Exploring Eswatini’s environmental compliance management, monitoring, and enforcement issues of construction projects

Abstract

This study explored issues of environmental compliance management, enforcement, and monitoring in Eswatini’s construction industry, focusing on case study construction projects in the Hhohho Region. Although legal frameworks do exist, Eswatini still experiences widespread environmental non-compliance in the construction industry, leading to environmental degradation and threatening efforts of environmental protection. The purpose of the research study was to answer the main research question: What are the environmental compliance management, enforcement, and monitoring issues of construction projects in Eswatini? The mechanism for answering the main research question was through the formulation of four sub-questions focusing on global environmental compliance mechanisms, Eswatini’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) obligations, issues experienced by EIA follow-up parties of construction projects, and measures of environmental compliance enhancement. The study employed a qualitative research approach, using an exploratory multiple case study design. Data was collected from four (4) construction projects in the Hhohho Region through in-depth interviews with 21 purposively sampled key informants. The key informants included first, second, and third EIA follow-up parties at the selected construction projects. Secondary data gathered for the study included legal and institutional frameworks and policy documents. Data was analysed with the support of ATLAS.ti software to identify themes and patterns from the data. Findings addressing sub-question 1 show that environmental compliance globally relies on an integrated regulatory cycle encompassing planning, implementation, monitoring, enforcement, and adaptive feedback mechanisms. In response to sub-question 2, the study discovered that while Eswatini has established environmental laws and institutional frameworks governing construction projects, there are constraints due to weak enforcement capacity and limited coordination. Results addressing the sub-question 3 showed that first, second, and third EIA follow-up parties experience challenges including limited financial and human resources, poor compliance attitudes among developers and contractors, political interference, and inadequate authority to enforce compliance. Addressing sub-question 4 identified capacity building measures through training and awareness, as well as the adoption of technological advancements for monitoring and policy reform key measures that can enhance environmental compliance at construction projects. An examination of the findings shows a divide between the application of environmental compliance procedures and policy rules. Environmental compliance management, enforcement, and monitoring across construction projects is compromised by weak institutional capacity, dispersed governance systems, and inadequate accountability mechanisms. The study makes a meaningful contribution by providing practical, evidence-based insights into the key factors affecting environmental compliance in Eswatini’s construction sector. The study demonstrates how challenges such as weak enforcement capacity, fragmented governance structures, and limited accountability work together to hinder effective environmental compliance and EIA follow-up. In addition, the study adds to existing knowledge by offering a clearer understanding of these issues within a developing country context, where resource and institutional constraints are common. It also proposes practical ways to improve environmental compliance, including strengthening institutional capacity, improving coordination between stakeholders, and making better use of technology for monitoring and reporting. These contributions are relevant not only for Eswatini, but also for other developing countries facing similar challenges.