KIEV, UKRAINE 21-23 May 2003  STATEMENT ON THE “STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ON WATER FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - EASTERN EUROPE, CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA COMPONENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION WATER INITIATIVE”REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY IN TRANSITION: LESSONS LEARNED FROM TEN YEARS OF UNECE ENVIORNMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS  submitted by  Government of Denmarkthe Committee on Environmental Policy of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe  through the Ad Hoc Working Group of Senior Officials  Distr.  ….  MarchApril 2003  Fifth Ministerial Conference  "Environment for Europe"  Kiev, Ukraine, 21-23 May 2003  to be held at the International Exhibition Centre, Kiev  beginning at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, 21 May 2003  Official opening of the Conference and adoption of the agenda.  State of the environment and environmental performance.  Guidelines for strengthening compliance with and implementation of multilateral environment agreements (MEAs).  Extraordinary meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context.  Second joint special session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents.  Extraordinary meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.  Opening of the protocols for signature.  Environmental partnerships in the UNECE region.  Signing of the framework convention on the protection and sustainable development of the Carpathians.  Energy efficiency and pricing  Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy.  Education for sustainable development.  Special session between Ministers and Environmental NGOs.  Development, priorities and perspectives of the “Environment for Europe” process.  Consideration of the draft ministerial declaration.  Adoption of the Kiev Ministerial Declaration.  Closing of the Conference.  Item 1.  Official opening of the Conference and adoption of the agenda  The President of Ukraine will officially open the Conference.  The mMeeting will adopt its provisional agenda.  Category I document:  Provisional agenda for the Conference (ECE/CEP/92)  Item 2.  State of the environment and environmental performance  This session will set the scene for the Conference.  The current state of Europe's environment, the key trends and the main areas of achievement and concern will be identified in a presentation by the European Environment Agency (EEA) of its Third Pan-European Assessment Report (Kiev Assessment).  Attention will also be drawn to reports on environmental monitoring, information and reporting by the UNECE Working Group on Environmental Monitoring, which assisted EEA in bringing the countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia into the assessment process and prepared sets of relevant recommendations to these countries.  The Ministers in Kiev may wish to welcome the reports submitted and endorse the Recommendations on strengthening national environmental monitoring and information systems, and the Guidelines for the preparation of governmental reports on the state and protection of the environment.  The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) will introduce its report on environmental policy in countries with economies in transition.  The report, which reviews the environment situation in countries with economies in transition, recalls that one decade has passed since Ministers at the 1993 Lucerne Conference asked UNECE to undertake Environmental Performance Reviews in countries in transition.  During this decade, the usefulness of the Reviews has been articulated by national policy makers and civil society.  The UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy has proposed that the Ministers at the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” may wish to decide that the Environmental Performance Reviews should continue, taking into account experience from the first ten years.  Following the presentation of these two reports, a high-level panel will discuss their key findings and the effectiveness of current and the need for new policy instruments to address their key issues at various levels.  The panel's discussion will be followed with an open discussion from the floor.  Category I documents:  Environmental policy in transition: lessons learned from ten years of UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews (ECE/CEP/98) and its Eexecutive summary (ECE/CEP/99)  The Third Pan-European Assessment Report and its Executive summary (ECE/CEP/100)  Lessons learned from the data collection for the Kiev report (ECE/CEP/101)  Recommendations on strengthening national environmental monitoring and information systems in countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (ECE/CEP/109)  Guidelines for the preparation of governmental reports on the state and protection of the environment (ECE/CEP/113)  Item 3: Guidelines for strengthening compliance with and implementation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs)  At its seventh session in September 2000, the UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy decided on the development of guidelines on environmental compliance and enforcement in association with preparations for the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” and mandated an open-ended task force to work on the issue.  These Guidelines were prepared pursuant to that decision.  The purpose of the Guidelines is to highlight options for strengthening compliance and implementation of MEAs, recognizing that each agreement is negotiated in a unique way and enjoys its own independent legal status.  The Guidelines also identify obstacles and potential solutions which may be relevant in the development of new MEAs in the UNECE region.  The Ministers in Kiev may wish to consider and endorse these Guidelines.  Category I document:  Guidelines for strengthening compliance with and implementation of multilateral environmental agreements in the UNECE region (ECE/CEP/107)  Item 4.  Extraordinary meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context  An extraordinary meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context will be convened.  The Meeting will have before it the draft protocol on strategic environmental assessment to the Convention as finalized and recommended for adoption at the eighth session of the Ad hoc Working Group on the Protocol, held in Geneva on 30 January 2003.  It is expected that the Meeting will adopt a ministerial resolution on the occasion of the adoption of the protocol.  Category I documents:  Provisional agenda for the extraordinary meeting (ECE/MP.EIA/2003/1)  Draft protocol on strategic environmental assessment (MP.EIA/2003/1)  Draft resolution on the protocol on strategic environmental assessment (MP.EIA/2003/2)  Item 5.  Second joint special session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents  The second joint special session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents will be convened.  The Parties will have before them the draft protocol on civil liability and compensation for damage caused by the transboundary effects of industrial accidents on transboundary waters.  They will be invited to adopt the protocol and consider and take a decision related to it.  Category I documents:  Provisional Agenda for the second joint special session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents (ECE/MP.WAT/; -ECE/CP.TEIA/8)  Draft protocol on liability and compensation for damage caused by the transboundary effects of industrial accidents on transboundary waters (MP.WAT/2003/-; CP.TEIA/2003/3)  Draft decision on the protocol on civil liability and compensation for damage caused by the transboundary effects of industrial accidents on transboundary waters (MP.WAT/2003/2-CP.TEIA/2003/4)  Item 6.  Extraordinary meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters  An extraordinary meeting of the Parties tof the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters will be convened.  The Meeting will have before it the draft protocol on pollutant release and transfer registers.  The Meeting is invited to adopt the protocol.  The Meeting is also invited to consider and adopt a resolution of the Signatories to be finalized at a preparatory meeting on 20 May 2003, in Kiev.  Category I documents:  Provisional agenda for the extraordinary meeting of the pParties to the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access in Justice in Environmental Matters (ECE/MP.PP/3)  Draft protocol on pPollutant release and transfer registers to the Aarhus Convention (MP.PP/2003/1)  Draft resolution of the Signatories to the protocol on pollutant release and transfer registers to the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access in Justice in Environmental Matters (MP.PP/2003/1/Add.1)  Category II documents:  Progress report on the status of ratification and implementation of the Aarhus Convention (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/5)  Report of the first meeting of the Parties to the Aarhus Convention (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/6)  Guidelines on genetically modified organisms to the Aarhus Convention (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/7)  Item 7.  Opening of the protocols for signature  Following their adoption, the protocols on strategic environment assessment, liability and compensation for damage caused by the transboundary effects of industrial accidents on transboundary waters, and pollutant release and transfer registers will be opened for signature at a signing ceremony.  In accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and established practice for multilateral treaties for which the United Nations Secretary-General is the Depositary, the protocols may be signed only by heads of State, heads of government, ministers of foreign affairs or representatives duly authorized by one of these three authorities and able to present full signing powers.  The UNECE Executive Secretary will preside over the ceremony.  Item 8.  Environmental partnerships in the UNECE region  (a) Environmental partnerships in the UNECE Region: environmental strategy for countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia: Strategic framework  This strategy has been developed by a drafting group to contribute to improving environmental conditions and to implementing the World Summit on Sustainable Development's Plan of Implementation in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia by strengthening the efforts of these countries in environmental protection and by facilitating partnership and cooperation between them and other countries of the UNECE region, including all stakeholders.  The strategy identifies key objectives and areas for action.  Ministers may wish to adopt the strategy as a basis for developing actions plans and partnerships for implementation at national, subregional bilateral and multilateral levels.  Category I document:  Environmental partnerships in the UNECE Region: Environment strategy for countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia: Strategic framework (ECE/CEP/105)  Category II documents:  Progress in implementing the EAP Task Force Sub-programme for Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia, 2000-2003 (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/8)  Progress in the implementation of the Aarhus policy statement on environmental management in enterprises in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/9)  Developing effective packages of environmental policy instruments in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/11)  Guiding principles for reform of environmental enforcement authorities in transition economies of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/12)  Urban water sector reform in EECCA countries: progress since the Almaty Ministerial Conference (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/14)  Creating Congruence: highlights and achievements of the REC activities in Central and Eastern Europe under the Environmental Action Programme (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/15)  The Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe (REReP): model for successful assistance mechanisms (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/32)  Progress in the implementation of the Aarhus policy statement on environmental management in enterprises: Central and South-Eastern Europe (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/38)  (b) Strategic partnership on water for sustainable development - Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia  At the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, in September 2002, the European Union formally launched a global Water Initiative, which the Council of the European Union has endorsed.  As part of the EU Water Initiative, a partnership was established between the EU and Ministers of the States of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (EECCA) entitled, “Strategic partnership on water for sustainable development.” It is also seen as complementary to the environment strategy for countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia.  The EU-EECCA partnership seeks guidance from the Ministers at the Kiev Ministerial Conference on shaping the initiative, especially regarding: (1) how water-related issues and challenges be put higher on the political agenda in the EECCA region; (2) how the Initiative could add value to existing efforts; (3) how the involvement in the initiative by a broad range of stakeholders could be ensured; (4) how the Initiative should be implemented and what the reporting and monitoring mechanism should be.  Category I document:  Statement on the “Strategic partnership on water for sustainable development - Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia Component of the European Union Water Initiative” (ECE/CEP/111)  Category II documents:  EU Water Initiative EECCA Component: draft programme (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/33)  EU Water Initiative EECCA Component: draft programme executive summary (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/34)  (c) Environment, water and security in Central Asia: Aan invitation to partnership  This partnership proposal was developed at the initiative of Central Asian States through meetings in Tajikistan (October 2002) and Kazakhstan (January 2003), with support from both Environment Ministers and Water Ministers and in cooperation with intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations.  Among other actions, it proposes three overriding goals: (1) Providing sustainable functioning of water ecosystems, vitally important for human life; (2) Sound use of and access to drinking water; (3) inter-sector partnership and capacity-building  It calls upon Ministers at the Kiev Conference to support the efforts of the Central Asian countries to achieve these goals, to begin drafting a multilateral partnership agreement for this purpose and to contribute to a new phase of the Aral Sea Basin Programme up to 2010 initiated by the Heads of the Central Asian States.  Category I document:  Invitation to partnership on the implementation of the Central Asian sustainable development initiative (ECE/CEP/111)  Environmental financing for partnerships  Ministers are invited to consider modalities for financing environment activities in the UNECE region, with a particular focus on support to partnerships.  Category II documents:  Financing environmental protection in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/2)  Trends in environmental expenditure and international commitments for the environment in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia, 1996-2001 (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/10)  Developing effective packages of environmental policy instruments in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/11)  Good practices in public environmental expenditure management in transition countries (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/13)  Environmental financing in Central and Eastern Europe, 1996-2001 (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/17)  Governance principles for foreign direct investment in hazardous activities (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/18)  PPC report to the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/19)  Debt swap for environment and development in Georgia: pre-feasibility study, institutional options (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/30)  Environmental Financing in Transition Economies (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/37)  Item 9.  Signing of the framework convention on the protection and sustainable development of the Carpathians  In cooperation with the Alpine Convention, a series of intergovernmental meetings on cooperation for the protection and sustainable development of the Carpathians took place.  This has resulted in a draft framework convention on the protection and sustainable development of the Carpathians.  The Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Framework Convention is scheduled to take place in conjunction with the Kiev Ministerial Conference to adopt the draft convention.  The convention will be open for signature during the Conference.  Category I document:  Draft framework convention on the protection and sustainable development of the Carpathians (ECE/CEP/104)  Item 10.  Energy efficiency and pricing  Energy Efficiency  The Energy Charter Protocol on Energy Efficiency and Related Environmental Aspects (PEEREA), through its Energy Efficiency and Related Environmental Aspects Group, has proposed a cluster of initiatives to reinvigorate the efforts made to improve energy efficiency and support innovative national and international activities.  The Ministers may wish to endorse the Statement of Energy Efficiency.  Category I document:  Draft statement on energy efficiency (ECE/CEP/112)  Guidelines on reforming energy pricing and subsidies  Through the combined work of the UNECE Committee on Environment Policy and the UNECE Committee on Sustainable Energy, guidelines have been proposed on reforming energy pricing in countries in transition and on reforming energy subsidies in all UNECE countries.  The primary goal of energy pricing reform to create a well-functioning, competitive market, aimed at increasing economic efficiency and improving the quality of energy services and taking fully into account the economic, environmental and social concerns of governments and society.  The guidelines on energy subsidies recall the recommendation of the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development to take action to phase out environmentally harmful energy subsidies and the energy-related decisions of the Aarhus Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” (1998).  Ministers may wish to endorse the Guidelines on Reforming Energy Pricing and Subsidies.  Category I documents:  Guidelines on Reforming Energy Pricing and Subsidies (ECE/CEP/103)  Explanatory notes to the Guidelines (ECE/CEP/103/Add.1)  Category II documents:  Progress report on the implementation of the energy-related decisions of the Aarhus Conference (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/20)  Progress report on the implementation of the Pan-European Strategy to Phase Out Leaded Petrol (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/21)  Executive summary of the Progress report on the implementation of the Pan-European Strategy to Phase Out Leaded Petrol (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/22)  Item 11.  Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy  The Council of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy has submitted the Kyiv Resolution on Biodiversity that expresses concern over the continued degradation of biological and landscape diversity in the pan-European region and its negative impact on sustainable development and the social and cultural integrity of the Earth's population.  The Resolution contains key targets: forests and biodiversity; agriculture and biodiversity; the Pan-European Ecological Network; invasive alien species; financing biodiversity; biodiversity monitoring and indicators; and public participation and awareness.  The Ministers may wish to endorse the Kyiv Resolution on Biodiversity.  Category I document:  Kieyiv Resolution on Biodiversity (ECE/CEP/108)  Category II document:  European Landscape Convention and its Follow-up (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/23)  Guiding Principles for Sustainable Spatial Development of the European Continent and its Follow-up (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/24)  Code of Practice for the Introduction of Biological and Landscape Considerations into the Transport Sector (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/26)  Statement on the Pan-European Ecological Network (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/27)  European Biodiversity Resourcing Initiative-Finance and Biodiversity (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/29)  The European Biodiversity Monitoring and Indicator Framework (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/35)  Report on the Service for Implementation of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/36)  Item 12.  Education for sustainable development  The UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy has submitted a draft statement on education for sustainable development, based on the work of its drafting group.  The draft statement emphasizes the importance of cooperation on education for sustainable development and notes that the World Summit on Sustainable Development stressed the need to integrate sustainable development into education systems at all levels of education.  Among other initiatives, the draft statement invites Governments in the UNECE region to further develop and finalize the UNECE strategy for education for sustainable development; to establish a joint process for education for sustainable development on the regional level and start a dialogue with all relevant international actors; and to convene a joint high-level meeting of Environment Ministries and Ministries or equivalent State bodies responsible for education in UNECE member States to adopt the UNECE strategy for education for sustainable development.  Ministers are invited to endorse the statement on education for sustainable development.  Category I document:  Draft statement on education for sustainable development (ECE/CEP/102 and Corr.  Basic elements for the UNECE strategy for education for sustainable development (ECE/CEP/102/Add.1)  Item 13.  Special session between the Ministers and environmental NGOs  European Eco-Forum will organize a special session between Ministers and environmental non-governmental organizations on environmental policy integration.  The objectives of the special session are to encourage an informal and frank discussion on the nature of bottlenecks for integration of environmental requirements into relevant sectoral and horizontal policies; to discuss good examples of environmental policies and their integration into sectors and horizontal policies in the region; and to discuss and clarify roles of governments and environmentalists and their complementarity.  The special session will contain three discussion blocks: (1) letting the market work for the environment; (2) agriculture as an example of sectoral policy integration; and (3) overcoming institutional weaknesses that prevent integration.  Category II document:  Environmental policy integration in practice (KIEV.CONF/2003/INF/3)  Item 14: Development, priorities and perspectives of the “Environment for Europe” process  The UNECE Working Group of Senior Officials, through its drafting group on this topic, has submitted a paper on the future of the “Environment for Europe” process as a basis for discussion by the Ministers.  The paper reviews the cooperative environmental framework established by North America, Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia and assesses the needs and opportunities for strengthening this cooperation and better coordinating it.  Part I of this paper has been agreed upon within the UNECE Working Group of Senior Officials.  Part II was being considered by the Working Group in the context of the draft Ministerial Declaration.  remains under consideration by the Working Group of Senior Officials, including in the context of the drafting of the Ministerial Declaration.  Category I document:  Future of the “Environment for Europe” process (ECE/CEP/95)  Category II documents:  Outline of a possible post-Kiev programme of work for activities in the EECCA region currently supported by the EAP Task Force (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/16)  Political Message from the Secretary General of the Council of Europe to the Ministerial Conference (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/25)  Framework for cooperation between the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy, the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) and the “Environment for Europe” process (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/31)  Item 15: Consideration of the draft ministerial declaration  The Ministers may wish to consider the draft Kiev ministerial declaration.  Category I document:  Draft ministerial declaration (ECE/CEP/94)  Category II documents:  Statement to Ministers from the Executive Body for the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on the preparation of a long-term funding arrangements for core activities (KIEV.CONF/2003/INF/1)  Item 16: Adoption of the Kiev Ministerial Declaration  The Ministers may wish to adopt their declaration of the Kiev Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe”  Item 17: Closing of the Conference  The Conference will be closed at 1 p.m. on 23 May 2003.  STATEMENT ON THE “STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ON WATER FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - EASTERN EUROPE, CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA COMPONENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION WATER INITIATIVE” ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY IN TRANSITION: LESSONS LEARNED FROM TEN YEARS OF UNECE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS  European Union Water Initiative  At the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg in September 2002 the European Union (EU) formally launched the global Water Initiative: Water for Life - Health, livelihoods, economic development and security (EUWI).  The Council of the European Union has fully endorsed this initiative and it carries political support from the European Commission and the 15 Member States.  Political support for the initiative is reinforced by commitments to achieve key water-related targets and the EU has reconfirmed its firm commitment to contribute to:  By 2015, halving the proportion of people who do not have access to safe drinking water and bacis sanitation; By 2005, developing integrated water resources management (IWRM) and water efficiency plans in all countries.  The EUWI provides a platform for strategic partnerships to implement the programmes of actions for the WSSD and to contribute to meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) on water.  Under the initiative, the EU seeks to work with its partners to:  Reinforce political will and commitment to action Make water governance effective and build institutional capacity Improve co-ordination and co-operation Increase the efficiency of existing EU aid flows  Challenges and issues of the water sector in the region of Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia (EECCA)  The EECCA countries face tremendous challenges in providing their populations with adequate water supply and sanitation services and in safeguarding and securing a sustainable management of the water resources.  Improved access to water supply and sanitation can make a major contribution to poverty eradication, health improvements, quality of life and protection of the environment but their contribution is often underestimated.  Progress toward targets on water supply and sanitation has been slow, particularly with regard to sanitation, and a higher priority for these in poverty reduction strategies and sustainable development strategies is required.  Integrated water resources management with strong stakeholder participation, a pro-poor emphasis, and gender sensitivity is a key instrument to ensure the integration of water services within an overall water management framework.  