The “issue list” collated from comments which pertain to this theme include:

• A common database; that people’s comments can be seen by other people and that is accessible.
• A platform is suggested on DEAT’s website or elsewhere to advertise projects for public participation purposes
• Address system shortcomings. Maximise the positive aspects of the EIA and M system
• All the information that everybody here, SAMA put it together, work with SANBI, put it all together on GIS form that people can use when they do planning and that the scientists can add to, everybody can add to, not interactive, but everybody can add information to this that can be used as a basis, as an environmental assessment of our region, of our country
• Allow faster decision-making
• Broad based, inclusive + informed decision making
• EAPs need help in public participation especially on who to contact at various departments in government. It is time consuming to find the correct person at the departments and municipalities.
• GIS-linked database of EIAs
• How significance assessment is communicated,- this high, medium, low issue, which doesn’t say very much about efficiency, equity or sustainability and who the affected parties are. I think that’s also something that needs looking at in terms of assessment processes, or that’s perhaps methodology rather than tools.
• In 2004 DEAT embarked upon a process to address all of these issues and they developed the NEAS system and please correct me if I’m wrong. The provinces said we cannot role out the whole NEAS, because the whole NEAS addresses all these issues about sharing information, consistency in decision making, decision making criteria, making a distinction between impact issues and decision making criteria, but from the provinces we said, well, you know, we can’t do all of that. That’s way too much. Our capacity won’t allow for it. So, we only dealt with the administrative part. Why has the totality of NEAS and its ability to address these issues not featured a lot more in the options available to us?
• More effective and efficient environmental management system
• NEAS (National Environmental Authorisation System) with a public portal
• Need to use intelligent appropriate communication methods (in terms of language, level of understanding) to enable effective participation. This relates to information given out by the EAPs (eg on the proposed development) and also to reports produced. Use the K.I.S.S principle.
• Reduce the administrative burden
• Single point of entry and exist
• Streamlined process
• The aspect of once again within the strategy, capturing the outreach, the awareness raising, basically building the entire nation’s capacity around the meaning of sustainable development and environmental management.
• The Department relies on old information when making decisions. They do not keep up with the current situation of the area.
• To include the requirements for better, clearer and more accessible dissemination of information.  Consider alternatives to paper-based, single-language reports as well.
• Transparent environmental reporting
• Competent authorities are not adequately resourced in terms of procedures, finance, hardware, knowledge management (institutional memory)
• Emphasis on information/knowledge management
• Government officials are not easily contacted. They seldom return calls or emails and are not trained/able to deal with the general public. Information is very difficult to obtain, making it even more difficult for meaningful public participation
• The whole aspect of institutional memory and I guess this refers to the turnover of staff and we’ve all heard these things, for instance, that an application is made, a particular official is dedicated to it, that official leaves and the whole process seems to grind to a halt. So, the best practice, the transfer of information, the institutionalising of sustainable development, the use of the media.

Report by SSI Environmental: Gillian Maree - PDF version of 1.2 MB

(The revision of reports follows after Sector comments - including organs of state, academia, NGOs, BUSA, SAPOA, Law Society, Chamber of Mines, the Advisory Group, Peer Review comment (selected themes), IAIA)

At the “Ten Years of EIA in South Africa Conference” (2008) it was agreed that an Environmental Impact Assessment and Management Strategy (EIAMS) should be formulated for SA. The strategy should facilitate a participatory process that, in the context of the objectives of integrated environmental management contained in Section 23 of NEMA and the principles of sustainable development of Section 2 of NEMA, revises the environmental management scheme in a systematic and rigorous manner. The sub- directorate: Environmental Impact Management Strategy at the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) has been tasked with the development and promotion of this comprehensive strategy to manage the environmental impacts of development in South Africa

The DEA therefore conceived a project that has to look at the desired future state for the EIAMS and path the way to achieve it within the mandate provided by Chapter 5 of NEMA and within a strategic policy context. The desired future includes an environmental impact assessment and management system, that consists of voluntary and regulated instruments in the next 5 years, where –

• the inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of the current system have been corrected and the efficiencies and effectiveness optimized;
• regulated EIA is used only when it is the most appropriate tool;
• Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) is given effect through a variety of other instruments that would, depending on the nature of activities and/or the receiving environment supplement, compliment or replace EIA;
• EIAM takes place within a strategic context of environmentally informed spatial instruments, sector strategies and policies;
• authorities are sufficiently capacitated with skilled and experienced officials;
• other stakeholders are capacitated and empowered to ensure maximum impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of the strategy;
• government regulatory processes have been as far as possible integrated, or at least aligned; and
• all stakeholders are equally committed to make it work: Government, EAPs, developers, community etc.

The project was conceived as a conglomerate of smaller tasks and studies, arranged around specific themes. Within this context, the DEA appointed SSI Engineers & Environmental Consultants to assist the Department with specialist studies in relation to the development of the national EIAMS. This specific specialist report relates to the compilation of a specialist report on EIMS Specialist Report: Subtheme 2 - Knowledge and Information under the Theme: Governance and Administration.

Timely availability of reliable geo-referenced land, climate, plant nutrients, production and water information, integrated with infrastructural- and socio-economic factors, are essential for stakeholders, policy makers and land users to exercise the best choices among options in using these resources to achieve sustainable levels of food production and development in an increasingly complex environment.

The need for and access to spatial information in South Africa for use in decision making and development planning is a topical issue and inevitably leads to discussions on uncoordinated effort, a lack of funding and expertise and the unavailability of good quality, standardised data.

1.1          Legislation

The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) mandate for information lies within NEMA Chapter 5. The need for information and the types of questions to be answered are directed by Chapter 5 of NEMA.

The DEA information systems to consult and consider include the NEAS, EIA GIS and DEA GIS.

Chapter 5 of NEMA clearly articulates that DEA’s responsibility for information management (linked to the environmental tools) is broad and covers the spectrum of environmental tools. In this regard, DEA is likely to become custodian of a range of data sets, including managing information on environmental decisions made within the scope of the EIA process. Spatially explicit decision support systems are becoming increasingly important as it allows users to understand the connections and cumulative effects between projects, as well as gather a deeper understanding of activities and environmental impacts within ecological units.

Decisions around data custodianship become more involved and should be linked to departmental requirements (in terms of legislation) and policy directives. Only when a departmental vision and objectives for information management are set can decisions be taken on who is responsible for what data. This requires both vertical and horizontal coordination across government departments to ensure alignment of resources and data collection and management.

