Doc. 7696
29 October 1996

REPORT1 on results and follow-up to European Nature Conservation Year 1995

(Rapporteur: Mr HARDY, United Kingdom, Socialist Group)

Summary

      In the first part of the report, the Assembly outlines the aims, target groups and activities of European Nature Conservation Year 1995 and highlights the success enjoyed by the campaign in the 42 participating countries.

      The report then discusses the support given by the Assembly to this venture and the initiative taken by the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities in organising a hearing on the dialogue between non-governmental organisations and parliaments as its contribution to ENCY'95.

      Lastly, the Assembly assesses ENCY'95 by considering it in the general context of the Council of Europe's activities in the environmental field and in relation to the work of an follow-up to the 3rd pan-European Conference of Ministers responsible for the Environment, now referred to as the "Sofia process".

      The Assembly expresses its regret that, despite its leading role in this field, the Council of Europe now seems to be confined - with inadequate resources - to the problem of nature conservation, without addressing other aspects of environmental policy, such as environmental protection through legal co-operation, a field in which the Council of Europe also has considerable experience.

I. Draft recommendation

1.       Almost thirty-five years after the Parliamentary Assembly's initiative aimed at establishing ongoing European co-operation in the field of nature conservation, the environment has become one of the key areas of work of several international organisations.

2.       Important conferences such as the Earth Summit in Rio (June 1992) at a global level, and the third Pan-European Conference of Ministers of the Environment (Sofia, October 1995) at a European level, have given governments the opportunity to commit themselves to policies specifically designed to conserve our resources and to guarantee the ecologically sustainable development of the planet.

3.       In spite of this growing awareness, which is already a significant step forward in addressing these problems, the measures implemented by governments so far rarely match the seriousness of the threats to our resources or to commitments made in this area.

4.       The Assembly firmly believes that, as in other areas, responsibility for environmental protection lies with each and every one of us and therefore that all sections of society should play their part.

5.       In this connection, raising awareness and providing information and education on environmental problems are an indispensable element of all environmental policies.

6.       The Assembly therefore welcomes the fact that the Council of Europe organised a second nature conservation campaign, twenty-five years after the first and also the fact that this campaign focused on environmental protection outside protected areas, that is, where the human activities which are the main cause of environmental degradation take place.

7.       European Nature Conservation Year 1995 (ENCY'95) was a great success in the forty-two European countries which participated in the event and provided an opportunity to reaffirm the Council of Europe's leading role in the field of nature conservation. Moreover, it undoubtedly helped to raise awareness of conservation problems in Europe and to convince people that, as with environmental policies in general, nature conservation calls for an integrated approach and needs to become a component of sectoral policies such as transport policy or policies in the field of public works, agriculture, tourism, and industrial development.

8.       It is important to ensure, however, that some of the activities undertaken and synergies created have lasting effects and make a long-term contribution to more effective nature conservation.

9.       In this connection, it is important, with due regard to the powers and responsibilities of the various parties, to foster dialogue with non-governmental organisations working in the field of environmental protection so that we can draw upon their experience and expertise and also, through them, be in direct contact with society at large.

10.       In this context, the Assembly can welcome the fact that the European Ministers of the Environment, meeting in Sofia for their third pan-European conference, approved the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy which had been prepared by the Council of Europe, and that the latter was asked to implement this strategy in conjunction with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

11.       Nevertheless, as with ENCY'95, successful implementation of the strategy will largely depend on the synergies created through the combined action of different groups involved, be they decision-makers, economic operators or non-governmental organisations.

12.       Moreover, the Assembly is fully aware and pleased that, out of concern for efficiency, European and international organisations working in the field of the environment are sharing tasks and that the Council of Europe's pioneering role and experience in nature conservation have naturally marked it out as the body responsible for pan-European co-operation in this field.

13.       However, it regrets that the role assigned to the Council of Europe in the "Sofia process" is limited to nature conservation which, in addition, is not a priority of the ministers.

14.       It regrets in particular that the Council of Europe's experience of conventions, and notably of drafting instruments concerning environmental protection, has not been recognised as a possible contribution to the "Sofia process", particularly in the preparation of the Convention on Access to Environmental Information and Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making.

15.       Similarly, it is equally deplorable that the governments which gave the Council of Europe the authority to prepare the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment, which they adopted and opened for signature at the Conference of Ministers of Justice in Lugano in 1993, have still not signed and ratified this instrument.

16.       Nevertheless, the Council of Europe must carry out the terms of reference given to it by the ministers in Sofia, act, as appropriate, upon the conclusions of and the expectations raised by ENCY'95 and assert a role equivalent to that of other organisations in the implementation of a pan-European environment policy.

17.       The budgetary decisions to be taken should therefore clearly reflect a determination to see the Council of Europe play an active role in its specific fields of competence and to make use of the potential represented by its long experience of working in these fields.

