|
|
12 January 1995
Doc. 7217
1403-10/1/95-3-E
REPORT
on a comprehensive and integrated
European conservation policy
European Nature Conservation Year 1995
(Rapporteur: Mrs GRAENITZ,
Austria, Socialist Group)
Summary
Twenty-five years after European Conservation Year 1970, which attracted attention to the vital importance of preserving our planet's natural resources, the Council of Europe has decided that 1995 will be European Nature Conservation Year.
The "Brundtland report" and the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio in 1992 showed that it was essential to introduce comprehensive resource conservation strategies incorporating environmental protection and social and economic development.
ENCY '95 is fully consonant with this approach in that its main theme is nature conservation outside protected areas, that is where our societies' social and economic activities are located.
The Parliamentary Assembly, convinced of the importance of the campaign, wishes to contribute to it by holding a colloquy on the role of non-governmental organisations in implementing environmental protection policies.
I. Draft order
1. In 1970 the Council of Europe launched European Conservation Year. The campaign, which was a great success, made people realise the importance and indeed necessity of protecting our environment.
2. That was the start of a concerted move to co-operate in nature conservation matters, and particularly in setting up protected areas.
3. Twenty-five years later, it must nevertheless be admitted that extensive damage is being caused to the environment and that the life of our planet's ecosystem is genuinely at risk.
4. This makes it imperative to frame comprehensive and effective emergency strategies to protect our environment, not only in protected areas but also where human activities pollute and endanger the resources on which our survival depends.
5. First the "Brundtland report", then the Rio Conference demonstrated that development can be planned, accepted and encouraged only if it does not jeopardise natural — that is vital — resources and consequently the life of future generations.
6. We must therefore direct our efforts towards the areas in which our society carries out its activities, whether productive or otherwise, and reconcile humankind and nature so that the two may live together in harmony.
7. With its many years of experience, the Council of Europe was bound to take action to promote this approach to conservation policy, and European Nature Conservation Year (ENCY), in the form in which it is planned, can make a valuable contribution to the collective efforts deployed for the purpose.
8. The Assembly is convinced that in view of the themes, chosen by the participating countries according to their own distinctive features, and the partners (decision-makers, civil society, economic operators, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), etc) ENCY has every chance of attaining the goals assigned to it.
9. However, it is fully aware that this calls for a real commitment by all the groups concerned, united by a shared will to succeed.
10. The Assembly therefore decides:
i. to monitor carefully and, if appropriate, take part in the activities organised as part of European Nature Conservation Year 1995;
ii. to make its own contribution by arranging a colloquy on the role of NGOs in implementing environmental policies;
iii. to help facilitate the central and east European countries' participation in the campaign;
iv. to make a comprehensive assessment of the results of European Nature Conservation Year at the beginning of 1996 on the basis of a report drawn up by the committee concerned.
II. Explanatory memorandum
by Mrs GRAENITZ
Contents
Page
Introduction 4
Resource conservation today 5
Prerequisites for a European conservation policy 6
Prerequisites for the success of ENCY 8
Appendix: Recommendation No. R ENV (90) 1 of the
Committee of Ministers 10
*
* *
Introduction
More than thirty years ago, when there was still little or no talk of environmental protection, the Parliamentary Assembly alerted the governments of the member states to the dangers threatening the planet's natural resources and the need to develop European co-operation in this area.
Breaking new ground both in Europe and worldwide, the Council of Europe accordingly made environmental protection a sector of international co-operation.
There can be no doubt that this step marked the start of a drive to bring home environmental issues to public opinion in Europe and of co-operation at various levels in this area.
Whether in environmental or other matters, the Parliamentary Assembly has always insisted that action needed to be taken at different levels, especially at local and regional government level.
The Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe — now the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities — resolutely embarked on this task with the Assembly, and the support of both bodies encouraged the Council of Europe to launch campaigns which were a great success with the target groups concerned.
They include European Conservation Year (1970), European Architectural Heritage Year (1975), the European Campaign for the Countryside (1987-88), the Campaign on Agriculture and Environment and the European Campaign for the Protection of Freshwater Fish.