Integrated water resources management also provides a framework to promote peace and security in transboundary waters.  As such the EU also has confirmed its support for initiatives that promote regional co-operation and economic development in transboundary waters.  Some of the major challenges facing the region relating to the two aforementioned water themes have been identified as part of the EECCA Environmental Strategy process:  Low quality of water services, threats to public health and environmental risks  Overuse of water resources Pollution originating from river effluent and coastal urban areas Overexploitation of living resources and habitat destruction  Economic and financial crisis Unclear and weak institutional and regulatory framework  Improvement of infrastructure and non-structural measures Monitoring and assessment Access to information, public participation and access to justice Development of concerted action programmes  These and other challenges are addressed by a plethora of programmes and projects sponsored by EU, EECCA countries and other bilateral as well as multi-lateral donors.  However, the co-ordination and co-operation between stakeholders leave room for improvement, which leads to a sub-optimal use of available financial and human resources.  Sometimes critical needs in the water sector are left unattended or under-funded, and sometimes duplication of efforts takes place.  The EUWI seeks to provide a vehicle to overcome these weaknesses in the way the problems of the water sector are currently addressed.  EU-EECCA Partnership  As part of the EUWI, a partnership was established in Johannesburg between EU and Ministers of the States of Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia (EECCA): “Strategic Partnership on Water for Sustainable Development” (EU-EECCA Partnership).  This partnership builds on 1) the preparation for and follow-up of the WSSD Summit in Johannesburg, and 2) the on-going Environment for Europe process.  The acknowledgement of the importance of contributions from all stakeholders in order to make water systems and their management more supportive of sustainable development objectives is a key aspect in the recommendations and consensus emerging from the WSSD process and an important feature of the partnership.  The EECCA Environmental Strategy process for the EECCA countries, under the auspices of the Environment for Europe process, was also transformed into the “East-West Environmental Partnership” as an outcome of the WSSD, paving the road for synergy and complementarity between the two partnerships.  They both address similar issues; the East-West Partnership broader environmental issues and the EU-EECCA Partnership specific water issues.  As a result of meetings between EECCA and EU ministers and senior officials, the EU Water Initiative's EECCA component is now accepted as a partnership between EECCA and EU for implementation of the water aspects of the EECCA Environmental Strategy.  The EU-EECCA Water Initiative is an active follow-up on the WEHAB process of the WSSD and the East-West Partnership launched there.  Thus, the EU-EECCA Partnership focuses on the two water themes identified as the key water problems/issues in the EECCA Environmental Strategy, namely “Improving the management of municipal water supply and sanitation infrastructure” and “Integrated management of water resources, including problems of transboundary river basins and regional seas”  The EU-EECCA Partnership builds on existing water initiatives and mechanisms of implementation.  The initiative is intended to reinforce existing partnerships and bilateral and regional programmes, by bringing partners with related water activities together under a common framework and co-ordination.  Indeed the initiative strongly recognises the importance of on-going and planned activities and views these as “building blocks” under the overall umbrella of the initiative.  Similarly, the importance of existing networks and partnerships (e.g. GWP's Regional and National Water Partnerships) is fully recognised and the aim is to co-ordinate closely, not duplicate, such activities.  The initiative will only add to the existing mechanism where it is absolutely necessary to fulfil the objective of the initiative.  Initial partners from the European side include the EU Member States, the European Commission, international organisations, European civil society and the private sector.  Political commitment and stakeholder support has already been secured from the EECCA countries.  As the initiative goes beyond the responsibilities of the Ministries of Environment the initiative also involves ministries of water, infrastructure, etc.  Strengthening of EU-EECCA Partnership  The EU-EECCA Partnership seeks guidance from environment ministers on shaping the initiative, especially in the following fields:  How could water related issues and challenges be put higher on the political agenda in the EECCA region?  The water crisis is not high on the agenda of many political leaders.  The initiative seeks to support governments in understanding the links between water, poverty and sustainable development and to help translate this into firm commitments for action.  Good governance, political and sectoral reforms are necessary.  Indeed, it has been stated that `the water crisis is mainly a crisis of governance' and making water governance effective is a major challenge for most countries.  Better governance arrangements and measures to safeguard against corruption and financial and operational mismanagement are important.  How could the initiative add value to existing efforts?  The initiative seeks to provide an umbrella under which a range of activities can be designed and implemented.  It offers several mechanisms by which on-going and future actions can be complemented through improved co-operation and co-ordination, increased efficiency and effectiveness and promotion of sector-wide approaches.  The EU can draw on a wealth of experience and knowledge in many fields of water related activity and has much to offer in promoting change and best practice.  The Water Framework Directive sets clear environmental objectives and requires that all partners in a given river basin manage their waters in close co-operation irrespective of administrative borders.  The EU experiences show that at an integrated river basin management level, participation by all stakeholders together with knowledge and information exchange will promote economic development, institutional sustainability and conflict prevention.  This experience of water management is not only confined to Europe itself; however, due consideration should be given to local conditions when transferring experiences from the EU WFD to other regions.  Lack of knowledge and experience sharing can engender economic inefficiency and social inequity in water allocation and use and thus come with potentially high social and economic costs.  The initiative seeks to promote a range of financial mechanisms already available to water projects and to draw from relevant EU and partner experience.  It actively seeks to locate the gaps in the provision of financing and to take co-ordinated and joint action to fill them.  The EU WI will be leveraging finance from all sources including private sector and international financing institutions, banks and so on - not just donor finance.  The idea is to use donor money to create the conditions (governance, capacity) that will allow private finance to be attracted to the sector.  Overall, the aim is to seek the right mix of financing options both for capital finance and cost recovery programmes.  The initiative also provides a strong lobby calling for additional financing into the sector and could serve as leverage to direct some of the Monterrey Commitments to action programmes on water.  How could the involvement in the initiative by a broad range of stakeholders be ensured?  Although the primary responsibility for ensuring equitable and sustainable water services and water resources management integrated into development strategies rests with local and national governments, it is essential to involve a broader range of stakeholders.  Other financing sources than government budgets are required in order to cope with the accelerating need for improved water services and management, given the competition for scarce resources from other sectors.  Partnerships between public, private and civil society actors have to be promoted, ensuring that those partnerships remain equitable, transparent, safeguard consumers' and investors' interests and maintain high standards of environmental protection.  Many non-governmental organisations have a valuable expertise and a broad resource base to offer as a complement to government measures.  Initially, the partners of the initiative were the governments of EU and EECCA countries but the process has reached out to a broader stratum of the water community in EU and EECCA, including, among others, the private sector and civil society.  With the regional High-Level Meeting in Moscow in March a true participatory process, responding to demands of EECCA partners, has been secured.  How should the initiative be implemented and what should be the reporting/monitoring mechanism?  With its close linkage to the EECCA Environmental Strategy, the further development and implementation of the EU-EECCA Partnership depends very much on the future of the Strategy.  There is a need for a mechanism to co-ordinate, follow up and monitor the initiative during the implementation phase, starting in 2003 and lasting until 2015.  Additionally, given the direct links to the EECCA Environmental Strategy there is a need to establish a reporting schedule to the “Environment for Europe” process.  Therefore, the progress of the initiative will be reported regularly to the task force to be established for the implementation of the EECCA Environmental Strategy, and the initiative will, to the extent possible, use and benefit from existing mechanisms and institutions in its implementation.  Paragraphs  Introduction 1-  Transition 1-  “Environment for Europe” 9-  Scope of Environmental Performance Reviews 11-  The EPR process  Objectives of this report 18-  Environmental legal and institutional reform 20-  Legislation for the environment and natural resources 25-  Establishment of environment ministries and agencies 33-  C. Inspectorates and enforcement 37-  D. Decentralization of environmental management 42-  E. Role of NGOs 47-  Resource management and trends 50-  Air 50-  Water 54-  C. Waste and contaminated sites 62-  Biodiversity 79-  E. Mineral resources 88-  Development of environmental policy tools 93-  Policy framework 93-  Regulatory instruments 104-  C. Economic instruments 119-  Domestic environmental financing 124-  E. Information tools 137-  Policy integration 153-  Introduction 153-  Agriculture 156-  C. Forestry 162-  Energy 166-  E. Transport 175-  Tourism 182-  Coastal zone management 185-  H. Industry 188-  Human Health 200-  International Environmental Cooperation 210-  Global processes and commitments 219-  B. UNECE regional environmental conventions 223-  C. Other regional cooperation 225-  EU accession 228-  Conclusions 238-  Future of the EPR programme 253-  Recommendations  Annex I The Environmental Performance Review process  Annex II Ratification by countries in transition in selected global and regional Conventions  iNTRODUCTION  Transition  In the early 1990s, the eastern parts of Europe were in the middle of a political, economic and social transition process following the collapse of communism.  The transition to a market economy had just begun.  In the absence of effective pricing mechanisms, the former economic policy had created certain distortions that led, in some instances, both to a waste of natural resources, such as energy and water, in industry and in public utilities, and to the development of energy- and raw-material-intensive production.  Priority was given to mining, chemical and metallurgical industries.  All of this left many areas and cities of the countries in transition with a crumbling and inefficient infrastructure.  Heavily polluted sites and areas were widespread.  Industries caused severe air and water pollution, and risks related to hazardous waste also left areas with severe environmental problems.  At the same time, a long tradition of nature conservation, combined with vast areas of untouched military zones, had left a rich biodiversity in the region.  Furthermore, in some parts of Central and Eastern Europe, the environmental problems related to intensive farming and urban traffic congestion were not yet serious.  The first years of transition in the region were characterized by a change in public financing and a rapid restructuring of the economies.  It was expected that industrial restructuring would lead to the collapse of wasteful and polluting industries.  However, many of the old and wasteful power plants and industries continued to operate.  At the same time, others were closed or are working at reduced capacity, and, in some countries, GDP has still not reached the pre-1990 levels.  Unemployment also grew to alarming levels in most countries in transition, as workers were made redundant from collapsing or restructured enterprises.  Affordability limited the possibilities for immediate full-cost recovery in utility services, and much needed long-term capital was not available on international or local capital markets.  In addition, the regulatory regime did not develop fast enough to enable efficient environmental management.  Political developments in the region were mixed; in some countries, there was strong opposition to the harsh introduction of a market economy due to its social consequences, leading to delays in the reform process.  In the process of constitutional and administrative reforms, municipalities and regions have received broader authority, including for local environmental management and for the provision of services.  Important issues related to local and regional reform have been the allocation of tax revenues between the national and sub-national levels, defining the respective institutional responsibilities, for instance, for inspection and permitting, and building the capacity of local and regional authorities.  In the first years of transition, the focus was on drafting new constitutions and establishing new government institutions such as multi-party parliaments, cabinets of ministers, ministries, independent courts, and reforming municipal and regional structures.  In this period, important steps were taken in many countries to secure appropriate institutions and a legal framework for the environment and sustainable development.  There was very little progress in the countries and regions affected by war and political instability.  The military activities and disruption of normal civil life generated new environmental problems such as landmines, contamination, chemical stockpiles, expired medicines and waste, and the breakdown of public infrastructure.  In these countries, solving the environmental problems is seen as an important part of post-conflict reconstruction because it can provide human security and offer scope for cooperation between former warring parties.  Environment for Europe  As part of the transition process, in 1991 the environment ministers from the member States of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) met at Dobris Castle near Prague upon the initiative of the Czechoslovak Minister of the Environment, the late Jozef Vavroušek.  The Conference discussed ways of strengthening cooperation to protect and improve the environment, and long-term strategies toward an environmental programme for Europe.  Thus began the process of cooperation called “Environment for Europe”.  Since this first meeting in Dobris, “Environment for Europe” ministerial conferences have taken place in Lucerne, Switzerland (1993), Sofia, Bulgaria (1995), and Aarhus, Denmark (1998).  The fifth Conference takes place in Kiev, Ukraine, in 2003.  Under the umbrella of this process, countries, international organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and businesses work together to assist the countries in transition.  Several regional conventions have also been negotiated and signed in the process.  One of the tools for sharing experience among countries in the region and for promoting good environmental management in specific countries is the Environmental Performance Reviews conducted within the framework of UNECE.  Scope of Environmental Performance Reviews  At the second Ministerial Conference "Environment for Europe”, which took place in Lucerne in April 1993, the Ministers decided that the Performance Review Programme, initiated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for its own member States, should be gradually extended to the whole of Europe.  They mandated UNECE to carry out this extended programme for the countries in transition.  At the outset, three pilot reviews were carried out jointly by OECD and UNECE, from 1994 to 1996, in Poland, Bulgaria and Belarus.  In 1996, the Committee on Environmental Policy decided to make the Environmental Performance Reviews a part of the regular programme of UNECE.  The objectives of Environmental Performance Reviews (EPRs) are to assist countries in transition to improve their management of the environment by establishing baseline conditions and making concrete recommendations for better policy implementation and performance; to promote dialogue among UNECE member countries; to integrate environmental policies into sectoral policies and to integrate further health aspects into environmental performance; to harmonize environmental conditions and policies throughout the region and to contribute to sustainable development.  Since 1994, UNECE has carried out Environmental Performance Reviews in 16 countries.  These include: Estonia (1995); Slovenia (1997); Republic of Moldova (1998); Lithuania (1998); Latvia (1998); Ukraine (1999); Croatia (1999); Kazakhstan (2000); Kyrgyzstan (2000); Armenia (2000); Romania (2001); Uzbekistan (2001), Albania (2001), the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (2002), Yugoslavia (2002) (now Serbia and Montenegro) and Georgia (2002).  UNECE also cooperated with OECD in its review of the Russian Federation (1999).  UNECE has undertaken second reviews in Bulgaria (2000) and Estonia (2001) and follow-up reviews in Slovenia, Republic of Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia and Ukraine.  At the request of the EPR Expert Group and the UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy, all Environmental Performance Reports are available on the Web, at http://www.unece.org/env/epr/  The EPR process  As a voluntary exercise, the Environmental Performance Review is undertaken only at the request of the country itself at the ministerial level.  It starts with an agreement on the structure of the report between UNECE and high officials of the candidate country.  The assessing team is made up of experts from all over the ECE region, and is flexible to meet the needs of the reviewed country.  This team meets with national experts to discuss the problems encountered in environmental management and the integration of environmental considerations in economic sectors.  The team's final report contains recommendations for further improvement, taking into consideration the country's progress in the current transition period.  The ad hoc Expert Group on Environmental Performance Reviews conducts an expert review of each country; the UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy carries out a peer review.  Objectives of this report  The general purposes of this document are to review and analyse what has been learned through the Environmental Performance Review programme and to use this analysis to recommend the future scope and direction of the Programme.  To fulfil this purpose, the specific objectives of the study are:  To highlight what has been achieved by the countries in transition over the past decade in environmental policy and management;  To describe the most significant obstacles and problems encountered;  To identify key areas that require further attention; and  To draw lessons and make recommendations for future policies at the national and regional levels.  The “Environment for Europe” process has provided a policy forum for promoting and setting priorities for the legal and institutional reforms of environmental management and natural resources protection in Central and Eastern Europe.  The drafting of new environmental and accompanying legislation, as well as the establishment of environment ministries and related institutions, has formed part of the overall reform process in all the Central and East European countries.  The legal and institutional reforms in many cases build upon recent constitutional provisions, which lay down the right to a safe and healthy environment.  The environment and natural resource laws were among the first to introduce provisions supporting participatory democracy and a market economy as well as the sharing of responsibilities among national, regional and local government.  The EU approximation process has been a major driving force for the legal and institutional reforms in EU applicant countries.  Though some of the applicant countries have made more progress in bringing their legal and administrative frameworks into compliance with EU requirements than others, all have significantly improved their capacity for environmental management.  The recent Partnership and Cooperation Agreements between the European Union and the EECCA countries, the Stabilisation and Association Agreements between the EU and the five SEE countries that are not yet applicant countries and associated assistance programmes are likely to further support the environmental reform process.  Steps have been taken in the EECCA countries and in South East Europe to reform environmental management through changes in legislation and institutions, but the reform process has generally been slow.  In the meantime, the public budgets of most of these countries are shrinking and much of the region's environmental infrastructure, e.g. water management and supply systems, are in a critical condition and require urgent rehabilitation due to a lack of maintenance.  Despite the progress made in the adoption of environmental legislation, the countries' capacity to implement and enforce it effectively remains inadequate, in many cases because of weak institutional and administrative structures.  Efforts are needed in particular in the areas of water, chemicals and waste management, contaminated sites, industrial pollution control and nature protection, both with regard to strengthening and enforcing legislation and to institutional capacity.  Legislation for the environment and natural resources  Over the past decade, Central and East European countries have started reforming their environmental legislation.  Overall the adoption of legislation for the environment and natural resources management has progressed well, in particular in the EU candidate countries.  Most environmental legal systems are now based on framework environmental laws that need to be complemented by and enforced through specific laws and regulations.  In many of the South East European and EECCA countries, the work of preparing and adopting these by-laws has only recently got under way.  The framework environmental laws set out the rights and responsibilities of actors in the environment sector, often incorporating such principles as the polluter pays and the precautionary principle, liability for environmental pollution, environmental standard setting, environmental impact assessments (EIA), public participation and access to information, among others.  Other environment and nature protection-related legislation includes laws on the management of air, water, waste, minerals and chemical substances, radiation protection and nuclear safety, environmental impact assessment, nature protection and physical planning.  One important target of new legislation has been the environmental and social rehabilitation of heavily polluted areas and contaminated sites.  In some of the reviewed countries, the use of natural resources (oil, gas, minerals, forests, wild animals and plants, water) is an important part of the economy.  Legislation for their management, relating to issues, for example, of ownership, contracting and licensing, and the respective roles of public and private sectors, has been reformed in all of the countries in the past decade.  The natural resource management sectors had been very powerful in the previous systems and have strongly influenced the legislative developments in their respective fields.  In some cases the result has been an institutional conflict between the environment ministry and other authorities managing natural resources; in others, some or all of the responsibility for resource management has been integrated into the environment ministry.  These conflicts have been related to two main relationships: the environment versus revenues from resource extraction, and existing structures versus transparency and accountability.  In the mid-1990s, the candidate countries for EU accession started the process of transposition and implementation of EU legislation.  Transposition of the body of EU environmental law requires amendment and changes to most existing legislation and the adoption of several new laws as well as ensuring administrative and other structures for implementation and enforcement.  The applicant countries are also required to ratify all international conventions to which EU is a party.  Overall the adoption of legislation for alignment with the body of EU law has proceeded well in applicant countries.  Laws and regulations have been adopted in most countries at a very decentr.  This has left a considerable implementation gap; created a lack of coherence among various legal acts; kept in force overlapping and contradictory laws and standards from the period before 1990; and delayed the adoption of the requisite implementing by-laws and regulations.  In such circumstances, classic enforcement action has had very limited scope.  Institutional reforms within the countries in transition have at times created additional confusion.  For example, institutions designated by law to be the legal implementing agencies have been dissolved or changed without amendment to the law.  In addition, the extensive enactment of environmental legislation is placing a major burden on the administrative capacity not only of the ministries preparing the legislation, but also, and in particular, on the implementing agencies and local administrations.  Establishment of environment ministries and agencies  Considerable progress has been made in the establishment of ministerial structures for environmental protection.  Almost all of the countries in transition now have environment ministries, although their structures and competencies vary widely.  Most environment ministries are responsible for the protection of natural resources, including nature protection.  This requires good coordination and cooperation with other ministries, including, for example, the ministries responsible for agriculture, transport, tourism and construction.  Where this cooperation does not exist, it is difficult for environment ministries, which are generally relatively weak and have insufficient political backing, to carry out their mandates fully.  With few exceptions, environmental institutions today are stronger, in terms of both their legal mandate and their capacity, than they were a decade ago.  They have benefited from general administrative reform in the countries and from special capacity-building programmes supported by donors and international organizations.  They have also benefited from an inflow of young experts and former environmental activists, who have been educated in the emerging programmes of environmental studies at home and abroad.  The institution building process was, however, anything but straightforward in most countries.  The accumulation of legal mandates that had previously been with other ministries has caused rivalry between ministries and in some cases duplication of capacities, for example with ministries of health or agriculture.  One of the most problematic areas in many countries in the region is responsibility for water management, which is often divided among three or four ministries and additional institutes, boards or other structures.  Clashes between ministries responsible for the economic use of natural resources (e.g. minerals, water, land) and the environment ministry, which is often responsible for the sustainable use of natural resources, are also not infrequent.  