18.       It has to be recognised, however, that, at least in the current situation, the resources made available to this sector do not seem to demonstrate this determination and that the funds which were available to these activities before they were incorporated into the strategy or before the Year's events have remained unchanged.

19.       In this connection, while reaffirming its concern to see that the Bern Convention obtains the financial resources and staff which would allow it to take on fully the role assigned to it in the Pan-European Biodiversity and Landscape Strategy, the Assembly is deeply disappointed to see that no additional resources have been made available to this convention.

20.       This lack of resources is all the more regrettable given that the Council of Europe could, in keeping with its role vis-à-vis the countries of central and eastern Europe, usefully offer these countries the benefit of its experience in order to help them meet the legislative or administrative conditions needed to implement the conventions to which they are party.

21.       The Assembly therefore recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

i.       take appropriate follow-up action on the positive results of ENCY'95, in particular by fostering closer relations with non-governmental organisations so as to take full advantage of the contribution which they can make in this area and by ensuring that certain priorities of the Year, such as environmental education projects, become long-term elements in the Council of Europe's work;

ii.       take the necessary measures to give the Council of Europe, within the limits of its specific fields of competence, a role equivalent to that of the other organisations involved in the "Sofia process" and, in order to achieve this:

      a. increase the resources allocated to the implementation of the Pan-European Biodiversity and Landscape Strategy in order to furnish tangible evidence of its commitment to this sector;

      b. help the countries of central and eastern Europe to meet the conditions for the application of the conventions to which they are party, through specific and appropriate projects;

      c. substantially increase the resources available to the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention, thereby demonstrating a real determination to make this instrument one of the key conventions in the field of nature conservation;

      d. invite the governments of member states to sign and ratify the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment, which was opened for signature in Lugano in 1993;

      e. ensure that the Council of Europe actively participates in the preparatory work for the fourth Pan-European Conference of Ministers of the Environment to be held in Denmark in 1998, and particularly in the preparation of the Convention on Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making.

II. Explanatory memorandum

by Mr HARDY

Table of contents

Page

Introduction        7

1.       The Year's target groups       7

2.       The Year's events       8

3.       The Parliamentary Assembly's contribution       8

4.       Assessment of European Nature Conservation Year 1995       12

Appendices

I.       Budget allocated by the Council of Europe for ENCY'95       17

II.       Programme of the hearing on the role of NGOs in environmental

      protection policy       18

III.       Extracts from the final report of the International Organising Committee

      for ENCY'95       20

Introduction

1.       Twenty-five years after European Conservation Year 1970, the Council of Europe decided in 1995 to launch European Nature Conservation Year.

2.       The difference between these two initiatives is that the aim of the European Conservation Year 1970 was to make decision-makers and the general public more aware of the need to conserve natural resources, mainly by establishing protected areas, and therefore of the value of fostering co-operation at all levels to protect them, whereas European Nature Conservation Year 1995 was exclusively devoted to nature conservation outside protected areas.

3.       The different ideas and objectives of these two initiatives clearly show that more than twenty-five years after the first "Year", the state of natural resources has deteriorated considerably, that nature reserves and protected areas are no longer enough to preserve our resources and moreover that unless comprehensive measures are taken in respect of all natural or semi-natural spaces in Europe and throughout the world, our biological diversity will be endangered.

4.       The Council of Europe's intention in basing ENCY'95 on nature conservation outside protected areas was undeniably to broaden the scope of nature protection significantly and to demonstrate that it is necessary and, above all, possible to incorporate ecological requirements into appropriate development policies.

5.       The Parliamentary Assembly has always supported the Council of Europe's specific role in nature protection and conservation and was keen to find ways of contributing to the activities organised for the Year and of demonstrating once again its commitment to the environment and the measures needed to halt the alarming degradation of our resources.

1. The Year's target groups

6.       ENCY was aimed at four target groups, whose role was considered vital if the campaign's goals were to be achieved: local and regional authorities, "users" of the environment, "consumers" of space and young people.

7.       Interestingly enough, all the member states, through their respective national organising committees, drew up their own programme, and some in fact redefined the themes of the campaign according to their particular situation and the target groups they wanted to reach.

8.       As with many initiatives of this kind — the European Campaign for the Countryside springs to mind — the vitality, commitment and enthusiasm of the national committee has was crucial to the campaign's success, at national level obviously, but also at European level. In some countries, the national committee had forty or so members (representatives of various ministries, NGOs, local and regional elected officials, etc.), while in others the committee was on a smaller, but more flexible, scale.

9.       NGOs working in the field of the environment participated in ENCY through an independent structure, Task Force NGO Nature, which was set up in January 1994 with a membership of fifty international NGOs. This task force, in which the Association "Rurality-Environment-Development" was the prime mover, devoted its energies to disseminating information on ENCY to national NGOs co-ordinating their activities and setting up projects in partnership with the Council of Europe.

