A social-ecological resilience and justice framework for mega-port expansions in the Global South: the case of the Port of Durban, South Africa

As Global South nations pivot toward “Blue Growth” strategies, exemplified by South Africa’s Operation Phakisa, tensions between industrial port expansion, estuarine conservation, and coastal livelihoods have intensified. Conventional Environmental Impact Assessments often rely on reductionist, mechanistic approaches that may treat ecological loss as a quantifiable trade-off. This paper argues that such approaches are inadequate for complex systems such as the Port of Durban, South Africa, which may risk approaching critical social-ecological thresholds. Drawing on the Social-Ecological Systems framework developed by Bowd, Quinn, and Kotze, the study analyses the proposed expansion of Berths 203–205, Pier 2. It critically examines both the 2012 Draft Environmental Impact Report and its amended 2014 final version, demonstrating that despite regulatory rejection and the incorporation of additional specialist studies, the fundamental mitigation logic remains unchanged. The persistence of “net gain” framing and habitat substitution masks deeper systemic risks, including fisher exclusion, habitat fragmentation, and the erosion of functional resilience within the estuary. The paper advances a Resilience-Based Impact Assessment approach, conceptualising the port and estuary as a single, coupled social-ecological infrastructure. This reframing positions natural capital as intrinsic to port development rather than a constraint, and calls for a re-evaluation of prevailing sustainability indicators, which often reflect Global North biases and fail to capture the socio-ecological realities of port cities in the Global South