Environmental Impact Assessment in Tanzania by Wilfred Mawalla ...

COPYRIGHTThis work is a copyright protected under the Copyrights and Neighbouring Rights Act No. 7 of1999, Laws of Tanzania and International instruments for the protection of intellectual propertyrights.And as such no part of this research paper may be reproduced, copied, adopted, abridged orstored in any retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any means; electronic, photocopying,recording or otherwise, save for the application of ‘fair use doctrine,’ without prior writtenpermission of either the authors or of the Dean, Faculty of Law, Tumaini University, IringaUniversity College.~ iii ~

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTDespite the fact that this research paper is a result of our own efforts, it will be unfair not tomention, at this stage, some people who have facilitated its completion. Although, it is notpossible to mention by names all of them, who, in one way or another have contributed to thecompletion of this research work, we would like to express our special gratitude to the followingpersons;Our special thanks go to our parents, for enabling us to be at the college in all aspects; fromfinancing college fees, research costs and their continued moral and parental support which haveall together made this research possible.We also owe much thanks to our supervisor, Ms. Joy Faida who, despite being overwhelmedwith other duties still spared time to go through work for this study; encouraging, and posingcritical comments and corrections from time to time, efforts which have, largely shaped thisresearch paper and made it a reality.We feel also indebted to Mr. Eliamani I. Laltaika, Mr. Nyaga P. Mawalla, Ellen Zambetakis,Mathew Eliakim, Protas Mwalongo and all those who assisted us in one way or the other toaccess, obtain and use data for the completion of this study. “We thank you and will alwaysremember you.”~ v ~

ABSTRACTSound environmental management and the need to protect natural resources, has necessitatedmany countries, including Tanzania to put down strict legislative measures to protect theenvironment; measure which include environmental impact assessment. This research criticallyanalyses the relevant provisions concerning environmental impact assessment under theEnvironmental Management Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessment and AuditRegulation, 2005.Chapter one which provides an introductory aspect of the study contains a background to theresearch, statement of the problem, objectives, and the significance of the study. It alsoprescribes the hypothesis and methodology used to carry out the study.Chapter two of this research contains a detailed discussion on the concept of environment impactassessment; its evolution, objectives and procedure as the focus of the chapter.In chapter three the research establishes, a critical analysis of the relevant provisions concerningenvironmental impact assessment under the Environmental Management Act, 2004 and theEnvironmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation, 2005. This chapter thus is apresentation of a detailed critique of the Act and Regulation which points out specificweaknesses and strengths inherent in the law.Finally in chapter four, this study makes conclusive remarks which sum up the discussion inprevious chapters. The chapter suggests recommendations for an effective EIA.~ vi ~

ABBREVIATIONSAct -The Environmental Management Act, 2004EIA-Environmental Impact AssessmentEMA, 2004 -The Environmental Management Act, 2004NCSSD-National Conservation Strategy for Sustainable DevelopmentNEAP-National Environmental Action PlanNEMC-National Environment Management CouncilRegulation -The Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation, 2005~ vii ~

TABLE OF CONTENTSPRELIMINARY PAGESDeclaration .................................................................................................................................... iCertification ................................................................................................................................. iiCopyright .................................................................................................................................... iiiDedication ................................................................................................................................... ivAcknowledgement ........................................................................................................................vAbstract ....................................................................................................................................... viAbbreviations ............................................................................................................................. viiTable of contents ....................................................................................................................... viii~ viii ~

CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION1.0 BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ......................................................11.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .................................................................................51.2 AIMS AND OBECTIVES OF THE STUDY1.2.1 AIMS …………………………………………………………………………….71.2.2 OBJECTIVES……………………………………………………………………71.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS…………………………………………………………….81.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY……………………………………………………..81.5 LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………………..91.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY……………………………………………………….111.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................11CHAPTER TWOTHE CONCEPT OF EIA, IT’S EVOLUTION, OBJECTIVES AND EIA PROCESS2.0 INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………..122.1 THE CONCEPT OF EIA .................................................................................................122.2 THE EVOLUTION OF EIA ............................................................................................132.3 THE OBJECTIVES OF EIA ...........................................................................................15~ ix ~

2.4 THE EIA PROCESS ........................................................................................................162.5 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………27CHAPTER THREECRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 2004 ANDENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND AUDIT REGULATION, 20053.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………..283.1 A CRITIQUE OF EIA PROVISIONS UNDER THE EMA, 20043.1.1 STRENGTH…………………………………………………………………….283.1.2 WEAKNESS……………………………………………………………………343.2 A CRITIQUE OF EIA PROVISIONS UNDER THE REGULATION, 20053.2.1 STRENGTH……………………………………………………………………..363.2.2 WEAKNESS…………………………………………………………………….403.3 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………43CHAPTER FOURCONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS4.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................444.1 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 444.2 RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………………………….47BIBLIOGRAPHY .........................................................................................................................50~ x ~

CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEMThe Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a tool used to improve decision-makingand ensure that development options under consideration are environmentally, sociallyand economically sound and sustainable. The assessment is concerned with theidentification, prediction and evaluation the foreseeable impacts, both beneficial andadverse, of proposed development projects and alternatives. It aims to eliminate orminimise negative impacts and optimise positive impacts through mitigation andenhancement measures. EIA relates to a process rather than a particular activity.Further, environmental impact assessment is an important management tool forimproving the long-term viability of projects. It can be used to prevent mistakes that canbe expensive and damaging in environmental, social and economic terms. Humanactivities are altering natural cycles and systems on an unprecedented scale, and thecumulative effects of these activities are estimated to be on par with bio-physicalprocesses as an agent of ecological change.Tanzania, like many other developing countries, is keen to protect and preserve itsenvironment from destruction. Tanzania did not have a comprehensive environmental1

law with mandatory requirements for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Thisomission may be explained in part as due to the marginal place that environmentalmatters played in the period preceding the Rio Conference in 1992. In the post-Rioperiod, the reluctance to integrate EIA requirements in legislation may be seen in thecontext of the liberalization and deregulation policies in force since mid 1980s whoseconcern has been privatization of the common wealth and promotion of private foreigninvestment.In other words, the overriding desire to create "conducive environment" for investorsexplains the omission of EIA requirements in our national investment law as well as thepolitico-bureaucratic control of the EIA processes in other legislations which regulateinvestment in the country. The effect has been that even where statute requirescompliance with environmental considerations, in practice this is either totally ignored orits spirit subverted while keeping intact the veneer of legality.Despite the absence of EIA legislation and institutional framework, impact assessmenthas been applied in Tanzania largely on ad-hoc basis for over 20 years. Since the firstEIA in 1980s, several have been undertaken in different projects.The need for more effective environmental management mechanisms in Tanzania hasbeen widely acknowledged. No wonder, therefore, that the omission of EIA requirementsin various environmental and natural resource management legislation has been a source2

