For debate in the Standing Committee — see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure

Doc. 9985

21 October 2003

Pan-European environmental co-operation: the Council of Europe’s role after the Kyiv Ministerial Conference and the Johannesburg Summit

Report

Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs

Rapporteur: Mr Alan Meale, United Kingdom, Socialist Group

Summary

The Parliamentary Assembly receives regular reports by the Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs which review European environmental policy for the period since the previous report.

These reports have grown from mainly outlining the major developments of member states’ policies to comprehensive overviews of the pan-European environment policies which take into account not only the political developments in the region, but also decisions taken at global level and their implications on regional pan-European policies.

It is essential that all European and pan-European action take into account the decisions taken at the Summits of Rio (1992) and Johannesburg (2002) and that, more particularly, they should be in line with Agenda 21, the United Nations Millennium Declaration and the provisions of the more recent Johannesburg Declaration and Plan of implementation.

The current report is set against the backdrop of the 5th pan-European Ministerial Conference on Environment which was held on 21-23 May 2003 in Kyiv. It reviews the evolution of the “Environment for Europe” process, concentrating on its major accomplishments and challenges and making recommendations for its further development.

I.       Draft recommendation

1.       The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 recognised the need for a regional approach in implementing the provisions of the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21. This need was more recently endorsed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in Johannesburg in 2002.

2.       Guided by the political changes in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the subsequent opening up of new opportunities for joint action, Europe has been at the forefront of responding to this global call for regional commitments, notably through the “Environment for Europe” (EfE) process, aimed at permitting countries in transition to achieve a degree of environmental protection equivalent to that of developed countries in the pan-European zone.

3.       The 5th pan-European Ministerial Conference on Environment, held in Kyiv on 21-23 May 2003, had a particular responsibility as the first high-level gathering on environment and sustainable development issues after the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) to integrate and adapt the goals and objectives established at the global level to the circumstances of the European landscape. The Parliamentary Assembly welcomes the fact that the political will for implementing the decisions of the Johannesburg Summit to “strengthen the environmental pillar of sustainable development at the global, regional, sub-regional and national level” was strongly felt at that important Conference.

4.       The Parliamentary Assembly has taken a close interest in the pan-European ministerial conferences from the inception of the EfE initiative. Furthermore, it has continuously expressed its full political support and endorsed the relevance of pan-European co-operation in securing peace, stability and sustainable development in Europe and beyond. To this end, Recommendation 1284 (1996) and Resolution 1076 (1996) were adopted after the third conference, held in Sofia in October 1995, which insisted on the need for concrete actions by governments and underlined in particular the role of national parliaments and parliamentary assemblies and the useful contribution they could make towards better environmental protection and management.

5.       The Assembly notes with satisfaction that, twelve years after the first pan-European Ministerial Conference on Environment in Dobris Castle (in the then Czechoslovakia), the state of the environment across Europe has improved in several respects and that European co-operation to protect the environment and promote sustainable development has expanded significantly.

6.       It is also pleased that the EfE process offers Ministers of the Environment the opportunity to tackle the serious environmental problems that face, in particular, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and to link the many different actors and initiatives.

7.       Thus, the Assembly welcomes the development of the EfE framework into an important platform for dialogue and co-operation, not only among governments but also for international organisations, non-governmental organisations and the private sector. In this respect, it appreciates the efforts made in Kyiv to renew the structures for co-operation taking account of these new opportunities.

8.       The Assembly also welcomes the publication of the Kyiv Assessment report by the European Environmental Agency (EEA) and the “Ten Years of UN ECE Environmental Performance reviews” as well as the signing of three legally binding multilateral Protocols, concerning pollutant release and transfer registers (to the Aarhus Convention), on strategic environment assessment (to the Espoo Convention) and on civil liability and compensation for damages caused by trans-boundary effects of industrial accidents on transboundary waters and the Framework Convention on Environment and Sustainable Development of the Carpathians.

9.       However, the Assembly believes that, while progress has been made in many countries to strengthen national capacities for the development and implementation of effective environmental policies and for integration of environmental considerations into other policies, the numerous concerns and problems that have evolved in the decade between the world Summits in Rio in 1992 and Johannesburg in 2002 require firmer political action by countries, including European states, to tackle environmental issues and to create more sustainable societies, following the guidance and commitments of the recent Johannesburg Summit.

10.       In this context, the Assembly reiterates its concern expressed in Recommendation 1594 (2003) that the Johannesburg Declaration and its accompanying Plan of implementation pay very little attention to the problems of environmental protection and set no real specific targets other than in relation to water.

11.       The Assembly believes that political statements and declarations alone do not suffice today to guarantee a balanced and mutually reinforcing environmental, social and economic approach to sustainable development. What is needed instead are specific targets and concrete action by states, regions, local authorities and civil societies to implement the provisions of the recent Johannesburg Declaration, its Implementation Plan, and the setting up of a proper monitoring mechanism to hold the contracting parties accountable for their commitment to the EfE and Johannesburg processes.

12.       The Assembly is therefore convinced that Europe must keep up the momentum and reinforce its role as an initiator and leader. The political will that was lacking in Johannesburg must in contrast be displayed in Europe. Europe needs a truly pan-European policy aimed at harmonising environmental quality and policies on the continent to secure its peace, stability and sustainable development.

13.       Likewise, the current inadequate legislative base, poor implementation and a weak institutional framework call for an urgent need to streamline proliferating European environmental processes and improve pan-European environmental governance.

14.       The Assembly recognises the enormous and significant work that the Council of Europe has done over the last 35 years for the environment to be included on the political agenda of its member states, wholeheartedly supporting the involvement of the intergovernmental sector in the process of initiating, within the EfE framework, the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS); a strategy offering a comprehensive European approach to the problem of protecting biological and landscape diversity and their integration in a global context of sustainable development.

15.       The Assembly also believes in the importance of pursuing the objectives of the Kyiv Biodiversity Resolution by agreeing on its aim to cut down the volume of biological and landscape diversity losses by 2011.

16.       The Assembly is committed to the implementation and further development of the Council of Europe instruments for improving the natural heritage and quality of life, such as the Bern Convention and other regional instruments of co-operation for the conservation of biological diversity.

17.       The Assembly also affirms its commitment to the Environment for Europe (EfE) process and underlines the role national parliaments and parliamentary assemblies can and do play in providing better environmental protection and management, especially by promoting the necessary mechanisms as well as co-operation with civil society organisations.

18.       Against this background, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

      i.       call upon the governments of member states to follow up and implement the decisions taken at the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development and the Kyiv 5th pan-European Ministerial Conference, to strengthen the environmental pillar of sustainable development at the global, regional and sub-regional levels and to promote partnerships in support of the goals of the Johannesburg Declaration and Plan of implementation and the Kyiv Declaration;

      ii.       promote activities in all sectors of the Organisation related to the objectives of the Johannesburg Plan of implementation to establish appropriate monitoring and implementation mechanisms;

      iii.       organise the Council of Europe intergovernmental sector on the environment in such a way as to enable the Organisation to continue to play its full part in implementing the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy and to contribute to the follow-up to the Johannesburg Summit;

      iv.       call upon the governments of member states to encourage the signature and ratification of relevant international and regional legal instruments for the conservation and sustainable use of natural and cultural heritage, and in particular the Council of Europe conventions on protection of the environment;

      v.       encourage member and observer states to favour environmental ethics through the elaboration of a European Charter of general principles for environment protection and sustainable development.