 

1.2          What is knowledge and information for integrated environmental management?

The underlying assumption in decision making is that access to good information will lead to better decisions and management practices, which will eventually lead to a more sustainable management and use of natural resources as well as improved quality of life of people.

The management of environment information involves a number of processes and outputs. The processes include collection, organisation, analysis and communication of data and statistics, including spatial information. The production of new or extrapolated environmental information entails the collection and analysis of raw data, and interpretation into forms that can be used for decision making. Outputs are packaged in a number of formats including the legislated looks like environmental impact assessments (EIAs), and the production of state of the environment reports, environmental outlook reports, statistical reports, environmental atlases and policy statements. These are produced by a large range of stakeholders and role players including government, parastatals, research organisations and the private stakeholders.

Decision makers use the information generated, along with their own learning and experience to assess the condition and trends in the environment (knowledge), to determine and adjust policy directions and to decide where best to invest resources for the management of the environment. Environmental information management is essential for decision makers to access appropriate information, analyse cause and effect, develop strategies for action, manage natural resources, prevent and control pollution, and evaluate progress towards environmental goals and targets.

The critical link between environmental information management and good decision making was recognized and formalized internationally in 1992 under Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development which in part states:

 

“Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens […]. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment […] and the opportunity to participate in decision making processes […] Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings […] shall be provided.” (UNEP 1992).

It is important to define what is meant by knowledge and information, and what the role and relationship of each is to IEM.  In general, the definitions of information tend to be more uniform and less complex than the definitions of knowledge, where information is commonly defined as: organized data; data endowed with relevance and purpose; interpreted data (e.g. Drucker, 2001). Knowledge is the  application of data and information and seeks to answer the "how" questions.

 

The context in which information is generated, cultural differences or communication difficulties can mean that the information may not be used, or misinterpreted by decision makers. This lack of a shared understanding can create gap between information and how the knowledge is interpreted and applied to environmental problems.

Decision makers are often criticized for the decisions that they make; whether they seen to misinterpret the information, ignore information available to them or not consider what is seen to be vital information. However, it can be difficult to make decision when faced with information overload, they may distrust of the information sources, not be able to effectively articulate their information needs (due to different scales of work) or even be faced by contradictory information (van Wyk, Drackner and Roux, 2008). This is often true of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process where government officials within the Competent Authorities are often faced with having to decide on whether a development may proceed, what conditions to place with the Record of Decision and often with political pressure as well. This can make decision making difficult, particularly when faced with thick volumes of reports of information.

For Integrated Environmental Management it is also useful to differentiate between two dimensions of knowledge, depth and breadth of knowledge (Roux et al, 2006). Depth of knowledge refers to the in depth knowledge and learning that an expert would have of their particular field of study, for example, a PhD in inorganic chemistry would be one indicator of a great depth of knowledge of a particular field. Depth of knowledge refers to knowledge across a broad range and diversity of areas and includes the ability to relate difference specialist areas to each other. Often, breadth of knowledge within the environmental field comes with experience and learning on the job. A good breadth of knowledge will enable an organisation to respond effectively to a variety of situations and changing circumstances (Roux et al, 2006). Knowledge within IEM requires skills that related to both depth and breadth of knowledge.

 

1.3          Knowledge sharing

Knowledge sharing refers to the behaviour of a person who voluntarily provides other people or organisations with access to their unique knowledge and/or experience (Hansen and Avital, 2005). Knowledge hoarding is the opposite of knowledge sharing and refers to the behaviour by which a person or organisation limits or prohibits access to knowledge. Two main drives for knowledge hoarding have been identified and are strongly influenced by organisational culture and structures:

1. Individuals hoard information out of fear that sharing it might reduce their personal value or influence (knowledge is power). This is true for organisations as well.
2. Knowledge is hoarded to avoid the costs (time and effort) of sharing.

Here it is also important to distinguish between sharing of tacit and explicit forms of knowledge. Explicit knowledge refers to knowledge that can be written down or physically recorded (e.g. record of best practice). Tacit knowledge refers to knowledge that is transferred by interactions between people (e.g. through mentoring).

In situations where knowledge is withheld in order to retain control and power over information or knowledge it can negatively affect integrated decision making. Dynamics between people and personality dynamics can affect sharing or hoarding processes as well as the culture within an organisation. People play an important role in the ability and willingness to share information, experiences (both good and bad) and can enable, or disable effective environmental decision making.

It is equally difficult to know or evaluate if the correct or best decision has been made if all available and relevant information is not shared or made available. The EIA process is one example of where there may be a tendency of only wanting to make information available that is favourable to the decision.

It is acknowledged that in a small number of situations public access to information can result in environmental loss or risk. In these cases availability of information may need to be controlled, however the balance must remain in favour of the responsible release of information and any restrictions should be fully justified and defendable.

1.1          Information management and Agenda 21

Agenda 21 recognizes that "there already exists a wealth of data information that could be used for the  management of sustainable development. Finding the appropriate information at the required time and at the relevant scale is a difficult task."

 

Agenda 21: Chapter 40

Information for Decision making

INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING

40.1. In sustainable development, everyone is a user and provider of information considered in the broad sense. That includes data, information, appropriately packaged experience and knowledge. The need for information arises at all levels, from that of senior decision makers at the national and international levels to the grass-roots and individual levels. The following two programme areas need to be implemented to ensure that decisions are based increasingly on sound information:

• Bridging the data gap;
• Improving information availability.

PROGRAMME AREAS

A. Bridging the data gap

Basis for action

40.2. While considerable data already exist, as the various sectoral chapters of Agenda 21 indicate, more and different types of data need to be collected, at the local, provincial, national and international levels, indicating the status and trends of the planet's ecosystem, natural resource, pollution and socio-economic variables. The gap in the availability, quality, coherence, standardization and accessibility of data between the developed and the developing world has been increasing, seriously impairing the capacities of countries to make informed decisions concerning environment and development.

40.3. There is a general lack of capacity, particularly in developing countries, and in many areas at the international level, for the collection and assessment of data, for their transformation into useful information and for their dissemination. There is also need for improved coordination among environmental, demographic, social and developmental data and information activities.