of considerable criticism in both the official and academic literature on natural resourcemanagement in the country. Much of this criticism has centred on the need to haveeffective regulatory controls in place in view of the growing importance of foreigninvestment in Tanzania.With time, the Government came up with a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)which was touted as 'a first step' in making the fundamental changes needed to bringenvironmental considerations into the mainstream of decision-making in our country. 1The NEAP, dubbed as the outcome of "distillation of lessons and thoughts onenvironment and development from a national perspective", gave recognition toenvironmental impact assessment as one of the "priority instruments" of environmentalpolicy. The NEAP also urged the incorporation of EIA approaches into all aspects ofplanning and decision-making. 2Later, the Government of Tanzania adopted a National Conservation Strategy forSustainable Development (NCSSD) which was prepared by the National EnvironmentManagement Council (NEMC). The NCSSD document observed the trend away fromdirect state involvement in economic activity which has obviously stimulated economicgrowth has, however, not been replaced with effective regulatory framework which couldallow market forces to work effectively while safeguarding certain national interests such1 See foreword by Minister of Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment, MTNRE, 1994 available athttp://www.zmuc.dk/entoweb/guidelines.htm, (retrieved on 18/05/2008)2 Tundu Antiphas Lissu, Environmental Impact Assessment of Foreign Investment Projects, 19993

as environmental quality and equitable income distribution. It further observed theabsence of a legal regime for EIA in the planning processes as one of the "legal issues ofnational concern", noting that "without a mandatory EIA process, no obligation exists toassess and monitor the effects of projects and government activities on the environment".It, therefore, urged the promotion of EIA methodology in the planning andimplementation processes of all relevant ministries regulating government activities aswell as private investment, especially the Investment Promotion Centre (IPC, now knownas TIC) "where most investment projects are scrutinized". In addition, it proposed thecreation of a legal regime requiring mandatory EIA of major development projects withsignificant impacts on the environment, with the EIA procedures requiring cross-sectoralconsultation in specific cases of government decision-making.In December 1997, the National Environmental Policy which was passed by thegovernment which recognized the importance of EIA as a planning tool to integrateenvironmental considerations in decision-making process in order to ensure thatunnecessary damage to the environment is avoided. It has, furthermore, proclaimed theneed for making EIA processes a mandatory requirement "to ensure that environmentalconcerns receive due and balanced consideration in reconciling urgent developmentneeds and long-term sustainability". The policy has, in addition, promised theformulation of requisite guidelines and specific criteria for conducting EIA processes aspart of the strategies to implement the policy. The cornerstone of these processes,4

according to the Policy, will be the institution of the mechanisms for public consultationsand public hearings in the EIA procedures. 3As the result of the government struggle in protecting its environment, it enacted theEnvironmental Management Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessment andAudit Regulation, 2005 which contains relevant provisions governing the entire EIAprocess and makes it mandatory that EIA should be carried out prior to the establishmentof certain projects. However, it is observed that despite such struggle by the government,such provisions governing EIA process are weak hence inadequate, thus diminishing thewhole purpose of EIA.1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMIt is realized that the newly enacted Environmental Management Act, 2004 and theEnvironmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation 2005 have made seriousattempts to incorporate EIA provisions that governs the entire process. However it isnoted that these provisions are not sufficient for effective protection and conservation ofthe environment in Tanzania as they contain within themselves weakness and loopholeswhich may defeat the whole purpose of EIA.3 Lissu T, supra note 25

Such weaknesses and loopholes which subsist in the provisions governing EIA may allowestablishment of some projects or activities which may result into massive adverseimpacts to the environment.Thus, considering the fact that we are living in an era in which the whole world is movingtowards liberalized economy to which Tanzania is not exceptional, foreign investmentwhich is flowing into the country is based on the exploitation of the finite naturalresources such as minerals, wildlife/forestry and coastal and marine resources. Therefore,the nature and character of the regulatory system for this investment has significantimpacts to the environment which pose a threat to the ultimate sustainability of thenatural resources and the livelihood of various communities who depend on the naturalresource for their survival. This in the long run will make it difficult for Tanzania toachieve the ultimate goals of EIA which involves decision-making and ensuring thatdevelopment options under consideration are environmentally, socially and economicallysound and sustainable.For effective carrying out of the study the following research question shall guide theresearchers;Are the relevant provisions governing Environmental Impact Assessmentsufficient for effective protection of environment?6

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY1.2.1 AIMS OF THE STUDYThis study aims at examining the relevant provisions governing the entire EIA process ofthe Environmental Management Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessmentand Audit Regulation, 2005 in order to determine the adequacy of such provisions in theprotection and sustainable management of the environment in Tanzania.1.2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDYThat, this study is intended to explore the relevant provisions governing EIA process inorder to examine the strengths and/or weaknesses that exist in the said provisions.That, the study further intends to provide possible solutions to the weak provisions (if anyis found) of the Act relating to EIA process.That, the study also intends to persuade the relevant authorities to make amendments tothe weak provisions (if any is found) and replace the same with the more effective ones.Moreover, the study intends to recommend for modern and more effective environmentalmanagement tools other than EIA.7

1.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESISThat some of the relevant provisions of the Environmental Management Act, 2004 andthe Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation, 2005 are inadequate in theprotection and sustainable management of the environment.1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDYThis research is intended to serve the following:The study will be important as it will create awareness and enlighten the society and thegovernment on the weaknesses of some relevant provisions governing EIA so thatappropriate measures may be taken by the government.Recommendations that shall be put forward at the end of this study shall operate as achallenge on the part of law makers, decision makers and relevant authorities concerningEIA in order that they adopt sufficient provisions for effective and sustainablemanagement of the environment.Since this research will be kept in the university library, it will serve as a reference toother academicians, Tanzanians and non - Tanzanians because it is going to provide a8

comprehensive study on recommendations that will be provided at the end of the researchon the possible amendments on the EIA provisions.1.5 LITERATURE REVIEWThe following are a few publications and writings which were reviewed by theresearchers that motivated them in one way or another to conduct this study.The work of Mwalyosi, R., Hughes R., Spooner, B., Kikula, I., Mohamed, S. andSosovele, H 4 is one of the publications reviewed. Their paper explains the role of EIA andsummarises the basic procedures involved in its implementation and explores its potentialrole in contributing to improved decision-making and development planning in Tanzania.Another publication which was reviewed is one by Mwalyosi, R. and Hughes, R. 5 Theirstudy evaluates the performance of EIA process in Tanzania as planning andenvironmental management tool.Furthermore, Mwalyosi, R., Hughes, R. and Howlett, D.J.B in their work 6 provide anintroduction to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and its potential role in4 Environmental Impact Assessment in Tanzania: A Briefing Paper, February 1996.5 The Performance of EIA in Tanzania: an assessment, IIED Environmental planning Issues No. 14. IRAResearch Paper No. 41. 1998.6 Introduction Course on Environmental Impact Assessment in Tanzania: Resource Handbook, 19999