II.       Explanatory memorandum by Mr Meale

Contents

A.       The “Environment for Europe” (EfE) process ………………………………………………………       4

      1.       From Dobris to Kyiv: major achievements ………………………………………………..       4

      2.       Major environmental concerns: accomplishments and challenges …………………….       5

      3.       Future of the “Environment for Europe” process …………………………………………       8

B.       The Johannesburg Summit ………………………………………..………………………………..       10

C.       Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………………..       10

Appendix: Protection of the environment at the Council of Europe (1996- 2003) ………………………       12

A.        The “Environment for Europe” (EfE) process

1.        From Dobris to Kyiv: major achievements

1.       Since the mid-1980s, European co-operation to protect the environment and promote sustainable development has expanded enormously, stimulated by the political changes in the region caused by the collapse of the socialist block in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and in the Newly Independent States (NIS), and the subsequent opening of new opportunities for joint action. The commitment to achieving sustainable development from the 1992 Rio World Summit and the negotiation of global conventions such as the conventions on the ozone layer, climate change and biodiversity have given further impetus to the regional co-operation.

2.       From the early 1990s efforts have been made to bring this expanding interaction and joint action in environmental co-operation under a co-ordinated and coherent approach at a pan-European level, with the objective of establishing an overall political framework to achieve environmental improvement and sustainable development.

3.       In 1991 the first conference of European Environment Ministers was held at Dobris Castle near Prague at the initiative of Josef Vavrousek, Environment Minister of the then Czechoslovakia, thus marking the beginning of the Environment for Europe (EfE) process. The Dobris meeting launched a new departure for a Europe, helping countries in transition from a centrally planned to a market economy to attain the standards of environmental protection established in western democracies, harmonising environment quality and policies throughout the region, and, at the same time, securing its peace and stability.

4.       The EfE mandate was reaffirmed at further conferences held in Lucerne (1993), Sofia (1995), Aarhus (1998) and more recently in Kyiv (May 2003). The process involves all member states of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), numerous international organisations, among whom the European Commission, the United National environment Programme (UNEP), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and development (OECD), the World Bank, the European Bank for reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the Council of Europe, as well as civil society organisation and other major groups.

5.       The geographical reach of the EfE process covers the whole of Europe, North America, Central Asia and Israel making it a very diverse region, which includes some of the most economically and industrially developed countries in the world, but also poorer ones facing particularly daunting environmental challenges. Its 55 member countries are responsible for two thirds of the world pollution, and are among the biggest consumers of natural resources and energy.

6.       The agendas of EfE Conferences have reflected the priority concerns of countries in the region and struck a balance between sub-regional and regional issues. EfE has evolved steadily into the “major long-term pan-European political framework” to discuss key policy issues, develop programmes, prepare legally binding documents and launch various initiatives including new institutional structures for environment.

7.       In response to the urgent need to promote policy reform, strengthen institutions and promote environmental investments in transition economies, the Lucerne Conference (1993) adopted the Environmental Action Programme (EAP) for Central and Eastern Europe. It established an EAP Task Force and a Project Preparation Committee (PPC) to implement the EAP by focusing on the preparation of national environmental action programmes, environmental financing and environmental management in enterprises and the promotion of environmental investments in countries in CEEC/NIS.

8.       The EfE has initiated the extension of the OECD programme of environmental performance reviews (EPR) to countries in transition. Since 1994, nearly 20 countries have been reviewed through the UNECE EPR programme. This has made it possible not only to assess the effectiveness of countries efforts to manage the environment, but also to offer the Governments concerted tailor-made recommendations on how to reduce the overall pollution burden, to better integrate environmental policies into sectoral policies, and to strengthen co-operation with the international community.

9.       Also, reports on the State of the European Environment produced by the European Environment Agency (EEA) play a key role in assessing progress and identifying priority issues. They lay the ground for the preparation of the Environmental Programme for Europe and the adoption of a series of actions for its implementation. The latest, third, report of the kind was published for the recent Kyiv Conference (“The Kyiv Assessment”), which concentrates on the specific efforts to improve national systems to monitor the environment and collect, process and manage data, particularly in transition economies, and to make these systems compatible throughout the region.

10.       The EfE ministerial conferences have led to a number of legally binding instruments promoting environmental protection and sustainable development in the region. These include the Convention on Access to information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, and the Protocols on Heavy Metals and on Persistent Organic Pollutants to the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, adopted in Aarhus in 1998. Furthermore, the recent Kyiv conference saw the signing of additional protocols on strategic environmental assessment, civil liability and pollution release and transfer registers. The environmental law-making that has been undertaken within the EfE process has added value to the EU initiatives (e.g. on public information and participation) and UNEP (e.g. on persistent organic pollutants).

11.       Other important policy tools endorsed by the EfE Conferences include the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS), elaborated by a joint effort secretariat of the Council of Europe and the UNEP, the Policy Statement on energy Efficiency and the Guidelines on Energy Conservation in Europe, as well as the Strategy to Phase out Leaded Petrol.

12.       The preparation work for the ministerial conferences has also made it possible to involve actively civil society organisations in the EfE and to promote public participation in environmental decision-making. A great number of environmental non-governmental organisations participating in the process have organised themselves in a movement called ECO-Forum. The EfE has also initiated the establishment of Regional Environment Centres (REC) in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in environmental Matters is recognised as the most ambitious venture in the area of “environmental democracy” so far undertaken under the auspices of the United Nations. It grants the public the right to access environmental information, to participate in the decision-making process and, if need be, to go to court to protect the environment.

2.        Major environmental concerns: accomplishments and challenges

13.       In the past decade, the Environmental Performance Review (EPR) programme and state-of-the-environment reports have provided a framework for the systematic in-depth analysis of a number of sectoral and cross-sectoral issues that affect the environment. They have generated continued demand from countries in transition for both initial and follow-up reviews.

14.       Though much remains to be done on the regional environmental agenda, nonetheless Europe has witnessed significant improvements in environmental quality over the past decade.

15.       Energy efficiency has been one of the most important regional accomplishments. For Europe and Central Asia (ECA) as a whole, carbon emissions have declined 28% and energy efficiency has increased 21% since 1992. Almost all countries are showing some improvement in this area. In the more advanced countries in transition, this has resulted from the introduction of technological innovations and more efficient management. In the less advanced countries, however, emissions reductions have largely resulted from the breakdown of the industrial sector, not from technological or managerial improvements. Notwithstanding improvements made to date, the EfE target region remains the least energy efficient (in terms of GDP per unit of energy use) in the world. An increase in efficiency of 58% is needed if the ECA region is to reach the same energy efficient level as countries at similar levels of development. The removal of subsidies, which promotes excessive use of energy, would help a great deal in this regard. For example, it is estimated that if Russia were to remove energy subsidies, it s energy efficiency would increase by 1,5% and the CO2 emissions would fall by 17%. ECA wide, a decrease in carbon emissions of by nearly two times is needed to reach the same level of CO2 per capita as other countries of a similar level of development.

16.       Emissions trading in carbon rights is also beginning to take off. ECA countries have enormous potential to benefit from participating in this market. These countries can implement carbon reduction programs at a relatively low cost and sell carbon rights to other countries who find it less expensive to buy rights abroad than to undertake carbon reducing measures at home.


17.       Another area of major accomplishment has been the phasing out of ozone depleting substances, primarily in Russia, but also in Ukraine, Belarus and several Eastern European countries. In these countries, funds from the Global Environment Facility, other donors and the World Bank compensate enterprises that phase out the production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons - the most potent ozone depleting substances (ODS).

18.       Water quality is a major concern as well throughout the region, especially where it relates to the quality of drinking water. Some major improvements in the provision of clean water for human use and irrigation have been made, although again, much remains to be done. Although official data show that 91% of the population in the EECCA countries have access to improved water supplies, there is a serious issue of water quality, constituting a major health threat. Among the EECCA countries, those in Central Asian countries will need to mount the biggest effort in this area. Within Central and Southern Europe, the biggest gaps are in Romania and Albania. Serious concerns are being voiced about the sustainability of many urban water companies, especially in secondary towns, but most effort needs to be made in the rural areas where the indicators for access to safe drinking water and sanitation are significantly worse. Roughly 30% of rural households in the ECA region do not have access to piped water, much of which is of unhealthy quality. Safe water should thus be taken as the basis for measuring water access.