40.4. Commonly used indicators such as the gross national product (GNP) and measurements of individual resource or pollution flows do not provide adequate indications of sustainability. Methods for assessing interactions between different sectoral environmental, demographic, social and developmental parameters are not sufficiently developed or applied. Indicators of sustainable development need to be developed to provide solid bases for decision-making at all levels and to contribute to a self-regulating sustainability of integrated environment and development systems.

Objectives

40.5. The following objectives are important:

To achieve more cost-effective and relevant data collection and assessment by better identification of users, in both the public and private sectors, and of their information needs at the local, provincial, national and international levels;

To strengthen local, provincial, national and international capacity to collect and use multisectoral information in decision-making processes and to enhance capacities to collect and analyse data and information for decision-making, particularly in developing countries;

To develop or strengthen local, provincial, national and international means of ensuring that planning for sustainable development in all sectors is based on timely, reliable and usable information;

To make relevant information accessible in the form and at the time required to facilitate its use. Activities

Development of indicators of sustainable development

40.6. Countries at the national level and international governmental and non-governmental organizations at the international level should develop the concept of indicators of sustainable development in order to identify such indicators. In order to promote the increasing use of some of those indicators in satellite accounts, and eventually in national accounts, the development of indicators needs to be pursued by the Statistical Office of the United Nations Secretariat, as it draws upon evolving experience in this regard.

Promotion of global use of indicators of sustainable development

40.7. Relevant organs and organizations of the United Nations system, in cooperation with other international governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, should use a suitable set of sustainable development indicators and indicators related to areas outside of national jurisdiction, such as the high seas, the upper atmosphere and outer space. The organs and organizations of the United Nations system, in coordination with other relevant international organizations, could provide recommendations for harmonized development of indicators at the national, regional and global levels, and for incorporation of a suitable set of these indicators in common, regularly updated, and widely accessible reports and databases, for use at the international level, subject to national sovereignty considerations.

Improvement of data collection and use

40.8. Countries and, upon request, international organizations should carry out inventories of environmental, resource and developmental data, based on national/global priorities for the management of sustainable development. They should determine the gaps and organize activities to fill those gaps. Within the organs and organizations of the United Nations system and relevant international organizations, data-collection activities, including those of Earthwatch and World Weather Watch, need to be strengthened, especially in the areas of urban air, freshwater, land resources (including forests and rangelands), desertification, other habitats, soil degradation, biodiversity, the high seas and the upper atmosphere. Countries and international organizations should make use of new techniques of data collection, including satellite-based remote sensing. In addition to the strengthening of existing development-related data collection, special attention needs to be paid to such areas as demographic factors, urbanization, poverty, health and rights of access to resources, as well as special groups, including women, indigenous peoples, youth, children and the disabled, and their relationships with environment issues.

Improvement of methods of data assessment and analysis

40.9. Relevant international organizations should develop practical recommendations for coordinated, harmonized collection and assessment of data at the national and international levels. National and international data and information centres should set up continuous and accurate data-collection systems and make use of geographic information systems, expert systems, models and a variety of other techniques for the assessment and analysis of data. These steps will be particularly relevant, as large quantities of data from satellite sources will need to be processed in the future. Developed countries and international organizations, as well as the private sector, should cooperate, in particular with developing countries, upon request, to facilitate their acquiring these technologies and this know-how.

Establishment of a comprehensive information framework

40.10. Governments should consider undertaking the necessary institutional changes at the national level to achieve the integration of environmental and developmental information. At the international level, environmental assessment activities need to be strengthened and coordinated with efforts to assess development trends.

Strengthening of the capacity for traditional information

40.11. Countries, with the cooperation of international organizations, should establish supporting mechanisms to provide local communities and resource users with the information and know-how they need to manage their environment and resources sustainably, applying traditional and indigenous knowledge and approaches when appropriate. This is particularly relevant for rural and urban populations and indigenous, women's and youth groups.

Means of implementation

Financing and cost evaluation

40.12. The secretariat of the Conference has estimated the average total annual cost (1993-2000) of implementing the activities of this programme to be about $1.9 billion from the international community on grant or concessional terms. These are indicative and order-of-magnitude estimates only and have not been reviewed by Governments. Actual costs and financial terms, including any that are non-concessional, will depend upon, inter alia, the specific strategies and programmes Governments decide upon for implementation.

(b) Institutional means

40.13. Institutional capacity to integrate environment and development and to develop relevant indicators is lacking at both the national and international levels. Existing institutions and programmes such as the Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS) and the Global Resource Information Database (GRID) within UNEP and different entities within the systemwide Earthwatch will need to be considerably strengthened. Earthwatch has been an essential element for environment-related data. While programmes related to development data exist in a number of agencies, there is insufficient coordination between them. The activities related to development data of agencies and institutions of the United Nations system should be more effectively coordinated, perhaps through an equivalent and complementary "Development Watch", which with the existing Earthwatch should be coordinated through an appropriate office within the United Nations to ensure the full integration of environment and development concerns.

Scientific and technological means

40.14. Regarding transfer of technology, with the rapid evolution of data-collection and information technologies it is necessary to develop guidelines and mechanisms for the rapid and continuous transfer of those technologies, particularly to developing countries, in conformity with chapter 34 (Transfer of environmentally sound technology, cooperation and capacity-building), and for the training of personnel in their utilization.

Human resource development

40.15. International cooperation for training in all areas and at all levels will be required, particularly in developing countries. That training will have to include technical training of those involved in data collection, assessment and transformation, as well as assistance to decision makers concerning how to use such information.

Capacity-building

40.16. All countries, particularly developing countries, with the support of international cooperation, should strengthen their capacity to collect, store, organize, assess and use data in decision-making more effectively.

B. Improving availability of information

Basis for action

40.17. There already exists a wealth of data and information that could be used for the management of sustainable development. Finding the appropriate information at the required time and at the relevant scale of aggregation is a difficult task.

40.18. Information within many countries is not adequately managed, because of shortages of financial resources and trained manpower, lack of awareness of the value and availability of such information and other immediate or pressing problems, especially in developing countries. Even where information is available, it may not be easily accessible, either because of the lack of technology for effective access or because of associated costs, especially for information held outside the country and available commercially.

Objectives

40.19. Existing national and international mechanisms of information processing and exchange, and of related technical assistance, should be strengthened to ensure effective and equitable availability of information generated at the local, provincial, national and international levels, subject to national sovereignty and relevant intellectual property rights.

40.20. National capacities should be strengthened, as should capacities within Governments, non-governmental organizations and the private sector, in information handling and communication, particularly within developing countries.