Tanzania. The work is also designed to help improve understanding of the contributionthat EIA can make towards sustainable development planning in Tanzania.Lissu, T. A. in his work 7 intends to examine environmental law and policy in Tanzaniaparticularly in respect of foreign investment in Tanzania with a view to showing themanner in which social and environmental considerations have been integrated in thedecision-making processes regarding foreign investment and the regulation thereof.Last but not least, is the work by Harmer, C. 8 which was based in assessing whetherimproving the effectiveness of EIA in the UK, is dependent on the use of follow-up. Theresults of his study suggest that the use of follow-up should be extended in the UK, inorder to improve EIA effectiveness.It is recognized that, despite the fact that the above cited works have not specifically dealtwith the provisions of the Environmental Management Act, 2004 relating to EIA, suchworks have been of great help in understanding the whole concept of EIA, its process andthe mechanisms that are necessary for an effective EIA. Thus, proper understanding ofEIA will help the researchers in carrying out their study.7 Environmental Impact Assessment of Foreign Investment Projects: A Study in the Law, Policy andGovernmental Decision-making in Tanzania, March 19998 Is Improving the Effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment in the UK Dependent on the Use ofFollow-up? Views of Environmental Consultants. (A Thesis presented in part-fulfillment of the degree ofMaster of Science in accordance with the regulations of the University of East Anglia, August 2005)10

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDYThe following are some of the limitations or challenges facing the researchers in thecourse of this study;1. Time factor2. Financial limitation3. Data inaccessibility4. Lack of cooperation on part of the government officials1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGYThis study is an analytical type of research because it basically looks at theEnvironmental Management Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessment andAudit Regulation, 2005 on a critical perspective in the protection and preservation ofenvironment in Tanzania.Therefore, this study will only employ secondary data which includes the EnvironmentalManagement Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation,2005.11

CHAPTER TWOTHE CONCEPT, EVOLUTION, OBJECTIVES AND EIA PROCESS2.0 INTRODUCTIONThis chapter intends to briefly explain the concept of EIA by providing its meaning andterms associated to it. It further explains the origin of EIA and its evolution in Tanzania;its objectives and the entire process involved in conducting EIA in Tanzania.2.1 THE CONCEPT OF EIAEnvironmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is one of the major tools relied upon bygovernments and societies worldwide to help effective environmental management. It canbe defined as ‘a systematic process that examines the environmental consequences ofdevelopment actions in advance’ and is primarily used to assist in the identification,prediction and mitigation of environmental impacts caused by certain newdevelopments. 9Environmental impact assessment is, in its simplest form, a planning tool that is nowgenerally regarded as an integral component of sound decision making. As a planning9 Clare Harmer, Is Improving the Effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment in the UK Dependenton the Use of Follow-up? Views of Environmental Consultants: A Thesis presented in part-fulfilment of thedegree of Master of Science in accordance with the regulations of the University of East Anglia, August2005 at p. 312

tool it has both an information gathering and decision making component which providesthe decision maker with an objective basis for granting or denying approval for aproposed development. 10The terms 'impact assessment' and 'environmental impact assessment' are umbrella termsfrequently used to cover a broad range of techniques, e.g. social impact assessment (SIA),risk assessment (RA), environmental impact assessment (EIA) and health impactassessment (HIA). To date, EIA itself has been applied generally at the project level, butincreasing attention is now being given to impact assessment at the level of policies,plans and programmes (this is known as strategic environmental assessment - SEA).2.2 THE EVOLUTION OF EIAEnvironmental impact assessment emerged in 1969 and has since become ‘a powerfulenvironmental safeguard in the project planning process’. 11 Over 100 different countrieshave developed individual EIA systems each with varying levels of sophistication. Theprocess was developed in the USA and came into operation as a part of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969. In the 15 years following its enactment, theestablishment of other mandatory EIA systems were confined to a relatively smallnumber of countries, including Canada, Australia and France. Less formalised and often10 Justice La Forest, Friends of the Oldman v. Canada et al. (1991)11 Clare H, supra note 913

more limited provisions for environmental assessment were also introduced in a numberof countries. However, since 1985 a major expansion in the number of formalised EIAsystems has occurred.In Tanzania though there was no legislation or institutional framework, impactassessment was applied largely on ad-hoc basis for over 20 years. Since the first EIA in1980s, several others have been undertaken in different sectors in the country. In 1995,the Tanzanian government came up with a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)which was touted as 'a first step' in making the fundamental changes needed to bringenvironmental considerations into the mainstream of decision-making in our country. 12The NEAP, gave recognition to environmental impact assessment as one of the "priorityinstruments" of environmental policy. Later in the same year, the Government ofTanzania adopted a National Conservation Strategy for Sustainable Development(NCSSD) which observed the absence of a legal regime for EIA in the planning processesas one of the "legal issues of national concern", noting that "without a mandatory EIAprocess, no obligation exists to assess and monitor the effects of projects and governmentactivities on the environment". In December 1997, the National Environmental Policywas passed by the government which recognized the importance of EIA as a planningtool to integrate environmental considerations in decision-making process in order toensure that unnecessary damage to the environment is avoided. It has furthermore,proclaimed the need for making EIA processes a mandatory requirement "to ensure that12 See note 1 (supra)14

environmental concerns receive due and balanced consideration in reconciling urgentdevelopment needs and long-term sustainability". 132.3 OBJECTIVES OF EIAThe objective of EIA is to provide decision-makers with a focused evaluation of thelikely environmental consequences of sanctioning a proposed development action, beforea decision is taken and at a time when it can actually affect the outcome. TheEnvironmental Impact Statement produced can be considered alongside other planningrelated documentation to enable the decision-maker to reach an informed conclusionabout the acceptability of the proposal. Completing an EIA should lead to more balanceddecision-making, as due consideration and weight should be given to environmentalfactors, in conjunction with other factors such as costs.Furthermore, EIA is a tool used to aid the developer. Although EIA is undoubtedly oftenseen as a time-consuming and expensive hurdle, EIA can be a great benefit to developers.If the process is fully integrated into the project design cycle, it can enable developers toidentify environmental issues at an early stage, allowing them to minimise or eliminatethe adverse impacts on the environment. This may lead to improved relations between the13 Lissu T, supra note 215

developer, the local authority and the local communities and therefore lead to a smootherplanning permission process.In the longer term, the ultimate purpose of EIA is to help to achieve sustainabledevelopment. In theory, EIA enables developers to identify, avoid and/or mitigateadverse impacts at the design stage and in some cases the development might beprevented, all of which can be seen as a move towards achieving more sustainabledevelopment.In addition, EIA has also been described as ‘a powerful tool that has been remarkablysuccessful in allowing for the consideration of social, economic and environmentaleffects in the review of major development projects’. It provides for the involvement ofthe public, departments of the Government and Government agencies in the review of theproposed activities. 142.4 EIA PROCESSThe steps for conducting EIA are described under the Environmental Impact Assessmentand Audit Regulations, 2005. These Regulations are made under the EnvironmentalManagement Act, 2004. Generally, there are nine steps for conducting EIA as provided14 Clare H, supra note 9 at pp 8,916