19.       Wastewater is a significant polluter and the primary source of contamination of rivers, lakes and groundwater, including transboundary waters. In the latter context, important success has been achieved, particularly around the regional seas. The over-use of fertilizers, combined with municipal and industrial waste waters from 17 countries have seriously degraded the Danube River and the Black Sea ecosystem, disrupted fisheries, reduced biodiversity, posed health threats to humans and resulted in billions of dollars of losses to the economies of 6 countries. Since 1992, however, there has been a concerted effort to identify the major sources of point and non-point pollution and to begin addressing them. This is being done, for example, by restoring wetlands to trap nutrients along the Danube River, by reducing nutrient run-off from agricultural practices and by improving or introducing municipal waste water and sewerage treatment prior to any discharge into the sea.

20.       A similar multi-country, integrated approach is also underway to tackle the main point and non-point sources of pollution threatening the Baltic Sea. The Balkan countries have joined longstanding programs to clean and safeguard the Mediterranean, following strict provisions of the “blue flag” program to certify beaches and coastlines for swimming and tourist use. For the Caspian, the five littoral states are beginning joint efforts to tackle potential oil spills, prevent the introduction of invasive species and protect sturgeon populations. And, recent improvements to irrigation and drainage systems in Central Asia go some way towards saving at least part of the Aral Sea.

21.       Serious problems persist in underground and surface water contamination by poorly stored hazardous chemicals and waste. Water shortages continue as a result of a poorly maintained infrastructure and water-pricing policies. Overall, water policies have suffered from a highly fragmented decision-making structure and, in some cases, short-sighted economic considerations that have failed to include long-term environmental and economic impacts.

22.       Major efforts are underway to make more sustainable use of the region’s forests. Certification is being promoted as an incentive to apply sounder managerial methods, and countries in the region are increasingly adopting fees for the felling of trees. From Bosnia to Bulgaria to Russia, efforts are underway to ensure forests are better safeguarded from fires and pests, as well as from illegal logging and unsustainable practices. Where areas are already under commercial use, regulations are being put in place to require sufficient replanting to ensure sustainable growth.

23.       The amount of forest area under national protection has also increased significantly since 1999, with the latest data showing an average of 7% of land under protected areas. Moreover, since the early 1990’s about 500,000 hectares have been brought under improved management and efforts underway will include an additional 800,000 hectares of forest ecosystems in these protected areas.

24.       However, despite 40% of the land surface of ECA covered by forests, and the official statistics indicating that forest areas are increasing in the region, the quality of these forests, as measured by canopy and old growth forests, continues to deteriorate. Also, illegal logging is problematic for some countries of the area.

25.       Waste management has deteriorated and the poorly managed dumpsites pose a particularly severe environmental and health hazard. One of the most serious problems is the lack of separation and treatment facilities for medical waste. Industries of the past have left accumulated waste, tailings and contaminated sites that can threaten groundwater, surface water, soil and air with heavy metals and radioactive contamination.

26.       The region has a remarkable wealth of biodiversity and landscapes which are being threatened from many fronts, including agriculture, mining, industrial pollution, transport, pipelines and urban growth, tourism and spatial planning. Many countries – in particular countries which hold extensive oil, mineral and forestry resources – need to improve their management of natural resources with a view towards economically and environmentally sustainable development.

27.       Extraction and processing of mineral resources are major economic areas in countries in the region, which have serious impacts on soil quality, water quality, air quality, and biodiversity. Mine tailings, containing heavy metals and other toxic substances, pose a significant threat of accidents with catastrophic effect.

28.       The absence of integrative policy-making and planning has also led to a number of significant problems in a range of sectors, such as

29.       There has been an increase in the number of integrative tools used in decision-making, including environmental impact assessment (EIA), strategic environmental assessment (SEA), voluntary agreements, and economic instruments targeted toward improving the environment. Other opportunities for integration include the privatisation process – which offers a chance for environmental clean-up of enterprises – and the national and local environmental action plans that afford the opportunity to look at environment and health issues from a cross-sectoral perspective.

30.       At the same time, great strides have been made in almost all of the transition countries to establish the legislative and institutional framework necessary to meet these challenges. This has been the real success story of the past ten years. Countries have taken up a number of important initiatives to build capacity. They have developed legislation, strengthened and restructured institutions, introduced innovative policy tools and supported public participation. With the increasing institutional capacity of government and other stakeholders, the performance in policy implementation has improved across the region.

31.       Overall, transition has put in motion a fundamental structural change in environmental policymaking and implementation in the countries in transition. What started as a movement to clean up polluted air, water and land in the region, turned into a process contributing to the reform of institutions, the economy and civil society. In countries where economic growth has resumed, the decoupling of pollution from economic development has begun. The result is a wealth of experience and know-how related to the management of the environment in the context of transition.

32.       Meeting the challenges that have been mapped out above requires a substantially increased effort by the international community and the countries themselves.

3.        Future of the “Environment for Europe” process

33.       The founders of the “Environment for Europe” saw the process as an overarching political framework providing leadership and setting the policy agenda for a long-term pan-European environmental programme. While the process has fallen somewhat short of this original vision, it nevertheless has had sufficient success in linking the many different actors and initiatives. It has played a useful role as a platform for sharing information, networking and strengthening co-operation among activities and processes in the region concerning subjects of great importance, such as environmental monitoring, energy conservation, conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, finding the appropriate economic instruments to better integrate environmental concerns, and promoting sustainable consumer patterns.

34.       Since the Aarhus Ministerial Conference in 1998, the political landscape around the “Environment for Europe” co-operation process has changed considerably. The recent Kyiv conference had a particular responsibility to take into account a number of emerging new challenges for regional co-operation on environment and sustainable development in Europe, such as:

35.       Among these changes, the forthcoming EU enlargement is probably having the biggest impact on the process. Concerns have been raised over how to maintain momentum and engagement from all parties in this new context of enlarged EU that will border countries with huge environmental, economic and social problems. While the accession countries will soon be implementing the same environmental policies, standards and rules, enjoying access to Community funding, there is a risk that the transition economies of South-Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia will become isolated from mainstream European environmental policy. It is unrealistic to believe that bilateral links between the enlarged EU and the non-accession countries, including North America, will be sufficient to tackle cross-border and region-wide environmental problems.

36.       Therefore, while welcoming the strengthening of the European integration, the author of this report holds with the conviction of numerous governments, international and civil society organisations that the new reality of enlarged Europe must not create new dividing lines in this continent. Our common environment can not be divided by political borders, nor should the multi-lateral approach for co-operation be sacrificed for the sake of becoming benchmarked by the European Union’s environmental legislation.

37.       One of the values of the EfE process is that the EU countries do not have to act in unity: they can take initiatives and act on the basis of their own national aspirations, not having to wait for EU consensus. The EU acquis should not become a ceiling for the EfE process; it should remain a floor that encourages countries in the wider UN ECE framework to seek further steps ahead.

38.       Furthermore, the EfE process has developed over the years in an open way of working, leaving no secrets as to which roles countries play, providing opportunities for environmental citizens’ organisations to take part in virtually all formal and informal discussions and negotiations, and even adopting repeatedly proposals such organisations make. This way of working has had positive impacts on how governments and NGOs relate to each other in countries east of the EU. It is regrettable indeed that virtually the only part of the EfE process that is not accessible to the NGOs, is the EU-coordination on it.