Economic considerations usually take precedence.  Another significant problem for many countries has been the lack of institutional continuity.  Environment ministries have been established, disbanded or restructured, re-established and again restructured, creating a climate of uncertainty for ministry staff, policy makers and civil society.  Strategies developed by one group may be abandoned by the next due to a lack of a sense of ownership.  The uncertainty, and its impact on long-term policy and plans, may also deter support from the international community.  C. Inspectorates and enforcement  In most countries inspectorates are organized at the national and sub-national level.  In some cases the sub-national inspectorates are part of the regional environmental authorities; in others, they perform the functions of the regional authority.  The basic role of the inspectorates is to inspect facilities to check their compliance, but in many countries it is the inspectorates that also issue environmental permits or decisions on environmental impact assessment.  In some countries inspectorates are also involved in ambient monitoring for the purpose of identifying environmental violations, helping municipalities in preparing programmes for environmental rehabilitation and providing information to the public.  Municipalities can also designate local inspectorates to enforce the regulations within their purview.  Inspectorates are generally under the responsibility of the environment ministries, but there may also be forestry inspectorates, health inspectorates, agriculture and water inspectorates.  Duplication of inspection units and lack of coordination exist not only at the central level but also between national and regional or local enforcement agencies.  A basic issue in developing enforcement is the extent to which responsibilities should be centralized at the national level or decentralized at a more local level.  Involving local government in enforcement is important because it is the closest to the actual environmental problems and generally the most affected.  The environmental enforcement institutions play an important role in ensuring compliance with environmental laws and regulations and the implementation of environmental policy, but their weak institutional framework and limited financial and human resources hamper environmental compliance and enforcement.  In addition, the movement of information is often top-down only.  There is little institutionalized feedback to ensure that information on the results of environmental policy implementation flows from inspectors on the ground back to policy makers.  Policy instruments are ineffective, and policy design is very often driven by a regulatory process that is independent of enforcement efforts and compliance.  The environmental institutions responsible for enforcement currently face a number of common difficulties such as a lack of human, technical and financial resources; institutional reform and instability; insufficient regulatory and compliance frameworks, compliance control procedures and enforcement tools; ineffective enforcement activities; weak environmental permitting systems; non-compliance with multilateral environmental agreements; and a lack of public participation in enforcement.  While the enforcement institutions have a variety of informal and formal enforcement tools at their disposal, greater use of enforcement powers is constrained not only by their weak positions but also by the low levels of fines and penalties.  In many cases, polluters choose to pay fines rather than invest in pollution control.  The low collection rate of fees and fines also contributes to the problem.  D. Decentralization of environmental management  Decentralization of environmental management has formed part of the institutional restructuring and reform processes.  It has offered an opportunity to strengthen environmental management by bringing it closer to the public and to local concerns, thereby enabling greater accountability, transparency and participation, and it continues to do so.  However, while the overall devolution of competences may be reflected in laws and policies in many of the reviewed countries, decentralization of environmental management has not always been supported by the resources necessary for implementation.  There has been a failure by the central government to provide funding to the local government, but constraints have also been imposed by the government on the ability of municipalities to generate income, for example, by capping public utility user fees.  Many environmental services that used to be provided centrally, like water supply and sewage, waste management and district heating, have become the responsibility of local and regional authorities.  In order to maintain them, they have had to introduce user charges to cover the costs of operation.  These services were heavily subsidized before, so it is now hard for people to accept price increases.  On the one hand, the charges are still too low to cover the full cost of investment and maintenance, and, on the other, non-payment is widespread.  In the more advanced countries, municipalities have made use of various kinds of private-public partnerships to develop or improve the quality of the services.  Implementation is also hindered by an insufficient number of staff in the local administrations as well as by their lack of experience in environmental matters.  It is crucial not only to expand the staff but also to provide them with the necessary training.  This should include training in managing public utilities, for instance, for water and waste management, and establishing criteria for monitoring performance.  Despite these obstacles, an increasing number of local and regional governments have developed their own environmental policies to tackle their priorities.  These include local and regional environmental action plans (LEAPs and REAPs), local environment and health action plans (LEHAPs) and Local Agenda 21 initiatives.  Local and regional environmental action plans have been efficient means for strengthening local environmental authorities and fostering stakeholder dialogues and public participation.  However, these plans need to be more fully and universally supported.  E. Role of NGOs  In the past, NGOs could not always be clearly distinguished from government.  Civil society, and especially environmental NGOs, underwent a process of fundamental change in the 1990s.  In the first wave of transition many NGO leaders moved to government and to donor-supported activities.  With economic hardship, the time available and the will of people to do voluntary work diminished along with domestic resources.  The NGOs have depended mainly on donor funding programmes that were established in most countries.  This has led to the establishment of more professional NGOs and fewer membership-based NGOs.  Today NGOs fall roughly into the following categories:  Expert-based organizations (already formed before transition);  NGOs whose members are often older, locally influential people (many founded before 1990);  NGOs that focus on raising awareness;  Private institutes, non-profit organizations performing professional environmental services;  Umbrella NGOs that represent networks of environmental and other NGOs in the national context or in relation to specific issues.  In many countries NGOs are actually better staffed and equipped and receive far better salaries than the governmental institutions dealing with the environment, which cannot receive direct support from donors.  Environmental NGOs have played an important role in introducing participatory democracy in the international, national and sub-national decision-making processes.  They also help to disseminate knowledge and raise awareness of environmental issues and possible solutions at all levels.  NGOs have been particularly successful in mobilizing the public at the local level.  Air  Around 1990, air quality was critical in many towns, cities and regions of the countries in transition due to inefficient technologies and the lack of environmental management.  Generally, air pollution significantly decreased in the 1990s.  This was due primarily to the decline in industrial production.  Air pollution with NOx, O, CO and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from road transport, however, has been increasing since the early 1990s.  In spite of decreasing industrial air pollution, air quality has not improved in most cities and regions because of the increase in transport pollution from old cars imported from Western countries.  Greater focus than earlier has been put on global environmental problems, such as the depletion of the ozone layer and global warming by greenhouse gasses largely because of the global conventions and their pro-active financing mechanisms, which have played an active role in raising awareness and political support.  In the past, the main source of SOx and NOx were coal-fired thermal power plants, oil shale power plants (Estonia) and district heating plants.  In the countries with rich mineral resources, industrial sources of pollution were the metallurgical industry, with heavy metals and SOx, and oil and gas industries, with methane and VOCs.  The cement industry is the main source of local dust and particulates.  At present in Central and Eastern Europe, where the economy has recovered, some obsolete technologies are being replaced with modern technology that pollutes less and runs on cleaner fuels.  Across the entire region there is the beginning of a switch in industry and households from coal or fuel oil to natural gas, less polluting imported coal, light oil and, on a much smaller scale, even renewable sources such as solar and biomass.  However, the price of this conversion and the availability of the less polluting fuels remain a constraint for many countries.  In many countries, outdated technologies are still in operation because of a lack of funding and unprofitable activities continue operating to maintain employment levels.  Existing pollution abatement equipment may not be in operation because of a lack of company revenues.  This situation has led to higher pollution levels per unit of GDP than before 1990.  Car fleets are growing all over the region, leading to more air pollution from mobile sources, as in some countries where the increase in CO emissions from road transport has already undone the reduction in emissions from industry.  In the more affluent countries in Central and Eastern Europe, car fleets are rapidly renewed, leading to much lower per vehicle emissions of NOx from new cars with mandatory catalytic converters.  In the less affluent countries, the main problem is the age of the car fleet.  Most countries have introduced restrictions on car imports in terms of age and technical specifications, along with tax incentives for cars with catalytic converters and lead-free petrol.  Several Central and East European countries have completely phased out leaded petrol, while others are doing so based on the Strategy to phase out leaded petrol adopted in Aarhus in 1998.  Phasing out leaded petrol is one of the biggest challenges for countries that have significant refining capacity and few resources to introduce new refining technology.  Water  The problem of water resources management in almost all counties in transition is one of the most important environmental priorities.  It includes water supply, especially drinking water; water use for industrial purposes; irrigation systems for agriculture; industrial and municipal waste-water treatment and recycling, and water conservation and protection of watercourses and lakes from pollution.  Flooding is also becoming a priority for action in the region.  The water resources in the countries in transition are very diverse in terms of quality and quantity, but they have some important common characteristics.  Most catchments are shared among several countries, and they drain into closed seas: the Baltic, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, the Caspian and the Aral Sea, or into landlocked lakes.  Many areas in the region are also sensitive in terms of water management, especially dry grasslands, semi-deserts, wetlands and karstic areas.  In the past, major development programmes were based on the use or diversion of water, such as hydropower plants, navigation, drainage and irrigation.  Such programmes altered water regimes significantly, in some cases leading to large-scale ecosystem change, such as the depletion of the Aral Sea or Lake Sevan in Armenia.  Drainage for agricultural purposes and river regulation destroyed wetlands and made flooding patterns worse.  Large dams and flood-control dykes blocked fish populations from reaching their spawning grounds and severely threatened species such as Black Sea and Adriatic sturgeon.  Irrigation has led to soil salinization and the subsequent loss of productive land in countries like Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia.  The biggest water polluters used to be industry (especially mining and heavy industry), agriculture with intensive use of fertilizers and pesticides, and urban settlements with few waste-water treatment plants.  Many rivers in the countries in transition have been seriously polluted with heavy metals, nutrients, phenols, petrochemicals, salt and other substances since before 1990.  With the closing of many industries and the use of fewer agriculture inputs, the quality of many surface waters has somewhat improved.  This is not the case, however, for areas that still rely mainly on mineral resource extraction and processing and intensive agriculture.  In addition, water pollution from human settlements has not diminished.  Many (but not all) cities have some sort of waste-water treatment facilities, but they are often obsolete and non-effective.  Because of the lack of investment capital, only a limited number of waste-water treatment plants have been modernized or built in the past ten years.  In Central and Eastern Europe, most investment in waste-water treatment has taken place in the framework of the Baltic Sea cooperation in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland with co-funding from Scandinavian and other donors.  The countries in the Danube River basin signed the Convention on Cooperation for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the River Danube in In the Joint Action Programme of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) for the years 2001-2005, Contracting Parties to the Convention agreed to invest in projects in the field of sewerage and waste water treatment from municipalities and industries and also to undertake wetlands projects.  Other international programmes are under way with the support of donors to protect and manage the water resources in the Black Sea, Caspian and Aral Sea basins.  Groundwater is the main source of drinking-water supply in Central and Eastern Europe and an important source along with surface water among EECCA countries.  In the past, the upper layers of groundwater were affected by pollution from agriculture, industrial activities, waste and tailings, as well as in some places by military installations.  Supplying safe drinking water to the population is therefore an important issue in many countries.  The issue is further complicated by the inability of national governments, municipalities and water-supply companies to ensure maintenance and investment in the water-supply systems.  Losses from the pipelines range between 30 and 80 per cent, and the water treatment facilities are in many cases inadequate.  In the EU applicant countries, the challenge in the coming years will be to meet the EU standards for the quality of drinking water, but in the EECCA countries, the drinking-water-supply situation is still deteriorating because of a lack of funds and effective management tools.  There are high losses in the distribution system, metering is rare, and users are charged only for operating and maintenance costs and not for the resource itself.  Drinking water increasingly fails to meet standards due to pollution, poor operation of treatment facilities, lack of disinfection and the poor condition of supply systems and sewerage systems.  In rural areas, water is pumped from wells that are often chemically and biologically contaminated.  Although water prices have increased significantly since 1990, they still cannot cover the full investment and maintenance costs.  Municipal and national governments are reluctant to increase water prices further because of concern for poorer households.  In any case, a large proportion of the population does not pay its water bills.  This creates a vicious circle of diminishing revenues and rising costs for water companies, and subsequent deterioration of the infrastructure.  C. Waste and Contaminated Sites  Municipal waste  The countries in transition generate between 190 and 380 kg of domestic waste per person per year, which is somewhat less than, but comparable to, Western countries.  The quantity of domestic waste has been rising, but not all households are served by waste collection.  Consequently, fly-tipping is common and there are a large number of uncontrolled and illegal waste dumps.  The waste that is collected is taken to municipal landfills that are usually municipal property and have been operated by the waste-collection companies more or less free of charge.  Most municipal waste-collection systems are subsidized, and landfill investment and maintenance costs are covered by municipal budgets or municipal environmental funds.  The consequence of this is, on the one hand, poor management of municipal landfills and, on the other, a lack of incentives for waste minimization, recycling or some more demanding forms of treatment.  The uncontrolled and poorly managed dumpsites pose a particularly severe environmental and health hazard.  All kinds of waste, including municipal, industrial and medical waste, are deposited there.  Waste is burned in open areas.  Smoke containing toxic substances (dioxins, furans) is a source of serious air contamination.  Some people scavenge reusable materials from the waste, and some even live on the waste tips.  There are no drainage systems nor waterproof layers to prevent leaching and percolation into groundwater.  One of the most serious problems is the disposal of medical waste.  Few countries in transition have any or sufficient facilities for medical waste separation and treatment.  As a result, medical waste is stored at landfills together with municipal waste, exposing people, from health-care workers to scavengers at the landfills, to the risk of infectious diseases.  To reduce investment costs, most governments in the Central and Eastern Europe have been promoting the development of a smaller number of regional landfills and waste management centres.  Progress has been slow, however, because of the lack of incentive for municipalities.  The development of landfills to Western standards and the introduction of separate waste collection have been linked to an increase in waste collection fees and in many cases public-private partnerships with foreign waste management companies.  More successful have been the countries that opened up the waste market and privatized the landfills.  In such a situation, the landfill's investment and maintenance costs are reflected in the price of landfilling, and the owners have a clear responsibility for good management as well as an incentive to develop larger landfills and recycle in order to extend the lifetime of a landfill.  The EU applicant countries have to meet the requirements of the EU Landfill Directive, and their populations are increasingly able to pay for Western-standard waste management services.  Municipalities in the EECCA countries, however, cannot afford major investments in waste management.  The focus in these countries is therefore on improving the regulatory framework for waste management, on introducing economic instruments to provide an incentive for better waste management and on cleaning up those production processes and waste sites that pose an immediate threat to human health.  Industrial waste  Most solid waste comes from mining, energy generation and heavy industry.  In some countries these industries do not work at all.  The main problems are accumulated industrial waste, tailings and contaminated industrial sites.  In the past, incompatible classifications and reporting systems have been used for waste, so it is hard to make comparisons across the region.  In general, amounts of new industrial waste declined in the 1990s owing to reduced production and some efficiency gains; the generation of hazardous waste also declined because of better control, the costs of disposal and environmental management in industry.  Industrial waste from large industrial facilities, such as tailings, slag, ash or sludge, is usually stored close to the site in heaps or ponds.  Depending on the composition, this waste threatens groundwater, surface water and soil, or is a source of wind-blown airborne particles that contain heavy metals or are even radioactive.  Hazardous waste and contaminated sites  The centrally planned economies left a significant legacy of hazardous waste such as surplus pesticides on large farms and stockpiles of waste containing hazardous substances on industrial sites.  In South East Europe the war exacerbated the situation with destroyed industrial sites, unexploded ordnance and surplus pharmaceuticals that were sent as humanitarian assistance.  In Central and Eastern Europe, significant progress has been made in the management of hazardous waste.  The ratification and implementation of the Basel Convention have had an important catalytic role in the development of hazardous waste classification, reporting and management systems.  The reporting and monitoring of hazardous waste have also established a market for hazardous waste management services such as storage, recycling, incineration and other types of disposal.  Industries have taken advantage of hazardous waste disposal services in Western countries, especially for the most demanding substances such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).  At the same time, many stockpiles of hazardous waste are still awaiting proper disposal in monitored storage sites.  Radioactive waste  Radioactive waste and tailings from uranium mining and processing industries are particular problems in countries with a nuclear industry.  In addition, some lignite mines have been associated with uranium deposits resulting in large radioactive fly ash dumps.  Most countries temporarily store radioactive waste at the nuclear sites and only a few in separate locations.  The use of storage facilities is reported to be reaching or in some cases to already exceed the available capacity.  In many cases, the nuclear waste storage facilities do not meet international safety standards or existing legislation.  There are no facilities for waste treatment or pretreatment.  There is no regular safety monitoring system at the facilities or in the vicinity.  The population and the environment are exposed to high levels of radiation.  Radioactive contamination also comes from uranium mining and milling (radioactive gas radon), and tailings from the uranium industry.  In many countries, tailing management is absent, and abandoned uranium tailings are commonly used as construction material due to their fine sand texture, raising the level of people's exposition to gamma radiation emitted from these tailings.  At the moment, all countries are studying their options for long-term radioactive waste storage, especially for the highly radioactive spent fuel.  Urgent measures should be taken to prevent radioactive contamination.  Contaminated sites  One of the consequences of poor environmental management in the past is the contaminated sites that are spread throughout the region.  They include:  Industrial properties, polluted by the chemicals and waste from technological processes, with stockpiles of accumulated hazardous waste;  Unsafe and abandoned landfills with mixed municipal and hazardous waste;  Obsolete pesticide storage sites and dumps;  Mining tailings;  Areas surrounding metallurgical plants contaminated with heavy metals;  Soviet military bases polluted with leaked fuel, unexploded ordnance and other substances;  Large areas contaminated with radioactive fallout such as the Chernobyl area in Ukraine, Belarus and the Russian Federation, Semipalatinsk in Kazakhstan and closed nuclear cities in the Russian Federation.  The countries in the region have not had the resources to deal effectively with contaminated sites, which would require billions of dollars per country.  Although these sites were seen as one of the main environmental threats in the early days in transition, only a limited number of top priority sites have actually been cleaned up.  In Central and Eastern Europe, the most common approach has been to set up longer-term remediation programmes, registering the sites, investigating them and setting up a monitoring system.  The actual remediation takes place where there is an immediate need or when it makes sense economically because of the possible site redevelopment, or, as in the case of several Soviet air bases, the possibility to recover commercially interesting quantities of fuel.  Only a few countries can afford a systematic clean-up of the sites.  Some sites have been cleaned up in relation to privatization.  Where this has occurred, environmental audits were made during the privatization process, and the remediation obligations were then included in the sales contract, usually as an obligation on the government to accept liability for past environmental damage and use the proceeds from privatization for remediation.  In EECCA countries, where the contaminated sites are much bigger, very little has been done for site remediation apart from programmes and projects supported by donors.  In view of the magnitude of the problem these also targeted only the most immediate threats.  A particular legacy of contaminated sites was left by the wars in South East Europe.  The most important contaminated sites include: destroyed and burned-down chemical plants and oil refineries, minefields, emergency waste dumps, stockpiles of obsolete pharmaceuticals, spilled PCBs from electrical transformers and military vehicles, and impact sites of depleted uranium shells.  Major international efforts are under way to clear the minefields, but it will take several years before most of the areas are safe.  In the meantime human casualties are regular.  The industrial sites that are reconstructed are also cleaned up in the process, although little is known about the standards.  For other remediation the South East European countries lack resources and they rely heavily on international assistance.  Biodiversity  Within the countries in transition there are several biogeographic regions and a vast variety of habitats and ecosystems, some of which disappeared from Western Europe in the past two centuries.  Large steppes, a variety of karstic and alpine habitats, deserts and semi-deserts as well as wetlands in river deltas and floodplains are characteristic of the area.  Certain areas, such as karst (Slovenia, Croatia, Lithuania), landlocked seas and large lakes with endemic flora and fauna (Caspian, Aral, Sevan, Issyk-Kul), and wetlands (Baltic, Danube delta, Black Sea) are biodiversity hot spots.  The area is also an important migratory corridor and wintering area for birds from Northern Europe (Baltic and Black Seas, the large lakes).  The Caucasus and Central Asian mountains are the origin of some of the fruit and animal species that were domesticated thousands of years ago and are now bred throughout the world.  The countries host populations of mammals that are mostly much larger than in Western Europe or have vanished from there, e.g. large bear and wolf populations in Southeast Europe, the Carpathians and the Caucasus, the only population of European bison in Poland and Belarus, snow leopard in Kyrgyzstan, tiger in the Russian Federation's Maritime Territory.  While the industrial towns and regions in Central and Eastern Europe and EECCA were heavily polluted, a wealth of biodiversity was preserved due to agricultural policies and strong State control of forests and protected areas, including extensive zones of prohibited access along borders and around military sites.  At the same time, agriculture had a significant negative impact on biodiversity too.  Forests were cut, steppes ploughed, wetlands drained (e.g. 70 per cent of all the marshland in Lithuania) and extensive irrigation systems built.  