2. The Year's events

10.       Many international events were organised in several member states. For instance, the International Seminar on the Conservation of Mediterranean Ecosystems (Portugal), the Conference on the Environment and Health (Ukraine), the Colloquy on Changing Land Ownership and Nature Conservation (Lithuania), the Colloquy on the Protection of the Coastal Areas of the Adriatic Sea (Albania).

11.       In addition to these international events, the national committees implemented national programmes which were often based upon very different kinds and numbers of activities. For example, photographic competitions, days organised around a specific theme, exhibitions, colloquies, seminars, etc.

12.       The Council of Europe and the national committees were well aware that the media now plays a key part in this kind of information and awareness-raising initiative, and therefore made a great effort to ensure that media "coverage" would be such as to help achieve the Year's aims.

13.       The budgets allocated to the campaign also varied considerably from one country to another. While some national committees were lucky enough to receive a fairly large special budget (Belgium, Switzerland, Denmark, etc.), others were only able to organise certain activities through other kinds of funding such as sponsorship, grants from foundations or from ministries, etc. (see Appendix I: ENCY'95 budget).

3. The Parliamentary Assembly's contribution

14.       As part of the Year's official launch, on 31 January 1995, during the Parliamentary Assembly's first part-session, our former colleague, Ms Graenitz presented a report on behalf of the committee on a comprehensive and integrated European conservation policy (Doc. 7217), which highlighted the Council of Europe's role in protecting and managing natural resources and underscored the importance of the Year's goal, which was to devise and put into effect a comprehensive strategy for the conservation of resources.

15.       The Assembly, believing that the Year was important and could make a contribution to the promotion of sustainable development worldwide, undertook to follow closely the activities of the international organising committee, on which it was represented by Ms Graenitz.

16.       On the occasion of this report, the Parliamentary Assembly reaffirmed its interest in the role which non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can play in implementing environmental protection policies. It accordingly requested its Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities to contribute to the Year by organising a hearing on this subject, and more specifically on co-operation between parliaments and NGOs.

17.       The Assembly's hearing on the role of NGOs in environmental protection policies was held in Strasbourg on 2 and 3 April 1996.

18.       The Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities has always been particularly aware of the role that NGOs play or can play in devising and implementing environmental policies and has always felt that it was vital to try and find the right balance in relations between NGOs and decision-makers.

19.       On the occasion of this report on the application of conventions concerning the environment (Doc. 7076 and Recommendation ...), your rapporteur, referring to the implementation of the Bern Convention, emphasised that the role of NGOs "in the application of, compliance with and improvement of the convention is decisive".

20.       As part of its preparations for participating in the third Pan-European Conference of Ministers of the Environment, for example, the committee organised a conference (Strasbourg, 8-9 June 1995) on the same general theme as the ministerial conference and invited, in particular, representatives of national parliaments and of NGOs active in the environmental economic fields.

21.       The purpose of the conference was to offer an opportunity for dialogue between these various partners and to stimulate activity before the conference, but also after it to help implement the results. In the course of the proceedings the role of the NGOs was recognised as being of fundamental importance, but various participants stressed that this role could only be fully effective if steps were taken to ensure that NGOs were in a position to act autonomously and independently and if the easy option of, as it were, delegating certain responsibilities to them and using them as a an alibi was avoided.

22.       The general view was that NGOs should have a right of appeal and be able to participate in procedures concerning the violation of conventions, internal regulations and agreements. This clearly means that countries should amend their domestic law to grant NGOs this right and thus recognise their competence in environmental matters.

23.       The participation of NGOs in environmental policies and the conservation and comprehensive management of resources has always been one of the favourite themes of the committee and the Assembly as a whole. However, the priority which has been given to this subject recently tends to prove how absolutely vital it is to ensure the greatest possible participation of interested groups in environmental policies so that practical solutions can be found to the most urgent, and often most serious, problems, which regrettably are sometimes neglected.

24.       It is this concern, therefore, which led the Assembly to develop this theme as part of its contribution to ENCY and to organise a parliamentary hearing.

25.       Moreover, it was important to supplement the discussions held as part of the Year on the role of civil society in implementing policies for the protection of natural resources, by adding an element which had not been addressed during the Year, namely dialogue between parliaments and NGOs.

26.       The basic idea behind this hearing was the observation that there is all too often an element of conflict in the "traditional" relations between NGOs and decision-makers, which, as a result, easily degenerate into what is usually sterile confrontation. It has to be recognised, however, that NGOs, or at least some of them, have human and financial resources which enable them to attain a high level of knowledge, expertise and organisation, and that they are a potentially precious ally for a good many initiatives.