39.       Another challenge is how to ensure sufficient coherence – both in principle and through the coordinated implementation of activities – within the multitude of institutions and mechanisms that have been built since the early 1990s, and in a political context vastly different from that of 1991.

40.       The EfE process is today facing a number of challenges stemming from the various developments within the region itself, the evolution of pan-European environmental governance, and global responsibilities of countries of the region. Questions have increasingly arisen concerning the co-ordination of this multifaceted institutional and instrumental architecture. The framework has no sound financial base either, with most of the money being raised from individual donors with their own political and bureaucratic conditions. All this has made political leadership in the EfE process difficult. There is a need for stronger political leadership in the region because of the diversification of the work over the last decade.

41.       The recent Johannesburg Summit made some important decisions to improve intergovernmental governance. It called for the strengthening of international bodies and organisations dealing with sustainable development, while respecting their existing mandates, as well as for the strengthening of relevant regional, national and local institutions. Specific provisions of the WSSD Plan of Implementation address institutional arrangements at the regional level, the consultation on which has already started at UNECE. On the other hand, the unique experience gained in the EfE process of developing a common platform between very diversified sub-regions with their specific needs, bringing together various international actors to work on joint agendas, involving sectoral ministers in co-operation on environmental issues, and of raising public support through the active participation of civil society organisations, offers an example to other parts of the world.

42.       “Environment for Europe” has helped over the past decade to win political support for the adoption of pan-European legal instruments, notably the Aarhus Convention on Public Participation and its protocols signed in Kyiv. It has also played a role in the transition of standards in the UNECE region. European environment ministers in Kyiv recognised the need for a greater effort to improve legally binding instruments for environmental protection, and notably for compliance with and national implementation of these instruments. However, legally binding agreements alone would not suffice to guarantee environmental protection or their implementation throughout the region. What is needed is specific targets and concrete action to be taken by the states, regions, local authorities and the civil society alike to implement the provisions of the recent Johannesburg Declaration and its implementation plan, and setting up a proper monitoring mechanism to hold the contracting parties accountable for their commitment to the EfE and Johannesburg movements.43

43.       Opinions have been voiced in the Kyiv discussions, particularly by the EU, over the shift from negotiation of new conventions to the implementation of existing ones. While the need for environmental monitoring is indeed gaining ground, new emerging threats to the environment call for the updating and introduction of new legislation.

44.       Since the Aarhus Conference in 1998, Europeans have suffered a number of environmental disasters, such as the oil spills following the wreckages of the tankers Erika and Prestige, the chemical accidents on the Danube and Tizla rivers or in the river Guadiamar in Southern Spain, or the devastating floods in Central Europe of summer 2002 and the droughts and forest fires of this summer. To avoid such effects, improved legislation and practices is needed concerning industrial plants and mines, transport of oil and hazardous substances, river basin management, special planning etc.

45.       In the light of the above developments, the rapporteur endorses that the future of the EfE process lies in the uniqueness of its nature as the only place where environmental ministers of the entire European continent can work together on equal footing on the activities of common interest. Its mission should concentrate on improved co-ordination of national and international efforts to support in particular those with a heavy task to achieve national recognition for the importance and urgency of the environmental agenda, and to focus on region-wide co-operation in environmental monitoring and assessment primarily on issues where the region has to act as a whole as well as on the activities for specific sub-regions.

46.       Within the EfE process, a larger concentration of efforts should be spent on the East European, Caucasian and Central Asian countries. The process should seek to build a broad political platform for environmental initiatives and perspectives for regional and sub-regional co-operation. It should aim towards the participation of the countries based on strategic approach and a real understanding and commitment to reform, including administrative and legislative improvements.

B.        The Johannesburg Summit

47.       The final text of the Summit refers to a commitment to sustainable development and to the building of "a humane, equitable and caring global society cognisant of the need for human dignity for all".

48.       In reality, very little attention was paid to the problems of environmental protection. No specific targets were set, other than in relation to water. The USA and its allies (Australia and Canada) proposed that the number of people in the world without access to water and sanitation should be halved by 2015. The USA agreed to this target on condition that the themes of energy and greenhouse gases were left aside. In the USA, energy consumption has risen by 21% and greenhouse gas emissions have increased by 13% since the Rio Summit. The problem is that the issues of water, greenhouse gases and energy consumption are interlinked and one cannot be solved unless the others are also dealt with. On 3 September 2002, Russia proclaimed its intention to ratify the Kyoto Convention. It is regrettable, however, that words have still not led to action.

49.       With regard to agriculture, Europe proposed only minimal reductions in farming subsidies. These funds would be much better used to develop a sustainable, egalitarian and fair system of agriculture.

50.       As far as the conservation of biological and landscape diversity is concerned, one-third of the 182 countries which undertook to protect threatened species have submitted national protection plans since the Rio Summit. The Biodiversity Treaty, signed by Bill Clinton in 1993, has still not been ratified by the USA. Meanwhile, the destruction of our environment continues and, more often than not, is accelerating. Since 1992, for example, 89 million hectares of forest have disappeared (2.4% of the world's forests), mostly in the northern hemisphere. In Rio in 1992 and The Hague in March, delegates talked about stopping and reversing the decline in biological and landscape diversity. Following the Johannesburg Summit, however, sights were merely set on significantly reducing the decline in biodiversity by 2010.

51.       Faced with the above and many similar bleak facts, Europe must keep up the momentum and reinforce, or even win back, its role as an initiator and leader. The political will that was lacking in Johannesburg must be displayed in Europe.

C.        Conclusions

52.       In the light of the European environmental co-operation entering a new phase with the enlargement of the European Union and the development of new partnerships as established at the Johannesburg Summit, it is essential for the Council of Europe to take account of this reality and look for innovative ways to reinforce its own participation in the pan-European process. To this end, it should

Appendix

Protection of the Environment at the Council of Europe (1996- 2003)

1.        The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS)

The Council of Europe has been fighting for over 35 years for the environment to be included on the political agenda. Since the First Ministerial Conference in Dobris (1991), it has been actively involved in the process of initiating the pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS); a strategy that offers a comprehensive European approach to the problem of protecting biological and landscape diversity and their integration in a global context of sustainable development.

The Council of Europe was one of the co-authors of the Kyiv Resolution on Biodiversity, a common statement of ministers on their intention to cut down the volume of biological and landscape diversity losses till 2010. Particularly, the matter concerns forest protection, management of regions of a high natural value in agrarian ecosystems, identification of the Pan-European Environmental Network and so on. Altogether nine targets that the ministers committed to achieving in the Final Declaration.

The Council of Europe is also committed to implement and further develop its instruments for improving the natural heritage and quality of life, such as the Bern convention as a regional instrument of co-operation for the conservation of biological diversity, the Guiding principles for Sustainable Spatial Development of the European Continent, adopted by the Committee of Ministers as a basis for spatial planning development measures, and the new European Landscape Convention to promote the protection, management ad planning of European landscapes.

The organisation also encourages the signature and ratification of relevant international and regional legal instruments for the conservation and sustainable use of our natural and cultural heritage. Moreover, it is engaged in favouring environmental ethics through the elaboration of the European Charter of General Principles for Environment Protection and Sustainable Development.

2.        What is the Strategy (PEBLDS)?

The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS) aims to curb the deterioration of Europe's biological and landscape diversity. It offers a comprehensive European approach to the problem of protecting biological and landscape diversity and, at the same time, strengthens existing measures and provides for action plans for the next twenty years. It also supports the integration of biological and landscape diversity into the economic and social sectors. Finally, the Strategy serves as a framework for the application of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) at regional and national levels.