for under the Regulations which include: project registration and screening; scoping;baseline study; impact assessment ; impact mitigation and enhancement measures;preparation of environmental impact statement; review of environmental impactstatement; environmental monitoring and auditing; and, lastly, decommissioning. 15 Theaspects covered in each step are as follows:2.4.1 Project Registration and ScreeningProject registration is done through submission of a project brief to NationalEnvironmental Management Council (NEMC) in a prescribed form and must contain,among others, the name of the project proponent (developer or sponsor); proposedproject; proposed site; required infrastructure and utilities. 16 Upon receipt of the projectbrief, NEMC is required within twenty one days to forward the project brief to otherstakeholders. Upon expiry of twenty one days, NEMC shall conduct project screening.The screening criteria involve establishing whether:1. The project will not substantially use natural resources in a way that pre-empts theuse, or potential use, of that resource for any other purpose.2. Potential residual impacts on the environment are likely to be minor, or of littlesignificance and easily mitigated.15 Fourth Schedule to the Regulation, 200516 Ibid17

3. The type of project’s environmental impacts and measures for managing them arewell understood in Tanzania.4. Reliable means exist for ensuring that impact management measures can and willbe adequately planned and implemented.5. The project will not displace significant numbers of people, families orcommunities.6. The project is not located in, and will not affect, any environmentally sensitiveareas such as national parks; wetlands; productive agricultural land; importantarchaeological, historical and cultural sites; areas protected under legislation;areas containing rare or/endangered flora or fauna; areas containing unique oroutstanding scenery; mountains or developments on or near steep-hill slopes; drytropical forests (e.g. Brachystegia woodlands); development near lakes or itsbeaches; development providing important resources for vulnerable groups suchas fishing communities along the lake-shore; development near high populationconcentrations or industrial activities where further development could createsignificant environmental problems; and prime ground water re-charge areas orareas of importance for surface run off of water.18

7. The project type will not result in: (a) policy initiatives which may affect theenvironment such as changes in agricultural pricing subsidies; (b) major changesin land tenure; or (c) changes in water use through irrigation, drainage promotionor dams, changes in fishing practices.8. The project will not cause: (a) adverse socio-economic impact; (b) landdegradation; (c) water pollution; (d) air pollution; (e) damage to wildlife andhabitat; (f) adverse impact on climate and hydrological circle; and (g) creation ofby-products, residual or waste minerals which require handling and disposal in amanner that is not regulated by existing authorities.9. The project will not cause significant public concern because of potentialenvironmental changes. The following are guiding principles: (a) is the impactpositive; (b) what is the scale of the impact in terms of area affected number ofpeople or wildlife; (c) what is the intensity of the impact; (d) what will be theduration of the impact; (e) will there be cumulative effects from the impact; (f) arethe effects politically controversial; (g) have the main economic, ecological andsocial costs been quantified; (h) will the impact vary by social group or gender ;and (i) is there any international impact due to the proposed project.10. The project will not necessitate further development which is likely to havesignificant impact on the environment. If, after project screening, NEMC finds19

that the project has no significant impact on the environment, it will approve theproject without requiring the developer to undertake EIA. If the council finds thatthe project will have a significant impact on the environment and the projectreport discloses no mitigation measures, NEMC will require the project developerto undertake a preliminary assessment if more information is required in makingdecision on the screening outcome or a comprehensive EIA.2.4.2 ScopingIf NEMC requests the developer to undertake EIA, the next stage will be scoping. Thepurpose of scoping is to: (a) identify the main stakeholders that will be negatively orpositively impacted by the proposed project; (b) identify stakeholders’ main concernsregarding the proposed project; (c) identify main project alternatives; (d) identify likelyimpacts, data requirements, tool and techniques for impact identification, prediction andevaluation; (e) identify project boundaries in terms of spatial, temporal and institutionalaspects; (f) ensuring adequate stakeholder participation in all stages of EIA; and (g)preparation of scoping report and terms of reference for EIA. 1717 See supra note 1520

2.4.3 Baseline StudyThe next stage after scoping is conducting a baseline study. The baseline study involves adetailed survey of the existing social, economic, physical, ecological, social-cultural andinstitutional environment within the project boundary and ensuring that adequatestakeholder participation is engaged.2.4.4 Impact AssessmentFollowing a baseline study, the developer will conduct an impact assessment. Impactassessment involves: (a) impact identification, impact prediction and evaluation of impactsignificance following a variety of appropriate techniques and approaches; (b) ensuringthat concerns and views from stakeholders are fully taken into account during assessmentof impacts; and (c) assessing all possible alternatives and their impacts andrecommending appropriate options.2.4.5 Impact Mitigation and Enhancement MeasuresImpact mitigation and enhancement measures involves preparing mitigation measures forall negative significant impacts, either by elimination, reduction or remedying them; (b)preparing enhancement measures for all significant positive effects arising from theproject so as to increase the contribution from the project to social development and21

environmental conservation; (c) preparing a mitigation and enhancement plan for allsignificant negative impacts and positive effects, with details about institutionalresponsibilities and costs where appropriate; and (d) preparing a monitoring plan andenvironmental and social management plan with details about institutionalresponsibilities , monitoring framework, parameters, indicators for monitoring and costsfor monitoring where appropriate.2.4.6 Preparation of Environmental Impact StatementAfter conducting an impact assessment, the next stage is to prepare an impact statement.Preparation of an environmental impact statement entails (a) preparing an environmentalimpact statement adhering to contents outlined in the Regulations; 18 (b) preparation of atechnical summary in both Kiswahili and English; and (c) preparation of all technicaldetails which must be appended to the statement.2.4.7 Review of Environmental Assessment StatementIn this step, NEMC in association with the developer review the environmental impactstatement with a view to ensuring its adherence to review criteria and any guidelines thatmay be issued under the Regulations. NEMC may call for a public hearing and publicreview of the environmental impact statement in accordance with the conditions and18 Regulation 1822

procedures stipulated under the Regulations. Having done that NEMC submits a reviewreport to the Minister responsible for the environment with recommendations and alldocuments used in the review for approval.2.4.8 Environmental Monitoring and AuditingIn this stage, NEMC conducts environmental monitoring in order to evaluate theperformance of the mitigation measures specified in the environmental and socialmanagement plan as well as monitoring plan. The monitoring process involves:• Verification of impacts, adherence to approved plans, environmental standards andgeneral compliance of the terms and conditions set out in the EIA certificate;• Undertaking by the developer to monitor the implementation of the project to ensurethat mitigation measures are effective;• Collecting of data that can be used in future projects and for environmentalmanagement;• Undertaking by NEMC and the project developer to carry out project environmentalaudit;23