40.21. Full participation of, in particular, developing countries should be ensured in any international scheme under the organs and organizations of the United Nations system for the collection, analysis and use of data and information.

Activities

Production of information usable for decision-making

40.22. Countries and international organizations should review and strengthen information systems and services in sectors related to sustainable development, at the local, provincial, national and international levels. Special emphasis should be placed on the transformation of existing information into forms more useful for decision-making and on targeting information at different user groups. Mechanisms should be strengthened or established for transforming scientific and socio-economic assessments into information suitable for both planning and public information. Electronic and non-electronic formats should be used.

Establishment of standards and methods for handling information

40.23. Governments should consider supporting the efforts of governmental as well as non-governmental organizations to develop mechanisms for efficient and harmonized exchange of information at the local, national, provincial and international levels, including revision and establishment of data, access and dissemination formats, and communication interfaces.

Development of documentation about information

40.24. The organs and organizations of the United Nations system, as well as other governmental and non-governmental organizations, should document and share information about the sources of available information in their respective organizations. Existing programmes, such as those of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Information Systems (ACCIS) and the International Environmental Information System (INFOTERRA), should be reviewed and strengthened as required. Networking and coordinating mechanisms should be encouraged between the wide variety of other actors, including arrangements with non-governmental organizations for information sharing and donor activities for sharing information on sustainable development projects. The private sector should be encouraged to strengthen the mechanisms of sharing its experience and information on sustainable development.

Establishment and strengthening of electronic networking capabilities

40.25. Countries, international organizations, including organs and organizations of the United Nations system, and non-governmental organizations should exploit various initiatives for electronic links to support information sharing, to provide access to databases and other information sources, to facilitate communication for meeting broader objectives, such as the implementation of Agenda 21, to facilitate intergovernmental negotiations, to monitor conventions and efforts for sustainable development to transmit environmental alerts, and to transfer technical data. These organizations should also facilitate the linkage of different electronic networks and the use of appropriate standards and communication protocols for the transparent interchange of electronic communications. Where necessary, new technology should be developed and its use encouraged to permit participation of those not served at present by existing infrastructure and methods. Mechanisms should also be established to carry out the necessary transfer of information to and from non-electronic systems to ensure the involvement of those not able to participate in this way.

Making use of commercial information sources

40.26. Countries and international organizations should consider undertaking surveys of information available in the private sector on sustainable development and of present dissemination arrangements to determine gaps and how those gaps could be filled by commercial or quasi-commercial activity, particularly activities in and/or involving developing countries where feasible. Whenever economic or other constraints on supplying and accessing information arise, particularly in developing countries, innovative schemes for subsidizing such information-related access or removing the non-economic constraints should be considered.

Means of implementation

Financing and cost evaluation

40.27. The secretariat of the Conference has estimated the average total annual cost (1993-2000) of implementing the activities of this programme to be about $165 million from the international community on grant or concessional terms. These are indicative and order-of-magnitude estimates only and have not been reviewed by Governments. Actual costs and financial terms, including any that are non-concessional, will depend upon, inter alia, the specific strategies and programmes Governments decide upon for implementation.

Institutional means

40.28. The institutional implications of this programme concern mostly the strengthening of already existing institutions, as well as the strengthening of cooperation with non-governmental organizations, and need to be consistent with the overall decisions on institutions made by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.

Capacity-building

40.29. Developed countries and relevant international organizations should cooperate, in particular with developing countries, to expand their capacity to receive, store and retrieve, contribute, disseminate, use and provide appropriate public access to relevant environmental and developmental information, by providing technology and training to establish local information services and by supporting partnership and cooperative arrangements between countries and on the regional or subregional level.

Scientific and technological means

40.30. Developed countries and relevant international organizations should support research and development in hardware, software and other aspects of information technology, in particular in developing countries, appropriate to their operations, national needs and environmental contexts.

 

 

1.2          What is the information needed for?

Within the IEM field there are a number of role players who need access to information to fulfil a number of purposes. Primarily though, it is to improve the quality of the outputs and decisions from environmental tools and policies.

Decision makers need to ensure that all relevant information has been considered, correctly interpreted and understood within the local context so that the best and most informed decisions can be made.  There needs to be a level of assurance that recommendations to proceed or halt a project are adequately understood, within the ambit of the law and that local communities and stakeholders are informed.

Developers and land users need certainty around investments they may want to make and what the forward planning visions are for a particular area. They need to understand whether or not there developments and ambitions will fit within the development framework of the area. Equally, they need to know what the environmental impacts of their development may be, how this may be influenced by options and what the legislative requirements from them will be.

Environmental Assessment Practitioners (EAPs) need access to detailed information on projects undertaken for clients, or need to generate specialist information about the site in order to fully understand the implications and impacts of the project. Information used by EAPs within a EIA context often covers numerous specialists fields and in a great deal of detail. Information around local development plans, local government forward planning and other current projects also inform the outputs of EAPs work.

NGOs need to know that awareness was raised within local communities and that the impacts and consequences of the project are fully realised and planned for. NGOs often require access to detailed information that would assist with feedback on specific issues or concerns. For monitoring purposes, information on mitigation measures and time frames should be available.

 

 

1.3          Understanding how information is currently used and deployed

The existing South African Procedure for an EIA serves as a basis to develop and understand how information and knowledge management flows work within this decision making process. The current EIA procedure is a good starting point as it is a comprehensive environmental assessment procedure and many other environmental management and/or licensing procedures follow similar processes.

Many of the current problems experienced with the EIA process cut across other environmental tools.

 

1.4          Decision support systems for EIA authorities

These are key elements in the whole EIA decision-making process.  It has been proven over the years that any change to the biophysical, socio-economic or cultural- historic environment often triggers amendments to the legislation and in particular, environmental legislation.  This necessitates the need to amend existing regulations, policies, guidelines, strategies and plans.  South African environmental legislation has gone through a constant process of law reform, ever since it came into effect. 

In light of the above, environmental authorities have no choice, but to develop new or re-design its existing decision support tools to be able to still effectively respond to these changes.  However, although some tools may still be useful, its applicability might have changed.

The capacity audit and needs analysis survey revealed that some provincial EIA administrators are still operating in a vacuum of decision support systems and tools.  This does not only impact significantly on the EIA regulatory timeframes, but also poses a serious threat to the quality of EIA decisions.  In many instances where decision support tools are absent, administrators are unable to timeously respond to submissions and the processing of applications is being delayed.  EIA administrators are also unable to challenge certain submissions with factual data or information at its disposal, if there is no decision support system or tool that can be used to verify information submitted.