I should like to draw special attention to a recent Assembly initiative, the "Freshwater Europe" action programme on management of freshwater resources. For almost two years the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities launched, organised and contributed to activities relating to water management, with the participation of all the socio-economic and political groups concerned. The programme resulted in the presentation of a report to the Assembly outlining the main points of a pan-European water management policy.
The Parliamentary Assembly has also initiated the preparation of legal instruments for the protection of the environment such as the European Water Charter (1968) and the Bern Convention (1979).
Where the Bern Convention is concerned, the Assembly did not simply play a part in the 1976 Committee of Ministers' decision to instruct a committee of experts to draw up a wildlife convention. As soon as the convention came into force, the Assembly set itself the task of monitoring its application to ensure that the convention took its rightful place as part of a European environmental policy.
Recently, in fact, our colleague Peter Hardy presented a report on the application of conventions in the environmental sphere in which he stressed the importance of the Bern Convention's potential role under the World Biodiversity Convention signed in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992.
True to its aims, therefore, the Assembly — which launched and supported the concept of protected area and its application — was bound to support and contribute to an initiative designed to promote an idea which is complementary to the concept of protected area and essential in today's world: the protection of unprotected areas, which in fact means human beings and their activities cohabiting in harmony with wildlife.
Resource conservation today
Twenty or so years ago resource protection was based on the concept of conservation within a limited geographical area: nature parks, protected areas and so on. So the primary aim was to maintain a certain environment and certain living conditions in particularly valuable and indeed exceptional natural areas.
Rapid economic growth on a large scale in the industrialised countries resulted in the degradation of natural resources and forcefully brought home to our affluent, contented societies the crucial problem of deteriorating resources and the deadly, irreversible dangers this can cause.
It was increasingly realised that it was absolutely essential to frame joint strategies for economic development and environmental protection, or rather the survival of our planet, aimed at introducing lifestyles, production methods and consumer habits conducive to sustainable development, that is to say development that was bearable for the planet's ecosystem and would allow its resources to be protected and remain available for consumption by future generations.
The Brundtland report gave official status to the concept of "sustainable development" and the realisation that it was absolutely imperative for the international community to take action to save the planet.
At the Council of Europe the 5th European Ministerial Conference on the Environment, meeting in Lisbon in 1987, endorsed the Brundtland report's approach and advocated a European conservation strategy, which gave rise to Committee of Ministers Recommendation No. R ENV (90) 1 on the European conservation strategy (see Appendix I).
In my view the recommendation deserves to be better known and better used. It is highly relevant and very clearly sets out the basic points of the environmental protection strategy that our recent development patterns compel us to adopt.
Since then a new process has been set in train by the Rio Conference, an unprecedented event in that it witnessed a worldwide commitment to the framing of a joint, concerted policy of sustainable development.
In actual fact there have been no substantive changes since the conclusions of the Lisbon and Brussels conferences and the Brundtland Commission. But the Earth Summit effectively demonstrated, greatly to its credit, that if our planet is to live and survive, we must take practical action on a large scale, as soon as possible and at all levels, as part of a comprehensive and integrated global strategy.
European Nature Conservation Year 1995 must be viewed in this context and as part of this process.
Prerequisites for a European conservation policy
The success of a conservation strategy depends on many factors, each of which has its importance, its own weight and its part to play in the success of the undertaking.
Awareness
As I mentioned in the introduction, the Assembly has always attached great importance to awareness of environmental protection issues. Becoming aware of them means putting oneself in a position where one can tackle them.
This also implies that it is not enough for each one of us to grasp the factors involved; we must also be aware of our responsibilities and the individual contribution we can make. It is likewise important to be aware of other people's responsibilities and their duties to society.
What is needed, in fact, is to reach a stage where the momentum of the action taken stems from individual commitment and from synergy between the responsibilities assumed at different levels according to each person's particular capacities.