• Putting in place mechanisms for stakeholder participation during monitoring andauditing process (which must be defined and followed); and• Defining areas of focus in audit exercise which normally includes (i)implementation/enforcement audit, which takes place when NEMC verifies ifmitigation measures and pollution levels are within limits; (ii) performance/regulatoryaudit that entails identification of compliance to relevant legislation or safety standards;(iii) impact prediction audit (which checks the accuracy and efficacy of the impactprediction by comparing them with monitored impacts); (iv) collection and compilationby NEMC of information arising from auditing for future use; and (v) collection of databy the developer from auditing and compiling information for project management andalso for submission to NEMC.2.4.9 DecommissioningThis is the last stage which occurs at the end of the project life. The decommissioningreport must be prepared either as part of the environmental statement or separately,indicating how impacts will be dealt with, including costs of mitigation measures. Thedecommissioning report must ensure that issues such as welfare of workers, resourceusers as well as their general livelihood are not worse off as a result of thedecommissioning. The developer must undertake to perform decommissioningobligations as per the proposals stipulated in the environmental impact statement. NEMC24

continues to monitor implementation of decommissioning plan, including rehabilitationof land and other resources that were affected by the project.Therefore, the EIA process can be represented as a series of stages. However, EIA shouldnot be considered as a linear process as it appears above, but a cyclical activity, withfeedback from later stages to earlier ones as illustrated in the diagram below.25

A diagram illustrating EIA process:26

2.5 CONCLUSIONIt is observed that this chapter has provided a comprehensive meaning of the concept ofEIA and it has traced its evolution. The Chapter also points out the objectives and theprocess of EIA.27

CHAPTER THREECRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT,2004 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND AUDITREGULATION, 20053.0 INTRODUCTIONThis chapter deals with a critical analysis of the EIA provisions under the EMA, 2004and the Regulation, 2005. This chapter therefore presents the findings and analysis of theAct and the Regulation through a detailed critique of the same by pointing out somespecific weaknesses and strengths inherent in the Act and the Regulations.PART I3.1 A CRITIQUE OF EIA PROVISONS UNDER THE EMA, 20043.1.1 STRENGTHAfter a thorough scrutiny of the EMA, 2004, herein below are some of the EIAprovisions identified to be noteworthy;Section 81 of the Act makes it mandatory for a proponent or a developer of a project toundertake or cause to be undertaken at his own cost EIA before the establishment of28

projects specified under the Act. It is observed that such a mandatory requirement ofundertaking EIA before establishing any projects is intended to guarantee protection ofthe environment against adverse negative impacts which might be caused by suchprojects. Such a requirement enables the relevant authorities based on the EIA conductedto determine if such projects will have adverse impacts to the environment. In case theprojects are found to have adverse impacts to the environment they will be rejected but ifthe projects have minimum impacts to the environment they will be allowed. This thusguarantees a sound and sustainable management of the environment.Furthermore, section 84 of the Act is to the effect that, issuance of EIA certificate inrespect of any project shall not be a defence in any legal proceedings brought against aproponent of a project or undertaking in respect of the manner of which the project orundertaking is being executed, managed or operated. This means that despite the grant ofan EIA certificate, such certificate shall neither act as a bar to prosecution nor defence forfailure to comply with conditions contained therein. This is because some proponentsmay decide to operate activities different from the ones permitted by the EIA resultinginto adverse negative impacts to the environment and seek to rely on the certificate as adefence. This provision will arguably compel potential developers to comply withconditions thereby ensuring environmental protection.Moreover, section 85 of the Act requires the Council to determine the scope of EIS byagreeing with the proponents on such matters as the prescribed issues that must be29

addressed by EIS; persons and institutions that must be consulted during the preparationof EIS and methodologies and approaches in the collecting, collating and analyzing therequired data, among others. This enables the Council prior to the preparation of EIS bythe proponent to be aware of all the issues to be addressed by the EIS. Further to that, theCouncil may confirm or give further directives on persons or institutions to be consultedduring the preparation of the EIS, and also to determine and approve the methodologiesand approaches in the collecting, collating and analyzing the required data that are to beused by the proponent. This therefore enables the Council to be in a position to determinethe scope of EIS in order for it to be effective and come out with fruitful results.Section 87(2) of the Act provides that the council may for purposes of carrying outreviews, set up a cross-sectoral technical advisory committee to advice it on reviews ofEIS. Apparently, the Council while reviewing EIS may be faced with technical issueswhich require assistance of experts on that particular field. Therefore, the council may setup a cross-sectoral technical advisory committee to advice them on such technical mattersencountered during the review of the EIS. A cross-sectoral technical advisory committeeis significant because of the contribution of different experts such as lawyers, surveyorsand scientists to mention a few. This is relevant for a comprehensive EIA.Section 89(1) of the Act requires public participation in EIA especially of those likely tobe affected by the project being the subject of an EIA study or review. The sectionguarantees public participation on EIA process. The importance of public participation on30

EIA process is that the public can contribute ideas and information that can help to avoidunforeseen problems, improve project design, and contribute to monitoring anddevelopment of mitigation measures for adverse impacts. Experience also shows thatdevelopment projects imposed on local communities often fail or under-perform becausethey lack a sense of local ownership and public support. Therefore, the involvement ofpublic in EIA process especially those likely to be affected is highly important foreffective operation of the project itself and protection of the environment.Section 97 of the Act requires a fresh EIA study to be undertaken by the holder of EIAcertificate and submit an EIS within such time as the council may prescribe due to any ofthe following: that there is substantial change or modification of the project orundertaking or in the manner in which the project is being operated; that the project orundertaking posses environmental threats which could not be reasonably foreseen at thetime of the study or review; and if in due course it is established that the information ordata given by the proponent or undertaking in previous EIA process was inaccurate, falseor intended to mislead the council. This acts as a control measure especially to thedishonest proponents who may change or modify the manner of operating their projectsthat might be contrary to the conditions stipulated under the certificate.This is also important in case the project or undertaking possess threats to theenvironment which at the time of the initial study could not reasonably be foreseen.Furthermore, the proponent will also be required to conduct a fresh EIA upon realization31

y the Council that he wilfully provided inaccurate or false information aimed atmisleading the Council. Therefore, this provision is important since it will ensureoperation of projects in accordance with conditions and in a manner prescribed in thecertificate. The provision further requires for fresh EIA to be undertaken on projects thatpose threats to the environment which were not initially foreseen. The provision alsorequires the proponents who provide inaccurate information which might mislead theCouncil to undertake a fresh EIA.Section 99(1) of the Act provides for monitoring of the environment. It requires thecouncil in consultation with the relevant ministry or government agency to monitor allenvironmental criteria and phenomena in order to make an assessment of any possiblechanges in the environment and their possible impacts. The Act further requiresmonitoring of project operations with the view to determining its immediate and longterm effects on the environment. It is observed that further to the undertaking of EIA, theAct is also keen in ensuring that the projects or undertakings are operated in accordancewith the EIA conducted. This is by requiring the Council to monitor the operation of suchprojects or undertakings.Section 100(2) of the Act provides for revocation of EIA certificate upon non-complianceof the conditions stipulated under EIA certificate. The Council may recommend to theMinister the revocation of such certificate if the results of an additional monitoringindicate persistent non-compliance with the conditions stipulated in the EIA certificate.32