Large dams for irrigation and hydropower production have disrupted spawning areas and changed microclimate and flooding patterns, while irrigation in some cases caused salinization of the soil.  Industry had a more indirect impact.  Use of space, acid rain and water pollution had the largest impacts, causing changes in species composition, defoliation of trees and eutrophication of waters.  Mining has led to land degradation and pollution from ore processing and sludge disposal.  Recently quarries for construction material have been expanding and increasing in numbers, quite often illegally.  The Chernobyl accident had a dramatic effect on the natural environment, from acid rain, mutations and long-term damage, to changes in species composition and the appearance of new pathogenic fungi.  The economic situation in a country has a considerable impact on how the natural resources are preserved and managed.  In countries where the economic situation has improved (e.g. Slovenia, Lithuania, Estonia) forests are expanding on former farmland and populations of large carnivores and hoofed animals are increasing as extensive agriculture and grazing are abandoned in less favourable areas.  At the same time in countries in economic hardship pastures and forests are overused owing to illegal cutting near settlements (Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Albania) as well as poaching and illegal fishing endangering some of species (e.g. drastic fall in the snow leopard population in Kyrgyzstan after the country opened up to foreigners and trade).  In the transition period, the use of fertilizers and pesticides plummeted, which resulted in richer biodiversity and growing populations of some species, (e.g. insects, birds of prey).  The transport infrastructure, however, is an increasing threat to biodiversity owing to habitat fragmentation, air pollution and other pollution risks.  In the Baltic, the seaports are increasing capacity for oil transport, which threatens migratory bird species.  Road construction takes up a lot of space and fragments habitats (e.g. highways crossing the bear range in Slovenia, Via Baltica crossing marshlands, large road infrastructure plans in Armenia).  Where tourism is well managed and, particularly, where ecotourism is being developed, biodiversity benefits.  However, in those countries where tourism is not well managed and is leading to uncontrolled construction and infrastructure development, it also poses a significant threat to biodiversity.  The abundance of biodiversity is creating a strong case for designating protected areas and for biodiversity conservation outside protected areas.  But the institutional and financial resources are insufficient to respond adequately to this pressure.  The consequences are an important implementation gap between legislation and conservation on the ground, difficulties with institutional development and significant involvement of domestic and international NGOs in the conservation efforts.  All countries have some areas protected for nature conservation, the total protected area ranging from 3 per cent (Kyrgyzstan) to 11.2 per cent (Lithuania).  Protected areas are mostly managed by State agencies under the environment ministries, in some cases also by national academies of science or national forestry services.  In some countries protected areas have advisory boards.  Much importance is given to monitoring, licensing (hunting, fishing, gathering) and control of use, but rarely to the provision of guidelines for sustainable use.  Management is hindered by complex administration and management problems of landownership (privatization and restitution), conflicting mandates of various authorities, outdated or non-existent management plans, a lack of funding, as well as insufficient collaboration and integration with other sectors.  The borders of protected areas were often set arbitrarily in a way that avoids larger settlements but ignores natural borders between ecosystems.  Where zoning exists, zones are often regarded as indicators of the potential and constraints for development rather than as a management tool, and buffer zones are too small, therefore development and exploitation that reach the boundaries of the protected area often damage the habitats within.  Several countries avoided the problem of private ownership by not allowing the privatization of land in protected areas; others are trying to achieve more sustainable resource use through the conditional leasing of some plots of land to private tenants.  E. Mineral resources  Countries in the region have significant reserves of mineral resources, including oil, natural gas, coal, ferrous and non-ferrous metal ores and construction materials (e.g., gravel and ornamental stones).  For a number of them, especially SEE and EECCA countries, mineral resources represent the most important sector of the economy.  In the more affluent Central European countries, mineral resources have lost their economic importance.  EECCA countries face the challenge of implementing sustainable resource extraction and processing practices.  Mineral resource extraction has multiple direct and indirect impacts on the environment.  Mines cause degradation of the landscape including land subsidence and the related destruction of human settlements.  Tailings from mining and ore processing are stored in heaps, ponds or tailing dams.  They are sources both of air pollution from dust containing heavy metals that are sometimes radioactive, and of surface water, groundwater and soil contamination through leaching chemicals.  Mines and ore processing produce waste waters that contain heavy metals, chemicals used in processing, high levels of salinity or particles, for example, from coal washing.  Oil and natural gas extraction and transport also cause soil, water and air contamination through waste and leakage of products from wells and pipelines, for instance in the Caspian region, where the soil in extensive areas is soaked with oil due to poor extraction practices.  Indirect impacts of mineral resource extraction include a high share of coal used for energy generation in coal-rich countries, leading to air pollution by SOx, NOx and higher emissions of CO Mineral extraction and processing require large inputs of energy.  In the short term, mineral resources are an important or even the main source of export revenues in many countries in transition.  In all the countries, the underground resources are State-owned, and mining permits or concessions are issued to qualified companies.  Some, but not many, mining and oil companies have been privatized.  Overall, there has been little investment in the mining sector, which has led to a deterioration of the facilities.  Virtually all investment that has taken place has been made by foreign companies.  Much more investment is needed to introduce modern, efficient technologies that also have a lower impact on the environment.  In Central and Eastern Europe, economy ministries are usually responsible for mining, while in EECCA there are a number of natural resources ministries that are responsible both for mineral resources and the environment.  Some countries have introduced new mineral resource legislation, introducing rules that should secure sustainable resource management in a market economy, including the polluter pays principle.  Mining permits are usually issued to qualified domestic and foreign operators, and should generally be based on an application that includes, inter alia, an environmental impact assessment and an environmental rehabilitation plan.  Operators have to pay royalties, environmental charges and in some countries set up a liquidation fund to pay for the clean-up at the end of operation.  In practice, however, given the economic importance of the mines, these requirements are not systematically enforced.  Policy framework  Nearly all countries in the region have developed new national environmental policies in the transition period.  The scope and objectives of these new policies have varied widely.  Following the adoption of the Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe (EAP) at the Lucerne Conference in 1993, many countries developed National Environmental Action Plans (NEAPs).  Many of these plans were developed in cooperation with the World Bank and others were usually prepared with the assistance of other donors.  In some cases, countries first prepared broader environmental strategies and, in others, the broader framework was set by the national economic development strategies.  Most countries in transition have recently concluded or are in the process of preparing the second generation of NEAPs.  According to the Environmental Action Programme (EAP), NEAPs should be documents defining a limited number of priorities within a realistic budget framework.  In the best cases, priority-setting exercises have brought together a wide range of stakeholders, who have helped gather and examine environmental information and have participated in the priority-setting exercises.  Priority-setting also requires strong analysis of policy issues, based on objective and transparent criteria.  In reality, NEAPs usually turned out as comprehensive lists of environmental programmes and projects, ranging from institution building and public participation to infrastructure investments.  It seems that environmental policy and investment has been a low priority in the economic and fiscal policies of virtually all the countries in the region, and that the NEAPs were an attempt to increase this priority.  One year after the EAP was adopted, Ministers at the Second Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health in Europe agreed to establish National Environmental Health Action Plans (NEHAPs) as well.  These have provided an important opportunity for discussions involving both health and environment ministries, as well as others, but, in general, coordinated implementation has fallen short of expectations.  Almost all environmental policies have lacked adequate financing strategies - a key problem, in particular for implementation, and a common one across all sectors of public policy in the region.  NEAPs did have some effect on the allocation of national investment resources in the countries that had some funds available for the environment because of the high priority of environmental issues during the democratic changes.  In the less affluent countries, there have been virtually no increases in domestic funding as a result of NEAPs.  Because of the overall low priority for the environment, NEAPs are still seen as sectoral programmes of the environment ministries, and even integration of NEAPs with NEHAPs has proven a major challenge.  In order to assist local and regional authorities in defining their policies and setting priorities two approaches were introduced across the region with the assistance of donors and support of NGOs.  Local Environmental Action Plans (LEAPs) or Regional Environmental Action Plans (REAPs) are intended as a tool for setting environmental policy objectives and investment priorities, and Local Agendas 21 (LA21) are broad-based participatory processes for developing a long-term vision of sustainable development.  LEHAPs are also being developed as a means of integrating municipal environmental and health planning.  All of these local plans employ methodologies that are based on public participation and stakeholder dialogue.  Hundreds of LEAPs, LA21s and LEHAPs have been developed so far across the region, often with strong support from local NGOs.  Some donors have focused on the regional and local levels, and have used LEAP and LA21 processes to programme their activities.  LEAPs, LEHAPs and LA21 have strengthened the local capacity for implementation of environmental policies and have focused the limited resources of local and regional authorities, even if many of them (like NEAPs) present very long lists of proposed actions.  In some cases, however, implementation has been constrained by poor cooperation between central ministries and local and regional authorities.  One of the most interesting areas of development in environmental policy has been the introduction of various policy instruments.  Countries have used a “mix” of policy instruments for pollution management, in which ambient standards, environmental permits and pollution charges for industrial facilities have all played prominent roles.  Many countries introduced these instruments under central planning.  In the early years of the transition, new democratic governments strengthened existing instruments and added new ones.  Spatial Planning  In the transition period, the countries have been facing a number of challenges related to physical planning and territorial development:  Deteriorating housing building and poor maintenance because of inability of many to pay the service;  Overcrowded living conditions, burdened with noise;  Migration of people from rural areas to the cities where they expect better economic opportunities and significant numbers of refugees from wars and internal conflicts, putting additional pressure on housing and urban infrastructure;  Growing demand for detached, single family houses in suburban areas around the cities because of lack of quality housing in the cities;  Prevalence of unauthorized construction and land speculation in conditions of undeveloped real estate markets;  Villages with few or without basic municipal services such as roads, water supply and sanitation;  Redevelopment of old industrial and mining cities and regions;  Integration of Trans-European Networks in the territorial structure of the countries;  Reconstruction after conflicts and natural disasters such as earthquakes or floods.  One of the important processes in the transition has been land restitution and privatization.  Different approaches were taken in terms of giving land back and providing compensation for agricultural land, forests, buildings and parts of buildings.  But in all cases the process has taken a long time because of poor land information systems and conflicts with recent users of the properties.  All the countries are developing integrated spatial information systems and land cadastres as a precondition for land management in the market economy.  In most CEE countries, spatial planning is integrated in the same ministry as environmental protection, while in most EECCA this responsibility remains with separate ministries of construction or urban development.  New legal systems for physical planning consist of laws on physical planning, construction, and housing.  These are complemented by legislation on agricultural land, forests, and environment.  The systems usually include three levels of spatial plans: national, regional and local.  The national government is responsible for the national level and the local authorities are responsible for regulating land-use and spatial planning at the local level.  There are different solutions for the regional level, depending on the institutional structure, but they usually involve the local authorities.  The objectives of these new systems are linked to balanced socio- economic development, protection of environment, natural and built heritage, and rational use of space.  In some sub-regions there is also good cross border cooperation in planning for common infrastructure and areas along the borders.  Spatial planning and construction permit processes are prominent fields where public participation is applied in practice.  Most laws require it in the decision making process, and, in more and more countries, physical plans are subject to Strategic Environmental Assessment.  Regulatory instruments  Environmental permits  There are several types of permits for new projects and existing installations: construction permits, pollution and environmental permits, natural resource licences (resource use permits) and operating permits.  Different types of permits apply in different countries, but usually the procedure for obtaining permits is rather complex and involves a number of different authorities that have to give their consent or even conduct studies, such as ecological expertise or setting maximum allowable pollution for individual installations.  This complexity threatens the effectiveness of the system.  In nearly all countries, industrial plants and other large, stationary pollution sources must have environmental permits.  These set air and water emission limits, which, in principle, are based on ambient standards and conditions.  Most Central and East European and EECCA environmental authorities have set separate emissions requirements for each point source at a facility and for each pollutant emitted.  Pollution charges and non-compliance fees are in turn tied to emissions.  Polluters pay charges on their air and water pollution discharges up to their permit limits; they pay non-compliance fees, usually at rates several times higher, for pollution levels above these limits.  There is often a separation of permitting and inspection functions within and between institutions.  In some countries central governments and environmental authorities are responsible for permitting.  In others, environmental inspectors who work at regional or local environmental authorities carry out that function.  In same cases, problems occur when permitting and control functions are within the same institution, and the institution issuing the permits is also involved in inspection.  The credibility of the system may be affected, as there is a conflict of interest.  Even though environmental officials and inspectors can be part of the same institution, serious lack of communication in issuing and controlling permits is another complicating factor, with the inspectors not being adequately informed about the detailed contents of permits granted to the enterprises.  This weakens the ability of inspectors to check compliance and undermines their credibility.  There may also be a number of institutions involved in issuing permits, including non-environmental permits (e.g. construction, sanitation, safety).  This separation of permitting procedures means that operators have to go through fragmented, time- and resource-consuming application processes.  Some Central and East European and EECCA countries are moving towards integrated permitting in line with the EU Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC).  Environmental standards  Ambient standards set maximum concentrations of a pollutant in a specific medium, such as air, water or soil, to protect human health and ecosystems.  Such standards can indicate targets for policy measures.  Before transition, nearly all countries in the region had developed ambient standards for air and water; however, air and water standards in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union were often much more stringent than those in Western Europe or than the guidelines recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO).  The number of ambient standards also exceeded the administrative capacities of countries to monitor them.  In effect, although countries set a great many standards, they could measure pollution levels for only a few.  For many pollutants, monitoring equipment is not sensitive enough to measure concentrations at the low levels they specified.  In many countries (mainly EECCA) these standards are still in force, while in others they have gradually been replaced by more realistic ambient standards and permissible limits for a limited number of air pollutants, emission standards such as on exhaust gas from motor vehicles, product standards such as UNECE motor fuels standards, limits and bans on the use of ozone-depleting substances, health protection regulations, water quality standards for drinking and bathing water, quality objectives for soil and groundwater, and regulations on waste-water discharges.  National systems of standardization comparable to Western systems have been established especially in Central and Eastern Europe.  In the EU applicant countries EU standards are being introduced in the process of transposition of EU legislation.  Environmental Impact Assessment  Environmental impact assessment (EIAs) is the obligatory assessment of the impact of proposed activities on the environment and an identification of measures that would be needed to comply with existing standards and regulations.  EIA is also a mandatory part of the environmental permitting procedure in terms of use of nature, pollution and construction.  All countries in the region have a system of project environmental assessment linked to the permitting system for facilities and installations.  The environmental assessment model differs from country to country.  In EECCA countries, environmental assessments are based on the Soviet system of ecological expertise introduced in the late 1980s.  Under this system, expert committees review the environmental impacts of almost all new industrial projects, as well as many modifications to existing activities.  The committees can make binding decisions to block or modify the projects.  There were few provisions for public information or participation, and in most EECCA countries these have remained underdeveloped.  Since 1989, nearly all Central and East European countries have adopted EIA procedures.  In some countries, the EU 1985 EIA legislation and the 1991 Espoo Convention on EIA in a Transboundary context have encouraged the development of these procedures.  EIA legislation in most countries requires public access to impact studies and provides for a notice and comment period, and often a public hearing.  In a number of countries, EIA may explicitly include the assessment of health impacts too.  There may also be separate environmental health assessments not only for projects, but also for policies and programmes.  In several countries, environmental authorities have faced capacity problems in trying to implement EIA procedures.  This has been a particular problem in countries that have carried out many assessments without strong institutional capacities.  It has been difficult for them to ensure quality assessments.  In these countries, the authorities should consider applying stricter screening procedures to make sure that limited resources are used to review the most important projects.  A further problem is that many officials who work on EIAs - in particular locally - could use additional training and standardized manuals on technical issues related to EIA procedures, as well as training in managing public participation and conducting public hearings.  In addition, environmental impact statements have often been of poor quality.  Several Central and East European countries, including the Czech Republic and Croatia, have addressed this issue by establishing accreditation systems for consultants who prepare these documents.  A few countries have introduced a formal “scoping” process to specify elements and approaches for each impact statement.  This process should help focus analysis on key project impacts.  C. Economic instruments  Most transition countries have established systems for pollution charges and non-compliance fees, mainly for air emissions, water effluents and waste disposal.  Fairly similar charges for the use and extraction of natural resources, such as water abstraction, logging, mineral extraction as well as hunting and fishing, are also in use.  These charges have generally been introduced in conjunction with a permit system: a base charge is applied for permitted emissions and a penalty rate encourages compliance with the permitted standard.  Before their independence, several countries had no experience with economic instruments for the environment.  In the 1990s many countries introduced pollution charges and payments for natural resource use to raise revenue for environmental investment, create incentives for pollution control and reduction, enforce permit requirements and implement the polluter pays principle.  Although the present systems of pollution charges are extensive, they do not function properly.  They fail to meet what should be their main goal: to modify the behaviour of people and institutions toward better environmental protection.  The instruments provide little incentive for pollution reduction, and revenue-raising has been their most important purpose.  The underlying reasons for this are:  Low prices for the use of natural resources;  The low level of pollution charges, which are not high enough to influence the polluter's behaviour significantly;  The low effectiveness of fines and penalties for non-compliance, which do not provide real incentives for keeping emissions within allowable limits;  The high number of pollutants on which charges are levied and the administrative complexities of the system;  The low collection rate of pollution charges, because of poor enforcement and limited monitoring capacity; the absence of strong inspection mechanisms to control payment of fines and penalties; and the lack of complementarities with command-and-control instruments;  The wide discretionary powers of environmental authorities, which give them the right to adjust emission limits and waive payments;  A lack of or poor understanding of the links between policy instruments, environmental priorities and environmental investment;  A limited institutional capacity to design the detailed programmes and mechanisms for implementing the instruments;  The perception that economic instruments are not viable under the present economic situation;  Controversies regarding the use of revenues, which also influences cross-ministerial and sectoral cooperation.  A few countries have taken (and others have considered) steps to strengthen pollution charge and non-compliance fee systems, and pollution management more generally.  However, from the start of the transition, environmental authorities have concentrated on maintaining existing charge rates in the face of inflation and opposition from polluters.  Lithuania has simplified its system for air pollution charges, reducing the number of rates and pollutants covered.  In Ukraine, a proposal was made to cut the number of pollutants subject to charges from hundreds to 25 air and 9 major water pollutants.  These improvements could be useful for other countries.  The introduction of full-cost user pricing in sectors such as energy, water and waste management has also been initiated in most of Central and Eastern Europe and, to a lesser degree, in EECCA countries.  Current user charges still remain well below full cost, and further increases in rates in line with increases in the purchasing power of citizens are inevitable for both environmental and economic reasons.  Although reducing price controls is generally a politically and socially sensitive issue where incomes are low, in the long term the benefits of improved services, environmental quality and more efficient resource use are expected to outweigh the initial price increases.  Domestic environmental financing  Macroeconomic imbalances and weak financial institutions have constrained the supply of affordable capital for investment by enterprises and public institutions throughout the region, though this is now changing in the countries where reform is more advanced.  Environmental funds (usually capitalized by pollution charges) and policy reforms that have prompted enterprise demand for environmental investment have been important factors in this respect.  In countries where reform has been slower, the economic context has been more difficult.  In many countries, output is at about half its pre-transition levels.  Environmental policies rarely provide sufficient incentives for action, while environmental funds have been smaller than in the more advanced countries.  In a few countries, environmental investment appears to be negligible.  Throughout the region, policies and institutions require further strengthening to mobilize and channel domestic resources for priority investment.  Sources of finance for environmental investment include enterprises, State, regional and local budgets, commercial banks and extrabudgetary environmental funds.  In Eastern Europe and Central Asia, the State remains the major source of finance but the share of the State budget allocated to the environment is about 0.5 per cent or less.  Many environment ministries have established funds for specific environmental investments such as municipal infrastructure (water, waste, heating conversion), industrial pollution control, prevention technologies, education and the establishment of monitoring systems.  These funds usually redistribute environmental fees, fines, eco-taxes and other resources, disbursing them in the form of grants and soft loans.  