ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF FOREIGN INVESTMENT PROJECTS

A Study in the Law, Policy and Governmental Decision-making in Tanzania

bulletIntroduction
bulletList of Statutes, Cases and Acronyms
bulletPart I. EIA in Tanzania's Environmental Law and Policy
bulletExpansive Policy Rhetoric
bullet...and Legislative Foot-dragging
bulletThe Section Proposes...
bulletEIA Regime under the Mining Act, 1998
bullet...and the Proviso Disposes
bulletNEMC's EIA Guidelines and Procedures
bulletPublic Participation under the Guidelines and Procedures
bulletAccess to Information
bulletPart II. Power Politics and EIA in Practice
bulletCase Study 1: Lessons from Rufiji Delta
bulletThe Rufiji Delta Prawn Farming Project
bulletControversy Over EIA
bulletContradictory Advice
bulletArms for What?
you are hereThe Cabinet Decision
bulletGovernment Intransigence
bulletThe Government and the Investor
bulletPicking Winners...and Counting Losers
bulletCase Study 2: EIA in National Parks
bulletConclusions
bulletRecommendations
bulletBibliography

Printable versions of this document:
Single HTML document
Microsoft Word format
Adobe Acrobat format

Get Acrobat MS-Word Viewer
The Cabinet Decision

On 30th November 1997, the Cabinet decided to approve implementation of the Rufiji Delta Prawn Farming Project as proposed by AFC. The decision was not made public. Nonetheless, aware that a number of diplomatic missions and international NGOs were supporting or implementing projects within the project area, the government wrote to assure those involved that their projects would "not be affected by implementation of the prawn farming project." In its letter, the government stated:

"African Fishing Company proposed to develop prawn farming in the Rufiji Delta covering 10000 ha of land. The Government of Tanzania considered the project and approved it. The project would be implemented in sites 1-6 in the Rufiji Delta and Bwejuu Island. The areas approved for this project do not have mangroves, or any other vegetation. The Government reached this decision after being satisfied that the project will have little environmental impacts and that the African Fishing Company Ltd. will take mitigating measures to ensure minimum environmental impacts. The Government will also form a team of experts to monitor the project to ensure minimum environmental impacts."

This was patently contradictory to what the Ministry had stated in its position paper for the Cabinet debate. As we have noted above, in the Cabinet the Ministry of Tourism had recommended that the project be implemented at Site No. 6 only; that it "...should not be implemented at Sites nos. 1 to 5"; and that the implementation of the project in Site no. 6 "should involve the investor and experts in mangrove conservation..." Sites 1 to 5 had been singled out precisely because they are mangrove areas and are protected by law. Recommendation that "experts in mangrove conservation" should be involved in the implementation of the project in site 6 (which is outside the protected area) also suggested that even in site 6 there were mangroves which were likely to be affected by the project. The Ministry's Cabinet position had also recommended that the hatchery for post larvae shrimp should be situated "outside the Mafia Island Marine Park". Bwejuu Island is part of the Marine Park and here again the Ministry went against its own words.