decentralisaton of environmental permitting and inspection experience from central and eastern...
Post on 18-Dec-2015
233 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Decentralisaton of Environmental Permitting
and Inspection Experience from Central and Eastern European Countries
Dr Radoje LausevicMr Mihail Dimovski
www.rec.org
The Decentralization
• Decentralization as transfer of functions
• Subsidiary Principle
• Forms of decentralization:• administrative
• deconcentration ( weakest form of decentralization)• delegation ( transferring decision making
responsibility )• devolution ( where local governments have legally
recognized geographical boundaries and public functions)
• fiscal • associated with making expenditure decisions with
funds
www.rec.org
Decentralization in South Eastern Europe
•Ensuring existence of a basic legal framework for decentralisation
•Ensuring sufficient financial resources to undertake assigned functions
•Trained human resources•Ensuring mechanisms for political accountability
•Setting up central and deconcentrated institutional arrangements to steer and implement the decentralisation process
www.rec.org
Why decentralization of Inspection in South Eastern
Europe• Impossible and undesirable for the central government to inspect
every single operator in the given year
• Centralized permitting and inspections represent great burden on the businesses
• Many countries from SEE replaced to-down approach with decentralized system
• Specific permitting and inspection duties spread among central and local governmentsHuman Resources (full time equivalents FTEs) in Croatia
Number of “Controlled Installations” (estimated)
Other Technical Resources available to Inspecting Authority in Croatia
Inspection Staff Support Staff
58 3 1,900 Directorate for Inspection of the MEPPPC employs 58 inspectors FTEs in environmental protection. Thirteen environmental protection inspectors are located in central office in Zagreb and 45 inspectors in 20 branch units in the county seats. In addition to the FTEs, the Directorate for Inspection has access to different areas of expertise such as different analyses in accredited laboratories, rehabilitation of environmental damage, sampling, monitoring.
www.rec.org
The role of the local inspectorates
Ensuring that the operators are in compliance with the permit/license issued by the competent authorities by :- site visits- administrative inspections- desk researchExample of inspections action taken in Croatia
Type of Action
Administrative Sanctions Criminal Prosecution instigated by the Inspecting
Authority
Civil / Administrative Court Actions instigated by the
Inspecting Authority
Other
Warning Letters
Issue of Notices/ Orders Requiring the operator to take action
Administrative Fines
Reports to Prosecutor
Prosecutions taken
Reports to Prosecutor
Civil/ Administrative Cases taken[1]
Undertaking by another person
Type of Enforcing Action
/ √ √ √ Not available
√ N/A
Number of actions per annum
/ 2,162 57 1 Not available
304 N/A
www.rec.org
Benefits of decentralization of environmental enforcement
• Enhanced decision-making on permitting through local knowledge of environmental conditions
• Higher responsibility in decision-making accompanied by higher motivation
• Higher transparency and accountability in the decision-making through facilitated local participation
• Increased local capacities for services consistent with local requirements
www.rec.org
Difficulties of decentralized Inspections
Problems in decentralized environmental enforcement
Consequence Solutions to be considered
Lack of knowledge and capacity -low quality inspections-inspection plans not implemented-law performance of the inspectorate towards set targets-diffuse expertise-disparate quality of inspection procedures
-transfer of knowledge from central to local level-increased number of training -increased budget for local inspectorates-establishment of minimum qualifications for local inspectors-developing inspection guidelines
Inconsistent application of national policies
-national policies not implemented-infringements imposed for improper implementation of EU legislation
-capacity building on local level-consistency of the local inspection plans-development of performance indicators
Overlap with central government functions
-replication of inspections-burden to businesses -waste of resources and staff-increased opportunity for corruption
-centralized control of the quality of inspection work-improved information sharing and data collection
www.rec.org
Planning of decentralized enforcement in SEE
Type of Inspection Plans
National (N)(1) Regional (R)(2) Sub Regional (SR)3)
Local (L)(4)
Which plans do you establish (tick)
- -
Which plans do you implement (tick)
- -
At which levels do you implement these plans (more than one box can be ticked)
N RSR
L N RSR
L N RSR
L N RSR
L
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.rec.org
Quality Assurance for Local Inspectorates
Choice of instruments
• Generalbindingrules
• License(s)
Targets and conditions
• Complianceand riskanalysis
• Prioritysetting
• Inspectionand enforce-ment targets
• Organisation
Strategy and working methods
• Inspectionand enforce-ment strategy
• Workflowplan
• Proceduresand methods
• Informationexchange
Execution
• Quality
assurance
• Quantityand qualityof execution
• Quality ofinspectors
Evaluation
•Monitoring
• Accountabi-ility
Output and effects
• Level of non-
compliance
• Compliancebehaviour
• Reduction ofpollution
• Improve-ment ofquality ofwater, air,soil, etc.
Feedback Feedback Feedback Feedback Feedback Feedback
•.
www.rec.org
Measures to enhance the decentralized environmental
enforcement • Implementation of regulations for organization
of inspectorates
• Adoption of internal regulations for providing training programmes
• Improved procedures for providing information to the private sector and general public
• Development of system for performance indicators and internal controls for the inspections
• Development of information systems aimed to improve coordination of work
top related