27.       In these circumstances, it is important to look beyond the respective behavioural stereotypes and establish a basis for effective dialogue between decision-makers and NGOs. Clearly, such dialogue should take account of the responsibilities and prerogatives of each party without, on the one hand, NGOs claiming that it does not lead to joint decision-making or, on the other, decision-makers succumbing to the temptation of delegating some of their tasks to NGOs.

28.       As has already been mentioned above, the committee has discussed this issue frequently, all the more so since NGOs working in the environmental field are among the most committed NGOs, who ask to be kept informed and allowed to participate in decision-making and who, admittedly, have often openly opposed decision makers.

29.       The Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities, indeed the Parliamentary Assembly as a whole, has always enjoyed excellent relations with the NGOs working in its fields of competence. It has always appreciated its dialogue with them, regularly requests their opinions and often takes these into consideration. Nevertheless, the committee has always wished to carry out its terms of reference as a parliamentary committee to the full extent and to express its views independently without having to share this responsibility.

30.       Indeed, while it is important to make every effort to harmonise action at all levels in order to solve the serious and urgent problems facing our environment, it is equally important for all those involved to retain their own identities and to act in complete conformity with their specific roles.

31.       It was with this in mind that the European Commission made specific provision to help NGOs working on the environment via a separate heading in the Community budget.

32.       Believing that this question was becoming increasingly important and wishing to hold an exchange of views with NGOs on the subject, the committee therefore organised this hearing.

33.       The first session (see programme, Appendix II) looked at the work of NGOs in promoting environmental protection and their participation in some of the Council of Europe's activities. The second session covered the existing or desirable co-operation between parliaments and NGOs both in providing support for and disseminating information on the legislative process and in helping to monitor and implement legislation.

34.       During the first part, the participants, with reference to the experience of the Bern Convention and an initial assessment of ENCY'95, discussed NGO participation. The NGOs asked for greater access to information, more dialogue and more participation. Some raised the notion of "well thought-out solidarity" while others spoke of partnership, joint responsibility and early access to decision-making processes, etc.

35.       More specifically, as regards relations with the Council of Europe, many participants complained about the limited funds available to the Organisation for its relations with NGOs. From easier physical access to the Organisation to systematic participation in various meetings (of governmental experts and parliamentarians), the NGOs certainly welcomed the Council of Europe's recognition of them, but asked for greater account to be taken of their views in decision-making and to be granted official and political recognition.

36.       The second part of the hearing was devoted to the theme which is of primary concern to the committee, namely relations between NGOs and parliaments. The advantages for parliaments of involving NGOs in their deliberations are to be found at different levels of parliamentary work. The expertise of NGOs can be useful at the various stages of the legislative process both in helping to prepare the legislation itself and in providing support by disseminating information and promoting legislative measures.

37.       However, and this is not the least of their roles, NGOs, by combining their efforts with those of parliaments, can also play an important role vis-à-vis governments. It has to be said that, at practically all levels, governments often fail to fulfil their promises and this is particularly true in an area such as the environment, which can easily be sacrificed in favour of more attractive economic priorities.

38.       In this context, parliamentary pressure on governments to try to halt this trend may be all the more effective if NGOs add their voice. Its acute awareness of these opportunities made the Parliamentary Assembly particularly keen to participate in the Sofia Conference right from the beginning.

39.       The committee felt that the issues were of the utmost importance and that contributions were needed from all the parties involved to ensure that the decisions taken were actually implemented. It therefore wished to be closely involved in what is now usually referred to as the "Sofia Process".

40.       As regards the role of the Parliamentary Assembly itself, this is especially important because the Assembly is composed of representatives of national parliaments who are able to exert direct pressure on their governments and on civil society in their countries to ensure that the decisions taken are effectively implemented.

41.       It is crucial that monitoring of implementation — whether of conventions, decisions taken at ministerial conferences or of any governmental measure — should be close as possible. The synergy created by effective dialogue between parliaments and NGOs can be extremely valuable here.

42.       Moreover, in my opinion, such matters warrant consideration at the level of the Parliamentary Assembly as a whole, which should perhaps concentrate on playing its specific role in relation to national parliaments.

43.       At a time when, in the context of the IGC, the European Union is considering what role national parliaments should play, given that they embody democracy and correspond exactly to the principle of subsidiarity as defined by the European Union, it is perhaps important for the Assembly to highlight its own role and use it to maximum effect.

44.       As far as relations with NGOs are concerned, the same kind of mechanisms being sought at the European level should be put in place lower down the system, that is between national parliaments and the NGOs which work at this level.

45.       Once transposed to the European level, these mechanisms for dialogue and "well thought-out solidarity" would certainly improve the quality of the discussions held and the solutions found in large forums such as the Parliamentary Assembly.

46.       However, it is inevitable that, as with conventions, the common solutions will not fully satisfy everyone in view of the disparities between one situation and another.