Following the workshop discussions, it is evident that the EIA administrator needs to expedite the development of an electronic tracking and database system, which will serve as a reporting tool for EIA administrators, but simultaneously also provide access to the applicant, EAP or public in general to monitor/follow the progress and status of applications submitted.  The National Environmental Authorisation System (“NEAS”), which is currently in the process of being re-developed aims to do exactly that.  Currently it serves as an electronic database, but other functionalities, such as application tracking, status and progress reporting, public portal and decision support (GIS) applications still needs to be finalised.

 

1.5          The difference between primary and secondary data

Data or information may be derived from many different sources and can be classified as primary or secondary data. Essentially, primary data is data gathered for the first time by the researcher; secondary data is data taken by the researcher from other or secondary sources, internal or external. Normally the cost of gathering secondary data is lower than the cost of primary data. A primary source is raw field data that has been collected or set of archival records. A secondary source is a summary of a book or set of records.

The first step before deciding whether primary data collection is necessary is to thoroughly search available secondary data sources before any primary data collection. In some cases, the secondary data may be sufficient to solve the problem. The value of secondary data is that it has several supplementary or other uses. The Internet is an example of a source of external secondary data. Many published, statistics and figures are available on the internet, although their accuracy or value is often debateable. In many cases, secondary data is collecting and possibly processing data by people other than the researcher in question.

In South African, the funds available for primary data collection are often limited, as is primary data collection. This makes our reliance on secondary data for IEMS high.

The right to access information is challenging particularly given the number of different user groups and needs. These include:

• Specialists who need detailed data. In addition, there are increasing reporting requirements on specialists which is making reporting more complex.
• Decision makers (government) needs support by selectively searching and finding trends in up to date data
• Other departments and users who need access to environmental data on an ad hoc basis
• The public has the right to up to date, accurate and trust worthy processed environmental information.

 

1.1.1     The South African Constitution

At the highest level the Constitution of South Africa (1996) within the bill of rights clearly states the right to access information:

32. Access to information

1. Everyone has the right of access to ­

1. a) any information held by the state; and
2. b) any information that is held by another person and that is required for the exercise or protection of any rights.

This duty to disclose information is important to protect the constitutional right to a safe environment. Access to information about the environment and the duty to disclose certain information about the environment are recognised tools for environmental protection both within NMEA and principal 10 of the Rio Declaration.

1.1.2     National Environmental Management Act and access to information

NEMA provides access to government held information about the environment and risks to the environment and gives powers to government to obtain environmental information. It allows the Minister of Environmental Affairs to draft regulations allowing for access to privately held information.

Section 31 of NEMA makes the following provisions for access to information:

1. a) every person is entitled to have access to information held by the State and organs of state which relates to the implementation of this Act and any other law affecting the environment, and to the state of the environment and actual and future threats to the environment, including any emissions to water, air or soil and the production, handling, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste and substances;
2. b) organs of state are entitled to have access to information relating to the state of the environment and actual and future threats to the environment, including any emissions to water, air or soil and the production, handling, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste held by any person where that information is necessary to enable such organs of state to carry out their duties in terms of the provisions of this Act or any other law concerned with the protection of the environment or the use of natural resources;
3. c) a request for information contemplated in paragraph (a) can be refused only:
   1. i) if the request is manifestly unreasonable or formulated in too general a manner;
   2. ii) if the public order or national security would be negatively affected by the supply of the information; or
   3. iii) for the reasonable protection of commercially confidential information;
   4. iv) if the granting of information endangers or further endangers the protection of the environment; and
   5. v) for the reasonable protection of personal privacy.

 

What the regulations do not do is define what is meant by environmental information or provide mechanisms for sharing and disclosure of the information. Ideally mechanisms are needed to respond to requests for information as well as making public information about the environment available. For example reports on the state of the environment, information about policies, plans and programmes that affect the environment, and information about environmental dangers or risks.

 

1.1.3     The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations of 2010

The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations of 2010 (Government Gazette No. 33306) clearly establishes the Competent Authorities right to access information (Section 7).

7. (1 ) A competent authority is entitled to all information that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing any decision with regard to an application unless access to that information is protected by law.

(2) Unless access to the information contemplated in subregulation (1) is protected by law, an applicant or EAP or other person in possession of that information must, on request by the competent authority, disclose that information to the competent authority, whether or not such information is favourable to the applicant.

In addition withholding information to the competent authority is listed as an offence (section 71):

71, (1) In addition to section 24F of the Act, a person is guilty of an offence if that person --

(a) provides incorrect or misleading information in any document submitted in terms of these Regulations to a competent authority;

(b) fails to comply with regulation 7(2);

(c) fails to comply with a request in terms of regulation 69(2); or

(d) commences or continues with an activity where the environmental authorisation was suspended in terms of regulation 49.

(2) A person convicted of an offence in terms of subregulation (1) is liable to a fine not exceeding R1 million or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year, or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

 

Unfortunately, these regulations do not extend to the responsibility of government departments to supply information to other government departments, NGOs or EAPs. This can be particularly problematic where a government department maintains information databases critical to decision making but does not share it. In addition, the regulations do not deal with the rights of civil society to access the information. In other words, the regulations are clear that EAPs are must supply information to government, but does not extend that responsibility to release all information to interested and affected parties (IAPS).

 

1.1          Background

The development and use of maps has changed a great deal over the last few decades and limited to a few generators of data and map makers. The rise of GIS (Geographical Information System) technology has changed how maps and data are generated, used and stored.

In the past, the collection and distribution of geographic information was highly centralised. The technical merit of the data was rarely challenged due to the heavy costs and technology associated with traditional mapping and to the long time-scales of mapping projects that often extended over several decades. Maps were not necessarily a consumer product, but were considered part of the national assets; data mainly used by the government, for defence, taxes, planning and development.

GIS technology has changed the way maps are generated, particularly with the development of desktop GIS.  Usage and type of applications is now incredibly diverse. Nearly anyone can create their own maps, thanks to the use of desktop mapping, GIS, GPS surveying, satellite imagery, scanning and intelligent software.

However, the overall cost of developing geospatial data required to support GIS applications remains relatively high compared with the hardware and software required for GIS. This has an impact on the type and quality of data that is available, and importantly, on how, and to whom, that data is distributed.