The Council may further institute proceedings in a court a law for damages for injury thatmay occur as the result of such non-compliance. It is noted that, in the course ofmonitoring of the project operation where a proponent is found persistently notcomplying with the conditions under the EIA certificate, the Council may recommend tothe Minister the revocation of his certificate for purposes of protecting the environment.The revocation of the certificate is intended to discourage the proponent from operatingproject contrary to the conditions stated under the certificate. Further to that, by requiringthe proponents to pay damages, such damages may be used for rehabilitation andrestoration of the damaged environment.Section 101(1) of the Act requires the Council to carry out an environmental audit inrespect of any project or undertaking that is likely to have significant impact on theenvironment. The Act requires that despite the EIA conducted by the project proponent,the council shall carry out an environmental audit if it is of the view that such a project orundertaking is likely to have significant impact on the environment. The purpose is torequire the proponent of the project or undertaking to take appropriate measures toprevent such impacts that are likely to occur to the environment.Lastly, Section 102(1) of the Act provides for undertaking of safe decommissioning, siterehabilitation and ecosystem restoration by the proponent upon expiry of the project orundertaking. Under this section the Act seeks to protect and preserve the environmenteven after the accomplishment of project activities as it mandatorily requires the33

proponent upon expiry of the project to safely decommission the project, rehabilitate thesite and restore the ecosystem before the closure of the project.3.1.2 WEAKNESSDespite the strength observed under the Act as shown above, there are also someprovisions on EIA which are considered to be weak and below are some of the saidprovisions.Section 88 of the Act whereas it provides for visit to the site for inspection by the councilduring the review of the environmental impact statement, the section does not make itmandatory for the Council to visit the site. It is observed that, the environmental impactstatement submitted before the Council for review may contain erroneous informationabout the description of the site or the study may overlook or underestimate the possiblenegative impacts that may occur on that site. Therefore, during the review of theenvironmental impact statement by the Council, it should be made a mandatoryrequirement for the Council to visit the site or any place associated with the proposedproject or undertaking in order for the Council to satisfy itself as to the correctness of allthe details and information gathered during the process concerning the site. Furthermore,the Council by visiting the site will be in a position to identify other possible negativeimpacts on the site which may have been left out during the study either intentionally orunintentionally.34

Moreover, section 90 of the Act is noted to contain contradictions within itself. Whereassubsection (1) of this section requires review of environmental impact statement to beconducted inter alia through public hearings; subsection (2) gives the council discretionwhether or not to convene a public hearing for the purpose of collecting submissions orcomments on the proposed project or undertaking. Thus, it appears under subsection (1)that public hearings is made mandatory in reviewing environmental impact statement bythe council, while subsection (2) appears to contradict subsection (1) by givingdiscretionary powers to the council to decide whether or not to convene public hearingswhen reviewing environmental impact statement.Under section 93 of the Act, the Minister is empowered to disapprove or recommend tothe licencing authority for the project not to be licensed or where the licence has beenissued, that the project be cancelled if inter alia it is likely to cause adverse impact to theenvironment. Under this provision, it appears that a project may be licensed to operatewhen the licencing authority has not satisfied itself whether or not the project has adverseimpact to the environment. This provision may be used as a loophole by the licencingauthority not to exercise its utmost care and due diligence in granting licenses to projectssince they are aware that they can cancel the project at any time. Further to that, thelicencing authority may wilfully grant a licence to a project which they are aware mayhave adverse impacts. This is because such a project can be cancelled later and thelicencing authorities may invoke section 93 as their defense.35

Lastly, section 184 of the Act provides for offences and penalties relating to EIA. It statesthat any person who commits an offence relating to EIA is liable upon conviction to afine not less than five hundred thousand shillings but not exceeding ten million shillingsor imprisonment for a term of not less than two years but not exceeding seven years orboth. It is observed that the prescription of a monetary penalty in the Act operates as alimitation to the courts or other judicial bodies in imposing more stringent monetarypenalties. This is the case especially where the defendant has caused grievous damage tothe environment of which its restoration may far exceed the ten million shillings specifiedby the Act as the maximum penalty to be imposed. It is suggested that, the Act shouldhave left monetary penalties to be decided by the courts and other judicial bodies basingon the merits of each case.PART II3.2 A CRITIQUE OF EIA PROVISONS UNDER THEREGULATION, 20053.2.1 STRENGTHAfter a thorough scrutiny of the Regulation, 2005, herein below are some of the EIAprovisions identified to be noteworthy;36

Regulation 4(2) and (3) of the Regulation provide that, no licencing authority under anylaw in force in Tanzania shall issue an authorization 19 for any project requiring EIA, orone which is likely to have cumulative significant negative impacts unless the applicantproduces to the licencing authority a certificate of EIA issued by the Minister under theRegulation. It is observed that the Regulation is keen in attaining the objectives of EIA inprotecting the environment by prohibiting licencing authorities from authorising projectseligible for EIA or which may have adverse impact to the environment unless theapplicant produces an EIA certificate. In so doing the licencing authorities shall satisfythemselves that EIA has been conducted and in the meanwhile environmental protectionis being pursued.Regulation 16 is to the effect that, an EIA shall take into account environmental, social,cultural, economic and legal consideration and shall identify the anticipatedenvironmental impacts of the projects. It shall further identify and analyze alternatives tothe proposed project, propose mitigation measures to be taken during and after theimplementation of the project and develop an environmental management plan withmechanism for monitoring and evaluating the compliance and environmentalperformance. It is observed that the strength of the Regulation is in the sense that itrequires an EIA to have a diverse approach meaning that, it should take intoconsideration not only environmental matters but also social, cultural, economic and legal19 Authorization may be issued by way of Certificate, Trading, Commercial or Development Permit37

aspects which may also be affected by the proposed project. Further to that, theRegulation does not only require an EIA to provide for anticipated environmental impactsbut also to provide for alternatives, mitigating measuresand an environmentalmanagement plan to ensure the an effective protection of the environment.Furthermore, regulation 17 is also noted to be a strength under the Regulation in the sensethat it recognizes the importance of public participation during the process of conductingan EIA. This is to the effect that those people who are or are likely to be directly affectedby the proposed project are sought to give their views and comments concerning theoperation of the same. Therefore, these views help the Council to take into considerationthe concerned people, when making the decision as whether to accept or refuse theproposed project, rather than the council making the decision on its own.As earlier pointed out in the Act, regulation 22(1) also empowers the Council to set up across-sectoral technical advisory committee when necessary, to advice it on reviews ofEIA related reports. This is of great importance because there are some matters which aretoo technical for the council that they require experts in the specific field. The saidexperts assist the council in coming up with an effective EIA.Moreover, the Minister is required to give reasons for his decision on an environmentalimpact assessment as provided for under regulation 31(2). This prevents the Minister38