Furthermore, an effective financing system requires environmental strategies with clear goals and priorities, another area where progress is needed.  There is a need for training and education in environmental management and financing, especially at the local level where local governments are becoming increasingly responsible for providing major investments for public services such as water and waste management.  In many countries, the capacity for preparing financially- and environmentally-sound projects should be increased.  Provision of environmental services and user fees  In the transition period the responsibility for municipal services, such as water, solid waste, district heating and gas networks, along with full or partial ownership of the infrastructure and service companies, has been transferred to municipalities in most countries.  In the process of restructuring of both municipalities and companies, sometimes larger regional companies were divided into smaller ones serving single municipalities, which caused additional, unnecessary cost.  In other cases companies remained integrated, but their ownership was divided among municipalities.  In waste management, municipal waste collection and landfills are usually run by municipalities, while hazardous waste and recycling schemes are managed or regulated nationally.  Various corporate structure models for the provision of these services have emerged.  Most of the companies are still run by the municipalities in the form of public enterprises.  Often the ownership of pipe networks and installations is public, while the service delivery is the responsibility of private or mixed public/private companies.  In a few cases, usually involving the development of new infrastructure, private companies provide the entire service under concession contracts.  The prices of services are regulated by municipalities and by the national government.  They have increased several times in this period in a move to substitute user payments for subsidies.  Due to declining income and the deficient system of collecting payments, many individual users do not pay.  Industries that were traditionally used to very low water prices are heavy users of drinking water, and many of them cannot pay their higher priced bills.  Regardless of the low level of wages and potential efficiency gains in water use, still higher relative water prices will be required in the future to meet EU standards for drinking water and waste-water treatment.  This will pose a serious challenge within the next years for social and economic reasons.  Effective growth in revenues from drinking-water sales takes years to materialize and is linked to economic recovery.  The situation has improved significantly in the countries with a higher GDP, where the population could afford to pay user fees close to the full-cost recovery rate.  This means that monthly utility bills as a share of household income are several times higher than in West Europe.  But the sufficient revenue flow has enabled the municipalities to upgrade the level of service through investments and financing from environmental funds, international financial institutions, donors or even commercial banks.  Investments include metering and better regulation of networks, more efficient pumps and boilers in district heating, repair and maintenance of pipeline networks, and new waste-water treatment plants.  These investments have made up the lion's share of the total environmental expenditure of the Central and East European countries.  The private sector has been especially involved in the development of local natural-gas distribution networks.  In less affluent countries, the levels of user charges are still much too low to secure cost recovery.  New investment is limited to donor-funded demonstration projects and hot spots with the most acute problems, but the infrastructure in general is still deteriorating and occurrences of water-borne diseases such as hepatitis are frequent.  The absence of a revenue stream has kept private companies away from these countries.  International financial institutions have a hard time justifying investments with very remote possibility of cost recovery.  Environmental Funds  The earmarking of public revenues and the use of environmental funds offer a number of opportunities, but also raise some concerns.  Earmarking remains a much debated issue: it can lead to the inefficient allocation of resources if the money could generate greater net social and environmental benefits by being spent elsewhere than the earmarked sector.  Some of these funds are basically budget lines earmarked for environmental purposes and managed by a designated section of the ministry, regional or local authority.  Others are independent organizations with their own corporate and governance structure and relative financial independence from the government, but under policy guidance from the environment ministry.  With debt-for-environment swaps two environmental funds were established in Poland and Bulgaria.  They are replenished from the outstanding debt of the country and jointly governed by the country and the donors.  The environmental funds receive money from a variety of sources, including pollution charges, pollution fines, loans and grants from international donors and international financial institutions, loan repayments with interest, proceeds from privatization, debt swaps, and profits from financial operations.  From these funds they offer a number of financing products, including grants, interest-free and soft loans, interest subsidies and equity investments.  The choice of product for an individual fund depends on the level of development of the financial market in the country and the environmental policy objectives.  In some cases too rigid an earmarking of funds has proven counterproductive in view of the very quickly changing needs and demand of the environment sector.  The State and regional funds in Central and Eastern Europe are in general large enough to finance environmental investments, and focus on water infrastructure, air protection measures and solid waste.  Their clients are municipalities and municipal companies and industrial enterprises.  Some funds also provide grants for other environmental activities such as education, nature conservation, monitoring and research.  In the EECCA countries, the funds support investments to a lesser extent, mainly because they do not have enough money.  They focus more on education, monitoring and nature protection, and are an important source of funding for the environmental authorities themselves.  E. Information tools  Monitoring  Countries in transition have complex systems of environmental monitoring involving a number of government agencies and scientific institutions.  These include hydrometeorology committees or institutes, health authorities and institutes, inspectorates, the polluting enterprises and in some case environmental agencies.  Because of the variety of actors and complex reporting duties there are problems with coordination, incompatible formats and management of databases.  To streamline the monitoring systems some countries have established special coordination bodies involving all the institutions concerned.  The monitoring systems are generally divided into three levels: national, municipal, and industrial.  The ministries are responsible for national monitoring, and municipalities and regions are responsible for monitoring that is specific to their needs.  At the industrial level the countries are moving toward self -monitoring and reporting.  Most countries are establishing integrated information systems, but this is a significant challenge as they lack staff and equipment funds to upgrade the monitoring systems.  In information collection, manual sampling still prevails over online monitoring equipment.  The quality of the information collected is improving with more and more laboratories involved in environmental monitoring receiving international accreditation.  The EU candidate countries have already become full members in the European Environment Agency and participate in its information network EIONET.  Other countries cooperate with the Agency in preparation of the pan-European state-of-the-environment reports.  So far two reports have been published, one in 1995 and another in 1998.  The “Kiev assessment” will be published in 2003.  The countries also participate in the UNEP Environment and Natural Resource Information Network (ENRIN).  Availability of information  Effective environmental information systems are vital for environmental management, including the design and implementation of policy measures.  At the start of the transition, most countries collected a large volume of environmental data, but the different agencies involved rarely shared data.  Data quality was often uncertain, data collected were often incomplete, little work was done to analyse or synthesise data for policy development, and environmental information was rarely released to the public.  Countries in transition have now created national institutions and networks to bring together data from different monitoring networks (where available and in operation) and to share, analyse and disseminate them.  The amount of environmental data provided to the public has increased, and most countries now produce annual state-of-the-environment reports An increasing number provide this information through the Internet and other electronic networks too.  Despite this progress, some important weaknesses remain.  In all countries in transition, emissions monitoring is poor and does not fulfil the needs of complex pollution charge systems.  In addition, environmental information systems have faced budget cuts.  Access to information, public participation and access to justice  Public information and participation play an important role in encouraging pollution reduction.  Over the course of transition, most governments have increased public access to environmental information, as well as opportunities for public participation in decision-making.  These measures have helped to improve public knowledge and awareness of environmental issues.  In a number of countries, NGOs, industries and other stakeholders have participated in the formulation of environmental policies.  This has helped develop consensus for environmental goals as well as the actions to achieve them.  In the region, the legal framework and institutions needed to secure public participation and access to information and justice have slowly begun to emerge since 1989.  The rights and freedoms of citizens, and general rights to information were included in the constitutions.  Aside from constitutional rights, several countries have provisions guaranteeing the right to participation in decision-making either in environmental protection laws or in administrative laws or codes.  However, these are usually general, declarative provisions that rarely give specific rights or lay down concrete procedures for participation in the different types of decisions.  In several countries, the absence of specific regulations or guidelines means that the real access to information and public participation has yet to happen.  Although the situation varies from country to country, the general trend shows that the strongest tools for citizen participation are EIA and local referendums.  The situation regarding public participation in law-making, policies, programmes and plans, especially nationally, is rather mixed.  A few countries plan to introduce new instruments that will promote public awareness such as pollutant release and transfer registers.  Their use in the region will need to take account of data quality problems related to self-reported emissions data.  In addition, environmental management systems can encourage enterprises to undertake voluntary environmental management efforts and to disclose their emissions levels and enterprise goals to the public.  As yet, few environmental authorities have considered the full potential of public awareness and participation in regard to enforcement.  For many countries, greater public access to information and participation - together with closer cooperation between government, environmental NGOs, and business and industry - can provide new pillars for strengthening pollution management, as well as for environmental policy in general, particularly regionally and locally.  Citizens in many of these countries experience difficulties due to administrative barriers to court access, lack of liberal standing rules, high court fees, lack of interim and permanent injunctive relief, and slow court procedures.  An important impulse for improving public access to information has been the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.  So far most ratifications have been in the countries in transition, and the Convention itself is to a significant extent linked to the work done on linking participatory democracy and environment in these countries.  Using this experience the Convention set a new standard that requires improvements in legislation and practices also in the Western countries, and is becoming a global benchmark for governance.  Environmental training and education  Environmental education has been an important priority in the countries in transition for two reasons: to raise public awareness and influence the behaviour of the population, and to secure sufficient human resources for the growing demand of environmental management.  Environmental programmes have been included in curricula of kindergartens, primary and secondary schools, usually as a part of existing subjects and in some cases as an optional subject in secondary schools.  Universities have introduced environmental curricula and courses at various schools.  Because of the interdisciplinary nature of the environment several universities have established interdepartmental centres for the environment.  Some newly established private universities have made the environment an important part of their curricula, many times in cooperation with universities from Western Europe and North America.  Schools and universities have been involved in international environment education networks and programmes such as Eco-schools Network and GLOBE.  Many students have studied environmental sciences at universities in the West.  Effective environmental education has been hindered by the rigidity of the traditional education systems and the lack of dialogue between environment and education ministries.  In some countries the lack of textbooks and teaching materials has been a problem.  On the other hand, many NGOs, companies and other institutions involved in the environment have been actively participating in environmental education, either working with schools or organizing special short-term training for environmental professionals.  Eco-labelling  In a few countries in transition environmental labels have been created for the promotion of environmentally acceptable products and manufacturing procedures.  They are modelled on similar labels in Western Europe as instruments for changing consumption patterns and awarded to manufacturers of consumer goods that market environmentally friendlier products - either in terms of their use, or in terms of their waste characteristics.  A number of products have received these labels, but there is little information on their commercial effect.  Probably the main effect of eco-labels has been to recognize the environmental efforts and motivate the producers, and to establish a dialogue between industry and environmental authorities.  International eco-labels have also had an impact.  Several international organic food certification networks are present in the region through their local NGO counterparts, along with numerous domestic organic and quality labels for food products.  In a few cases, forests and wood-processing companies are applying for Forest Stewardship Council certification to be able to sell wood and wood products to Western markets.  Introduction  One of the first achievements of environmental policy in the transition process in most countries was the establishment of an environment ministry.  With this a new policy portfolio was established and the responsibility for national environmental management clearly assigned.  The newly established ministries have fought for their budget, staff and mandate in tight fiscal and economic conditions, as well as a general drive towards reducing government administration.  They have developed environmental legislation based on the principles agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the Rio Conference), secured environmental financing and gradually started enforcement action.  But in the early phases of institutional development the emphasis was on establishing the identity and authority of environment ministries in the government and society as a whole.  At the same time, the sectoral institutions were restructuring and building capacity to operate in the new context, and the level of inter-ministerial dialogue and communication, as well as dialogue with stakeholders, has been significantly lower than in mature Western democracies.  To solve the major environmental problems of today, environmental concerns have to be integrated into sectoral policies.  The environment ministries have been among the first to initiate sectoral integration through the development of environmental strategies, action plans, sustainable development strategies, physical plans and other policy initiatives.  Other ministries and stakeholders were invited to participate, but the level of their involvement and cooperation, as well as of public participation, was usually below expectations.  The consequence is a proliferation of sectoral strategies with uncoordinated and many times conflicting goals, even when they do include environmental objectives.  B Agriculture  Agriculture in many transition countries was characterized by large-scale (cooperative) farms, monoculture crops, inefficient irrigation schemes and high input of fertilizers and pesticides.  Environmental problems associated with the agricultural sector included eutrofication, desertification, air pollution, soil and ground water pollution.  Following the collapse of many export markets in the early 1990's and the privatization of land environmental pressures from agriculture greatly eased.  With transition the agricultural sector in many countries came close to collapse owing to its inefficiency, landownership issues and competition from less expensive, higher-quality products from Western countries.  The use of pesticides and fertilizers dropped sharply with the end of subsidies.  Many people moved to the cities looking for better job opportunities.  Significant problems remain, however, particularly concerning practices that lead to the exhaustion and erosion of the land, the irrational use of water through poor irrigation systems, and a lack of proper drainage.  Furthermore, there is little in place in South East European and EECCA countries to prevent a return to the heavy use of fertilizers and pesticides once the economic situation improves.  Some countries have introduced environmental objectives into their agricultural policies, and many have passed more stringent legislation on pesticide and fertilizer use, as well as codes of good agricultural practices.  The Central and East European countries have also introduced policies and programmes supporting environmentally friendly farming and especially organic farming in cooperation with domestic and international NGOs.  The number of participating farms is growing, as is their market share.  Still, agriculture is one of the main environmental threats to groundwater quality.  In most countries, there is little evidence of any real integration of environmental concerns into the agricultural sector.  Where the (relatively weak) environment ministries try to play a role, they are often overpowered by the much stronger agriculture ministries.  C Forestry  Forests cover vast areas in the countries in transition, with the Russian Federation's forests accounting for nearly one fifth of the world's standing timber.  These forests are home to numerous plant and animal species.  Roundwood harvesting has fallen dramatically as a result of the decline and restructuring of the wood-processing industry, increasing logging costs in terms of energy and labour, and falling global timber prices.  But wood remains an export product.  The more affluent countries have seen a decline in private owners' extraction of forest products, while in lower-income countries forests came under severe pressure as a source of firewood and construction timber in times of hardship.  Illegal logging is an important factor in these countries, especially in regions with low forest cover.  Institutionally, forests are usually the responsibility of agriculture ministries, although in a few countries they are under the mandate of environment ministries.  New forest, hunting and freshwater fishing laws were adopted in most countries in order to adapt to the new situation.  In recent years certification of sustainable forest management has emerged under the pressure of buyers in the global wood market.  Forests also have an important role in terms of ecosystem services, such as water retention, soil conservation, habitat for species as well as recreation.  The picking of non-timber products such as berries, medicinal plants and mushrooms has traditionally been popular in the region, and various rules have been introduced to guarantee the right of people to use forests for these purposes and to maintain the ecological balance.  D Energy  The countries in transition are rich in energy sources, including coal, oil and natural gas, as well as hydropower in the mountains and on big rivers.  Energy production and supply were synonymous with progress throughout the twentieth century, and the energy sector was considered of strategic importance during the socialist period.  The countries were aiming mostly at energy self-sufficiency rather than cost-efficiency.  This led, for example, to the development of a brown coal and lignite-based power industry that employed entire regions in mining and related activities.  These regions became the hot spots of air and water pollution as well as land degradation.  The exploitation of hydropower was characterized by large dams on rivers that significantly altered river habitats and water regimes.  The oil and gas industry was also managed in a way that disrupted the environment during extraction, transport and processing.  Because of the lack of market mechanisms and exposure to global markets, the socialist countries responded to the 1973 oil crisis by increasing domestic supply rather than by increasing energy efficiency.  The strong, but polluting, power supply sector and energy-intensive basic industries led to very high energy and pollution intensities in the countries in transition at the end of the 1980s, and problems such as forest decline and widespread respiratory diseases in the big cities.  During the transition process, energy consumption and the pollution linked to it fell with the drop in industrial production.  Energy policies have been determined by two conflicting considerations.  One has been increasing economic and environmental efficiency through market liberalization, including the closure of unprofitable lignite mines and power plants.  The other has been the social problems resulting from redundancies in the energy sector as well as price increases for industry and households.  In these circumstances privatization, market liberalization, more efficient production and demand-side management have progressed rather slowly.  Polluting power plants were refurbished rather than shut down, and energy prices for households have remained below prices on the European market.  Direct and indirect subsidies continue for social reasons.  Most countries did introduce some sort of policies to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.  Significant motivation for this came from donors and international financial institutions and in recent years from opportunities emerging from the flexible mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol, but they are not yet showing a major impact because of the inertia and resistance in the power sector.  Existing policies include energy efficiency agencies or centres, subsidized energy audits, energy conservation funds, EU energy-efficiency standards for home appliances, consumer information and other tools.  District heating systems were well developed in the socialist countries, especially in the large housing blocks surrounding industries.  But the systems were inefficient in terms of losses and regulation, and there was no metering.  In those countries where district heating is profitable, significant improvements were achieved by adequate management, the gradual introduction of regulation technology and metering, mostly paid for by energy savings.  However, in the low-income countries, many district heating systems collapsed owing to the collapse of the industry that used to supply excess heat or because of a lack of revenues.  In these cases the use of wood and coal for home heating increased, contributing to local air pollution and putting pressure on forest resources.  One of the notable successes in several Central and East European countries was fuel switching for home heating from coal to natural gas, both in district heating systems and in individual houses.  This process was facilitated by the competitive price of natural gas, the drop in consumption by industrial users and the supply of sufficient quantities from the Russian Federation and other sources.  A number of international financial institutions' projects in Central and Eastern Europe provided financing for investment in fuel switching, and private sector operators developed local networks in many towns based on concession contracts.  Many thermal power plants that could technically and politically switch their supply of coal (i.e. they are not tied to a specific coal mine) started using more energy-rich and less polluting imported coal, which decreased their emissions considerably.  Also, the quality of oil products improved because new technologies were introduced to keep up with competitors.  First attempts to introduce renewable energy have been made in Central and Eastern Europe with biomass, micro hydro, wind and solar (mainly for heating water) energy.  Energy intensity per unit of GDP is still several times higher than in the West, so there is a huge potential for more efficiency in power generation, industry and housing, as well as for meeting Kyoto targets with win-win projects.  The obstacles to these are the energy intensity of the economy and social concerns.  Nuclear energy is an important and controversial industry in the countries in transition.  Significant nuclear capacity was built throughout the region and some power plants were only completed recently or are still being built.  E Transport  175 In the past countries in transition developed an extensive network of roads, railways and public transport services.  Since 1990 the overall freight transport and passenger travel have decreased owing to economic decline.  At the same time, road haulage and the use of private cars have shot up, creating demand for more motorways and urban roads.  Both the demand for, and the capacity of, public transport decreased in this period.  This was to some extent the result of the unsatisfactory quality of service and obsolete vehicles.  In addition, public subsidies were largely discontinued.  This caused significant increase of fare prices.  The situation is deteriorating further with emerging urban sprawl, a lack of cooperation between the environment and transport authorities and the inability of local governments to develop and finance complex urban public transport projects.  In those countries that could invest, most funds have been directed towards road reconstruction, or the upgrading and building of motorways.  This was also seen as a contribution to the development of international transport corridors.  The countries in transition inherited a well-developed road and other transport infrastructure.  However, they have had few funds for maintenance, which has led to infrastructure deterioration and exacerbated environmental problems, such as dust in the cities.  Air emissions from road transport have been the most rapidly increasing environmental problem in the past decade owing to the remaining old vehicle fleets and the import of cheap used cars from the West.  In very few countries have the negative effects been mitigated by the introduction of unleaded petrol, fuel standards, restrictions on the import of used cars, emission standards with annual inspections and the pricing of fuel.  