The PEBLDS was adopted in 1995 by the "Environment for Europe" Ministerial Conference of Lucerne, once it had been presented by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The idea of the Strategy actually dates back to 1962, when, at the suggestion of the Parliamentary Assembly, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe included the theme of the environment in its work programme for the very first time. The inaugural European Ministerial Conference on the Environment, held in Vienna in 1973, and the World Conservation Strategy drawn up in 1980 by the WWF, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) served as the basis for the drafting of the European Conservation Strategy by the Committee for the Activities of the Council of Europe in the field of Biological and Landscape Diversity (CO-DBP). This Strategy was presented at the 6th European Ministerial Conference on the Environment, held in Brussels in 1990. However, it was after the first Earth Summit on environment and development, held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, that the Council of Europe began to draw up the PEBLDS. The Strategy is therefore in keeping with the Convention on Biological Diversity and follows on from the 1993 Maastricht Declaration, as well as building, inter alia, on the Bern Convention, the European Conservation Strategy (1990), the Ministerial Conferences in Dobris (1991) and Lucerne (1993) and the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED, 1992). The Secretariat of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy is provided alternately by the Council of Europe in Strasbourg and UNEP in Geneva.

Strategy aims and objectives

The Strategy is based on four aims and six objectives.

The aims are as follows:

1) to substantially reduce and, where possible, remove threats to Europe's biological and landscape diversity;

2) to increase the resilience of European biological and landscape diversity;

3) to strengthen the ecological coherence of Europe as a whole;

4) to assure full public involvement in conservation of biological and landscape diversity.

The objectives are as follows:

1) conservation, enhancement and restoration of key ecosystems, habitats, species and features of the landscape through the creation and effective management of the Pan-European Ecological Network;

2) sustainable management and use of the positive potential of Europe's biological and landscape diversity through making optimum use of the social and economic opportunities on a local, national and regional level;

3) integration of biological and landscape diversity conservation and sustainable use objectives into all sectors managing or affecting such diversity;

4) improved information on, and awareness of, biological and landscape diversity issues, and increased public participation in actions to conserve and enhance such diversity;

5) improved understanding of the state of Europe's biological and landscape diversity and the processes that render them sustainable;

6) assurance of adequate financial means to implement the Strategy.

The activities to be implemented are divided into five-year Action Plans.

The first five-year plan (1996-2000) set out to remedy the deterioration of the key ecosystems and to integrate pan-European priorities concerning biological and landscape diversity into national policy. The activities were meant to stimulate the establishment of national ecological networks and a pan-European ecological network, as well as recognition at European level of the need for sustainable use of natural economic resources. The Action Plan consisted of twelve Action Themes, five of which addressed issues of pan-European importance. Six were concerned with priority ecosystems and one dealt with the issue of threatened species.

Finally, during the 1996-2000 period, the Council of Europe was required to establish a Pan-European Task Force made up, inter alia, of representatives of the Council of Europe member states, other European countries, the European Union, United Nations bodies (UNDP, UNECE, UNEP, UNESCO, FAO), the World Bank and NGOs. The role of the Task Force was to set up the Strategy process.

This five-year plan was to be monitored by means of regular assessments carried out by the Council of Europe, which would report to the "Environment for Europe" Ministerial Conferences.

The second five-year Action Plan (2001-2005) was adopted in Riga (Latvia) on 23 March 2000 by the Council for the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (STRA-CO). It revolves around the following six themes:

1) enhancing implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) through the Pan-European Strategy process;

2) integrating biological and landscape diversity considerations into sectoral policies;

3) building up environmental development capacity in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and in the Newly Independent States (NIS);

4) providing information and enhancing communication;

5) developing the Pan-European Ecological Network;

6) carrying out reviews and assessments, and monitoring, reporting and funding of the Pan-European Strategy.

3. Five-year action plans 1996-2000 and 2001-2005: Overview of Council of Europe activities

Action theme 1 : Establishing the Pan-European Ecological Network

European Diploma of Protected Areas

The European Diploma of Protected Areas was originally established by the Council of Europe. Regulations for the European Diploma, which was introduced in 1965 by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, were adopted in 1973.

At the Committee of Ministers meeting on 18 September 1998, the Regulations for the European Diploma awarded to protected areas of exceptional European interest were amended in such a way as to highlight the protection of biological and landscape diversity. The three categories (A, B and C) were abolished and the criteria for the award of the Diploma were reorganised. Finally, an information form was to be submitted with every new application.

By 30 March 1999, nine protected areas had been awarded the European Diploma. The number had risen to eleven by the beginning of 2000. By 2002, sixty areas spread across 23 different countries had been awarded the Diploma.

Establishing the Pan-European Ecological Network

Establishing the Pan-European Ecological Network is the primary objective of the five-year Action Plan for 1996-2000. A Committee of Experts for the Development of the Pan-European Ecological Network (STRA-REP) was set up by the Council of Europe in 1997, under the auspices of the STRA-CO.

The following activities were carried out during the first five-year Action Plan 1996-2000:

- Basic documents:

as well as studies, reports and conferences.

Furthermore, the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of the environment through criminal law was adopted in Strasbourg on 4 November 1998. This was the first international convention to provide for criminal sanctions in the environment sector. Under its provisions, potential or actual damage to the environment from the disposal, treatment, transport or manufacture of substances or radiation that is dangerous for people or for the environment in general may be considered as a criminal offence and punished accordingly.

Action Theme 2 : Integration of biological and landscape diversity considerations into sectors.

Transport

On 30 October 1998, the Council of Europe drew up a Code of practice for the introduction of biological and landscape diversity considerations into the transport sector in the context of the PEBLDS. The code aims to encourage elected representatives, decision makers and practitioners to take environmental considerations into account in the planning, design and use of linear transport networks.

The code was presented at the 5th Ministerial Conference on the Environment in Kyiv, in May 2003.

Tourism

The Council of Europe continues to lead the way with its activities connected with tourism and the environment at national and European levels. As part of its intergovernmental programme, a "Tourism and Environment" Group of Specialists was set up by the CO-DBP in 1993. The role of this group was to make recommendations to the member states concerning sustainable tourism development policies based on environmental concerns. In 1996, the group's activities were brought under the umbrella of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (Action Theme 2). Four recommendations have been adopted: Recommendations R (94) 7, R (95) 10, R (97) 9 and R (99) 16.

The CO-DBP has also dealt with subjects such as "sustainable tourism and employment" and the "European code of conduct on sports and recreation activities".

The Group of Specialists has examined themes such as tourism development in European countries, the implementation of sustainable tourism and environment training for tourism professionals.

The Council of Europe has been co-operating with the CEE countries since 1991, both as part of a technical consultancy programme for the preparation and implementation of general plans for the development of sustainable tourism, and by organising colloquies. Slovakia, Albania and Belarus have all benefited from this aid programme, which has helped them to develop sustainable tourism while respecting the environment.

In November 1998, the Council began to consider a project on the development of sustainable tourism in several national parks in Latvia, Ukraine and Romania. The reports that were drawn up led to practical support being provided to these countries to help them implement economic and social development policies for the designated areas.

A European code of conduct for environment-friendly open-air recreation and sport was presented to the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Sport held in Bratislava (Slovakia) in May 2000, in order to promote environment-friendly sport. The code was adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 13 September 2000 (Recommendation Rec(2000)17).

Agriculture

In 1998, the Council of Europe looked at the theme of agriculture and the environment. It was decided at the 4th "Environment for Europe" Ministerial Conference in Aarhus on 25 June 1998 that a Conference on agriculture and biodiversity should be held, focusing on the incorporation of environmental considerations into farming practices. The working group that was set up to organise the Conference agreed to follow a three-point plan. The first stage was to hold a high-level conference for senior agriculture and environment officials in 2002. The second part was the presentation of the conclusions of this conference during the 5th Ministerial Conference in Kyiv (2003). Finally, the third objective was to propose a combined Ministerial Conference for Agriculture and Environment Ministers, to be held in 2005 or 2006, depending on the decisions taken by the Environment Ministers. The High-Level Pan-European Conference on Agriculture and Biodiversity was held in Paris (France) from 5 to 7 June 2002. It was organised by the Council of Europe, the French Government and UNEP. During the three-day conference, the Council of Europe attempted to incorporate the theme of biological and landscape diversity into sectoral policies, particularly farming policies.

