enea 3 regional sustainable development through environmental integration in community programmes a...

ENEA 3

Regional Sustainable Development through

Environmental Integration in Community Programmes

A challenge for environmentally sensitive management

Guenter Raad, European Commission DG Environment – Unit D3

email: [email protected]

12 September2005, Brussels ENEA 3 2

Presentation objectives

Initiate reflection and discussion

Provide outline information

Invite for follow-up actionon the possible use in SF management of an

EMS Environment Management System


Presentation outline

• Why do we need EMS ?Regulatory + policy context + experience

• What is an EMS ?Key features - requirements

• What is an EMS for ?Expected output – Value added

• How to do it ?Voluntary principle – give good example to convince


Why do we need EMS ? / 1

• Environmental partners (environmental

authorities, NGO/interested public) can play an

Important role in SCF programme cycle and in

continuous management (environmental

partners)

• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

SF 2000 – 2006:

Arrangements to be made

for:

• Planning/programming

• Implementation

• Monitoring & evaluation


Why do we need EMS ? / 2• Arrangements shall ensure

– integration of environmental dimension of SD into the SCF

– compliance with legal requirements of Community legislation

– consistency with Community policies

• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

SF 2000 – 2006:

Arrangements subject to:

• Ex-ante evaluation (and reviews)

• Clear and detailed description

• Verification of their relevance/effectiveness


Why do we need EMS ? / 3• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

• SF 2007 – 2013: – a reformed delivery system– more simplification + decentralisation

Confirmation of key principles

programming – PARTNERSHIP – co-funding - evaluation

Reforms for greater efficiency• More strategic programming

• Decentralisation of responsibilities to partnerships “on the ground” (MS – regions – municipalities)

• Reinforced, more transparent partnership + clear and more rigorous monitoring mechanisms

• Simplified management system (more transparency, differentiation and proportionality)


Why do we need EMS ? / 4• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

• SF 2007 – 2013: SEASEA ! ?– Application of SEA Directive (art.11.3)– Requires also “arrangements”– Continuous monitoring

“Arrangements “to be made for :

Editing of the environmental report of sufficient quality (art.5) Respect of environmental protection objectives (also

EC) [A I e]

Description of monitoring measures [Annex I – i]

Preventive, minimisation measures [A I – g]

Information and consultation (art.6)

Monitoring (art.10.1) of also positive (!) environmental effects of SCF programmes implementation

Use of existing monitoring arrangements if effective (art.10.2)


Why do we need EMS ? / 5Cohesion policy in harmony with Renewed Lisbon

Strategy and environmentally sustainable development

– integration of environmental dimension of SD into the SCF confirmed– compliance with legal requirements of Community legislation – consistency with Community policies of continued validity

• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

Arguments in favour of EMS • New and particular challenges and responsibilities

• Little experience in practice within SCF management• Concentration of resources – less bureaucracy -

standardisation• Transparency – Accountability – systems oriented

monitoring

• Assurance of high quality – comparability – environmental audit “trails”

• Visibility of EC value added – env pillar of SD


Why do we need EMS ? / 6• Great variety of role given to environmental

partners in SCF context

• No real system set-up within SCF management

• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

• Three basic types of “Environmental Managers” :• “beginners” – experience/capacity to be further developed and partnership practised, rather ad-hoc approaches, • “routiniers” – use of existing administrative routines; formalised consultations, little visibility; no SCF specific routines•“networkers” – defined roles, specific institutional set-up, SCF specific; visibility/transparency relatively high


Why do we need EMS ? / 7• Great scope for improvement of “quality

assurance” function of environmental issues in SCF management

• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

• Examples:• full respect of legal requirements of key Directives (SEA- EIA-Natura 2000-consultation of the public) • information value of annual reports on SD/environment• selection of projects and identification of alternatives (professional qualification of staff)•Identification and use of appropriate indicators; quantification of objectives• complexity of project design in envrionment sectors• up-date of knowledge of EC policies• verification of EU value added difficult


Why do we need EMS ? /8• SCF regulations call for further

improvement of management and control

• SCF encourages EMAS with SME

• Regulations

• Policy

• Experience

• OP approval and management stages: Commission to assess monitoring arrangements (strategy + priority themes) New function :Certification by independent body Action for reinforcing administrative efficiency and sound management ( => convergence objective)

• SCF management to give good example for others to apply EMS


What is an EMS ? - 1

• EMS is:

– a voluntarily chosen management tool

– applicable not only in SME but to any organisation also in administration and SCF management structures

– a set of standard operating procedures and control to ensure and promote continuous and successful respect of environmental objectives within a programme or project and at all levels



• Key features common to EMS

Voluntary but firm commitment

Environmental Statement – „road map“ for managers and staff what to do

Verification – (external/internal) audit support and quality certification

Initial review of objectives and arrangements – description of situation – „policy and programme“ - plan

Transparency and Accountability information of public Comparability- ex-change with other EMS – best practice - indicators

Corrective action – based on audit review/performance check



Commitment

Review

EStatement

Audit Annual

report

Remedial

action

External

verification

Management authorities to :

• declare willingness to environmental managment and its improvement

[organisational promise]

• Identify, determine and improve „arrangements“ for integration of environment into SCF (to achieve objectives – how to achieve)

• Accept follow-up and improvement measures (the better is the ennemy of the good)

• Subscribe to effiency and best possible quality

POLICY DECLARATION



Commitment

Review

EStatement

Audit -

annual

report

Remedial

action

External

verification

Description and analysis of environmental competence and performance of SCF Management :

• SCF staff + capacity building /training needs

• Selection/decision making process/green procurement etc.