47.       This applies particularly to an issue such as relations between NGOs and parliaments, which call for sound and long-established democratic processes. Can we really imagine that the experience of NGOs, not simply in carrying out their work but also in their relations with decision makers and especially with elected officials, is the same in western European as in eastern European countries?

48.       In the light of these observations, I can only emphasise the importance of the role that NGOs can play and the need to establish fruitful and co-operative relations with them. It is equally important to stress the need for each partner to retain their respective roles. It would be regrettable if, for want of experience in this area, a government were to rule out dialogue altogether or, at the other extreme, delegate its authority wholesale.

49.       ENCY'95 offered NGOs considerable scope, and they organised a wide range of activities, thereby clearly demonstrating the extent to which civil society needs to be taken into account. The Parliamentary Assembly felt that it was useful to focus on this particular aspect of the campaign which, although not of direct relevance to the Year's theme, is implicit in all the activities and is certain to be the cornerstone of all future environmental policies.

4. Assessment of European Nature Conservation Year 1995

50.       The committee has often wondered about the role which the Council of Europe should be playing in the environmental field and I have on numerous occasions spoken out in favour of the Council's making a larger and more decisive contribution to areas which clearly fall within its sphere of action, such as the implementation of the Bern Convention or other conventions in the environmental field which are not given the attention they merit.

51.       With this in mind, I felt that the assessment of an event such as ENCY'95 required a dual approach.

52.       First, it is necessary to evaluate the way in which the activity itself developed in relation to the effort and financial resources deployed and the response it prompted in terms of the activities and commitments of the various players in the campaign.

53.       But it is just as important to carry out a second assessment, which might be termed a "consolidated assessment", taking into account the general background against which ENCY was organised, the long-term commitment of the people involved, the tangible results achieved or which should be achieved in the future, where it fits into the activities of the Council of Europe and the latter's current role in this field.

54.       ENCY'95 was an undeniable success in the majority of participating countries. As in previous campaigns (for example the European Campaign for the Countryside), the setting up of national committees led in a number of countries to the creation of sometimes particularly intense "areas" of activity and the mobilisation of considerable resources which enabled highly satisfactory results to be achieved. In addition, the setting up of national committees also generally has the added advantage — and fortunately ENCY has been no exception — of creating special relationships between the countries concerned or between the Council of Europe and those countries. This cannot but augur well for continuing co-operation.

55.       In its final report, the International Organising Committee (see Appendix III: extracts) pointed out the considerable impact the campaign had made on the public, especially in some countries, and the extensive media coverage at local and regional level of the initiatives undertaken, thus confirming the undeniable success of the campaign's community-based approach. However, it has to be acknowledged that at national and European level the campaign received much more modest media attention, with little — if any — reporting on the event. Furthermore, it was enlightening, although unfortunately not surprising, to see that the national media which did cover some of the ENCY activities more often than not made no reference to the Council of Europe.

56.       This would appear merely to confirm the frequently-voiced belief that the media nowadays only come out in force for events which are of mass appeal and in which considerable resources have been invested. Consequently, it is unrealistic to contemplate organising a campaign aimed at the general public without adequate funding.

57.       While this assessment in no way detracts from the impact which a campaign such as this has on specific sections of the public, for example young people, schoolchildren, local elected representatives, etc., it proves once again that, for the future, a choice has to be made between organising a similar initiative but with much larger financial resources, and holding more limited events concentrating on targeted themes and audiences.

58.       If the latter were to be the way forward, and given the acknowledged importance of environmental education, I think a future initiative, to be carried out with the directorate concerned, might, for example, focus on schools and be implemented in co-ordination with the relevant ministries and schools in the member states.

59.       A further positive feature of ENCY was without a doubt the mobilisation and dynamism of NGOs. NGOs are showing themselves increasingly to be an ideal partner for such action and can have an extremely positive role to play with regard to policy-makers. It is important therefore to bear this in mind and we should be grateful for the fact that ENCY'95 helped create the necessary conditions for a decision-maker/NGO dialogue, which both I and our committee have so often wished to see.

60.       Accordingly, any Council of Europe initiative aimed at continuing the support given to NGOs during the campaign should receive our backing.

61.       Furthermore, and this is also gratifying, ENCY gave our new member states the opportunity to take part — often for the very first time — in an event of this type. The enthusiasm and high participation rate of the public in these countries, where such events are probably quite a novelty, illustrate how great the impact on the population was and the extent to which they were made aware of the issues at stake.

62.       All the same, and as I said at the beginning of this section, it is also important not to assess ENCY'95 merely as an isolated event but rather to ensure that any assessment takes account of the general background against which ENCY was organised, and indeed all the constituent parts of that background, be these the Council of Europe's policy and/or role in this field, trends in European environmental policy, the actual intentions of governments, etc.