In conclusion, the participants asked the Kyiv Ministerial Conference, to invite the Agriculture Ministers to a combined Ministerial Conference for Agriculture and Environment Ministers in 2005. The Council for the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy was invited to participate in and to help organise the combined Ministerial Conference.

As well as preparing for the combined Ministerial Conference, the Parliamentary Assembly's Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs is discussing ways of transforming the farming policies of the CEE countries and, together with the European Union, reforming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).

Action Theme 3 : Raising awareness and support with policy makers and the public

In early 1998, the European Centre for Nature Conservation (ECNC) organised a meeting of experts representing national, international and pan-European authorities and NGOs. The aim of the meeting was to draw up a list of activities to be carried out in the information and education sectors. The participants set out three main areas of interest, which can be summarised as follows: promotion of the PEBLDS, development of activities relating to the other Action Themes, and support for the implementation of national biodiversity strategies through the formulation of national action plans within Action Theme 3. These objectives were co-ordinated by the Council of Europe, IUCN and ECNC. As part of its information strategy, the Council of Europe decided to publish the Strategy Bulletin in five languages six times a year and the Naturopa magazine in five languages three times a year, to set up a travelling exhibition on the theme of the PEBLDS, to help finance an Internet site devoted to the Strategy and to publish thematic brochures entitled "Questions and Answers"1. The Strategy Bulletin has not been published since April 2000.

In 1998, IUCN set up a programme aimed at devising effective information policies in the biodiversity sector. Targeting governmental and non-governmental communication professionals, the programme was implemented in Poland, Slovenia, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Thanks to support from the Netherlands authorities, plans were carried out in Slovenia and Poland. In September 1998, the European network of IUCN's Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) organised a conference on "Learning in Protected Areas - How to Assess Quality" on the Austro-Hungarian border (Lake Neusiedler). In 1999, IUCN produced two publications: "All Aboard", which describes activities to be carried out with a view to developing the PEBLDS, and "Education and communication for biodiversity. Key concepts, strategies and case studies in Europe".

For its part, ECNC has published eight issues of European Nature since 1998, as well as "Facts and Figures on Europe's Biodiversity: state and trends 1998-1999". ECNC organised a training course funded by the Netherlands authorities on "Making nature conservation more effective through strategic and interactive communication" in Banska Stiavnica (Slovakia) from 21 to 23 March 1998. Then in 1999, again with funding from the Netherlands authorities, it published a "Communication Manual". In early 2000, ECNC published "Communicating Nature Conservation", a handbook dealing with policies and activities promoting nature conservation. It was published in co-operation with the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries and the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

At the 1997, 1998 and 1999 annual meetings of the National Agencies of the Council of Europe's Centre Naturopa, seminars were held on the various aspects of environmental communication. In early June 1999, the Council of Europe took the opportunity offered by the seminar and annual meeting of the National Agencies of the Centre Naturopa to announce the official launch of the Centre Naturopa Internet site http://www. nature.coe.int. On the occasion of the 32nd annual meeting of the Network of National Agencies of the Centre Naturopa, a seminar was held on work in the context of the Council of Europe campaign "Europe, a common heritage". The themes tackled were:

The Centre Naturopa initiated three projects as part of the "Europe, a common heritage” campaign:

In 1999, the Centre Naturopa published six bibliographical bulletins and three selective bibliographies on "local and regional authorities and the environment", "health and environment", and "nature, the common heritage of humankind".

The 33rd annual meeting of the Network of National Agencies of the Centre Naturopa, held in April 2000, was based on the theme "Raising awareness of the landscape: from perception to protection". The conference expressed support for the Council of Europe's draft European Landscape Convention.

Action Theme 4 : Conservation of landscapes

Florence Convention

On 25 and 26 March 1999, a European workshop was organised in Strasbourg by the English Countryside Commission with the support of ECNC and the Council of Europe. The workshop was attended by Europeans involved in landscape protection and management. Among the important European projects that were discussed, the progress of the draft European Landscape Convention, prepared by the Council of Europe's CLRAE in 1994, was such that a decision was taken to continue work on this text (with the agreement of the Committee of Ministers, the Committee for the Activities of the Council of Europe in the field of Biological and Landscape Diversity (CO-DBP) and the Cultural Heritage Committee (CC-PAT)). This led the Committee of Ministers, on 27 May 1999, to set up a select committee of experts to finalise the wording of the Convention. On 11 January 2000, a draft was adopted for submission to the CO-DBP and CC-PAT. On 10 March 2000, once it had been examined by both committees, the draft was transmitted to the Committee of Ministers. On 19 July 2000, the European Landscape Convention was adopted. The Convention requires the implementation of policies and measures aimed at "the protection, management and planning of all landscapes in Europe" at local, regional, national and international levels. It is the first legal instrument to deal in this way with the problems of safeguarding the natural and cultural heritage, whether it is outstanding or not.

The Parliamentary Assembly also recommended to the Committee of Ministers that the member states sign and ratify the Convention and that it invite the European Union to accede to it. This was an important step. It was also decided that all European landscape-related activities should be included under the umbrella of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS) and that a citizen-based landscape management and planning policy should be adopted. The draft action plan drawn up by ECNC laid down four objectives:

-       production of a European landscape map;

The inaugural Conference of the Contracting and Signatory States to the European Landscape Convention was held in Florence (Italy) on 20 October 2000. It was proposed that a Council of Europe Landscape Award be set up to reward local and regional authorities or NGOs for implementing policies or measures for the protection, management or planning of landscapes.

The Second Conference of the Contracting and Signatory States was held in Strasbourg on 28 and 29 November 2002. The signatory states were urged to ratify the Convention as soon as possible in order that it might enter into force. The Conference also invited the signatory states "to develop the awareness-raising, training and education" of the public, to develop "tools for integrating landscape into sectoral policies" and to "promote knowledge of traditional skills".

Activities of the OECD, EEA and CEMAT

In the area of landscape conservation, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) expressed the wish to publish a Reference Guide dealing with landscape conservation and regional planning at national and international levels. The OECD also identified three landscape indicators from among the pre-defined agri-environmental indicators:

The European Environment Agency (EEA) and ECNC worked together on Action Theme 4, particularly in producing the EEA's environmental report "EU 98", in which the chapter on landscapes was written by ECNC, and on the technical report on landscapes that was prepared by ECNC and published by the EEA in 1999.

It is worth recalling that the European Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (CEMAT) discussed the issue of sustainable development at its first Conference, held in Bonn (Germany) back in 1970. It was responding to the presentation in 1968 of a report entitled "Regional planning - a European problem", drawn up at the suggestion of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Numerous texts drafted by the Parliamentary Assembly and CLRAE have since been adopted, including the European Regional/Spatial Planning Charter (Torremolinos, 1983) and the European Regional Planning Strategy (Lausanne, 1988). The Guiding Principles for Sustainable Spatial Development of the European Continent were adopted by the 12th CEMAT in Hanover (Germany) on 8 September 2000. More recently, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted Recommendation Rec(2002)1 "Guiding principles for the sustainable spatial development of the European Continent" on 30 January 2002.

