Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls
The effects on seawater quality from Cape Town's marine outfalls and their use for sewage disposal has been a concern for local residents for over a century. This dissertation explores the production of scientific evidence that contrasts public experience and independent science. Beginning with the...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Department of Medicine
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1867614485889417216 |
|---|---|
| access_status_str | Open Access |
| author | Zackon, Melissa Amy |
| author2 | Green, Lesley |
| author_browse | Green, Lesley Zackon, Melissa Amy |
| author_facet | Green, Lesley Zackon, Melissa Amy |
| author_sort | Zackon, Melissa Amy |
| collection | Thesis |
| description | The effects on seawater quality from Cape Town's marine outfalls and their use for sewage disposal has been a concern for local residents for over a century. This dissertation explores the production of scientific evidence that contrasts public experience and independent science. Beginning with the 2015 application by the City of Cape Town (CoCT) for a permit renewal to continue discharging 38 million cubic meters of sewage daily off the city's Atlantic coast, the study considers the arguments of concerned citizens, photographers and independent scientists who warned that the outfalls are responsible for poor seawater quality. This dissertation begins by tracing the contemporary experiences of concerned citizens as they discovered that the outfall was polluting the ocean and then considers the evidence utilised by the CoCT in their responses to these concerns and in their permit application. The study finds that the CoCT's commissioned CSIR report and the use of tourism-orientated Blue Flag criteria are not compatible with the public interest and independent findings, and further finds that a managerialist approach to scientific data has confused the fulfilment of departmental mandates with the public interest, though they are not the same thing. Through the signing of international treaties, its constitution and various legislations, South Africa prescribes to the precautionary principle, but the author argues that this principle has not been applied in this scenario and that retrospective attitudes towards beach management and seawater quality concerns have been applied instead. Consequently, the implementation of a proactive and forward-looking procedure is recommended, and transparency, ocean modelling and the precautionary principle should be applied to the management of Cape Town's marine outfalls and to concerns over its water quality and attendant data. |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/33985 |
| institution | University of Cape Town (South Africa) |
| language | eng |
| last_indexed | 2026-06-10T12:52:48.140Z |
| license_str | Not specified — see source repository |
| provenance_str_mv | Harvested via OAI-PMH from UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| publishDate | 2021 |
| publishDateRange | 2021 |
| publishDateSort | 2021 |
| publisher | Department of Medicine |
| publisherStr | Department of Medicine |
| record_format | dspace |
| source_str | UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| spelling | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/33985 Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls Zackon, Melissa Amy Green, Lesley Petrik, Leslie medicine The effects on seawater quality from Cape Town's marine outfalls and their use for sewage disposal has been a concern for local residents for over a century. This dissertation explores the production of scientific evidence that contrasts public experience and independent science. Beginning with the 2015 application by the City of Cape Town (CoCT) for a permit renewal to continue discharging 38 million cubic meters of sewage daily off the city's Atlantic coast, the study considers the arguments of concerned citizens, photographers and independent scientists who warned that the outfalls are responsible for poor seawater quality. This dissertation begins by tracing the contemporary experiences of concerned citizens as they discovered that the outfall was polluting the ocean and then considers the evidence utilised by the CoCT in their responses to these concerns and in their permit application. The study finds that the CoCT's commissioned CSIR report and the use of tourism-orientated Blue Flag criteria are not compatible with the public interest and independent findings, and further finds that a managerialist approach to scientific data has confused the fulfilment of departmental mandates with the public interest, though they are not the same thing. Through the signing of international treaties, its constitution and various legislations, South Africa prescribes to the precautionary principle, but the author argues that this principle has not been applied in this scenario and that retrospective attitudes towards beach management and seawater quality concerns have been applied instead. Consequently, the implementation of a proactive and forward-looking procedure is recommended, and transparency, ocean modelling and the precautionary principle should be applied to the management of Cape Town's marine outfalls and to concerns over its water quality and attendant data. 2021-09-21T16:53:21Z 2021-09-21T16:53:21Z 2021 2021-09-21T16:49:06Z Master Thesis Masters MPhil http://hdl.handle.net/11427/33985 eng application/pdf Department of Medicine Faculty of Health Sciences |
| spellingShingle | medicine Zackon, Melissa Amy Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls |
| thesis_degree_str | Master's |
| title | Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls |
| title_full | Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls |
| title_fullStr | Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls |
| title_short | Is our evidence contaminated? Tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of Cape Town's marine effluent outfalls |
| title_sort | is our evidence contaminated tracing the ways in which proof is validated in the context of cape town s marine effluent outfalls |
| topic | medicine |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/11427/33985 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT zackonmelissaamy isourevidencecontaminatedtracingthewaysinwhichproofisvalidatedinthecontextofcapetownsmarineeffluentoutfalls |