63.       While we may welcome the fact that ENCY'95 — as pointed out in the evaluation report produced by the International Organising Committee (see Appendix III) — highlighted the need to review nature conservation policies and the need to incorporate these in other sectoral policies, it is not easy to ignore the fact that although some groups are certainly more familiar with these ideas as a result of ENCY'95 — which is certainly a positive result — unfortunately, decision-makers have in fact been urged to adopt this approach for several years now and are still as reluctant as ever to take the necessary measures.

64.       Let us not forget that OECD several years ago was the first to launch the idea of integrated environmental management and the "Environmental Strategy for the 1990s", defined at the 1991 ministerial meeting, calls for the integration of economic and environmental decision-making. OECD has therefore focused its attention on studying the various economic instruments which could be employed to implement environmental policy. It is worth pointing out that this approach includes the idea of "green accounting", whereby a value is assigned to natural resources, which are incorporated into gross domestic product (GNP), thereby increasing or decreasing the latter depending on the state or value of those resources.

65.       Given the economic role of OECD, it is quite logical for their activities to be focused on economic policy. But the concern to incorporate environmental factors into sectoral policies such as the economy of course, but also transport, energy, tourism or agriculture, can also be found in Community action programmes on the environment, and particularly, the latest one, the fifth.

66.       In recent years, this concern has also been a feature of the texts adopted in this field by the Assembly, which with a considerable degree of perseverance continues to invite the governments of member states to engage in integrated resource management and to take environmental protection into account in all the decision-making processes which may have some influence on the state of resources.

67.       These thoughts of mine do not mean that the results of ENCY in this area have been insignificant, far from it. Rather they should be interpreted as a warning against the temptation to believe that the few results of ENCY in this field will have an impact on government policy. We should be viewing these results in the more realistic and more relevant context of raising the awareness of other sections of the community, the effect of which will undoubtedly be positive but longer-term.

68.       With this in mind, it would be worthwhile adding this last observation to the arguments put forward by the IOC when it refers to the need to target action more narrowly and perhaps, in the same spirit, to limit the number of participants.

69.       If we were to organise action programmes focusing on the problems of a given region (for example the Baltic region, the Black Sea, the Danube region, the Mediterranean, etc.) and targeting specific groups (schoolchildren, the media, researchers, industrialists, etc.), this would probably enhance the effectiveness of the resources which could in the future be allocated to such initiatives and which would, in all events, be invariably relatively modest.

70.       As for the changes which governments might make to national policies in the wake of such campaigns, I cannot help feeling somewhat sceptical. While a carefully targeted campaign can improve the knowledge of specific groups, thus enabling them to act or react in relation to the decisions taken by the authorities, it is difficult to imagine national policies being changed by campaigns of this type in a tangible way and as quickly as we invariably expect such change to occur.

71.       In this connection, it is not inappropriate to remember that ENCY'95 took place in the same year as the 3rd pan-European Conference of Ministers responsible for the Environment, which was held in October 1995 in Sofia. Since the holding of the first of these conferences in Dobris (Czech Republic) in 1991, they have given rise to considerable expectations, particularly in the central and east European countries which are relying on pan-European solidarity to help them solve their urgent environmental problems.

72.       But as was the case with the first two, it could quite justifiably be claimed that the Sofia Conference did not give rise to a great deal of enthusiasm. Once again, it proved impossible to make a positive assessment of what had been achieved so far. Nor did it turn out to be the occasion when governments finally committed themselves to concrete action in this field.

73.       It was at this conference that the Council of Europe submitted its Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy to the ministers, who approved it, and offered to make it available to the UNEP member states its considerable experience in this field, in particular the experience acquired from ENCY.

74.       Unfortunately, and this has already been mentioned in other circumstances, in particular during a recent meeting with the Secretary General, it was abundantly clear to the Assembly members present in Sofia that the strategy was not nor would be a future priority for ministers, despite the fact that in entrusting its implementation to the Council of Europe they had also asked for a report on the strategy to be submitted to them at the next ministerial conference.

75.       It is worthwhile reiterating that the strategy is based on a voluntary commitment by states, which, being convinced of the need to change their nature conservation policies, would adopt national strategies in line with the strategy presented in Sofia, selecting the themes and actions which best suit their own situation.

76.       The pan-European environmental policy role given to the Council of Europe is extremely limited and is a minor one in comparison with the role entrusted to other organisations which are occasionally responsible for sectors which quite logically could have fallen to the Council, provided of course it were given adequate resources.

77.       While it is true that the Council has considerable experience in organising awareness-raising campaigns, it is also true that it has recognised expertise in the legal field and a potential political role at the level of the Parliamentary Assembly, and at the level of the CLRAE for local and regional matters.