Unfortunately, geospatial data sets have been poorly documented and there have been duplicate efforts in geospatial data development, which hinders dissemination of GIS applications in local, national, regional and global circumstances.

Today GIS is characterised by:

• many actors involved in data collection and distribution
• a proliferation of GI applications, product types, and formats (Google Earth is an example of a well used application)
• duplication as a consequence of the difficulties to access the existing data, and the highly specific quality of the data collected (e.g. data collected at a local project scale can be incompatible with nationally generated data layers)
• increasing difficulty in the exchange and use of data that comes from different organisations

 

1.2          The Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) Act

To address some of the above issues in South Africa the SDI Act (Act 58 of 2003) was published in 2004. The Act establishes the South African Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI), the Committee for Spatial information, an electronic metadata catalogue, determines standards for capturing and sharing of spatial information and provides for other matters. The SDI act is applicable to organs of state which hold spatial information and to users of spatial information. The Act aims to ensure that that spatial information can be shared more easily, avoid efforts in duplicating data, setting standards for data capture, allow data to be kept in a central and accessible storage area.

The Objectives of the SDI Act are to:

• Facilitate the capture of spatial information through co-operation among organs of state
• Promote effective management and maintenance of spatial information
• Promote the use and sharing of spatial information in support of spatial planning, socio-economic development and related activities
• Create an environment which facilitates co-ordination and co-operation among all stakeholders regarding access to spatial information
• Eliminate duplication in the capturing of spatial information
• Promote universal access to such information: and
• Facilitate the protection of the copyright of the state in work relating to spatial information.

The Act makes provision for the identification of data custodians. Data custodians are organs of state which captures, maintains, integrates, distributes or uses spatial information.

• A data custodian must capture and maintain metadata for any spatial information held by it
• A data custodian must ensure that metadata is available to users by making its metadata available for inclusion in the electronic metadata catalogue: and including it in a manual on functions as described in section 14 of the Promotion of Access to Information Act. 2000 (Act No. 2 of 2000).

 

There are 3 key issues when it comes to GIS:

1. GIS data and capture standards
2. GIS systems
3. Data dissemination

 

1.3          The function of GIS in DEA

The DEA has a number of responsibilities for geographic information in South Africa. This includes providing, maintaining and managing the departmental GIS infrastructure (hardware and software) and general GIS support to DEA staff, including basic GIS training.

1. A vital function is the capturing and maintenance of geographic data, especially those data sets for which DEA is custodian (Protected Areas). Other data sets captured or being captured include:

• Waste facilities (medical, hazardous/general waste, permited/non-permited)
• Botanical gardens
• Ramsar sites
• Air quality priority areas
• Tourism facilities
• EMF’s completed
• Marine areas (territorial & inland waters)
• Marine Protected Area
• GMO’s – experimental farms, and so on
• SA Coastline

1. The Department also facilitates the capturing, purchasing and acquiring of geographic data to support DEA’s strategic business areas. These include the:

• SANBI Municipal Biodiversity Summaries
• Satellite Imagery for the country SPOT5
• National Land Cover
• Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland
• Protea Atlas
• Bird Atlas
• Sensitive Coastal Areas

1. The Department has a strong role to play in geographic data analysis and the production of maps for dissemination to the public (for example, State of the Environment mapping).
2. Provide access to a range of spatial data sets for spatial analysis to DEA staff and external stakeholders through Internet and Intranet GIS portals.

• Spatial datasets on tourism facilities and tourism infrastructure for rural nodes (interactive maps server),
• State of the environment (interactive map server),
• Paper maps for download (ENPAT maps)
• Data sets on protected areas for download (shapefile) and data sets on CD/DVD

 

1.4          GIS data capture and standards

Curently the means of GIS capture and the standards set vary across government departments. The implications are that when a project cuts across administrative boundaries (e.g. 2 provinces) the data sets may not be compatible. In these cases it may be necessary to recapture data or even model new data. This is particularly concerning when it comes to base data sets (e.g. landcover).

At an international level standards for data capture and sharing do exisit, for example the  Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) implement and promot biodiversity information standards and protocols, to facilitate information sharing in the global environment. At a national level the SDI Act guides standards for metadata management.

 

1.5          GIS systems

Current DEA GIS systems in use or under development include: EIA GIS and NEAS.

1.5.1     EIA GIS

The EIA GIS system is currently under development by DEA and its purpose is:

• An expansion of the RSA – Norway agreement project: National Sensitive Areas project
• Identify of geographical areas of national importance (particularly focusing on those for the current EIA regulations contained in Listing Notice 3);
• Collation and visual display of useful information; and
• Development of an EIA decision support system

The development of the site will focus collecting and displaying spatial information on the applicant’s proposal; the site of the proposed activity; and other relevant and available environmental data. So for any query done within the system the follow sets of information will be available:

• A list of activities for which application is necessary
• Any environmental attributes of the site
• The type of assessment
• The competent authority
• Any available environmental information
• Other applications from the NEAS system underway
• Any policies and guidelines that may apply

Current issues that the decision system still needs to resolve include are:

• Environmental attributes are consistently defined and captured;
• The list of activities is populated accordingly;
• The GIS Viewer is populated;
• The legal notice as an update of Listing Notice 3 is published; and
• the GIS system is linked to NEAS for EIA applications received.

In addition, the system would need to solve a number of technical issues relating to the data that is used to populate the system. It is worth noting that these issues are common across the country for GIS.

Problems include:

• Data ground truthing as many data layers are modelled from existing information or at a courser scale than necessary.
• Determination of high water mark of the sea
• Estuary to be changed to estuarine functional zone
• Delineation of the Urban edge
• Delineation of rivers/wetlands
• Decisions around what gets included and what is excluded, e.g. wetland overlapping to a built-up area

1.5.2     National Environmental Assessment system (NEAS)

NEAS is an electronic system used to capture and process EIA applications, generate environmental reports and record decisions (RoDs) and serve as an E-government solution for tracking environmental applications.

NEAS has undergone a number of iterations for capturing EIA information.  NEAS I focused on the Environmental Conservation Act (ECA) Regulations, NEAS II on the 2006 Regulations of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). The latest version, NEAS III captures EIAS for the NEMA 2010 Regulations.

