CHAPTER 6: THE PERFORMATIVE DIMENSION OF POLICY MAKING
6.4 Conclusion
technocratic power relation between the environmental consultants and specific key stakeholders. The consultants realised that some of the stakeholders could meaningfully deliberate over particular environmental issues pertinent to the SEA as they could draw on their local knowledge and personal experiences. Some of the stakeholders realised that the consultants were approachable and that they could engage with them over the environmental problems impacting on the local community (Interview 4, Rustenburg 2).
This performance illustrates the influence that a contextualised interaction, such as a site visit, can have on the SEA policy process. This is because a performance can produce a new social reality through a redefinition of the problem at hand and creation of new knowledge (Hajer 2006; 2005a).
For example, in the Rustenburg 2 SEA the site visit created a new understanding of the environmental problems for the environmental consultants as they were able to interpret the problems in terms of their own experience and local knowledge. A performance also brings about a new social reality through the development of new power relations and trust (Hajer 2006; 2005a). For example, in the Rustenburg 2 SEA some of the key stakeholders began to trust the consultants and a more equitable power relation developed between the consultants and specific stakeholders. This performance therefore introduced a new script into the SEA process which shifted the staging of the project away from the original technocratic script.
In conclusion, the performative dimension of policy making focuses on the practices in the KwaDukuza and Rustenburg SEA policy processes. The four concepts which constitute the performative dimension are scripting, staging, setting, and performance. These concepts were applied to the three SEAs in order to understand the practices through which the discursive process of policy formation takes place and produces, reproduces, and transforms particular discourses, story lines, and policy vocabularies.
concepts which are applied are discourses, story lines, and policy vocabularies. Chapter six presents the concepts which constitute the performative dimension of policy making. This chapter discusses the KwaDukuza and Rustenburg SEAs in terms of four concepts; scripting, staging, setting and performance. Table 6.1 summarises the results of the application of these concepts to the three SEAs.
Table 6.1 Summary table of the results presented on the performative dimension of policy making
CONCEPT CHARACTERISTIC EVIDENCE FROM SEAs
Scripting Main script The technocratic SEA policy process outlined in the IEM SEA Guidelines (2006; 2004)
Cues of appropriate behaviour
The SEA Terms of Reference and IEM SEA Guidelines (2006;
2004) determine the appropriate behaviour of public officials, environmental consultants, and key stakeholders in the policy process
Actors
Project steering committee (For example, in the KwaDukuza SEA the steering committee included environmental consultants, public officials, and a representative of the DBSA)
Stakeholder committee (For example, in the KwaDukuza SEA the stakeholder committee included public participation consultants and interested and affected parties, such as Simon Bundy and Di Jones)
Staging Deliberate organisation of an interaction
The interactions in the Rustenburg SEAs were deliberately organised to follow the technocratic script of the SEA process.
This script assigned a considerable amount of power and authority to the environmental consultants. In the Rustenburg 1 SEA the public officials reinforced this power relation as they limited their involvement in the policy process. In contrast, in the Rustenburg 2 SEA there were two deliberately staged events in which the public officials took back some of the power and authority assigned to the consultants.
The master script of the Rustenburg SEAs limited the involvement of key stakeholders to consultation. This resulted in passive stakeholders as they had very little authority or influence on
decision making processes.
Symbols
The ward councillors in the Rustenburg 2 SEA were identified as a symbol of the new democracy which emerged in South Africa.
The ward councillors represent the voice of the local community and act as a link between key stakeholders and government.
Setting Physical setting
Project steering committee meetings were mostly held in the municipal offices for strategic reasons. However, a respondent did indicate that the venue was not that neutral as the consultants were not as comfortable as the public officials in those settings.
Public participation meetings were generally held close to the community or study area, such as municipal offices, churches or schools. The meetings were generally staged according to the technocratic script with the state and consultants presenting technical information about the project using power point presentation, posters, and maps. The role of key stakeholders is limited to being the recipients of the information and raising their issues or concerns.
Props Maps were used as a prop in the three SEAs to stimulate the interest of key stakeholders and initiate deliberation
Performance Contextualised interaction
The environmental consultants were guided around the study area by the community in the Rustenburg 2 SEA to point out the environmental problems that the SEA focuses on
There were a range of actors involved in the KwaDukuza and Rustenburg SEAs and included public officials, project consultants, and key stakeholders. The SEA policy process was identified as the main script of the KwaDukuza and Rustenburg SEAs as it brings the actors together and sets the stage in which the rest of the policy process plays out. The technocratic nature of the SEA process is defined by two cues which determine the appropriate behaviour of actors in the policy process. These cues are the IEM SEA Guidelines (2006; 2004) and each SEA’s TOR. These cues defined the roles and responsibilities of the actors in the policy process.
Evidence collected from the interviews indicated that the three SEAs were deliberately staged to be a technocratic process. The environmental consultants were scripted to manage the project and played a dominant role in the policy process because of the lack of capacity in government and their expertise in undertaking a SEA. The public officials were scripted to steer the project and to determine the
outcome of the process as they would be implementing the project. The key stakeholders were scripted to play a passive role, and to raise their issues and concerns and make comments in the public participation meetings. Ward councillors were used as a symbol in the Rustenburg 2 SEA to attract key stakeholders to the public participation meetings. The meetings which were organised by the ward councillors were well attended as the key stakeholders view the councillors as a symbol of their representation in decision making processes.
The two most common settings in which the interactions between the actors in the SEAs took place were the project steering committee meetings and public participation meetings. The steering committee meetings were mostly held in the municipal offices. These venues were not deliberately chosen to give the municipal officials more authority and power than the consultants, but because of their strategic position. For example, the Rustenburg municipal offices are the most central venue between the offices of the NWPG and environmental consultants. The venues for public participation meetings were also chosen for their strategic positioning as the venues had to facilitate accessibility for stakeholders. These meetings were generally held in the municipal offices, churches, and school halls. It was noted that maps were used as a prop in the public participation meetings to make the information more accessible to stakeholders with lower education levels and to encourage deliberation.
The performances in the KwaDukuza and Rustenburg SEAs were found to be similar as the three SEAs applied the same technocratic script. However, a performance which occurred during the second public participation meeting of the Rustenburg 2 SEA introduced a more deliberative script to the policy process. The performance was a site visit in which some key stakeholders from the local community guided the environmental consultants around the study area. This performance had a significant influence on the policy process as it redefined the environmental problems contained in the SEA and shifted the trust and power relations between the environmental consultants and specific key stakeholders.