• Interdisciplinary co-operation

• Role of environmental authorities

• Role of public / NGO /networking

• Information systems (knowledge of EU legislation and policies – up-date + application)

• Control mechanisms – quality requirements

BASELINE ASSESSMENT



Commitment

Review

EStatement –

Audit -

annual

report

Remedial

action

External

verification

Envrionmental Statement – key reference document

• Clear and concrete description of action to be undertaken (reference : SCF Regulations and framework documents – EU policies)

• Target groups: SCF management and staff, associated services,

• Understanding: It is at the level of MS, its regions and communes where implement EU policies and laws decided by the MS and EP are implemented

• Statement to be made public and performance measurable (indicators)

ACTION PLAN



Commitment

Review

EStatement

Audit/

annual

report

Remedial

action

External

verification

Management to follow-up ES implementation:

• Continuous monitoring - ES timetable (?)

• Opportunity: current annual reports of SCF (sections on environment + SD )

• Self-assessment ? External assessment ? Culture and practice of auto-evaluations/peer reviews

• Allow for use of Technical Assistance funds available in SCF programmes

• Assessment of actions, methods and system (operational level)

• Validity check of EMS overall policy

• Up-date synergy with MS developments

MONITORINGReporting Self-assessment


What is an EMS ? - 7 Commitment

Review

EStatement

Audit/

annual

report

Remedial

action

External

verification

Corrective

and pro-active measures

for improvement

• Recording of mistakes (e.g.EIA/SEA) – rapid reaction systems – association of SCF management/monitoring committees

• Identification of discrepancies and their causes

• Integration of feed-back (tailoring of action plan to specific and individual needs)

• Responsiveness to non-conformity

(legislation) or inconsistency (policy)

problems• Constructive dialogue with Commission

STEERING RESPONSIVENESS


What is an EMS ? -8

Commitment

Review

ES – annual report

Audit

Remedial

action

External

verification

Transparency commitment and sound evaluation practice call for independant external assistance and assessment:

• External expertise useful to improve practice and to seek approaches commensurate with best practice standards (e.g. ‚certification‘)

• Possible use of Technical Assistance funds of SCF to alleviate work

• Establish comparability with other EMS within and between MS ; association of stakeholders

• Possibility to “objectively“ control the controllers and system performances (constructive competition)

VALIDATION


What is an EMS for ? /1 Advantages, Value added and expected output

of efficient EMS:

Context:• EMS is not an objective on its own

• Supports decentralisation and reflects responsiveness of SCF programmes contribution to SD – in particular environmental pillar – degree of commitment to SD

• Not new – consolidates „piecemeal“ experiences – national networks and auxiliary structures (rather ad hoc)

• Capacity buliding and experience sharing with new MS

• Greater visibility and association of EU citizen


What is an EMS for ? /2 Advantages, value added and expected output

of efficient EMS:• Supports objectives of simplification (improved quality

– less queries and delays for approvals)

• Comprises much of SEA procedural requirements (e.g. reporting – monitoring etc.) => spill over effects into administrative routines

• Conflict prevention and management through greater transparency and involvement of public

• Contact point for partnership with Commission and MS-EMS network (receiving and sending ‚messages‘; channelling up-dates on policy and legal requirements and practice)


How to do it ? - 1

Management to take

own initiativeTwo guiding principles for organising EMS :

[] seek „voluntary acceptance“ – no top-

down – no imposing

„why-not-try“ approach – convincing through good examples or positive competition


How to do it ? - 2

Principles

Voluntary

Acceptance

Why-not-try

SCF programmes

to show “community policy “

value-added, not simple extensions of national programmes. New programmes with greater responsibility: no business-as-used-in-the- past

Explore possibilities taking into account :

• country specific needs for differentiation

• National policy and practice context • Hesitations of SCF management:

•Lack of EMS understanding•Concern about more ‘bureaucracy’•Deeply rooted inflexibility

• Conflicts of competence – role of environmental authorities and partners

•

NOT GOOD FOR BUSINESS-AS-USUAL FANS


How to do it ? - 3

Principles

Voluntary

Acceptance

Why-not-try

Environmental sustainability

and management are still “new concepts”.

Little information and knowledge at hand = uncertainty.

Encouragement to use :

• External assistance (TA budget)

• Experience gained by others already

-networks; expert groups;committees

-national -INTERREG projects e.g.GRDP

-Agenda 21 models (urban context)

EMS = innovative !


How to do it ? - 4

Principles

Voluntary

Acceptance

Why-not-try

EMS is not a start from “scratch” it can accommodate much of existing tools and methods already in use :

• Handbooks – guidelines – model documents – check-lists – use of quality checks and certification model

• Networks ( IQ-net, GRDP, SQM etc.)

• Annual flagships of good practice examples ( => constructive competition)

Start with the (few?) courageous – others follow !

• National EMS networking

• Connecting with ENEA

• Associate economic and social partners (use their experience and support)

Most Tools exist !


What steps next ?

• Discuss usefulness – exchange experience – identify general and specific needs – demonstrate advantages -

• Set-up new working group under ENEA ?

• Identify potential and possibilities in given contexts (national/regional but also Community level => INTERREG experience GRDP, IQ-net, EMAS/ISO bodies, support from ENCORE, etc. )

• Develop joint approach in partnership (SCF management- context of programming – ex –ante evaluations)

• Define roles (SCF management – environmental authorities – NGO/stakeholders – cooperation with expertise centers (research – universities – joint teams ?)


Thank you for your

interest !

Let us have a fruitful

discussion before …

enea 3 regional sustainable development through environmental integration in community programmes a...

Documents

scf regulations

brussels enea

environmental integration

sf management

scf compliance

scf context

control scf

high slide