The objectives of the current system are to:

• improve processing of EIA applications
• track the status of an application
• have a database storage
• identify bottlenecks in the  process
• be a decision support system
• provide national reports on applications
• integrate with other systems
• be flexible and adaptable to the changes

 

The type and quality of data available differs greatly across provinces, and seems to be dependant on the strength and investment in data at a provincial level. At a national level, national government departments are custodians of many of the national data layers, some of which are too course to be used at provincial or lower scale. This section provides an overview of some of the data available.

 

1.1          National data sets

At a national level, many national government departments are actively involved in maintaining certain data sets, often which are used for their own planning and reporting needs. These data layers are often freely available to other users, both in the public and private sectors.

Table 2 provides an overview of the nationally available data sets.

 

 

1.2          Provincial data sets

The quality, type and level of data available at a provincial level differ between the provinces. Provincial data sets are often more difficult to access than national data, and provincial departments often only give specific use of the data to provincially funded projects by means of a data exchange agreement.

 

1.3          International data sets

International data sets are becoming increasingly important, particular when one considers that many ecological boundaries, like catchments, cross administrative and national boundaries. This is also linked to a shift in focus for IEM to understanding cumulative effects and integrated resource management. For South Africa, the SADC countries and shared catchment boundaries are particularly important considerations.

There is an extensive range of international data, norms and policies available internationally, often which are specific to sectors and areas. The table below provides an outline of some of these, however, a comprehensive list would be difficult to put together and would be very large.

 

 

1.4          Data dissemination

Access to accurate, timeous and relevant data is critical for integrated environmental management. In many cases access to base data sets is difficult, and in some cases even denied, which has impacts on the quality of information used to derive findings. This is particularly true for tools like EIAs and EMFs where up to date and accurate information is necessary to make informed decisions on the impacts of projects.

Mechanisms to access, use and update datasets requires attention and there are few working examples of this in South Africa. A widely used web portal is the BGIS site.

1.5          Case Study: Biodiversity Geographic information System (BGIS)

1.5.1     Introduction to BGIS

Biodiversity Geographic Information System (BGIS) was developed to bridge the gap between science, policy and decision making.

BGIS has eight years of experience in information sharing and is regarded as an international pilot in this area. India is one of the first countries which intends on utilizing the South African processes and methodology for information sharing as a guide to develop their own, and extend it to East Asia.

 

1.5.2     Methodology for information sharing

A number of core components are responsible for the functioning of the BGIS and would be essential for any information portal. These can briefly be classified and explained as follows (based on the experience and functioning of BGIS):

• The method of information sharing must be user friendly. When the process of gathering information and/or analyzing the information becomes too cumbersome the value of the information tends to be lost and many users lose interest.
• Dedicated team of skilled scientists, managers and IT specialists
• Substantial budget
• Network capacity and functionality
• An understanding of how users interact with the website, and how the information is being utilized. Only once this is understood can a website be built that meets the needs of its users by presenting information in a manner which is easily accessible, understandable and functional; and make information available in formats which can be utilized by the website users.

 

1.5.3     New BGIS Tools

Over and above the mapping capabilities that BGIS provides the public and private sector access to, there are a number of tools which have been developed or are in the process of being developed, to further assist information sharing and decision making.

 

1.5.3.1    BGIS Advisor

This tool can be useful in a number of ways with regard to the Environmental Assessment process for individuals in all schools of thought, from the public and private sector.

The BGIS Advisor provides information on what an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is, the process and how to go about undertaking an EIA. This tool also currently holds 11 million biodiversity records which can be used in the environmental impact assessment process by channeling the user to information that is relevant to the particular study and the use of this information in a comprehensive and effective manner.

More information can be found at http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org/

 

1.5.3.2    Species Distribution Modeling

The Species Distribution Modeling, which forms part of the BGIS Advisor is specifically aimed at Environmental Assessment Practitioners (EAPs) and Biodiversity Specialists, aims to assist with information sharing of biodiversity records and improve the quality of data available on biodiversity records. The Biodiversity EIA System allows EAPs to upload Biodiversity Studies undertaken for Environmental Assessments and identify the relevant location associated with the data set. In so doing this system not only facilitates information sharing and collaboration of biodiversity datasets to produce a comprehensive set of data over South Africa, but it also allows for patterns and processes to be identified, it highlights where Environmental Assessments are being undertaken, and facilitates in identifying and measuring cumulative impacts.

To ensure quality of information is maintained, BGIS has decided to make all information that is loaded onto the system to be peer review by other users.

This tool will be announced at the IAIA Conference in Mexico in June, and shortly after this it will be launched in South Africa.

 

1.5.3.3    Land Use Decision Support

Similarly to the BGIS Advisor, the BGIS can be used in land use development plans, climate change studies, and general research.

More information can be found at http://bgis.sanbi.org/LUDS.asp

 

1.5.4     Workshops & Training sessions

1.5.4.1    Training

BGIS runs a number of training sessions every year for the public and private sector. The intention of these training sessions is to inform individuals about the abundance of information available to them, and guide them on how to ustilise the information in a responsible and accountable manner. These workshops are free to ensure that accessibility to this resource is open to everyone.

1.5.4.2    Workshops

BGIS has held a number of workshops to gain understanding of the types of information that users require, the format for this information, how this information could best be presented and to discuss to improve information sharing and social networking.

 

1.6          GIS issues

The majority of GIS users and practitioners are in government departments and the private sector. Many of the systems in use in government institutions were acquired through separate processes and consequently, each institution tends to have its own GIS system independently of other departments.  In most cases there is very poor coordination among departments, however, coordination is continually improving as data custodian’s link with one another. The independent and isolated development of GIS applications result in duplication of data collection and data coverage, the use of various scales for base maps and in a lack of standards for spatial data quality.

Other issues here:

1. Bandwidth issues
2. Standards
3. Metadata
4. Copyrights and end user agreements

Subtheme 2:  Knowledge and Information

* Angela Andrews of the Legal Resource Centre compiled this summary of the Specialist Report.
The following constitutes a summary of a report written by consultants to the EIAMS process and does not reflect the views of the Legal Resources Centre.

Original Report by Gillian Maree of SSI Environmental

Problem Statement

Reliable information on land, climate, water, vegetation, socio-economic factors, and infrastructure is essential to making good decisions in environmental policy.  Information management includes the collection, organization, and analysis of data, as well as turning the data into formats (like statistics, reports, and maps) that can be used to communicate the information and make decisions.  Proper management of information is crucial to accurately developing future strategies and evaluating progress towards environmental goals.

