A Critical review of EIA report quality in Lesotho

M (Environmental Management), North-West University, Potchefstroom CampusEnvironmental Impact Assessment appears across the world as a vital tool that ensures environmentally sound and sustainable developments. Considering the advantages and the benefits of EIA, it is important to ensure that it is effective. There are various aspects of EIA effectiveness, one of which is the assessment of the quality of EIA reports. Poor EIA report quality can negatively influence decision-making as well as sustainable development in any country. Hence the importance of ensuring that EIA reports are of good quality. Lesotho has been facing various environmental problems for several years. To address these problems, government undertook numerous strategies of which Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is the most used. EIA has been carried out in Lesotho since 1980s. Since then, its effectiveness has been questioned. To evaluate the effectiveness of EIA in Lesotho, it is essential to review the EIA report quality. The most recent research on the quality of EIA reports in Lesotho, carried out in May 2011, revealed a very poor quality of EIA reports. Therefore the objectives of this research were to assess the quality of EIA reports written since 2011 in Lesotho, compare the results with the previous findings and international studies, and investigate the opinions of practitioners on the findings. Fifteen EIA reports written between October 2011 to 2018 were reviewed using the Lee and Colley criteria. The findings were compared with the previous results for the EIA report quality in the country and international studies. The opinion of the EIA practitioners regarding the findings was also investigated through administration of questionnaires. The findings show that 13 (87%) of the reports achieved a satisfactory grade (A-C) with Review Area 2 more satisfactorily addressed than Review Areas 1, 3 and 4. The study identified more areas of weakness than strength in the sample of the EIA reports reviewed. The weakest areas include the physical appearance of the development, number of workers and/or visitors entering the site, their access and transport, clear records of the commitment of the developer to mitigations measures, chapter summaries and external sources acknowledge. The strengths include the purpose of the development, the description of the environment expected to be affected, the description of the effect of the project, and the coherence of information in the report. A comparison with previous results shows improvements in the overall quality of EIA reports over time, although some critical areas still need attention. No improvement was noted over time in Review Area 1 whereas, a significant improvement was observed in Review Areas 2, 3, and 4. A comparison of the quality of EIA reports in Lesotho and that of reports in other countries reveals that the quality of EIA report in Lesotho is slightly lower. The main difference observed is the poor performance of Review Area 1 in Lesotho reports. The majority of the EIA practitioners have agreed with the areas of strength and weakness identified in the study. Ten (91%) of practitioners agree that the demarcation of land used by the project and the description of the impacts are often well detailed in the EIA reports, also ten (91%) of practitioners agreed that the chapter summaries are often overlooked and 8 (73%) are in the same opinion that there is also a lack of attention in the physical appearance of the project, the expected rate of production, and the nature and quantities of raw materials. From a survey of practitioners' personal opinions on the areas of weakness and strength in the EIA practice in Lesotho, it emerges that the description of the size of the project, the identification and assessment of impacts are main areas of strength, while consideration of alternatives, commitment to mitigation measures and monitoring of impacts still need more attention. The majority of strengths and weaknesses indicated are similar to those identified in the analysis of reports. Recommendations were made to improve the quality of EIA reports in Lesotho, and areas for future studies were further proposed.Master