Abstract
The eastern basin acid mine drainage treatment plant was launched in February 2017. The short-term treatment (STT) of acid mine drainage (AMD) involves a high-density sludge management system and the purpose of the treatment is to discharge improved (neutralised) quality of water into the Blesbokspruit, a tributary of the Vaal River in the Gauteng Province of South Africa. When the plant was launched, stakeholders became aware of changes that were made to the STT after the public consultation process of the environmental impact assessment (EIA), as required by law. This involved a change in the sludge disposal site for which an environmental impact assessment (EIA) was conducted. According to the authorities, as an emergency measure, the mine void was selected as the alternative site, without an EIA having been conducted for this site, and without knowing the potential impacts on the quality of surrounding water. This concern by some stakeholders was coupled with the fact that the neutralised water discharged into the Blesbokspruit contains high sulphate levels, which negatively impacts on the water quality. This study explains how the water quality of the Blesbokspruit was socially constructed by stakeholders and key individuals in the context of AMD and its treatment. Three objectives guided this study: first, exploring the different perceptions of various stakeholders on the water quality of the Blesbokspruit, in the context of AMD and its treatment; second, identifying and explaining the contributing factors, processes and contexts that play a role in the varied social constructions of the water quality of the Blesbokspruit; and, third, exploring how the social constructions of water quality are linked to power relations in respect of AMD and its treatment. Social constructionism was used as the framing for this study to explain how water is intrinsically social. Findings of the study show that stakeholders are aware that the changes in the physicality of the Blesbokspruit resulted from human interventions and varied uses of the water over the years. Such knowledge and various factors (such as the historical context of mining, current coal mining, flows and volumes of water, technology used and processes followed, information and communication and vested interests) influence social constructions of the water quality. What counts as truth about water varied, depending on the perspective of who was talking about it, their purpose and ii their individual interests. The study explains how these social constructions are entrenched in power relations regarding AMD and its treatment and looks at how power was used to influence decisions and to improve the water quality of the Blesbokspruit.
D.Phil. (Development Studies)