78.       In conclusion, I believe that the Parliamentary Assembly can be satisfied with ENCY'95 and the effort pout in by the organisers to make this event a success. However, I feel I must stress that such a campaign cannot be the keystone of the environmental activities of an organisation such as the Council of Europe which must play its part in the introduction of more effective policies by also targeting its action on governments.

79.       In addition — and this is an observation made by the International Organising Committee itself — the resources were too limited to make it a large-scale campaign reaching not only all publics, but all publics in all member states.

80.       In the light of the above remarks and considerations, I would like the Committee of Ministers to decide to continue entrusting the Council of Europe with environmental awareness-raising/information/training tasks, but on a scale more in keeping with the financial resources allocated to such projects. Regional projects on specific themes would be an alternative approach worth exploring.

81.       The Committee of Ministers should also give fresh impetus to the Council of Europe's activities or instruments which are aimed at contributing more directly to the implementation of environmental policies. A considerable increase in the resources made available for the implementation of the Bern Convention, and targeted action to encourage signature and ratification of the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment would be a step in the right direction.

APPENDIX I

Budget allocated by the Council of Europe for ENCY'95

      For three years (1993, 1994 and 1995) the ENCY budget was taken out of the funds allocated to the relevant sector of the intergovernmental programme, namely the sector under the responsibility of the Steering Committee for the Conservation and Management of the Environment and Natural Habitats (CDPE).

      In 1993, the budget was used to finance the organisation of the first meeting of the International Organising Committee (IOC).

      The 1994 and 1995 budgets (1 000 000 French francs and 1 100 000 French francs respectively) covered the meetings of the IOC and its Steering Group, financial support for a number of international events and production of information material.

      During ENCY'95 itself, the budget was used primarily to assist the activities of the central and east European countries.

      It should be noted, however, that other departments, including the Centre Naturopa and the Public Relations Service, also contributed to the funding of ENCY.

APPENDIX II

2 April 1996       AS/Loc/Aud/ONG (1996) 1

COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT,

REGIONAL PLANNING AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES

Hearing on the role of NGOs

in environmental protection policy

(Strasbourg 3 April 1996)

PROGRAMME

11 a.m.       Opening of the meeting by Mr Jean Briane, Chairman of the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities.

Introduction by Mr Peter Hardy, rapporteur

11.15 a.m.       1.       International action by NGOs in the field of environmental protection

12 noon       Discussion

1 p.m.       Lunch

2.30 p.m.       2.       Co-operation between parliaments and NGOs

3.15 p.m.       Discussion

4.15 p.m.       3.       Co-operation between the Parliamentary Assembly and NGOs

4.30 p.m.       Discussion

5.30 p.m.       Conclusions by Mr Peter Hardy, rapporteur

APPENDIX III

Extracts from the

"results, evaluation and follow-up of ENCY'95"

doc. AECN/CIO (96) 2 final

(Document of the Secretariat General)

ENCY: Evaluation, perspectives and follow-up

1.       At national level

1.1.       The NOCs constituted quite a new focal point for partnership schemes and, although in some cases not all members of the committee were genuinely active, were structures that facilitated joint projects and dialogue between partners who otherwise have few opportunities of working together. In most countries such co-operation proved a most enriching experience; some of the alliances that came into being will outlive ENCY. As the national committees cannot be kept in being after ENCY, their role should be taken over by the national agencies of the Centre Naturopa, which would thus be given a firmer basis in the country and become better known.

1.2.       The theme selected for ENCY was extremely broad and offered wide scope for national variants. It was important for all European countries wishing to take part in the campaign to be able to join. Many countries of northern Europe chose to limit themselves to a single sub-theme. On the other hand, certain countries, particularly in central Europe, made some very ambitious decisions with the result that, for lack of resources, certain campaigns had a rather scattered impact.

1.3.       The same can be said for the choice of target groups. The more it is desired to have a real impact, the more it is necessary to target a particular audience. If it is desired to reach many different target groups, enormous financial and human resources are needed, without which it is difficult to do the job.

1.4.       There was enormous enthusiasm for ENCY at both local and regional level and activities are to continue. In Switzerland a manifesto for a more nature-conscious Switzerland has been adopted at the Palais Fédéral, at a session called "Nature Day". This manifesto thus constitutes the basis for commitments for the years to come. Austria regards ENCY as a second starting point for a new nature conservation policy. A few countries have developed bilateral projects. Projects of this type are long term and the partnerships concerned, like that between Austria and Slovenia, will continue after ENCY. Greece is preparing a decree on the protection and management of watercourses and will intensify its relationships with NGOs in the future. As a result of ENCY, Spain will organise a series of conferences on the management and protection of wetlands.