Action Theme 5 : Coastal and marine ecosystems

For the last fifteen years, the CLRAE and the Parliamentary Assembly have been endeavouring to set up co-operation between the Mediterranean and Black Sea regions. Five conferences relating to the Mediterranean environment have been organised in that time. They were held in Marseille (France) in 1985, Malaga (Spain) in 1987, Taormina (Italy) in 1993, Limassol (Cyprus) in 1995 and Marmaris (Turkey) in 1999. The Council of Europe has also organised five colloquies on the protection of the Mediterranean coasts in Izmir (Turkey) in 1989, L’Escala (Spain) in 1990, Bastia (France) in 1991, Larnaca (Cyprus) in 1995 and Messina (Italy) in 1998. A resolution on interparliamentary co-operation in the field of sustainable development was adopted during the 6th Interparliamentary Conference of the Mediterranean and Black Sea Basins, held in Varna (Bulgaria) in October 2000.

On 26 and 27 June 1997, the Group of Specialists on Coastal Protection met in Strasbourg. Set up in 1995 by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the Group examined a draft Model Law on Sustainable Management of Coastal Areas and a European Code of Conduct for Coastal Zones.

Also in the context of the PEBLDS, the Council of Europe, in co-operation with the Countryside Council for Wales, organised a colloquy on "Marine and coastal ecological corridors" in Llandudno (Wales) on 20 and 21 June 2002. The aim of the colloquy was to prompt programmes for the protection of marine and coastal biodiversity and the establishment of marine and coastal ecological corridors. It took place in the context of the development of the Pan-European Ecological Network of the PEBLDS. At the end of the two-day colloquy, the participants concluded that:

The aim of all these activities (carried out since 1997) was to lay the foundations of a future Action Plan for Action Theme 5, ie the adoption of the Model Law on Sustainable Management of Coastal Areas and of the European Code of Conduct for Coastal Zones by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the establishment of an assistance programme for the integrated management of coastal zones in the CEE countries and newly independent states and the development of a coastal and marine environment education and training programme.

Action Theme 6 : River ecosystems and related wetlands; Action Theme 7 : Inland wetland ecosystems.

Protection of ecosystems

World Wetlands Day is celebrated on 2 February, the date on which the Ramsar Convention was signed. The Convention deals, inter alia, with the importance of wetlands as waterfowl habitat.

A Mediterranean Wetlands Committee (MedWet/Com2) was set up by the European Commission in collaboration with governments, NGOs and international institutions to promote the preservation and rational use of Mediterranean wetlands.

The Committee met for the second time in Valencia (Spain) from 31 January to 3 February 1999.

By August 1999, the most notable progress had been made in the following areas:

The inaugural meeting of the MedWetCoast initiative, launched by the Bureau of the Ramsar Convention, took place in Barcelona from 12 to 15 October 1999. The aim of the meeting was to pinpoint joint activities that could help to resolve common problems in the Mediterranean region, particularly the management of coastal areas and wetlands.

Protection of water

The Council of Europe drafted one of the first European texts concerning the protection of water from pollution in 1967. Numerous international instruments dealing with this subject have incorporated the principles enshrined in that text. On 17 October 2001, the Council of Europe adopted a new European Charter on Water Resources. The Charter includes new concepts, such as integrated water resource management at local, regional, national and international levels, and related social considerations. It mentions that water has ecological, economic and social value, which implies that water should be available to everyone in sufficient quantity and quality, and that consumers and nations are responsible for its use and protection. Meanwhile, the Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is dealing with this subject as part of the International Year of Water in 2003.

Action Theme 8 : Grassland ecosystems

On 8 October 1996, IUCN convened a meeting of experts to discuss the future creation of a corridor extending from the judet of Tulcea in Romania to the west of Kazakhstan and the centre of Uzbekistan, areas of Eastern Europe with huge expanses of intact grasslands and steppes. The participants also identified the four main groups of projects which would form the basis of a pan-European grasslands action plan. They decided:

Action Theme 9 : Forest ecosystems

Instruments and measures concerning forests are adopted at the Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE), the first of which was held in Strasbourg in 1990. Six resolutions designed to promote knowledge of forests were adopted on that occasion. At the second Ministerial Conference in Helsinki in 1993, four resolutions were adopted, including resolution H1 "General guidelines for the sustainable management of forests in Europe" and resolution H2 "General guidelines for the conservation of the biodiversity of European forests". A "Pan-European Work Programme on the Conservation and Enhancement of Biological and Landscape Diversity in Forest Ecosystems, 1997–2000" was jointly adopted at the third Ministerial Conference in Lisbon in 1998 and at the fourth "Environment for Europe" Ministerial Conference held in Aarhus in the same year. The programme had four main objectives, each relating to various activities. The objectives were based on Helsinki resolution H2 and Action Theme 9.

The four objectives were:

Since 2000, UNEP, which provides the secretariat, has been participating in the activities of the Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe and disseminating related documents to the Council for the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy.

As a result of the various PEBLDS and MCPFE conferences, a draft co-operation programme should be finalised for adoption at the fourth Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, to be held in Vienna in April 2003, and at the fifth "Environment for Europe" Ministerial Conference in Kyiv in May 2003.

Action Theme 10 : Mountain ecosystems

Minimising the ecological impact of leisure activities

On 1 June 1995, the CLRAE adopted Recommendation 14 (1995) on The European Charter of Mountain Regions. Article 13 of the Charter deals with the question of mountain tourism. In September 1997, the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities organised a Parliamentary Conference for a pan-European policy on mountain regions in Rodez (France). The aim was to set out a pan-European mountain policy within the framework of the Charter of Mountain Regions. In collaboration with the International Mountaineering and Climbing Federation (UIAA), IUCN therefore implemented two activity programmes. The first involved the drafting of a questionnaire on restrictions on access to certain mountain areas for environmental reasons. Access to some mountain regions of environmental interest is restricted to protect vulnerable ecosystems, because they are within a national park or are geologically significant, or because they are on private or military land or in an area of "quiet recreation". The second programme consisted in organising an expert workshop to prepare strategies designed to minimise the ecological impact of leisure activities. The workshop was held in Barcelona (Spain) from 1 to 3 May 1998. Guidelines on rock climbing below the Alpine zone were drawn up following the discussions.

Mechanisms for the protection of regional ecosystems

Two reports have been drafted concerning different levels of co-operation in the Alps and Carpathians (state authorities, governments, NGOs, scientific bodies).

A work programme involving efforts to set out conservation principles for mountain ecosystems in the Tian Sian region of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan) has also been carried out.

European mountain forest project

A workshop on "a European mountain forest project" was held in Trento (Italy) from 24 to 26 September 1998 and was attended by representatives of 17 European countries and delegates from various European institutions and NGOs. A declaration was adopted at the end of the proceedings.

Winter sports

The March 1999 edition of the newsletter of the International Commission for the Protection of the Alps (CIPRA) dealt with the impact of winter sports on the environment.

2002 – International Year of Mountains

On the initiative of Kyrgyzstan and with the backing of 130 countries and the United Nations, 2002 was designated International Year of Mountains. A World Mountain Summit was held in Bishkek (Kyrgyzstan) from 29 October to 1 November 2002 with the support of Kyrgyzstan and UNEP. A platform was set up to foster joint efforts to preserve mountain ecosystems and improve living conditions for mountain communities. It aims to advise governments on issues connected with mountain environments.

Action Theme 11 : Action for threatened species

Bern Convention

The Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats, known as the Bern Convention, was opened for signature on 19 September 1979. It is an active convention, whose role changed following the Rio Summit in 1992 to one of promoting co-operation between the member states in their implementation of environmental policies, thereby fostering sustainable development and helping to improve quality of life in Europe, whilst supporting the conservation and protection of flora and fauna. The activities carried out under the Convention form part of the European Action Programme for Threatened Species (EUROSPECIES). These activities are aimed at:

In 1997 and 1998, efforts to achieve these aims included the drafting of check lists of European species and national and European red books and red lists of protected species, raising of public awareness and implementation of pre-established action plans. In December 1998, the first issue of the Bern Convention News was published. This publication reported on the progress of activities carried out under the Convention and the decisions taken by the Standing Committee.