from misusing his powers by permitting the operation of projects which are likely to haveadverse impacts on the environment. The Regulation thus requires the Minister to justifyhis decision by giving reasons for permitting or refusing the operation of a project.Regulation 38(1) and (2) provide for suspension or revocation of environmental impactassessment certificate by the Minister where the holder contravenes the conditions set outin the EIA certificate or where there is a substantial change or modification in theprojects or in the manner in which the project is being implemented. The fact that thedeveloper has acquired the certificate, does not entitle him to operate the project in a waythat he wishes but he shall operate the project subject to the conditions stated in thecertificate, failure of which shall entitle the Minister to suspend or revoke the certificate.This power granted to the Minister helps in monitoring the activities of those proponentswho are likely to act in a manner contrary to the condition set out in the certificate.Regulation 39(1) and (2) provide that, any project brief, environmental impact statement,terms of reference, public documents, report of a person presiding at a public hearing orany other information submitted to the council under the Regulation shall be publicdocuments and the council shall ensure freedom of access to such documents to anyperson who wishes to make consultation. This is to the effect that such documents are notmade to be confidential to the council, rather they are made to be public documents sothat any person can have access to them. This is important because it ensurestransparency on the part of the council as the documents are made open to the pubic39

which may uncover any discrepancies or insufficiency which occurred during thecarrying out of the study. Therefore, by making such documents accessible to the public,the whole process of EIA study may be conducted effectively as it will be subject tocriticism by the public.Lastly, regulation 60(1) and (2) provide for a wide range of offences for various activitiesthat may be committed in the entire EIA process and during the implementation of theproject. This entails that various offences have been created to cover different activities inthe EIA process in order to ensure compliance with EIA procedural requirements, thusachieving the ultimate purpose of EIA. For instance, the Regulation makes it an offence ifany person commences, causes to be commenced, proceeds with or execute any projector undertaking without approval granted under the Regulation. Further to that, theRegulation also makes an offence if any person fails to prepare and submit project brief,or fails to prepare an environmental impact statement, or fraudulently makes a falsestatement in a project or environmental impact statement, or fraudulently alters projectbrief or an environmental impact assessment statement, to mention but a few.3.2.2 WEAKNESSThough there are EIA provisions under the Regulation, 2005 which are considered to benoteworthy, herein below are some of the EIA provisions identified to be weak;40

The first schedule to the Regulation states types of projects requiring mandatory EIA andother projects which may or may not require EIA. List A provides for projects requiringmandatory EIA while List B provides for projects which may or may not require EIA. Itis observed that there are some projects that appear to exist in both lists that is list Awhich requires mandatory EIA and list B to which EIA may or may not be required.Examples of such projects which exist in both lists include hunting, zoo and sanctuaries,wildlife ranching, oil refineries and ginneries to mention but a few. It is thus observedthat this is the major weakness under the regulation due to the fact that some of theprojects which require mandatory EIA and those which may or may not require EIA cannot be distinguished as they appear under both lists. The Council may thus takeadvantage of this weakness by deciding that a project does not require the undertaking ofEIA when in reality it does require a mandatory EIA. In other words the Council caneasily justify its decision that a project falling under list A does not require the mandatoryundertaking of EIA by asserting that it falls under list B. This may arguably encouragecorruption on the part of the Council as they determine whether a project appropriate forEIA or not. Therefore, this may result in misuse of power by the Council.Also, as far as the projects listed under list B are concerned, there is no criteria laid downupon which the Council shall base in determining whether the project requires EIA ornot. This means that as the Council determines whether a project under list B requiresEIA or not, it does so upon its own discretion which may sometimes be misused.41

Scoping is one of the steps involved in the EIA process and it is viewed as a veryimportant stage in the process. The term scoping is not defined under the Regulationneither under the Act, rather the Regulation under the fourth schedule only states itspurpose. As a main procedure widely accepted to be the one that identifies major issuesrelevant to a specific EIA, one would expect the least definition of this concept under therelevant regulation. This is not the case however.Public participation is also another important stage in the EIA process where individualswho are or are likely to be affected by a project are consulted by the developer. Also civilsocieties organization and institutions, community based organisations, public and privateinstitutions are consulted when conducting an environmental impact assessment to givetheir views. It is observed that, although public participation is mandatory, the Regulationdoes not state specifically the stage at which it should take place. It is stated underregulation 17(1) that the developer or proponent should seek the views of any person whois or is likely to be affected by the project during conducting an EIA. However theRegulation does not state specifically at what time the public participation shall beconducted.42

3.3 CONCLUSIONFollowing a thorough scrutiny of the EIA provisions under the EnvironmentalManagement Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation,2005, it is observed that there are some of the EIA provisions which appear to be weakand inadequate for the protection of environment and conservation of the resourcesthereto. However, there are some of the provisions which seem to be effective andsufficient for the protection of environment.43

CHAPTER FOURCONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS4.0 INTRODUCTIONAfter a critical analysis of the relevant EIA provisions under the EMA, 2004 andRegulation, 2005 as observed in the previous chapter; this chapter intends to present aconclusion on the entire paper by pointing out the researcher’s findings. Further to that,the chapter shall also state the suggested recommendations by the researchers for a moreeffective EIA system.4.1 CONCLUSIONMany changes have taken place in Tanzania during the last decade. Among these changesis the programme of economic reform and liberalisation which is attracting a host of newinvestments into this country. If Tanzania is to maximise the benefits from suchdevelopments, and avoid incurring unforeseen costs, then the careful consideration oftheir social and environmental implications will be required.44

Decisions on development activities can only be sound and rational if they are made withfull understanding of their environmental impacts, and that any negative impacts areavoided or reduced through mitigation measures. Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA) of projects and programmes is an important tool to achieve this. Also, in order fordecision-makers to make the right and sound socio-economic decisions on proposedprojects or programmes, they need guidance and support from regulatory agencies whoreview and control the quality of EIAs. Reviewers provide the necessary information onthe quality and adequacy of EIAs. It is this information that provides the basis fordecision-making.Tanzania did not have a comprehensive environmental law with mandatory requirementsfor Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, despite the absence of EIAlegislation and institutional framework, impact assessment has been applied in Tanzanialargely on ad-hoc basis for over 20 years. Since the first EIA in 1980s, several othershave been undertaken in different projects.In the efforts to protect her environment the Tanzanian government came up with severalinstruments calling for the acknowledgment of EIA and the need for enactment of aspecific legislation encompassing EIA. Some of those instruments include, The NationalEnvironmental Action Plan (NEAP), National Conservation Strategy for SustainableDevelopment (NCSSD), National Environmental Policy, to mention but a few.45