With this in mind, I should like to reproduce a welcome extract from the article by Mr Henchman in issue No. 71 of Naturopa ("A great idea for 1995", pp. 27 and 28): "ENCY '95 would fail were it to become a centrally-directed and monolithic dinosaur. Because of its nature, however, it will not do this and it will not make the mistake of trying to do everything to everybody in the same way at the same time". This act of faith is a guarantee of success. With this as its guiding principle, ENCY will be able to meet everyone's needs and demands and draw out everyone's potential. Surely it is the only possible approach if the aim is to pave the way for cohabitation between human beings and wildlife in a spirit of respect for the legitimate expectations but also the fundamental rights of all those concerned.
Training and information
The goal is far from simple because it is not enough simply to put a message across and make those actually or potentially responsible for damage to the planet aware of the dangers confronting it. What is needed is to equip everyone with skills and tools commensurate with their capacities and responsibilities so that they can exercise the latter to the full.
This means bearing in mind the relevant technologies, which are increasingly sophisticated and demand thorough training if people are not only to use them advisedly but also to understand and master them.
Elected representatives, for example, are often responsible for making important choices which affect the environment and resource protection; they must be in a position to take decisions on the basis of their knowledge and skills, which should obviously not be the same as those of the people who will implement and manage the choices made.
Civil society will be able to play its full — and increasingly vital — part in this process only if members of the public are in a position to assess the decision-makers' choices and act accordingly so as to exert some sort of influence on them.
Mr Henchman very aptly sums up the approach present-day society needs: "We do things with people, because we are part of that people; we no longer do things to people."
And if our society's new way of doing things is to achieve optimal results, it is essential that all those involved should perform their part to the full. Obviously, therefore, awareness, information and training are vital building blocks in this whole undertaking.
Political resolve
Informed decision-makers, fully trained technicians and economic operators and an informed, aware and fully responsible civil society — all this is of fundamental importance. However, it may all be in vain if the political will is lacking, because without it the above components — provided that they exist — have no framework in which to operate.
But political resolve cannot take the form of a praiseworthy commitment unsupported by practical action.
Every government that embarks on the framing of an effective conservation policy must carry out the necessary institutional and legislative reforms. Recognising, for example, that it is essential to introduce a comprehensive, integrated and environment-friendly spatial planning policy means taking practical steps for the purpose.
One of these is undoubtedly applying the principle of subsidiarity, a basic requirement for local and regional authorities to be able to perform such tasks as are assigned to them. Local and regional self-government practised as a form of shared responsibility is bound to be conducive to the best choices, since decisions will be taken where the problems arise, and therefore on the basis of real situations.
Political resolve is also a prerequisite for the application of conventions and agreements concluded by governments. I referred earlier to the report on the subject presented to the Parliamentary Assembly by our colleague Mr Hardy (Doc. 7076), Recommendation (1994) 1241 on the application of conventions concerning the environment). It demonstrates quite clearly that the world environmental situation no longer allows us to perform a momentary, gratuitous act in signing a convention or an agreement. The commitment a government enters into when it signs a convention must be accompanied by practical regulations and legislation ensuring that the convention is applied. Needless to say — and yet it does need to be repeated — the political will to achieve effective protection of the environment must always be reflected in suitable budgetary measures commensurate with the commitments made.
Prerequisites for the success of ENCY
As indicated above, much has changed in the twenty-five years separating the Council of Europe's two nature conservation campaigns. We are much more aware of the environment and devote much more space to it in public pronouncements. But it must be stressed that the importance we attach to it is due to a state of affairs for which we are largely responsible. The urgency of the problem demands that we act fast and do our utmost to remedy a serious, and in some cases, critical situation.
One purpose of ENCY '95 should be to remind people or make them realise that this process of deterioration which must be opposed and halted with the utmost urgency started only two centuries ago. And within that time span, which is extremely short compared to the age of life on this planet, fundamental changes have taken place. Moreover, the degradation of the planet's resources endangers not only fauna and habitats, but human beings themselves. And while the human race cannot survive without Nature, the reverse is not true.
