The Custodian Project

Janet Loubser and Mark Freeman of SSI Environmental reported on the perceived skills shortage in the Environmental Sector.  The report confirms inadequacy, lack of skills and a high staff turnover.  The high vacancy rate is a reflection of the small supply of appropriately skilled people in the market place.

•    High turnover rates in the environmental sector, leading to lack of institutional memory and inefficiency in the system.  Staff turnover is essentially as a result of a small supply of appropriate skilled and qualified people.
•    High vacancy rates in the biodiversity sector.  34% of core biodiversity staff hold positions for which they are under-qualified.
•    No environmental SETA: According to the Skills Development Act No. 97 of 1998, Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) must develop skills development plans for various sectors within the framework of the national skills development strategy. SETAs are to establish learnerships, approve workplace plans, allocate grants to employers, provide training, and monitor the education and training in the sector. Currently there is no specific environmental SETA, but because environmental management skills cut across so many different sectors, the DEA issued an enabling document for all SETAs to include those skills into their development plans. In addition, a new Energy and Water SETA will deal with many environmental skills.
•    Environmental skills are not included in the National Skills Development Strategy II (NSDS II). In June 2010, the DEA made a submission to the National Skills Authority (NSA) to include environmental and sustainability education and training in the NSDS III.
•    There are critical skills which are in demand in the environmental sector.  These include leadership, sustainable development planning, risk management, environmental monitoring and compliance (inspection), specialist skills, climate change assessment, information communications and technology, environmental law and policy, environmental ethics and social justice policy, and education, mentoring, and training. The Department of Labour does not include all of the environmental sector’s needs on its Scarce Skills list.
•    Management skills in demand: skills necessary for effective management are in demand.  These include report and business writing, people management skills, analytical and communication skills, organisational skills, problem solving, and conflict resolution.
•    Professional registration requirement: Currently there is no official registration body for environmental practitioners.  The establishment of a Registration Authority for Environmental Assessment Practitioners will include an important component - the registration of a qualification for environmental assessment practice within the National Qualifications Framework in collaboration with the SAQA. Environmental Assessment Practitioners’ Association of South Africa (EAPASA) was launched in April 2011 and will apply to be recognised as the official registration authority for EAPs.  See Subtheme 5 for a more detail on EAPASA.
•    South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA): SAQA is charged with advancing the National Qualification Framework (NQF), standardised guidelines to measure learner achievement. SAQA helped develop the criteria for EAPASA certification, which marks a significant step in setting baseline criteria and a national standard for the EAP profession.
•    Green Economy:  There is a need to develop capacity for integrating, and strategic plans being developed for the green economy and green job development must consider the cost of skills development.  The regime requires pro-active skills development to ensure capacity.

In the report prepared by Marlene Laros of MLA Sutainability Matters, the role of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) is explored.  Areas where the role of the EAP is not clear were identified, and then a wider list of problems defined.

The role of the EAP is not clear in these respects –
•    Should EAPs be informing the decision making process with a real consideration of the no-go option
•    Should EAPs be making a recommendation – i.e. offering a reasoned professional opinion -  to the authorities
•    Should EAP be promoting the best outcome for sustainable development , the environment and society, or should EAPs be neutral?

Problems identified include -
•    EAPs are judged for the inefficiencies of the assessment process.
•    The regulatory system has emphasised the need for independence rather than quality assurance.
•    There is too much emphasis on independence, and insufficient focus on objectivity.
•    EAPs are often engaged when a development proposal is already well-conceived and there is little opportunity to influence the project.
•    There is too much emphasis on the administrative aspects, and too little on the outcomes of the regulation of the environment.
•    The quality of decisions and assessments cannot be verified because compliance monitoring and feedback are inadequate.
•    Public participation frequently questions the objectivity and independence of EAPs because of the employment relationships.
•    The person best qualified is not always appointed as EAP on a project because the person is not independent.  The option to apply for exemption to the regulation is seldom exercised because of the risk of vexatious legal challenges from IAPs.
•    Environmental Management Programmes/Plan compiled by someone without on-site environmental management experience may compromise quality in favour of independence.
•    The absence of a mechanism to sanction EAPs for unethical or unprofessional conduct hinders quality assurance.
•    While core competencies and certification criteria have been established by EAPASA, there may be a requirement for specialisation in the future. While core competencies and certification criteria have been established by EAPASA, there may be a requirement for specialisation in the future.
•    There are specialist inputs into the Assessment process by professionals for which there is presently no quality assurance e.g public participation practitioners, social impact assessment practitioners.
•    Practitioners engaged in monitoring and inspection – EMI, building inspectors, etc. – have no registration body.
•    There is no registration requirement for practitioners implementing authorizing aspects
•    There is no requirement for other professionals who have an important role in environmental impact management to comply with environmental standards and ethics – e.g. spatial planners, civil engineers, etc.
•    Training lacks a co-ordinated content specific skills development programme.
•    Training offerings at tertiary institutions need to be accredited to the qualification standard.
•    Accreditation of a qualification standard could be extended to include planning, landscape architecture, sustainability and engineering programmes.
•    Learnerships are needed to bridge the experience and competence gap in recent graduates in order that they can meet the requirements for registration
•    There should be a range of learnerships to enable competence in specific areas, for structured leaning.
•    There is a need for internship and mentoring programmes.
•    There is no opportunity for review to improve the efficiency of the system (as review presently tends to be from a regulatory perspective).
•    Reviews which take place after the assessment process are least effective, yet this is the tendency.
•    Review is not being institutionalised in the system, and it is an effective quality assurance mechanism.