Such government efforts culminated into the enactment of the EnvironmentalManagement Act, 2004 and the Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation,2005 which provide for comprehensive EIA provisions. However, it is observed thatdespite such struggle by the government, some of the provisions governing EIA processare weak hence inadequate, thus diminishing the purpose of EIA. On the other hand, it isobserved that there are EIA provisions in the Act and Regulation which seem to beadequate and sufficient for environmental management.Whilst EIA is now applied routinely to aid-funded development projects, Tanzania lacksadequate numbers and quality of expertise for its implementation. The need for increasedefforts and areas for immediate action in EIA capacity building have been clearly statedin the Communiqué of the 1995 High Level Ministerial meeting on EIA in Africa whichwas held in Durban with the participation of Tanzania. 20 This was also recently echoedby the stakeholders and participants in the Nairobi workshop who emphasized the needfor EIA capacity building to support sustainable economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa.This was done through integration of its principles and practice in development plans andimplementation of activities particularly for key socio-economic sectors where currentand future development will concentrate. 2120 The meeting stressed among others things, the need to put more efforts in EIA capacity building. It isargued that, in order to have a successful capacity building, initiatives need to be put in place at nationallevels through national policies at both macro and sectoral levels21 Mwalyosi, R., Hughes, R. and Howlett, D.J.B Introduction Course on Environmental Impact Assessmentin Tanzania: Resource Handbook, 199946

4.2 RECOMMENDATIONSBased on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are considered to berelevant for a more effective EIA:It is recommended that, the government of Tanzania should take appropriate steps ineducating and sensitizing the public on the whole concept of EIA, the role of the public inEIA process and its importance in the protection of the environment. This will enable thepublic to effectively participate not only in the EIA process but also in the protection ofthe environment.Furthermore, the EIA administrators should develop strategies for public participation,which will enable the public especially those who are directly to be affected by theproposed project to actively participate in the EIA process by giving their commentsthereto. It is observed that while the involvement of those who are directly to be affectedby the project is of vital importance, there are those who are not directly affected with theproject but have the expertise and experience on issues regarding EIA and environment ingeneral. Therefore, the involvement of the latter is also of paramount importance.Nonetheless, for effective protection of the environment the Tanzanian governmentshould ensure that decisions reached by the relevant authorities on EIA should be final,respected and acted upon. This is because some of the executives, for their personal47

interests, tend to make decisions which are contrary to the EIA findings. It is argued thatEIA findings are based on scientific research to which room for political propagandashould not be given.Additionally, the government of Tanzania should develop effective linkages and integrateEIA systems with other environment safeguard systems such as social impact assessment(SIA), risk assessment (RA), health impact assessment (HIA) and strategic environmentalassessment (SEA) in order to provide a holistic and integrated approach to environmentalprotection and the assurance of social well-being.Nevertheless, the Tanzanian local communities have a role to play in securing anddefending their access to natural resources in view of the propensity of the state to securethe resources for investors and at the expense of the communities. Therefore, with theview of the general concept of environmental protection in the minds of the public whoalso have the responsibility for its protection, it is recommended that the public shouldtake initiatives for active participation in EIA process.Also, it is noted that, the capacity and expertise to manage the EIA process in Tanzania isextremely limited and is thinly spread across different institutions in the country.Experience in undertaking EIA is limited due to inadequate EIA specific training48

expertise. It is therefore recommended that specific training should be undertaken toimprove the capacity and more expertise in the field of EIA.Further to that, experience shows that environmental activists and NGOs have beenactive and more vigilant in the matters of environmental protection. Therefore, it isrecommended that, NGOs should forge closer links with local communities and seek totake joint position in matters of environmental protection specifically in the EIA process.Lastly, it is recommended that, from the discussed EIA provisions under the EMA, 2004and Regulation, 2005 which are observed to be weak and inadequate in the protection ofenvironment; the Tanzanian government is thus recommended to take immediatemeasures towards amendments of the said provisions for a better and more effective EIAprocess for sound environmental protection.49

BIBLIOGRAPHYJournal Articles:Bailey, J. and Hobbs, V., ‘A Proposed Framework and Database for EIA Auditing’,Journal of Environmental Management, 31:163-172, (1990)Beanlands, G.E. and Duinker, P.N., ‘An Ecological Framework for EnvironmentalImpact Assessment’, Journal of Environmental Management, 18: 267-277, (1984)Dipper, B. Jones, C. and Wood, C., ‘Monitoring and post-auditing in environmentalimpact assessment: a review’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 41(6):731-747, (1998)Peter, C.M. “Promotion and Protection of Foreign Investment in Tanzania: A NewInvestment Code”, ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, (1993)Other References:Bailey, C. “The Social Consequences of Tropical Shrimp Mariculture Development”,Ocean and Shoreline Management, No. 11:31-44, (1988)Harmer, C., Is Improving the Effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment in theUK Dependent on the Use of Follow-up? Views of Environmental Consultants. (A Thesis50

presented in part-fulfillment of the degree of Master of Science in accordance with theregulations of the University of East Anglia, August 2005)Kerario, E.J.C., Mango, G.K., Nhwani, L.B., Dallu, A.M., Tibanyenda, R., Faraji, H.M.,Ndimbo, M.M., Mung’ong’o, C.G., Milne, G.R., Mitzlaff, U., Vergne P.J. 1997, Reviewof EIA for an Environmentally-Responsible Prawn Farming in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania,prepared for the National Environment Management Council.Lawyers Environmental Action Team (LEAT), Report on Institutional Mandates andLegal Framework for Environmental Management in Tanzania, Prepared for theInstitutional and Legal Framework for Environmental Management Project (ILFEMP) ofthe Vice President's Office, Dar es Salaam, VPO, (1999)Lissu, T. A. Environmental Impact Assessment of Foreign Investment Projects, (1999)Mgaya, Y.D. Environmental Impact Assessment of the Proposed Integrated Prawn FarmProject in the Rufiji Delta: The Marine Environment Section, University of Dar esSalaam, (1997)Mwalyosi, R. B.B. Impact Assessment and The Mining Industry: Perspectives fromTanzania, Vancouver, Canada, April, (2004)51

Mwalyosi, R., Hughes, R. and Howlett, D.J.B. Introduction Course on EnvironmentalImpact Assessment in Tanzania: Resource Handbook. International Institute forEnvironment and Development and Institute for Resource Assessment, (1999)Mwalyosi, R., Hughes, R., Mohamed, S. and Clayton, B. D. Environmental Assessmentin Tanzania: A Needs Assessment for Training, June (1995)Mwalyosi, R., Hughes, R., Spooner B., Kikula, I., Mohamed, S. and Sosovele, H.Environmental Impact Assessment in Tanzania: A Briefing Paper. February (1996)NEMC, National Conservation Strategy for Sustainable Development (NCSSD), RevisedProposal, Dar es Salaam, NEMC, (1995)International Instruments:The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, 199252

Statutes:The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977 as amended from time to timeThe Environmental Management Act, No. 20 of 2004The National Environmental Management Council Act, No. 19 of 1983Subsidiary Legislations:The Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulation, 2005Internet Sites:http://www.zmuc.dk/entoweb/guidelines.htmhttp://www.art.man.ac.uk/eia/EIAC.htmhttp://envirolink.org/53