Origins and Inclusion of the Public Trust Doctrine in South African Environmental Law. In review — Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law. 2. The Relationship between the NEMA and the Public Trust Doctrine: The Importance of the NEMA Principles in Safeguarding South Africa's Biodiversity (2015) South African Journal of Environmental Law and Policy 20(2) 89–118. 3. The Public Trust Doctrine, Research and Responsible Wildlife Management in South Africa. Bothalia 47(1), a2217. https://doi.org/10.4102/abc. v47i1.2217. 4. The Interplay between the Public Trust Doctrine and Biodiversity and Cultural Resource Legislation in South Africa: The Case of the Shembe Church Worship Site in Tembe Elephant Park in KwaZulu-Natal, (2014) Law, Environment and Development Journal 10(1) 1–15. 5. Legal and Public Trust Considerations for the Ndumo Game Reserve and South Africa-Mozambique border, following the migration of the Usuthu River (2015) Journal of Southern African Public Law 30(2) 347–379. 6. Tsetse flies should remain in protected areas in KwaZulu-Natal (2017) Koedoe 59(1) 1–12. (Co-authored with Dr Armstrong). Only the legal section is relevant to this thesis from an examining perspective. 7. Who Owns and is Responsible for the Elephant in the Room? Management Plans for Free-Roaming Elephant in South Africa. Accepted: Bothalia. Paragraphs 4– v 7 inclusive under the heading ‘Ownership of and Responsibility for Elephant, in a Nutshell’ should not be included in the examination as this is the contribution of the co-author Dr Trouwborst. vi Table of Contents PROEFSCHRIFT ........................................................................................ i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................... iv PREFACE ............................................................................................... v CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION TO ‘THE REDISCOVERY OF THE TRUSTEESHIP DOCTRINE IN SOUTH AFRICAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN CONSERVING BIODIVERSITY IN SOUTH AFRICA’ .................................................................................. 1 1.1 THE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE ................................................ 2 1.1.1 A BRIEF CHARACTERISATION OF THE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE ............................................................................... 3 1.2 THE SOUTH AFRICAN BIODIVERSITY CONTEXT ...................... 5 1.3 THE CONUNDRUM ................................................................... 6 1.4 THE RESEARCH QUESTION ...................................................... 8 1.4.1 Theoretical Framework ........................................................... 9 1.4.2 Applied Framework ................................................................. 9 1.5 SCOPE OF RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY U.SED ................. 10 1.5.1 SCOPE OF RESEARCH ............................................................ 10 1.5.1.1 Theoretical Analysis .............................................................. 10 1.5.1.2 Case Study Analysis .............................................................. 11 1.5.2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................... 12 1.5.3 Methodology — Chapter 2 ..................................................... 13 1.5.4 Methodology — Chapter 3 ..................................................... 14 1.5.5 Methodology — Chapter 4 ..................................................... 15 1.5.6 Methodology — Chapters 5 and 6 .......................................... 16 1.5.7 Methodology — Chapters 7 and 8 .......................................... 17 1.5.8 Methodology — Chapter 9 ..................................................... 19 1.6 CONCLUSION ........................................................................ 19 CHAPTER 2:REDISCOVERING THE ORIGINS AND INCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE IN SOUTH AFRICAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: A SPECULATIVE ANALYSIS .............. 22 2.1 ABSTRACT ............................................................................. 23 2.2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 24 2.3 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................................................ 28 2.3.1 Framework for Environmental Management ......................... 29 2.3.2 Biodiversity and Protected Areas .......................................... 37 2.3.3 Coastal Zone ......................................................................... 43 vii 2.3.4 Air Quality ............................................................................