Present-day society must start from these principles if it is to cope with a situation that has radically changed in the space of a few centuries. While it is not too late to avoid irreversible degradation, it is too late to restore the initial biological situation. This has to be accepted as the basis for an integrated conservation policy.
The Bern Convention is definitely a key component of a conservation policy and is in any event the "hard core" of the Council of Europe's work in this area. ENCY must take this opportunity of seeing to it that all the groups concerned are aware of its existence and understand the need to exploit it to the full.
In the spirit of the report by our colleague Mr Hardy and Recommendation 1241 (1994), one of the aims of ENCY '95 should be to secure an increase in the funds available for the Bern Convention.
In the committee's view, ENCY should also be an opportunity to strengthen ties with non-governmental organisations working in the environmental sphere.
These organisations, many of which are highly qualified in scientific terms, have a part to play and can be of valuable assistance to decision-makers and the general public. Their independence from decision-makers and other sections of the community is one of their greatest assets, empowering them to influence the democratic process. They can also exert considerable influence over local and regional authorities, and must therefore be encouraged to do so.
It must be admitted, however, that relations with NGOs are not always easy on account of the automatically negative attitudes adopted by one or the other partner. Decision-makers sometimes feel that NGOs engage in systematic opposition, while NGOs always — and sometimes rightly — feel sidelined and ignored.
Taking the opportunity afforded by ENCY '95 to establish fruitful and , continuous co-operation with NGOs in the environmental sector would be a substantial achievement. That is in fact why the Parliamentary Assembly Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities plans to hold a meeting between parliamentarians and NGOs concerned with environmental protection. The purpose of the colloquy would be to start up a dialogue, review the issues at stake and discuss how to devise solutions based on co-operation. It would in fact amount to setting up a real forum for dialogue between parliamentarians and NGOs.
The first discussion of the kind could focus, for example, on assessment of the application of the Bern Convention or on the relationship between economic development and nature conservation.
So the success of ENCY '95 will depend on two key factors: dialogue, co-ordination and co-operation with all the parties concerned and a wide variety of activities. The latter, while reflecting a comprehensive and co-ordinated approach, will always have to meet a particular need, situation or demand and never be applied across the board.
At the end of the Year a critical assessment will be needed to exploit the results and successes achieved as fully as possible and draw lessons from the mistakes that will inevitably be made.
At the beginning of 1996 the Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities will present a report on ENCY to the Parliamentary Assembly, reviewing its own contribution to the Year and taking stock of the whole campaign. The recommendations adopted and addressed to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the governments of the member states should be geared to making the best possible use of the results of a campaign which is clearly set to be one of the Council of Europe's major projects in the sphere of nature conservation.
APPENDIX I
Reporting committee: Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities.
Budgetary implications for the Assembly: 150 000 French francs.
Reference to committee: standing mandate.
Draft order adopted by the committee on 15 December 1994.
Members of the committee: Mr Parisi (Chairman), Mr Ruffy, Lord Newall (Vice-Chairmen), MM. Bachna, Bernardini, Bianchi, Gudmundur Bjarnason, Mrs Blunck (Alternate: Mr Antretter), MM. Bonrepaux, Brennan, Briane, Büchel, Mrs Ciemniak, Mr Demiralp, Mrs Dromberg (Alternate: Mr Tiuri), MM. Eversdijk, Feldmann, Frunda, Mrs Graenitz, MM. Grau, Hadjidemetriou, Hardy, Johansson, Jung, Mrs Kaliská, MM. Korakas, Kukk, Lanner, Lie, Magnusson, Mrs Melandri, MM. Monfils, Motiu, Mozetič, Pinto, Pottakis, Požéla, Redmond, Reis Leite, Mrs Robert, Mr Rott, Mrs Sanchez de Miguel, Mr Sarens, Mrs Severinsen, MM. Špaček, Szabo, Szymański, Talay, Theis, Toshev, Vella, Mrs Verspaget, Mr Zierer.
N.B.: The names of those members who took part in the meeting are printed in italics.
Secretaries to the committee: Mrs Cagnolati-Staveris and Mr Sixto.