 |
|
IV. ASSESSING INTEGRATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES INTO DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
[ IV-A | IV-B | IV-C | IV-D| IV-E| IV-F ]
E. Impediments to integrating local planning and environmental management
The manner in which Malaysia develops and enforces its developmental and environmental policies is a crucial element of the effort to reconcile developmental and environmental needs. There is a need for greater integration of development planning and environmental considerations at the local level, since the local authorities act as the planning authority in their respective areas. They regulate, control and plan the development and use of all land and buildings within their jurisdiction. Some integration in land-use management at the local level has been achieved through the statutory structure and local plans under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1976. Those plans have strategic and spatial implications. The Structure Plan concerns policies and general proposals on land-use management by a local authority for its area. They include measures for the improvement of the physical environment, communications and the management of traffic. Local plans, on the other hand, detail proposals for the development and use of land in the local planning area, including measures to improve the physical environment and communications. In the formulation of the goals and objectives of those plans, State and national environmental policies, strategies and programmes are taken into consideration. Further, the State Planning Committee may require pertinent environmental matters to be taken into account. In the drafting of the actual plans, environmental considerations including consultations with interest groups and government agencies on related issues are incorporated. The public is also given the opportunity to object to any environmental policy or proposal in the draft structure plan before it is submitted to the State Planning Committee. The Committee may add, alter or reject any environmental policy or general proposal on the basis of public opinion and or its own initiatives.
Apart from land-use management, local authorities play a limited role in air and water pollution. That is because the Department of Environment is the federal agency responsible for environmental management through the enforcement of the Environmental Quality Act, 1974, and the regulations made thereunder. The all-embracing enforcement powers of the Department of Environment leave the local authorities with only the responsibility of ensuring that drains and streams are clean. That is an important function, which contributes to a better environment, but environmental protection goes beyond the mere upkeep of streets, drains and streams. Much of the powers of the Department of Environment in respect of environmental management should also be part and parcel of the functions of the local authorities, as the latter are responsible for the health and quality of life of their citizens. As such, anything that promotes those elements should also be within the jurisdiction of the local authorities, including the abatement of noise, air and water pollution. The partial success of the Department of Environment in enforcing the exhaustive provisions of the Environmental Quality Act, 1974, and its regulations bolsters that viewpoint (Fernandez, 1996).
Most of the difficulties have been the result of the limited capacity within the Department of Environment, in terms of both finance and manpower, to enforce the Act and its regulations. Its regional offices are grossly undermanned, with most State offices being manned by only three officers. There is a Department of Environment office at the regional level, but its activities are generally perceived as concentrating largely on pollution control. Although the offices serve a useful purpose in enabling communication and feedback with the State and local officials, the effectiveness of such an arrangement, especially regarding planning and management, is still in question. Further, it is not a prerogative of the Department of Environment to undertake consultations on every matter on development at the State and local levels. In any case, not all land offices at the district level consult the Department on matters pertaining to land conversion. Usually, the Department is usually consulted after a decision has been made on the location of a project. Economic and sometimes political considerations assure top priority in the implementation of development projects, and environmental concerns may not be given due consideration. The final decision on whether or not to approve a certain project in a particular location lies entirely with the State authorities.
The need to integrate local development planning and environmental considerations is even more imperative given that statutory requirements regarding environmental protection are not part of the licensing requirements of the local authorities. All development projects require adherence to the provisions of the Environmental Quality Act and its regulations. However, those requirements are not incorporated in planning approvals at the local level. As such, a local authority can give planning permission for buildings, and is statutorily bound to do so if all other conditions are satisfied, even where there is no evidence of conformance to the statutory provisions of the Environmental Quality Act. The satisfaction of environmental considerations could be ensured if the related statutory requirements are made part of the requirements for planning permission. Such is the case with the licensing of trades; one example is the delegation, by the Ministry of Health to the local authorities, of the power to enforce the Food Act.
It is also important to ensure the integration of environmental considerations and responsibility into local planning, as the local authorities are the first to know of any breach of statutory conditions related to environment. For example, section 6 of the Environment Quality (Sewage and Industrial Effluents) Regulations, 1979, prohibits the use of land for storing and destroying hazardous waste without the prior permission of the director-general of the Department of Environment. Any breach of that condition is bound to come to the notice of the relevant local authority, given the understaffing situation in the regional environment offices and the far removed position of the Department of Environment. But the local authority is powerless to do anything other than report the matter to the Department.
The institutional and legal structures of local government are generally not equipped for enforcement purposes. The existing administrative structure prohibits effective communication and interaction among agencies involved in the assessment of a development activity. The normal channel of communication (through letters) generally takes time and can be tedious. The setting up of interdepartmental committees is often used as a means to resolve that constraint. However, shortcomings are faced when a mix of State and federal agencies is involved. Those agencies are quite separate in their perspectives, and often their objectives and priorities do not coincide. Although channels of communication exist at the highest level, such as the National Land Council, the National Council for Local Government and the meetings of chief ministers, greater interaction by personnel is required at the working level where the bulk of day-to-day matters can be resolved (Ho, 1988). However, should the local authorities have the necessary powers of enforcement, quick action would be possible against any breach of the EQA and its regulations; such action would help to contain any damage to the environment.
|
|
|