Vehicle emissions comprise several hundred compounds.  Significant pollutants include particulate matter (PM) (dust and soot), CO, CO, NOx, SOx, and hydrocarbons (HC).  Vehicle emissions also include persistent compounds.  Some toxic pollutants (e.g. Pb) are largely related to fuel composition or additives.  Some emissions (e.g. NOx) are associated with the formation of secondary pollutants (e.g. ozone (O)).  Other negative effects of growing road transport have been the use of space and the fragmentation of habitats, increasing noise, more and more severe traffic accidents, as well as risks and events related to the transport of hazardous goods in countries with shallow aquifers and karst.  In spite of the move towards more road transport and the use of private cars, the modal split between public transport and cars is still favourable compared to the West.  This presents an opportunity for achieving more sustainable mobility with appropriate transport policies and investments.  Most transport policies do mention sustainable mobility, but most environmental objectives are related to mitigation instead of structural change.  The EU has made rail a priority in its Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession (ISPA), so that transport-related disbursements for road and rail are about equal.  But there is still a need to develop effective policies that will ensure the success of public transport projects.  F Tourism  Tourist regions are scattered around the countries in transition, and for some countries, such as Croatia, tourism is a major economic activity.  Most popular are the coasts and mountains.  In the past the tourism infrastructure was largely developed without regard to the environment or sustainable development.  The consequences were air pollution from increased traffic, water pollution (sea and freshwater) from the discharges of waste water and solid waste, and soil pollution from litter and the proliferation of open dumps.  Some areas are overcrowded in the tourist season, straining the environmental resources and infrastructure.  The tourism industry has been undergoing change both in terms of structure - from State to private ownership - and in terms of tourist product.  It is predicted that tourism will grow further with increasing security and prosperity in the region, improved transport infrastructure and more open borders.  A good environment is recognized as the prerequisite for a high-quality, high added-value tourism, and most national tourism strategies in the region claim sustainable tourism as the future model of development.  At the same time, new infrastructure, for example, for resorts, roads, golf courses and ski lifts, is planned.  These types of projects are subject to EIA in most countries, although this is not systematically enforced everywhere.  Most coastal countries in Central and Eastern Europe also participate in the European Blue Flag for Beaches and Marinas programme, which is designed to inform tourists about beaches with good water quality by flying a blue flag  G Coastal zone management  There are many coastlines of environmental, economic and recreational importance in the countries in transition, including along the Baltic, Adriatic, Black Sea and Caspian coasts.  Some are areas of outstanding natural beauty and very important ecosystems.  In the past they were developed for economic activities such as ports and industries linked to sea transport, oil refineries of PVC factories, and tourism.  Some coastlines were closed to the public for military reasons.  Coastal development was subject to strict zoning rules, including a public zone belt along the coastline itself.  In the transition period, various pressures on the coastal zone increased, including the development of new tourist facilities, the construction of secondary homes and population increases owing to better economic opportunities along the coast in some countries.  These developments use the limited high-value space along the coast at the expense of natural ecosystems and generate water pollution that adds to the pollution load brought by the rivers from inland.  In some places, intensive recreational activities, hunting and fishing threaten the very ecosystems that they rely on.  The sea is also threatened by the pollution caused by marine transport and the penetration of exotic species.  Coastal countries have developed various approaches to dealing comprehensively with coastal zone management.  These include physical planning, the designation of marine and land-based protected areas, pollution monitoring, waste-water treatment and rules on the environmental management of shipping.  An important aspect of coastal zone management in all countries in transition is guaranteeing public access to the entire coastline.  H Industry  Industrial policy in the countries in transition has focused mainly on privatization, based on the assumption that private ownership will restructure and improve the performance of enterprises.  Because of the high stakes and political interference from many sides, privatization became a long and complex process, which is still not finished in many countries.  Privatization, technological renewal and the requirements of the international market, as well as the enforcement of environmental standards, have helped to improve environmental management in industry.  In some countries, the emergence of environmental liability issues in the privatization process has made industrial policy makers understand that environmental performance is a significant part of overall industrial performance.  The successful market leaders have introduced environmental management systems such as “Responsible Care” or ISO 14 000 and voluntarily improved their environmental performance ahead of, and beyond, legal standards.  At the same time some of the most polluting industries have closed down for economic reasons.  Further significant results can be achieved by focusing initially on a few of the large and heavily polluting sectors where most of the (low-cost) investment needed appears to be financially viable.  The main problem is that few of these industries have yet been privatized (like mines and power plants); they are generally unprofitable but subsidized and are not exposed to international markets.  While in the EU candidate countries the forthcoming creation of the common market and the implementation of the IPPC Directive are forcing the introduction of good environmental management in all companies, the situation in EECCA countries and South Eastern Europe is less favourable.  Industry in these countries is dominated by large and very large enterprises, primarily within the heavily polluting sectors of mining and processing of metals, oil extraction and processing, and food production.  Their technology is outdated, low production cost is viewed as their main competitive edge, and virtually no investment has been made in technologies for pollution prevention and control.  Industrial and trade associations have evolved along with privatization, from parts of the political establishment towards organizations that genuinely represent the business sector.  This happened faster in the countries with more rapid privatization and was helped by the emergence of associations of foreign-owned companies, which introduced more Western modes of operation.  With this process a structured dialogue between environmental institutions and industry started, especially in relation to the drafting of new laws and regulations.  The results were not always in favour of stringent environmental standards, but they contributed to implementation.  In some countries the dialogue has been particularly intensive regarding the rules on packaging and solid waste.  Industrial and trade associations also facilitate the development of voluntary agreements in the countries in transition.  This instrument seems to be in its very early stages of application.  One crucial element is the enforcement capacity of the government authorities to implement command-and-control measures should voluntary agreements not work.  Another is the existence of credible and representative industrial associations that are able to negotiate on behalf of industry.  The few real voluntary agreements have been negotiated in countries where these circumstances exist.  What is more frequent in the countries in transition are local and national agreements of informal, non-binding cooperation between authorities and industry.  They cover general cooperation between industrial associations and ministries on the environment, simplified and improved self-monitoring, pollution abatement investment, cooperation between municipalities and enterprises in providing environmental services, and others.  Integrating environmental concerns in privatization  The privatization of enterprises and land has been one of the main economic and social reforms in the region in the past decade.  It consisted of two processes: the restitution of property to the previous owners and the transfer of State or “socially owned” assets to private legal and physical persons.  In most countries privatization was long and cumbersome.  The procedures were very demanding from the legal, administrative and management point of view, and privatization generated much political controversy.  The approach to restitution differed from country to country, ranging from giving back the land, buildings and other assets in their current state, to paying compensation.  In some countries, forests and land in protected areas are exempt from restitution “in kind.”  Privatization also offered an important opportunity for the environmental clean-up of enterprises, especially where fresh investment was considered.  Early in the transition, the business sector asked for clear rules about the transfer of environmental liability, but some governments started dealing with the issue only once some deals were blocked by uncertainty regarding clean-up.  Two basic methods were applied: holding the government liable or transferring liability to the investor but granting an appropriate discount on the price of the assets.  In the first case, the government accepts liability and then actually performs the clean-up according to the risk assessment of the sites and the funds available.  In the second, the new owner undertakes to clean up the site by a certain deadline.  In both, the sale requires an environmental audit of the site and a rehabilitation or compliance plan, followed by clear provisions on liability in the legal documents of the transaction.  Corporate governance and performance have improved more rapidly where foreign direct investment was involved in the privatization than in cases of voucher privatization and internal buyout.  The privatized companies that compete on global markets were quite successful in improving their environmental performance, while the industries that remain under government control continue with old technologies and are politically immune to environmental action.  Where there are no legal provisions on past ecological damage clearly stating the respective responsibility of the previous (State) and new owners, privatization has not had a universally favourable impact on the environmental performance of enterprises.  Some foreign investors are deterred by the prospect of possibly having to assume liability for past environmental damage and by the lack of clear and credible rules for ongoing pollution control.  I Human health  According to several indicators, the health of the population in transition countries is poorer than that observed in the other countries of the region.  The situation varies, with the worst health conditions found in the EECCA and SEE countries.  Although a combination of social, economic and institutional issues impact on health and health care, the poor state of the environment is one of the most contributory causes.  The most prominent health risk factor is the poor quality of drinking water, especially in rural areas.  Many decentralized water-supply systems do not have either protected sanitary zones around their drinking water sources or disinfecting facilities, and microbiological contamination of the water is not uncommon.  The pollution of ambient air with suspended particulate matter is high in the cities and can lead to a range of adverse effects, such as respiratory and cardiovascular morbidity, as well as increases in the risk of premature death.  High levels of NO, associated with particulate pollution, indicate that transport is the main source of urban pollution.  The poor technical condition of the cars, the poor quality of the fuel and the lack of effective emission control, combined with an increase in traffic, will continue to be a threat to the health of the urban population.  Energy production, using poor-quality fuel oil, contributes to the problem in some cities.  Urban residents living close to busy roads are also heavily exposed to outdoor air pollutants when they are indoors.  There remain many areas in countries in transition that are highly polluted, mostly as a result of past industrial and mining activities.  Accumulated industrial waste creates a potential risk to public health, due to the possibility of accidental contamination of the environmental media, e.g. rivers, or as a result of long-term emission of hazardous materials to air and water (surface and ground).  Industrial wastes create chemical and radiological risks.  The leading role in protecting public health usually lies with the Ministry of Health and its subordinate institutions.  The institutes of public health play a specific role in this system as centres of professional support and scientific resource for decision-making and implementation.  In some countries these networks lack the resources to successfully conduct their work.  At the same time, many actions necessary for improving health and living conditions also require the involvement of other sectors, including the economy, industry, transport, housing and environmental protection.  There is also an increased role for the public in the determination of environmental health conditions and actions.  Several initiatives have been taken to increase the involvement of stakeholders and for effective measures, such as National Environmental Health Action Plans and participation of municipalities in the network of Healthy Cities.  The development and adoption of NEAPs and NEHAPs represent an opportunity for looking at environmental and health issues from a cross-sectoral perspective, and for identifying priorities and areas for action on the basis of a broad consensus of stakeholders.  This potential, however, remains largely untapped.  J The challenge  In the past ten years, the transition from a sectoral approach to a more integrated and preventive one has been steady in most countries.  Many have seen the allocation of environmental responsibilities to national environmental committees and eventually to the highest level in environment ministries.  In addition, (new) instruments have been adopted and applied to integrate environmental concerns better into economic transition and development.  Environmental impact assessment, spatial planning, permit systems and user and polluter fees can all contribute to minimizing the environmental impact of economic sectors.  One important challenge is the strengthening of institutional coordination and cooperation amongst ministries linked to the environment, such as the ministries of energy, industry, agriculture, transport, health, the economy and social affairs.  Some ministries have environmental departments.  However, these departments do not have enough power and responsibility to cope, and are often understaffed.  There are other forms of cooperation, from the most formal, through the councils of ministers, to inter-ministerial working groups, to the informal contacts between individual professionals.  Integrating environmental concerns into sectoral policies remains the main challenge for many countries.  Sectoral development policies of direct concern to the environment are being drawn up, but do not identify environmental impacts or specify programmes for prevention and mitigation.  International cooperation has been a dominant feature and a driving force for environmental and other reforms in the transition process.  Donor assistance has facilitated policy formulation and funding for demonstration projects.  Most importantly for the future, a fair share of policy formulation has been done internationally through global, regional and subregional conventions, as well as geographically or topically oriented programmes and strategies.  Environmental cooperation has played an important part in establishing a dialogue among the member States of UNECE and in the future can be an important element of preventing new divisions in Europe.  Countries in the region are parties to many of the worldwide and regional environmental conventions currently in force.  They also participate in the further development of multilateral environmental agreements and participate in all major processes and international institutions.  They are putting considerable effort into fully implementing the international agreements to which they are parties.  International cooperation in environmental protection is important for the countries in transition for a number of reasons:  Institutional capacity can be strengthened through participation in environmental agreements and through bilateral, regional and multilateral cooperation;  The legislative framework can be strengthened through the ratification of international environmental conventions;  International funding and technical assistance can accelerate the implementation of environmental protection policies.  Countries in transition hope to attract additional international funds in order to accelerate the implementation of environmental protection measures because of the lack of financial resources in the State budget, and low private investment in environmental protection.  International financing  Throughout transition, donor countries and international financial institutions have provided technical assistance (for training, policy reform and similar activities) and financing (usually for investment projects) in a number of areas.  The bulk of international assistance from the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other international financial institutions has been directed towards macroeconomic stabilization and structural reforms.  Limited support was given to infrastructure and the environment.  The ministries have sought grants for technical assistance leading to much policy advice, planning and capacity-building programmes in the environment sector.  The countries in transition sought international financial assistance from the international financial institutions and donor countries for a large number of projects early in the transition process.  This approach proved to be unsatisfactory for both donors and recipients, and at the Lucerne “Environment for Europe” Ministerial Conference in 1993 the Environmental Action Plan for Central and Eastern Europe was agreed to assist in setting priorities, and the Project Preparation Committee (PPC) was established to facilitate the process of preparing and implementing environmental investments in countries in transition and better channel the appropriate funds.  Later the recipient countries developed capacity for project preparation.  Different models of coordination in the country have been developed, including project implementation or management units, special centres and inter-ministerial committees.  Donor coordination and project management have required a significant effort by the environmental institutions, but have also had an important capacity-building effect on those involved.  However, in many countries, there are still significant problems with coordination, both between ministries at the national level and between the State and donors.  The level of loans and grants for investments has depended on the borrowing and co-financing capacity of the countries.  This capacity has been limited in most cases, so international funding contributed only a small share of total environmental expenditure.  The internationally funded projects have a lead time of several years, involving preparation and decision making by the donor and the recipient and procurement procedures.  Because of these, some countries have had problems using the funds in the timeframes set by the donors.  In many countries, the international funding has exceeded the funding provided for the environment by the national government.  The absence of domestic resources and the availability of donor funds have shifted the focus of the environmental authorities and stakeholders away from cost effective solutions for environmental problems towards attracting foreign funding to secure the survival of their institutions.  It has also established a pattern in some countries of donor-driven priorities and projects.  In these cases, there is a tendency of some countries to identify as “most important” whatever is likely to secure funding.  Global processes and commitments  In the global context the countries in transition belong to the group of industrialized countries that have major responsibilities for solving global environmental problems.  The Rio Summit on Environment and Development in 1992 took place at a time of major upheavals in the region.  The special situation of the countries in transition was recognized in the Rio documents, enabling them also to receive technical and financial support.  Most of the countries of the region have signed or acceded to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention to Combat Desertification.  Many are also parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.  The countries in transition have participated actively in the processes related to global conventions in the past decade and have started implementation within their national environmental policies.  The ratification and implementation of multilateral environmental agreements have been significant driving forces for setting national environmental policy objectives and priorities.  The countries in transition also actively participated in the preparation of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and in the Summit itself.  The “Environment for Europe” process has proven to be very successful and innovative in its approach to international environmental cooperation.  It combines analysis, strategic planning, legal drafting, as well as technical cooperation and financial support, in an open-ended networking arrangement between countries and between stakeholder groups.  This network provides an important stimulus for the environmental policy makers in the countries in transition during the period of restructuring, when it is vital to set the right course.  The process also supports the harmonization of policies in the region through the drafting of multilateral environmental agreements.  The Aarhus Convention is an achievement of worldwide importance that benefited from the structure of this process.  B. UNECE regional environmental conventions  The Economic Commission for Europe of the United Nations (UNECE) has an important mandate in international environmental policy in the region.  Its Committee on Environmental Policy is the main forum for debating, creating and implementing environmental policies.  The UNECE Division for Environment and Human Settlements carries out the Environmental Performance Reviews for countries in transition.  And it provides the secretariat for five regional conventions: the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution; the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in Transboundary Context; the Convention of the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes; the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents; and the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.  The regional conventions' many signatures and ratifications indicate the will of the countries in transition to contribute to solving common environmental problems and to harmonize environmental standards across Europe.  The conventions are also an important source of policy objectives and tools for the countries themselves.  Countries in transition have used two approaches to the ratification of conventions.  They have ratified the conventions as a way of introducing a new policy in the country and started preparing for implementation afterwards; or they have begun implementation before or at the time of ratification.  The first approach is consistent with the overall tendency to draft laws that can be implemented only gradually as the transition progresses, and with the importance that countries are assigning to international recognition.  The second approach is becoming possible with the increasing capacity of ministries and other stakeholders for policy analysis and implementation.  C. Other regional cooperation  Countries in transition benefit also from environmental cooperation with the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Environment Programme, the Council of Europe, particularly through the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy, the Task Force of the Environmental Action Programme, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).  There are several general agreements on environmental cooperation between neighbouring countries or small groups of countries, providing for cooperation in areas like sustainable use of natural resources, monitoring, reduction and control of transboundary pollution and others.  Most countries have agreements and standing committees for the management of transboundary rivers.  Many important areas of biodiversity are located in borders and several transboundary protected areas have been established in the past decade.  In recent years a number of sub-regional frameworks and processes of cooperation started in the region.  They are related to shared ecosystems such as river basins and seas or to cooperation on common environmental issues.  These processes have contributed to solving environmental problems, harmonizing policies and building confidence and cooperation among neighboring countries.  Examples include the following:  Baltic Sea Area: Cooperation among the Baltic States, the Nordic States and the European Union that has led, inter alia, to the 1992 Helsinki Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, a Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental Action Plan and an Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region, adopted in 1998;  Danube and Black Sea: Cooperation among the States sharing the Danube river basin and the Black Sea that has led to two conventions: the Convention on the Protection of the Black Sea against Pollution, in Bucharest in 1992, and the Convention on Cooperation for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the Danube River, in Sofia, in 1995;  The Caspian Sea: Cooperation among the States surrounding the Caspian Sea within the framework of the Caspian Environment Programme;  The Aral Sea: Cooperation among the Central Asian countries for funding products related to the Aral Sea, through the International Fund of the Aral Sea, and through a broader process of cooperation for sustainable development.  In April 1998, a Joint Declaration of the Environmental Protection Ministers of the Central Asia Region was signed; a Regional Environmental Action Plan is under preparation;  The Black Triangle: Cooperation among Czech Republic, Germany and Poland over a heavily-polluted region at their common border, which has led, inter alia, to the establishment of a Joint Air Monitoring System (JAMS);  The Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe: Cooperation among the countries of South Eastern Europe that led, in 2000, to the creation of a common Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme (REReP);  Regional Environment Centres: Establishment in 1990 of the Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe in Budapest, which serves 17 countries with a network of country offices and headquarters in Szentendre, Hungary.  Similar centres are being established in EECCA countries; to date these include RECs for Moldova (Kishinev), Russia (Moscow) for Ukraine (Kiev), for the Caucasus (Tbilisi), and for Central Asia (Almaty).  EU accession  Negotiations for membership in the European Union were concluded in December 2002 with eight Central and East European countries, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia (along with two Mediterranean countries: Cyprus and Malta).  