Currently, information is not being effectively collected, managed, or distributed, resulting in haphazard data collection and an unwillingness to share information.  Decisionmakers often do not possess enough knowledge, skills, and resources (such as technology, institutional memory, and finances) to make informed choices.  While there is much data that could be used in sustainable development decisionmaking, the problem often lies in finding the right information at the right time at the right scale.

What Information is Available

Mapping information is collected through Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology, which is costly and not uniform.  The Spatial Data Infrastructure Act 58 of 2003 designated state organs as data custodians – institutions responsible for collecting, maintaining, and providing access to information.  The DEA is a custodian for various types of geographic data, such as air quality priority areas, waste facilities, and marine protected areas.  Because methods and standards of GIS capture vary across government departments, data from different offices may not match.  Data collected and maintained by national government departments are mostly freely available to the public.  At the provincial level, data is often more difficult to access, and the type and quality of data available varies widely.

EIA information is available on the National Environmental Assessment System (NEAS).  On this electronic system, users can track environmental applications and access environmental reports and record decisions.  However, access is limited to a few government staff.

What The Information Is Needed For

Information is needed by various players in the environmental management process, such as developers, EAPs, land use planners, NGOs, and decisionmakers.  The flow of information in the current EIA system moves among the different players, from developer to the public to the EAPs to the decisionmaker, and sometimes back again.  However, because of outdated or  limited access to relevant information, it is difficult for decisionmakers to challenge findings in an EIA and ensure that all relevant information has been considered.

Problems

1. Data collection, distribution, and storage:  Data is collected mostly for specific projects, such as an EIA, using methods tailored to the project and without being integrated into a larger national or regional data set.  As a result, collected data is scattered, inconsistent, in different scales, and often not useful for purposes other than the specific project.  In addition, data is often not freely distributed, in hard copy only, and limited to those who already know where to go.  The high cost of data collection, distribution, storage and maintenance also contribute to the problem.
2. Capacity, expertise, and equipment:  Data collection and analysis requires technical expertise and special equipment, which are expensive to acquire and maintain.  There are not enough staff with the specialized skills, and new technological advances requires continuous training.  Training is also needed for users on how to use the information systems.  There are also infrastructure issues, such as unreliable power and internet connectivity.
3. Networking:  Currently there is very little data sharing, and no explicit policies for permission to access, use, or release information.  Sharing among different government departments is weak, and even weaker among the government, the public, NGOs, and the private sector.  Sometimes data is not shared due to political sensitivity or fear of damage to industries like tourism.  Because of data hoarding, few are aware of the availability of environmental information, leading to low demand for it and to decisions being made without critical information.
4. Communication:  Different users need information presented in different ways.  Specialists will need detailed scientific information, whereas community members may need an easy to understand format.
5. EIA issues:  The above problems with information gathering, analysis, and maintenance have made the EIA process less effective.  EIAs are conducted without taking into account the broader context of the specific area or sector where the project will take place, and instead include much unnecessary and expensive information.  Often the EIA process is used to collect information about an area in the first instance because there is no baseline information from which to measure the impact an activity will have.  Projects that cross boundaries may not have data that matches.

Proposals

1. Develop a clear information management policy geared towards achieving environmental goals, not just data goals.
2. Establish five key processes for effective information management: 
   1. Catalogue of what and where information is stored, so that it can be easily accessed and used.
   2. Standardised data, so that it can be used by many different users for various purposes.
   3. Digitised data, so that it can be shared and leveraged.  The EIA process in particular should become digitized, with all reports and specialist data submitted electronically.  The NEAS falls short as it captures only the initial application, not full reports and data, and is not accessible to the general public.
   4. Data quality assurance, to ensure data reliability.
   5. Data sharing, so that it is available to all users, stakeholders, and interested parties.
3. Provide digital resources with consideration for internet bandwidth and accessibility issues, such as packaging data in the smallest possible file format.  Internet access should also be improved in rural areas.
4. Strengthen the collection of baseline data (basic information on environment, natural resources, infrastructure, and land uses of an area) by increasing coverage, standardising the scale, linking the information to environmental policies and tools, and allowing access to all stakeholders.
5. Recognise the link between natural resources and the people who live there.  Socio-economic and demographic information is part of integrated environmental management.  Environmental indicators should be linked to development and economic policy.
6. Coordinate data sharing between government departments by formal agreement and other channels.  Informal networks, however, should be in addition to formal agreements, not the only means of acquiring data.
7. Establish data standards linked to specific environmental legislation and policy requirements to ensure that the data collected is actually needed.

This article provides the problems identified by Gillian Maree of SSI Environmental for the theme "Knowledge and Information" as it pertains to Environmental Impact Assessment and Management. 


There are information gaps, and data is inconsistent, often inaccessible and poorly maintained.  Without rigorous standardisation of data formats and data collection, information will continue to be poorly integrated/shared.  There is inadequate strategic data, which limits the ability of decision makers to discern where protection is needed and how best to secure environmental assets.

•    There are inconsistencies in the collection of data on key natural resources, resulting in information gaps which make accurate predictions difficult
•    Data may be unreliable, incompatible, inconsistent, non-uniform and even contradictory because of poor standardization.
•    Information is not always fit for purpose – data layers may be too coarse, may lack  -  strategic context, baseline information about environmental thresholds, environmental no-go areas, environmental sensitivity delineation
•    Access to information is limited.  Those who already know where to go, or more importantly, know whom to ask, may have access.  Inaccessibility may be influenced by an attitude to information which sees it as a currency to be traded or not shared. Information is sometimes restricted (e.g. mining).
•    Poor infrastructure (hardware); poor standardisation of software (to enable sharing); and poor maintenance of data portals (web sites) limited accessibility
•    Where technical staff decide which data, how much detail, and who has access, inadequate or distorted information may be available to decision makers
•    High costs associated with data collection (specifically for primary data collection), costs of data storage, maintenance and dissemination, result in poor maintenance.
•    The technical expertise and specialized equipment (hardware and software) required to capture or manipulate data is limited to certain specialised people and expensive (often tightly licensed) equipment.
•    Inadequate training in the use and maintenance of information systems
•    Different users and interest groups have greatly differing needs when it comes to information access
•    Information may be out-of-date
•    There is insufficient base-line information.  It is not updated often enough, may not be accessible and may have an environmental bias or exclude information pertinent to decision making.