1.5.       Nature conservation appears to be a subject that the media find difficult to handle when it does not involve wild plants and animals which are always an attractive topic. For ENCY, relations with the media were of two types:

      —It       had little impact in the big national newspapers, except in a few countries. Nature conservation almost never makes the front page and it is very difficult to reverse this trend.—

      —On       the other hand, in most countries local and regional press, and sometimes the specialised press, reported on ENCY. It is thanks to this press, "information close at hand", that the campaign's message was known at national level.In

      In the Council of Europe, it would have been desirable to have a person truly responsible full-time for relations with the press and monitoring press coverage and for developing a strong information policy.

2.       At NGO level

2.1.       It is interesting to note the large number of activities organised by NGOs for this campaign and to see how they form part of a long-term effort. Several of these actions will be continued in 1996 through projects launched by NGOs in 1995. In addition to this long-term approach, the NGOs also seem anxious to gauge the impact of their commitment and have decided to undertake in 1996 an evaluation of their ENCY'95 activities.

2.2.       The Nature NGO Task Force was dissolved at the end of ENCY but, in order to maintain the co-operative action and special relations built up, the European Centre for Rural Interest — one of the nine groups of NGOs enjoying consultative status at the Council of Europe — will continue the work of dialogue and partnership begun by the task force.

2.3.       The Council of Europe's support for and promotion of NGO activities, which started with ENCY, will thus continue after 1995: more room in the Council's publications for NGOs, more frequent logistic support and even the possibility of funding to encourage NGO actions. The Centre Naturopa could thus become the leading partner of NGOs and be responsible for a programme of co-operation.

3.       At Council of Europe level

3.1.       It is very important to plan a campaign such as ENCY'95 long in advance. The success of any campaign in any country depends on adequate funding. Whether this comes from the state budget, private sponsors or foundations, the necessary contacts must be established at a very early stage by the Organising Committee since funds are voted and projects selected several years beforehand. Similarly, in the case of ENCY, certain opening ceremonies were coupled with events that had already been arranged since the states did not have the time to make special arrangements and the calendar of events for the environment sector was already full.

3.2.       One of the problems for the Council of Europe was to preserve the pan-European identity of the campaign. Certain countries, such as the United Kingdom or the Netherlands, developed their own distinct emblem from the start, while others, like Finland, conducted a national campaign in parallel with the European one. There were, moreover, relatively few bilateral projects, with the result that sometimes the general public did not clearly perceive the European dimension. In the press, for example, national campaigns sometimes predominated and little reference was made to the Council of Europe.

3.3.       If, in future, we wish to make sure that nature conservation campaigns are really effective, it might be necessary to limit the number of countries taking part around a specific theme that is common to all of them. This might permit greater financial support and enable the Council of Europe to provide more appropriate and less polyvalent materials.

3.4.       As for the Council of Europe itself, it should work out a planned strategy for campaigns that take place on a regular basis but do not follow each other too closely so that each can be properly funded. Their themes, such as education and nature, citizenship, human rights and nature, health and nature, culture and nature, should find expression in practical action at national policy level. It would also be desirable to involve other directorates in such campaigns depending on the themes selected.

3.5.       The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy was approved in Sofia in October 1995. Some fifty-five states will be members of the task force to be set up shortly. The experience gained from ENCY, a campaign conducted over three years with forty-two states, should prove very useful for carrying out the actions included in the strategy, particularly action theme No. 3. The Centre Naturopa could, to this end, propose a multi-annual communication plan to meet the needs of the Directorate of Environment and Local Authorities.

Reporting committee: Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities.

Budgetary implications for the Assembly:none.

Reference to committee: standing mandate.

Draft recommendation adopted by the committee on 28 October 1996.

Members of the committee: Mr Briane, (Chairman), Mr Ruffy, Lord Newall, (Vice-Chairmen), MM. Akçali, Andreoli, Arata, Assis Miranda, Mrs Aytaman (Alternate: Akarcali), MM. Benetatos, Blaauw, Mrs Blunck, MM. Bonrepaux (Alternate: Le Grand), Büchel, Carcarino (Alternate: Dionisi), Mrs Ciemniak, Mrs Dromberg, MM. Feldmann, Frunda, Haraldsson, Hardy, Hoeffel, O. Johansson, Mrs I-B. Johansson, MM. Korakas, Kukk, Lie, Lukas, Martinez Casan, Mocanu, Molloy (Alternate: Mitchell), Molnar, Mota Amaral, Motiu, Mozetic, Mme Naoumova, Mrs Oleinik, MM. Parisi, Penz, Plattner, Pozela, Priedkalns, Prokes, Prusi, Rakhansky, Recoder, Redmond, Mrs Riess-Passer, MM. Rott, Samofalov, Mrs Severinsen, MM. Shishlov, Staes, Svoboda, Sytchev, Szymanski, Theis, Toshev, Valkeniers, Vella, Woltjer, Zierer.

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

Secretaries to the committee :Mrs Cagnolati-Staveris and Mr Sixto.

1 1by the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Autorities