Bulgaria and Romania are in negotiation for possible membership in 2007 and many of the South East European countries have also expressed their intention to accede to EU in the future and have signed Association and Stabilisation Agreements.  The process of EU accession started in the mid-1990s when the candidate countries signed Association Agreements with the European Union.  Before becoming an EU member State the applicants have to harmonize their legislation with that of the European Union, implement it, and ensure that their administrative systems are fully in compliance with EU requirements.  In 1997, the European Commission published an opinion recommending that the European Union should open membership negotiations with the applicants.  At a meeting in Luxemburg in 1997, the European Council created the Accession Partnership to provide assistance to the applicant countries within a single framework.  The applicants drew up national programmes for the adoption of EU legislation (acquis communautaire), which set out the timetable for achieving the Accession Partnership priorities.  The Accession Partnerships are monitored within the framework of the European agreements, which identify short- and medium-term priorities on the basis of the Commission's opinion.  The first accession negotiations with the European Union opened in 1998.  The first phase of the negotiations was the Commission's bilateral screening process, identifying 31 chapters for negotiation, which was completed by the summer of 1999.  After the initial screening process, negotiations are conducted chapter by chapter and each chapter is closed when a satisfactory agreement has been achieved.  The environment was dealt with under chapter 23 and most applicants closed this chapter at the end of 2001.  The main questions at the end of negotiations were the transition periods in which the candidate countries would fully implement certain aspects of EU legislation.  Each country was able to request transition periods in the fields where it thought they were justified.  Horizontal legislation such as environmental impact assessment could not be subject to transition periods.  The transition periods were mainly related to the directives requiring heavy investment, such as waste-water treatment, waste and air pollution.  The transition periods agreed vary, the longest extending to around ten years.  The negotiation of the environment chapter was conducted by the Directorate-General for Enlargement and Directorate-General for the Environment on the EU side and the environment ministries from the candidate countries.  It was facilitated by the experience and existing cooperation in the “Environment for Europe” process, which improved mutual understanding and communication.  The process was also facilitated by several studies developed by the DG Environment such as the environmental cost and benefit assessments of EU enlargement and the guide to implementation of EU legislation.  During and after the negotiations the candidate countries were busy transposing EU law into their domestic legislations.  Because of the large body of environmental directives and regulations, this was a demanding task for the environment ministries, almost fully occupying their policy and legal capacity for several years.  The countries with framework environmental laws were in a favourable position as they could transpose many directives through government regulations.  The countries without framework laws had to take more new legal acts to parliament, which took time and in some cases the parliaments even tried to lower the environmental standards in the discussion.  EU has provided pre-accession financial assistance to the candidate countries through three instruments:  ISPA, the precursor of the cohesion funds, which is dedicated to transport and environmental infrastructure in equal shares.  PHARE, the precursor of the structural funds, which covers various structural actions agreed with the country,  SAPARD, the precursor of the agricultural subsidies, which targets restructuring of the agricultural sector and rural development.  All three instruments require co-funding from the country and can be used for environmental purposes.  They have significant environmental safeguards to avoid damaging the environment through the use of EU funds but their actual impact on the environment remains to be seen.  The accession process has been a major driving force for modernizing environment-related legislation and standards among the candidate countries.  In some cases, however, transposition has not included the most advanced policies that were or are still being negotiated, including, for example, CO taxes, Kyoto mechanisms or the Aarhus Convention, which EU has not yet ratified.  There is a potential problem especially with the EU transport and agricultural policies, which, if implemented in the candidate countries the way they are now, will have a serious negative impact on the environment.  Both policies are being reconsidered in the EU, but the final decisions are still pending.  The problem was partly solved by introducing some of the advanced policy elements in the regulations on pre-accession instruments such as ISPA and SAPARD.  Overall the EU accession process has focused and quickly advanced environmental policy development in the candidate countries.  Most of their priorities are consistent with the EU priorities, and the policies in the remaining areas will catch up quickly because of the increased policy capacity of the ministries.  The transition has put in motion a fundamental structural change in environmental policy-making 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.  Pollution from inefficient industry and agriculture declined sharply with the decline in production.  In countries where economic growth has resumed, the decoupling of pollution from economic development has begun.  Structural reforms were slower and have had a less positive effect in the countries where the economy stagnated or in those affected by war and instability.  The main obstacles to achieving the environmental goals in the countries in transition were:  The lack of management capacity:  The lack of strong environmental institutions and institutional continuity; and  The lack of funds.  Countries have taken a number of important initiatives to build capacity, often with external technical support.  They have developed legislation, strengthened and restructured institutions, introduced innovative policy tools and supported public participation.  With the increasing institutional capacity of the government and other stakeholders, the performance in policy implementation has improved across the region.  The result is a wealth of experience and know-how related to the management of the environment in the context of transition.  This information is captured in the Environmental Performance Reviews, and it represents an important contribution to the general knowledge about environmental management.  The lack of funds has so far been overcome only in the countries where economic growth has resumed, economic instruments can be enforced and industries are in a position to assume their environmental responsibilities (e.g. application of the “polluter pays” principle).  In these countries, the government and the business sector have been able to commit significant funds for environmental protection, and they should be able to achieve international environmental standards in the foreseeable future.  The environmental situation has remained poor or even deteriorated in the countries where the economy has not yet recovered and sufficient funds are not yet available from any source.  The environmental management system  With the introduction of democracy and a market economy, the restructuring of regulations proved more complex than expected.  It meant new principles, legislation, policies, economic instruments, standards, and enforcement and management tools.  This has taken time and has inevitably left an implementation gap between the legal requirements and policy objectives, and the results on the ground.  The gap is gradually closing.  Most countries are making serious efforts to strengthen implementation.  It is difficult, however, for countries in economic crisis where the environmental infrastructure and services continue to deteriorate.  The experience from the countries in transition shows that environmental improvement is facilitated when polluters take financial and management responsibility for pollution abatement and control, and users pay for the full cost of environmental resources and services.  This usually also implies the application of a wide array of policy tools, including technical standards, permitting and enforcement, monitoring, information and public participation, pollution charges, targeted subsidies and financing arrangements.  In conditions of economic growth and available financing from international and domestic banks, these tools will increase polluters' and users' expenditure for environmental investment.  However, in the conditions of economic decline and widespread poverty, polluters and users cannot afford to pay.  The regulatory and economic instruments are designed or implemented in such a way that they do not shut down polluting facilities.  Instead, pollution charges and fines are collected at levels well below pollution abatement costs, basically to raise revenue, and the revenues are rarely channelled back into pollution reduction.  The countries in transition are important providers of biological and landscape diversity, water and carbon sinks.  By actively conserving these goods, the countries and their populations should be able to enjoy the economic benefits arising from their management.  They are among the most important markets for the flexible mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol, which will fully develop in the next few years after the ratification or commitment to ratify it made at the World Summit in Johannesburg (South Africa) by all the Central and East European and EECCA countries and the EU.  The countries will also focus on the conservation of biodiversity and water resources.  Both offer important benefits for rural development and the quality of life of the population.  There is significant scope for various types of partnerships that would aim at conservation combined with economic development.  The countries in transition share the Baltic, Mediterranean, Black, Caspian and Aral Seas and their catchment areas.  Even if they are landlocked regional seas, they are of global importance and need to be preserved and managed in an international context because of their cross-border nature.  Their future is of primary importance for the riparian countries as well as the global environment.  Looking forward  The “Environment for Europe” process began in order to assist the countries in transition in the process of restructuring and solving their environmental problems.  This was seen as a contribution to the end of the ideological, political and economic division of the European continent, as a way of improving the livelihoods of people in countries in transition and as a cost-effective means of reducing overall pollution on the continent and the planet.  After 13 years of transition more and more countries are emerging as capable of solving their problems and actively contributing to the international agenda.  Eight Central and East European countries will become full members of EU in the near future.  Accession countries will continue to focus on the transposition and implementation of the body of EU law, but will need another decade to comply fully.  Because of their size and problems, new member States will play an important role in future environmental policy setting in the European Union.  This way they will also have an impact on the global environmental and sustainability agenda.  The countries of South Eastern Europe, which have all expressed their intention of applying for EU membership, will continue their efforts to develop their environmental institutions and management capacity.  Because of the past war and instability in the area, some of these countries really started the transition process only a few years ago, and are now rapidly learning from the experience of their EU candidate neighbours.  The political and economic situation in these countries is still quite difficult, but environmental cooperation can contribute to building up general security, political stability and economic prosperity.  The environmental authorities from these countries participate and cooperate very well in the “Environment for Europe” framework and, in particular, the Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe.  Because of a much more difficult economic situation, the environment generally was a lower priority in EECCA countries in the early years of transition.  The situation is gradually changing, however.  One example is their initiative to develop a common environmental strategy in cooperation with donors and international organizations to be presented at the Kiev Ministerial Conference.  Similarly, they took an active role during the Johannesburg Summit.  With progress in transition, the focus of the “Environment for Europe” process is shifting from West - East assistance towards joint policy-making in the pan-European context, resulting in significant conventions and pan-European strategies.  The countries in transition have committed to a number of these.  With growing experience, they will play an increasingly active and qualified role in international policy-making.  At the same time, there is also a growing emphasis on sub-regional cooperation within the context of the UNECE-wide cooperation, and particularly on the EECCA and South East European countries.  It is also worth noting that most of the countries in transition have voluntarily requested Environmental Performance Reviews.  They have seen this as a key tool for documenting the range and complexity of their environmental problems; for understanding possible next steps, sharing experience and monitoring progress; and for engaging fully in regional and global processes.  By participating in the Environmental Performance Review programme, the countries have underscored their desire and commitment to move ahead.  Future of the EPR programme  One decade has passed since Ministers at the 1993 Lucerne Conference asked the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) to undertake Environmental Performance Reviews (EPRs) in the countries in transition.  During these ten years, the UNECE EPR programme has generated continued demand from countries in transition for both initial and follow-up reviews.  The usefulness of the Reviews has been articulated by national policy makers and civil society, particularly those engaged in environmental policy.  The environmental review process has provided a framework for the systematic in-depth analysis of a number of sectoral and cross-sectoral issues that affect the environment, including policy development, the legal and institutional structure, and the integration of the environment with other sectors.  It has been important for the environmental institutions in the countries to receive an independent and authoritative review from an international organization like UNECE that strengthens their position inside the country.  The process also provides for the sharing of experience and dialogue among the stakeholders in the country and between different countries in transition.  During follow-up reviews and informal consultations, a number of countries that have undergone reviews have emphasized the direct impact of an EPR on implementation.  Two examples are the Republic of Moldova and Romania.  The first round of reviews covers a broad range of issues, identified jointly by the country and UNECE.  Very often, these reports result in the first comprehensive picture of the environmental situation in a country and, as such, are extremely important for the country as a basis for action and as a benchmark against which to measure progress.  The second round of reviews is focused on a more limited set of issues, also jointly chosen.  Experience with second reviews has been limited so far to only two reviews because priority has been given to completing the first round.  The strength of the reviews lies not only in the end-product, but also in the process itself.  First, the reviews are undertaken by an international team of experts chosen from both Western countries in the region and from countries in transition.  This mix of experience and knowledge has proven to be considerably important.  Second, the contents of the ensuing EPR reports, and particularly their recommendations, are reviewed by an ad hoc EPR Expert Group with the full participation of experts from the reviewed country.  This approach achieves three things.  The Expert Group has an opportunity to check the merits and accuracy of the text and the recommendations.  The Expert Group enters into a dialogue with the reviewed country to determine, among other things, the appropriateness of the recommendations and their relative weight.  Finally, the country's experts commit themselves to implementation.  Third, the UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy carries out a peer review during its regular session.  In its peer review, the Committee focuses on the key policy issues highlighted through the reviews, and it provides an opportunity for all UNECE member States to enter into a dialogue with the reviewed country.  The reviewed country is usually represented at a very high, decision-making level.  Some countries in transition have not yet been reviewed.  If conditions allow, first reviews should be carried out in these countries as a matter of priority.  In general, however, the first round of Environmental Performance Reviews is coming to an end, and attention should now be given to designing the most appropriate format for the second round of reviews.  The Ministers at the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe,” meeting in Kiev, Ukraine, in May 2003, may wish to recommend the following:  The process of Environmental Performance Reviews should continue, taking into account the experience from the first ten years.  Countries and organizations are encouraged to make broader use and support wider dissemination of the Reviews, through, for example, press conferences, or by bringing the reports to the attention of staff of embassies, national aid organizations, all relevant ministries, departments and institutes within the country and national information centres;  The first round of reviews should be completed and the second round proceed.  All countries that are member States of UNECE but not members of OECD are eligible for first and second reviews;  The second Environmental Performance Reviews should measure progress made in implementation, including implementation of the recommendations from the first review, using a relevant set of indicators;  The second Reviews should focus more on issues of implementation.  With the most dynamic legislative phase of the early transition over, the future EPRs should devote more attention to performance in implementation of the national policy targets, national legislation, best practices, and international commitments, such as conventions and regional strategies.  This could be valuable for the further development of international instruments;  The second Reviews should remain flexible and focus on the priorities of the countries, including, in particular, new concerns that have arisen;  The second Reviews should examine issues of financing This would include, for example, the generation and allocation of public domestic financing for the environment; the position of environmental funds; the use of economic instruments; funds derived from the private sector; donor support; and foreign direct investment, as well as an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of environmental policy measures;  The second Reviews should give greater emphasis to the integration of the environment with other sectors at all decision-making levels and to its socio-economic interface.  In this regard, the Reviews should further assess how environmental issues could be viewed comprehensively and in an integrated manner.  This could assist countries, inter alia, to implement decisions taken at the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” and the Johannesburg World Summit and to meet the Millennium Development Goals.  They should also assess environmental issues in the context of environmental democracy, environmental justice and poverty eradication, among other critical economic and social concerns common to all countries;  The second Reviews should make maximum use of existing data The first reviews have dedicated considerable resources to collecting and assessing data that have not been available outside the country or in electronic format.  Many countries in transition have now had an opportunity to strengthen their monitoring and reporting systems and are providers of data to, for example, the European Environment Agency.  UNECE should work in close cooperation with these and other organizations to maximize efficiency;  Cooperation with the Environmental Performance Review programme of OECD should be continued and strengthened;  Reviewed countries could provide an interim report to the Committee on Environmental Policy on implementation of first Review recommendations within three years of the conclusion of their first Review  Annex I  The process of the first review  The structure of the EPR process consists of:  The preparation  The review mission  The peer review  Publication  Follow-up and monitoring  The process begins when a country requests UNECE to undertake a review.  The decision to proceed with a specific country is taken by the UNECE intergovernmental Committee on Environmental Policy.  Guidance is provided by the ad hoc ECE Expert Group on Environmental Performance (EPR Expert Group).  UNECE consults with the country to be reviewed on the structure of the review.  Eight core topics are always included.  These are (1) legal instruments, (2) economic and regulatory instruments, (3) international cooperation, (4) human health, and (5) the management of waste, (6) air, (7) water, and (8) biodiversity.  Additional chapters are decided on jointly based on the specific concerns of the country to be reviewed.  Examples of such chapters have included nuclear safety, industrial safety and cleaner production, the management of specific seas and coastal zones, the management of mineral resources, and environmental concerns in agriculture, in energy and in transport.  The secretariat assembles a review team, which is typically made up of experts from UNECE member States, including countries in transition, as well as the staff of UNECE, the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Health Organization's European Centre for Environment and Health.  This stage also includes data and information gathering by the secretariat in cooperation with the reviewed country.  Relevant information and documentation are sent to all team members so that they can familiarize themselves with the situation in the reviewed country well before the review mission.  Once this preparatory stage has been completed, the expert team travels to the country under review and meets with government and non-government representatives, including industry, trade unions, NGOs, experts and local government representatives.  The focus of discussion is on the evaluation of environmental performance.  The assistance from national experts in the review country and their participation in the EPR expert teams also brings invaluable guidance and experience.  Each team member prepares a first draft of a chapter of the review report after the mission.  Chapters contain both descriptive text and a series of recommendations on ways to improve problem areas.  Further drafting and editing of a consolidated draft text are done by the secretariat.  Draft chapters are circulated for comment to all experts concerned, and the recommendations are circulated for comment to the country under review.  In a few cases, it is necessary to organize an additional mission to the country to update the text.  Final drafts are discussed by the Ad Hoc Expert Group on Environmental Performance and then submitted to the UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy for peer review, with a focus on the key policy issues identified in the EPR, and for consideration and adoption of the EPR report  Publication of the report is the last step of the review process.  Updated facts and figures are requested from the reviewed country.  The secretariat incorporates these changes, as appropriate, together with possible changes in line with the conclusions of the Committee on Environmental Policy.  Follow-up and second reviews  To date, UNECE has used two tools for follow-up and monitoring: a second review and follow-up reports to the first review.  First is the follow-up report, which focuses on short-term implementation of the recommendations in the review and obstacles to implementation.  The second step is the second review.  The second review assesses medium-term implementation.  It also analyses in depth a few specific problems identified by the country after the first review.  The process of a second review is similar to that of the first review, but its focus is narrower.  The intention is to carry out second reviews when sufficient progress has been made in the implementation of the recommendations and when second-generation problems occur.  In general, this is about five years after the first review.  Annex II  Annex I  Annex I  Annex I  Annex I  Annex I  Annex I  Annex I  Annex I  Economic and Social  Council