Meetings of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention

The Standing Committee of the Bern Convention meets annually to discuss a number of specific issues. At is 18th annual meeting (30 November to 4 December 1998), the Rules for the Emerald Network and the list of species requiring special habitat conservation measures were adopted. The 19th meeting of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention (29 November to 3 December 1999) marked a step forward in the common desire to draw up a Memorandum of Co-operation between the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and the Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). This instrument should enable the Bern Convention secretariat to enforce the provisions of the CBD at European level (incorporation of the CBD at European level by the PEBLDS). Action plans for large carnivores were adopted at the 20th meeting and a European Plant Conservation Strategy at the 21st meeting. The 22nd meeting was held in Strasbourg from 2 to 5 December 2002. The main theme was the presentation by BirdLife International of 16 new action plans for the most seriously threatened bird species.

Emerald Network of the Bern Convention

Plans to set up a network devoted to the protection of habitats were first discussed by the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention in June 1989. On that occasion, Resolution 1 (1989) on the provisions relating to the conservation of habitats, along with three recommendations (Recommendations 14, 15, 16 (1989) on the creation of a network of special conservation areas) were adopted. Recommendation 16 (1989) defined the network of areas of special conservation interest (ASCI). However, the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention actually set up the Emerald Network by adopting Resolution 3 (1996) concerning the setting up of a network (Emerald Network) including areas of special conservation interest. At its meeting on 28 and 29 September 1998, the Group of Experts for the setting up of the Emerald Network drew up the Rules for the Emerald Network, discussed the incorporation of the Network into the Pan-European Ecological Network and drafted a list of species requiring habitat conservation measures. However, the states concerned are entrusted with the task of selecting the ASCIs, which must fulfil a short list of stringent criteria so that the Emerald Network complies with the objectives of the Convention. The Emerald Network implementation phase began in 1999.

The first countries to become involved were Russia, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Turkey. Each of these countries set up a national team of experts responsible for drawing up lists of species and habitats in the selected geographical areas and for applying the Emerald Network techniques and principles. To date, they have been followed by Albania, Croatia, the Czech Republic, “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Ukraine, Cyprus, Malta, Iceland (self-financing) and Switzerland (self-financing). The state of progress was reported at the 6th meeting of the Emerald Network Group of Experts in Istanbul in October 2001. Current activities were reviewed at five workshops held in 2002 (Croatia, “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Albania, Georgia and Senegal). The results are not yet available.

The possibility of further co-operation between the Emerald Network and other networks, such as the EEA's Corine biotopes network, was discussed at a seminar held in Ljubljana (Slovenia) from 3 to 5 September 1998. Many CEE countries had brought their Corine biotopes project to a close by that time, thus paving the way for entry into the Emerald Network and, consequently, to Natura 2000.

Action plans for the Mediterranean

In connection with the 1976 Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution, ten main objectives were adopted for the Decade (1985-1995) of the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP). One of these objectives was the protection of certain marine species such as marine turtles, cetaceans and monk seals in the Mediterranean. At a meeting of experts from the 18 Mediterranean countries, held in Arta (Greece) from 27 to 31 October 1998 under the auspices of the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas (CAR/ASP), a partial evaluation was carried out and various activities designed to achieve this objective were outlined.

Protection of amphibians and reptiles

At the seminar on the implementation of action plans for amphibians and reptiles, held in Thessalonica (Greece) from 28 to 31 May 1998, the Bern Convention's Group of Experts discussed a number of conservation action plans proposed by IUCN's group of European herpetology specialists.

Protection of large carnivores

The protection of large carnivores is the subject of a strategic action plan adopted in Aetos (Greece) in 1999. This three-year plan was devised by a group of experts brought together by the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe (LCIE), WWF and the Bern Convention. Its main aims are to promote the following at political level:

Plant conservation

Various activities have been carried out since the Group of Experts on Conservation of Plants was set up, in particular the drafting of a European red list of threatened plants.

A European strategy for plant conservation was set out at the third Planta Europa Conference for the conservation of wild plants, held in Pruhonice (Czech Republic) from 23 to 28 June 2001. The Council of Europe and Planta Europa have joined forces in order to curb any further damage to the diversity of European flora. This strategy is the result of co-operation between the delegates at the third Planta Europa Conference, the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention and other European organisations. The Council of Europe has lent financial and technical support to the strategy.

Bird conservation

The Bern Convention's Group of Experts on Conservation of Birds has carried out various activities. The Standing Committee of the Convention has adopted numerous recommendations concerning the protection of European birds. The most notable of these are:

Two new recommendations are currently being prepared. They concern sixteen new action plans for the most threatened birds on the territory covered by the Convention, the implementation of action plans for globally threatened birds and other issues connected with bird conservation on the territory covered by the Convention.

Programme of activities for 2003 under the second five-year Action Plan 2001-2005

The programme of activities for 2003 is based on the six objectives of the second five-year Action Plan 2001-2005 on biological diversity and on the delegations' comments on the programme (see doc. CO-DBP (2000) 12). The following aims were therefore set out:

-       implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity through the Pan-European Strategy process;

-       integrating biological and landscape diversity considerations into sectoral policies;

-       providing information and enhancing communication;

-       developing the Pan-European Ecological Network.

New additions to the 2003 programme of activities include consideration of the geological heritage and environmental ethics.

Reporting committee: Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs

Reference to committee: Doc. 9803 and reference No. 2841 of 27 May 2003.

Draft recommendation adopted by the committee on 30 September 2003.

Members of the committee: Mr Martinez Casañ (Chairman) (Alternate: Mr de Puig), MM. Meale, Gubert, Schmied (Alternate: Ms Fehr) (Vice-Chairmen), Mr Açikgöz, Mrs Agudo, MM. Akselsen, Andov, Annemans, Mrs Anttila, MM. Ates, Bruce, Mevlüt Çavusoglu (Alternate: Yüksel Çavusoglu), Sir Sydney Chapman, Mr Churkin, Mrs Ciemniak, MM. Cosarciuc, Deittert, Delattre, Dokle, Duka-Zolyomi, Ekes, Etherington, Frunda (Alternate: Kelemen), Giovanelli (Alternate: Crema), Götz, Graas, Grabowski, Grachev, Grissemann, Gunnarsson, Mrs Hajiyeva, Ms Herczog, MM. Hladiy, Högmark, Ilascu, Mrs Jäger, MM. Jakovljev, Jevtic (Alternate: Dimic), Juric, Mrs Kanelli (Alternate: Mr Pavlidis), MM. Karapetyan, Kharitonov, Klympush, Kuzvart, Lachat, Libicki, van der Linden, Lobkowicz, Loncle (Alternate: Lengagne), Masseret, Mauro (Alternate: Nessa), Mrs Mesquita, MM. Meyer (Alternate: Goulet), Milojevic (Alternate: Lozancic), Mincevic, Mrs Muizniece, Mr Nazaré Pereira, Mrs Ohlsson, MM. Oliverio, Opmann, Podeschi, Podobnik, Popov (Alternate : Sudarenkov), Pullicino Orlando (Alternate: Falzon), Salaridze, Ms Schicker, MM. Sfyriou, Sizopoulos, Steenblock, Ms Støjberg, Mr Stoica (Alternate: Coifan), Ms Stoyanova, MM. Timmermans, Txueka Isasti, Vakilov, Velikov, Wright, Zhevago.

N.B. The names of those members present at the meeting are printed in italics.

Secretariat to the committee: Mrs Cagnolati, Mr Sixto, Mr Torcatoriu and Ms Trévisan.

1 http://www.Strategyguide.org hosted by ECNC