CINQUIÈME CONFÉRENCE MINISTÉRIELLE UN ENVIRONNEMENT POUR L'EUROPE  KIEV, UKRAINE 21-23 mai 2003  ORDRE DU JOUR PROVISOIRE DE LA CONFÉRENCE  COMMISSION ÉCONOMIQUE POUR L'EUROPE  COMITÉ DES POLITIQUES DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT  Cinquième Conférence ministérielle «Un environnement pour l'Europe» Kiev (Ukraine), 21-23 mai 2003  ORDRE DU JOUR PROVISOIRE DE LA CONFÉRENCE  qui se tiendra au Centre international des expositions, à Kiev, et s'ouvrira le mercredi 21 mai 2003 à 9 heures  Ouverture officielle de la Conférence et adoption de l'ordre du jour.  État de l'environnement et performance environnementale.  Principes directeurs visant à renforcer le respect et l'exécution des accords multilatéraux relatifs à l'environnement (AME).  Réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention sur l'évaluation de l'impact sur l'environnement dans un contexte transfrontière.  Deuxième session extraordinaire conjointe des Parties à la Convention sur la protection et l'utilisation des cours d'eau transfrontières et des lacs internationaux et des Parties à la Convention sur les effets transfrontières des accidents industriels.  Réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention sur l'accès à l'information, la participation du public au processus décisionnel et l'accès à la justice en matière d'environnement.  Ouverture des protocoles à la signature.  Partenariats pour l'environnement dans la région de la CEE.  Signature de la Convention-cadre sur la protection et le développement durable des Carpates.  Efficacité énergétique et tarification de l'énergie.  Stratégie paneuropéenne de la diversité biologique et paysagère.  Éducation au développement durable.  Réunion spéciale entre les ministres et les ONG d'environnement.  Évolution, priorités et perspectives du processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe».  Examen du projet de déclaration ministérielle.  Adoption de la Déclaration ministérielle de Kiev.  Clôture de la Conférence.  Point 1.  Ouverture officielle de la Conférence et adoption de l'ordre du jour  Le Président ukrainien ouvrira officiellement la Conférence.  Celle-ci adoptera son ordre du jour provisoire.  Document de la catégorie I:  Ordre du jour provisoire de la Conférence (ECE/CEP/92)  Point 2.  État de l'environnement et performance environnementale  L'examen de ce point donnera le ton de la Conférence.  L'état actuel de l'environnement en Europe, les grandes tendances en la matière et les principaux domaines dans lesquels des résultats positifs ont été obtenus ou qui sont source de préoccupation seront mis en évidence dans l'exposé du représentant de l'Agence européenne de l'environnement (AEE), qui présentera le troisième rapport d'évaluation paneuropéen de l'AEE (Évaluation de Kiev).  L'attention des participants sera également appelée sur les rapports du Groupe de travail de la CEE concernant la surveillance de l'environnement, l'information et la notification des données.  Ce groupe de travail, qui avait aidé l'AEE à incorporer les pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale dans le processus d'évaluation, a élaboré des ensembles de recommandations intéressant ces pays.  Les ministres présents à Kiev voudront peut-être saluer les rapports présentés et approuver les recommandations portant sur le renforcement des systèmes nationaux de surveillance de l'environnement et d'information sur l'environnement ainsi que les Principes directeurs relatifs à l'élaboration des rapports nationaux sur l'état et la protection de l'environnement.  La Commission économique des Nations Unies pour l'Europe (CEE) présentera son rapport sur la politique de l'environnement dans les pays dont l'économie est en transition.  Ce document, qui dresse le bilan de l'état de l'environnement dans les pays concernés, rappelle qu'une décennie s'est écoulée depuis la Conférence de Lucerne de 1993 et qu'à cette occasion les ministres avaient demandé à la CEE d'entreprendre des études de la performance environnementale des pays en transition.  Durant cette décennie, aussi bien les décideurs nationaux que la société civile avaient relevé l'utilité de ces études.  Le Comité des politiques de l'environnement de la CEE a proposé qu'à leur cinquième Conférence ministérielle du processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe», les ministres décident que le programme d'étude de la performance environnementale se poursuive compte tenu de l'expérience acquise au cours des 10 premières années.  À l'issue de la présentation de ces deux rapports, un groupe de haut niveau examinera les grandes conclusions de ces documents, l'efficacité des instruments directeurs actuels pour ce qui est d'intervenir à différents niveaux pour répondre aux questions cruciales qu'ils soulèvent et la nécessité d'adopter de nouveaux instruments à cet égard.  Cet examen sera suivi d'un débat ouvert à tous les participants.  Documents de la catégorie I:  La politique de l'environnement dans les pays en transition: bilan de 10 années d'études des performances environnementales (ECE/CEP/98) et le résumé de ce document (ECE/CEP/99)  Troisième rapport paneuropéen d'évaluation et le résumé de ce document (ECE/CEP/100)  Enseignements tirés des données recueillies en vue de l'élaboration du rapport de Kiev (ECE/CEP/101)  Recommandations portant sur le renforcement des systèmes nationaux de surveillance de l'environnement et d'information sur l'environnement dans les pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale (ECE/CEP/109)  Principes directeurs relatifs à l'élaboration des rapports nationaux sur l'état et la protection de l'environnement (ECE/CEP/113)  Point 3.  Principes directeurs visant à renforcer le respect et l'exécution des accords multilatéraux relatifs à l'environnement (AME)  À sa septième session, en septembre 2000, le Comité des politiques de l'environnement de la CEE a décidé d'élaborer, dans le cadre des préparatifs de la cinquième Conférence ministérielle «Un environnement pour l'Europe», des principes directeurs sur le renforcement du respect et de l'exécution des accords multilatéraux relatifs à l'environnement et a chargé une équipe spéciale à composition non limitée de cette question.  Ces principes directeurs ont été élaborés en application de cette décision.  L'objectif des Principes directeurs est de faire ressortir les formules qui permettent de renforcer le respect et l'exécution des AME, étant entendu que chaque accord est négocié d'une manière particulière et qu'il jouit d'un statut juridique indépendant qui lui est propre.  Ces principes mettent également en évidence les obstacles qui pourraient entraver l'élaboration de nouveaux accords multilatéraux sur l'environnement dans la région de la CEE ainsi que les solutions possibles.  Les ministres présents à Kiev voudront peut-être examiner ces principes directeurs et les approuver.  Document de la catégorie I:  Principes directeurs visant à renforcer le respect et l'exécution des accords multilatéraux relatifs à l'environnement dans la région de la CEE (ECE/CEP/107)  Point 4.  Réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention sur l'évaluation de l'impact sur l'environnement dans un contexte transfrontière  Il sera convoqué une réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention sur l'évaluation de l'impact sur l'environnement dans un contexte transfrontière.  Cette réunion sera saisie du projet de protocole à la Convention, relatif à l'évaluation stratégique environnementale, tel qu'il a été finalisé et recommandé pour adoption par le Groupe de travail spécial sur le protocole à sa huitième session, tenue à Genève le 30 janvier 2003.  La réunion devrait normalement adopter une résolution ministérielle à l'occasion de l'adoption de ce protocole.  Documents de la catégorie I:  Ordre du jour provisoire de la réunion extraordinaire (ECE/MP.EIA/2003/1)  Projet de protocole relatif à l'évaluation stratégique environnementale (MP.EIA/2003/1)  Projet de résolution sur le protocole relatif à l'évaluation stratégique environnementale (MP.EIA/2003/2)  Point 5.  Deuxième session extraordinaire conjointe des Parties à la Convention sur la protection et l'utilisation des cours d'eau transfrontières et des lacs internationaux et des Parties à la Convention sur les effets transfrontières des accidents industriels  La deuxième session extraordinaire conjointe des Parties à la Convention sur la protection et l'utilisation des cours d'eau transfrontières et des lacs internationaux et des Parties à la Convention sur les effets transfrontières des accidents industriels sera convoquée.  Les Parties seront saisies du projet de protocole sur la responsabilité civile et l'indemnisation en cas de dommages causés par les effets transfrontières d'accidents industriels sur les eaux transfrontières.  Elles seront invitées à adopter le protocole, à étudier une décision sur ce sujet et à adopter cette décision.  Documents de la catégorie I:  Ordre du jour provisoire de la deuxième session extraordinaire conjointe des Parties à la Convention sur la protection et l'utilisation des cours d'eau transfrontières et des lacs internationaux et des Parties à la Convention sur les effets transfrontières des accidents industriels (ECE/MP.WAT/10-ECE/CP.TEIA/8)  Projet de protocole sur la responsabilité civile et l'indemnisation en cas de dommages causés par les effets transfrontières d'accidents industriels sur les eaux transfrontières (MP.WAT/2003/1-CP.TEIA/2003/3)  Projet de décision relative au protocole sur la responsabilité civile et l'indemnisation en cas de dommages causés par les effets transfrontières d'accidents industriels sur les eaux transfrontières (MP.WAT/2003/2-CP.TEIA/2003/4)  Point 6.  Réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention sur l'accès à l'information, la participation du public au processus décisionnel et l'accès à la justice en matière d'environnement  Il sera organisé une réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention sur l'accès à l'information, la participation du public au processus décisionnel et l'accès à la justice en matière d'environnement.  Cette réunion sera saisie du projet de protocole sur les registres des rejets et transferts de polluants.  Les participants sont invités à adopter ce protocole.  Ils sont invités aussi à étudier une résolution des signataires dont le texte sera finalisé lors d'une réunion préparatoire qui se tiendra le 20 mai 2003 à Kiev, et à adopter cette résolution.  Documents de la catégorie I:  Ordre du jour provisoire de la réunion extraordinaire des Parties à la Convention d'Aarhus sur l'accès à l'information, la participation du public au processus décisionnel et l'accès à la justice en matière d'environnement (ECE/MP.PP/3)  Projet de protocole sur les registres des rejets et transferts de polluants (MP.PP/2003/1)  Projet de résolution des signataires du protocole sur les registres des rejets et transferts de polluants, relatif à la Convention d'Aarhus sur l'accès à l'information, la participation du public au processus décisionnel et l'accès à la justice en matière d'environnement (MP.PP/2003/1/Add.1)  Documents de la catégorie II:  Rapport sur l'état des ratifications et sur la mise en œuvre de la Convention d'Aarhus (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/5)  Rapport de la première réunion des Parties à la Convention d'Aarhus (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/6)  Principes directeurs relatifs aux organismes génétiquement modifiés, intéressant la Convention d'Aarhus (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/7)  Point 7.  Ouverture des protocoles à la signature  Une fois adoptés, les protocoles relatifs à l'évaluation stratégique environnementale, à la responsabilité civile et à l'indemnisation en cas de dommages causés par les effets transfrontières d'accidents industriels sur les eaux transfrontières et aux registres des rejets et transferts de polluants seront ouverts à la signature lors d'une cérémonie spéciale.  Conformément à la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités et à la pratique établie pour les traités multilatéraux dont le Secrétaire général est le dépositaire, les protocoles ne peuvent être signés que par les chefs d'État, les chefs de gouvernement, les ministres des affaires étrangères ou des représentants dûment autorisés par une de ces trois autorités et pouvant justifier des pleins pouvoirs requis.  Le Secrétaire exécutif de la CEE présidera la cérémonie.  Point 8.  Partenariats pour l'environnement dans la région de la CEE  a) Partenariats pour l'environnement dans la région de la CEE: stratégie environnementale des pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale: cadre stratégique  Cette stratégie a été élaborée par un groupe de travail pour contribuer à l'amélioration de l'état de l'environnement en Europe orientale, dans le Caucase et en Asie centrale et à la mise en œuvre du Plan d'application du Sommet mondial pour le développement durable dans cette région.  Il s'agit, à cette fin, d'intensifier les efforts que font les pays concernés pour protéger leur environnement et de faciliter le partenariat et la coopération entre ceux-ci et les autres pays de la région de la CEE et toutes les parties prenantes.  Cette stratégie met en évidence des objectifs et des domaines d'action primordiaux.  Les ministres voudront peut-être adopter cette stratégie, qui servira de base à l'élaboration de plans d'action et de partenariats de mise en œuvre bilatérale et multilatérale, aux niveaux national et sous-régional.  Document de la catégorie I:  Partenariats pour l'environnement dans la région de la CEE: stratégie environnementale des pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale: cadre stratégique (ECE/CEP/105)  Documents de la catégorie II:  Progrès de la mise en œuvre du sous-programme de l'Équipe spéciale du PAE relatif à l'Europe orientale, au Caucase et à l'Asie centrale pour la période 2000-2003 (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/8)  Évaluation de l'application de la Déclaration de principes d'Aarhus sur la prise en considération des impératifs écologiques dans la gestion des entreprises d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/9)  Élaboration d'ensembles de moyens d'action efficaces dans le domaine de l'environnement en Europe orientale, au Caucase et en Asie centrale − expérience acquise et axes des réformes (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/11)  Principes directeurs pour la réforme des autorités chargées de la mise à exécution des normes environnementales dans les pays en transition de l'Europe orientale, du Caucase et de l'Asie centrale (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/12)  Réforme du secteur de l'approvisionnement en eau des zones urbaines des pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale: progrès réalisés depuis la Conférence ministérielle d'Almaty (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/14)  Assurer la concordance: éléments marquants et résultats des activités du CRE en Europe centrale et orientale dans le cadre du programme d'action pour l'environnement (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/15)  Programme régional de remise en état de l'environnement dans l'Europe du Sud-Est: modèle de mécanisme d'assistance (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/32)  Progrès de l'application de la Déclaration de principes d'Aarhus sur la prise en considération des impératifs écologiques dans la gestion des entreprises: Europe centrale et Europe du Sud-Est (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/38)  b) Partenariat stratégique sur l'eau pour le développement durable − Europe orientale, Caucase et Asie centrale  Lors du Sommet mondial pour le développement durable de Johannesburg (Afrique du Sud, septembre 2002), l'Union européenne a lancé officiellement une initiative mondiale sur l'eau que le Conseil de l'Union européenne a approuvée. À ce titre, il a été établi entre l'Union européenne et les ministres des États d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale (EOCAC) un partenariat intitulé «Partenariat stratégique sur l'eau pour le développement durable», conçu comme un dispositif complémentaire à la stratégie pour l'environnement des pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale.  Le partenariat UE-EOCAC sollicite des ministres participant à la Conférence ministérielle de Kiev des indications quant à la structure de l'initiative, et souhaiterait savoir, en particulier: 1) comment inscrire les questions et les défis relatifs à l'eau au premier rang des préoccupations politiques dans la région de l'EOCAC; 2) comment cette initiative pourrait valoriser les activités en cours; 3) comment y rallier un large éventail de parties prenantes; 4) comment cette initiative pourrait être mise en œuvre et quel devrait en être le mécanisme de notification et de surveillance.  Document de la catégorie I:  Déclaration sur le «Partenariat stratégique sur l'eau pour le développement durable − L'élément pour l'Europe orientale, le Caucase et l'Asie centrale de l'initiative de l'Union européenne dans le domaine de l'eau» (ECE/CEP/111)  Documents de la catégorie II:  Initiative de l'UE dans le domaine de l'eau: élément concernant l'Europe orientale, le Caucase et l'Asie centrale, projet de programme (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/33)  Initiative de l'UE dans le domaine de l'eau: élément concernant l'Europe orientale, le Caucase et l'Asie centrale, projet de programme, résumé (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/34)  c) Environnement, eau et sécurité en Asie centrale: invitation au partenariat  Cette proposition de partenariat a été conçue à l'initiative des États d'Asie centrale lors de réunions tenues au Tadjikistan (octobre 2002) et au Kazakhstan (janvier 2003), avec l'appui des ministres de l'environnement comme des ministres de l'eau et en coopération avec des organisations intergouvernementales et non gouvernementales.  Il s'agit d'atteindre, entre autres, trois grands objectifs: 1) pourvoir au fonctionnement durable des écosystèmes aquatiques, qui revêtent une importance vitale pour l'être humain; 2) veiller à ce que l'accès à l'eau de boisson et la consommation de cette ressource se fassent dans des conditions rationnelles; 3) former des partenariats intersectoriels et renforcer les capacités.  Dans cette stratégie, les ministres participant à la Conférence de Kiev sont engagés à appuyer les efforts que font les pays d'Asie centrale pour atteindre ces objectifs, à entamer l'élaboration d'un accord de partenariat multilatéral à cet effet et à contribuer à une nouvelle phase du Programme pour le bassin de la mer d'Aral jusqu'en 2010 qui a été lancé par les chefs des États d'Asie centrale.  Document de la catégorie I:  Invitation à un partenariat sur l'exécution de l'initiative pour le développement durable de l'Asie centrale (ECE/CEP/106)  d) Financement dans le domaine de l'environnement à l'appui des partenariats  Les ministres sont invités à étudier les modalités de financement des activités de protection de l'environnement dans la région de la CEE, en privilégiant l'appui aux partenariats.  Documents de la catégorie II:  Financement de la protection de l'environnement dans les pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/2)  Tendances des dépenses d'environnement et des engagements internationaux en faveur de l'environnement dans les pays d'Europe orientale, du Caucase et d'Asie centrale, 1996-2001 (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/10)  Élaboration d'ensembles de moyens d'action efficaces dans le domaine de l'environnement en Europe orientale, au Caucase et en Asie centrale (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/11)  Bonnes pratiques en matière de gestion des dépenses publiques d'environnement dans les pays en transition (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/13)  Financement dans le domaine de l'environnement en Europe centrale et orientale, 1996-2001 (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/17)  Principes directeurs concernant l'investissement étranger direct dans des activités dangereuses (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/18)  Rapport du Comité de préparation des projets à la cinquième Conférence ministérielle «Un environnement pour l'Europe» (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/19)  Conversion de créances en faveur de l'environnement et du développement en Géorgie: étude préalable de faisabilité, options institutionnelles (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/30)  Financement dans le domaine de l'environnement dans les pays en transition (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/37)  Point 9.  Signature de la Convention-cadre sur la protection et le développement durable des Carpates  Une série de réunions intergouvernementales sur la coopération à la protection et au développement durable des Carpates, tenues en coopération avec le secrétariat de la Convention sur la protection des Alpes, a débouché sur l'élaboration d'un projet de convention-cadre sur la protection et le développement durable des Carpates.  La Conférence des plénipotentaires sur la convention-cadre devrait se tenir à l'occasion de la Conférence ministérielle de Kiev afin d'en adopter le projet de texte.  Cette convention sera ouverte à la signature durant la Conférence.  Document de la catégorie I:  Convention-cadre sur la protection et le développement durable des Carpates (ECE/CEP/104)  Point 10.  Efficacité énergétique et tarification de l'énergie  a) Efficacité énergétique  Par l'intermédiaire de son Groupe de l'efficacité énergétique et des aspects environnementaux connexes, le secrétariat du Protocole de la Charte de l'énergie sur l'efficacité énergétique et les aspects environnementaux connexes a proposé un ensemble d'initiatives afin de dynamiser les initiatives visant à améliorer l'efficacité énergétique et d'appuyer les activités nationales et internationales novatrices.  Les ministres voudront peut-être approuver la déclaration de principes sur l'efficacité énergétique.  Document de la catégorie I:  Projet de déclaration de principes sur l'efficacité énergétique (ECE/CEP/112)  b) Principes directeurs concernant la refonte de la tarification et du subventionnement de l'énergie  Le Comité des politiques de l'environnement et le Comité de l'énergie durable, relevant tous deux de la CEE, ont élaboré conjointement des principes directeurs concernant la refonte de la tarification de l'énergie dans les pays en transition et du subventionnement de l'énergie dans tous les pays de la CEE.  L'objectif premier de la refonte de la tarification de l'énergie est de créer un marché opérationnel et concurrentiel afin d'augmenter l'efficacité économique et d'améliorer la qualité des services énergétiques, en tenant pleinement compte des préoccupations économiques, écologiques et sociales des gouvernements et de la société.  Les principes directeurs concernant la refonte du subventionnement de l'énergie rappellent la recommandation du Plan d'application du Sommet mondial pour le développement durable, selon laquelle il conviendrait de prendre des mesures pour éliminer progressivement les subventions à l'énergie qui sont néfastes pour l'environnement, ainsi que les décisions de la Conférence ministérielle d'Aarhus «Un environnement pour l'Europe» (1998) relatives à l'énergie.  Les ministres voudront peut-être approuver le texte des principes directeurs concernant la refonte de la tarification et du subventionnement de l'énergie.  Documents de la catégorie I:  Principes directeurs concernant la refonte de la tarification et du subventionnement de l'énergie (ECE/CEP/103)  Notes explicatives relatives aux principes directeurs (ECE/CEP/103/Add.1)  Documents de la catégorie II:  Rapport intérimaire sur l'application des décisions prises à la Conférence d'Aarhus dans le domaine de l'énergie (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/20)  Rapport intérimaire sur la mise en œuvre de la Stratégie paneuropéenne visant à éliminer progressivement l'essence au plomb (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/21)  Résumé du rapport intérimaire sur la mise en œuvre de la Stratégie paneuropéenne visant à éliminer progressivement l'essence au plomb (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/22)  Point 11.  Stratégie paneuropéenne de la diversité biologique et paysagère  Le Conseil de la Stratégie paneuropéenne de la diversité biologique et paysagère a présenté une résolution (résolution de Kiev) sur la diversité biologique dans laquelle il se disait préoccupé par la dégradation constante de la diversité biologique et paysagère dans la région paneuropéenne et de ses retombées négatives sur le développement durable et l'intégrité sociale et culturelle de la population de la planète.  Dans ce texte, le Conseil mettait l'accent sur certains points qui présentaient une importance capitale, à savoir: les forêts et la diversité biologique; l'agriculture et la diversité biologique; le Réseau écologique paneuropéen; les espèces exogènes envahissantes; le financement de la diversité biologique; la surveillance et les indicateurs de la diversité biologique; et la sensibilisation et la participation du public.  Les ministres voudront peut-être approuver la résolution de Kiev sur la diversité biologique.  Document de la catégorie I:  Résolution de Kiev sur la diversité biologique (ECE/CEP/108)  Documents de la catégorie II:  Convention européenne du paysage et suivi de son application (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/23)  Principes directeurs pour le développement territorial durable du continent européen et suivi de leur application (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/24)  Code de pratique sur la prise en compte de la diversité biologique et paysagère dans le secteur des transports (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/26)  Déclaration sur le réseau écologique paneuropéen (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/27)  Initiative européenne pour le financement de la diversité biologique − Finances et diversité biologique (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/29)  Programme européen de suivi et d'indicateurs de la diversité biologique (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/35)  Rapport sur le Service de l'application des stratégies et plans d'action nationaux pour la protection de la diversité biologique (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/36)  Point 12.  Éducation au développement durable  En s'appuyant sur les travaux de son groupe de rédaction, le Comité des politiques de l'environnement de la CEE a présenté un projet de déclaration sur l'éducation au développement durable.  Dans ce projet, le Comité souligne l'importance de la coopération à l'éducation au développement durable et note que le Sommet mondial a insisté sur la nécessité d'intégrer les principes du développement durable à tous les niveaux de l'enseignement.  Entre autres initiatives, le Comité invite les gouvernements des pays de la région de la CEE à développer et finaliser la stratégie de la CEE pour l'éducation au développement durable, à mettre en place un processus conjoint d'éducation au développement durable au niveau régional et à entamer un dialogue avec tous les acteurs internationaux pertinents, et à organiser une réunion de haut niveau conjointe entre les ministères de l'environnement et les ministères ou organes d'État équivalents chargés de l'éducation dans les États membres de la CEE afin d'adopter la stratégie de la CEE pour l'éducation au développement durable.  Les ministres sont invités à approuver la déclaration sur l'éducation au développement durable.  Documents de la catégorie I:  Projet de déclaration sur l'éducation au développement durable (ECE/CEP/102 et Corr.1)  Éléments de base de la stratégie de la CEE pour l'éducation au développement durable (ECE/CEP/102/Add.1)  Point 13.  Réunion spéciale entre les ministres et les ONG d'environnement  L'ONG Eco-Forum européen organisera une réunion spéciale entre les ministres et les organisations non gouvernementales d'environnement sur l'intégration des politiques d'environnement.  Cette réunion a pour objectifs d'encourager une discussion informelle et franche sur la nature des obstacles qui s'opposent à l'intégration des considérations d'environnement dans les politiques sectorielles et horizontales pertinentes, d'examiner des exemples probants en matière de politique environnementale et leur intégration dans les politiques sectorielles et horizontales dans la région, et d'étudier et définir avec précision les rôles des pouvoirs publics et des écologistes ainsi que leur complémentarité.  Cette réunion spéciale aura trois grands thèmes: 1) laisser le marché travailler pour l'environnement; 2) l'agriculture en tant qu'exemple de politique sectorielle intégrée; et 3) comment pallier les faiblesses institutionnelles qui empêchent intégration.  Document de la catégorie II:  Intégration de la politique environnementale dans la pratique (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/3)  Point 14.  Évolution, priorités et perspectives du processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe»  Par l'intermédiaire de son groupe de rédaction compétent, le Groupe de travail de la CEE composé de hauts fonctionnaires a présenté un document sur l'avenir du processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe» destiné à servir de base aux travaux des ministres.  Dans ce document, le Groupe de travail examine le cadre de coopération en matière d'environnement établi par l'Amérique du Nord, l'Europe, le Caucase et l'Asie centrale, étudie la nécessité de renforcer cette coopération et de mieux la coordonner et examine les possibilités à cet égard.  La première partie de ce document a été approuvée par le Groupe de travail composé de hauts fonctionnaires.  La seconde partie était à l'examen au sein du Groupe de travail dans le cadre du projet de déclaration ministérielle.  Document de la catégorie I:  Avenir du processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe» (ECE/CEP/95)  Documents de la catégorie II:  Esquisse d'un programme de travail qui pourrait être mis en place après la Conférence de Kiev pour les activités concernant l'Europe orientale, le Caucase et l'Asie centrale qui sont actuellement menées avec l'appui de l'Équipe spéciale du PAE (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/16)  Message du Secrétaire général du Conseil de l'Europe à la Conférence ministérielle (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/25)  Cadre de la coopération entre la Stratégie paneuropéenne de la diversité biologique et paysagère, la Conférence ministérielle sur la protection des forêts en Europe et le processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe» (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/31)  Point 15.  Examen du projet de déclaration ministérielle  Les ministres voudront peut-être examiner le projet de déclaration ministérielle de Kiev.  Document de la catégorie I:  Projet de déclaration ministérielle (ECE/CEP/94)  Document de la catégorie II:  Déclaration de l'Organe exécutif de la Convention sur la pollution atmosphérique transfrontière à longue distance adressée aux ministres au sujet de l'élaboration d'un mécanisme de financement durable pour les activités de base (KIEV.CONF.2003/INF/1)  Point 16.  Adoption de la Déclaration ministérielle de Kiev  Les ministres voudront peut-être adopter la Déclaration de la Conférence ministérielle de Kiev sur le processus «Un environnement pour l'Europe».  Point 17.  Clôture de la Conférence  La clôture de la Conférence sera prononcée le 23 mai 2003 à 13 heures.