QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE Volume 3 Number 2 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | EUR 5.00

Serbia lagging on leadAs Balkan countries begin to phase out leadedfuel, Serbia stands alone without a plan.

see page 19

Tourist thawOver-development hastarnished appeal of someof region’s scenic jewels.

see page 10

Talking it outMediation replacing litigation as the favoured way to resolve environmental disputes.

see page 24▼▼ ▼

The spate of record floods in recent

years underscores the urgency for water

resource management that balances the

needs of nature and humankind.

RISING WATER

CRISIS

CONTENTS

Green Horizon is the quarterly magazine ofthe Regional Environmental Center for Centraland Eastern Europe (REC), published from1990 to the spring of 2004 as The Bulletin.Green Horizon assists the REC in its mission topromote public participation in environmentaldecision making by providing information onthe environment and encouraging cooperationbetween regional stakeholders. Green Horizon reports on the cases andstories that shape the environment andsustainable development in Central andEastern Europe. The magazine is useful forprofessionals from businesses, internationalorganisations, national governments, localauthorities, non-governmental organisations,academic institutions and the media. The views and opinions expressed in GreenHorizon do not necessarily reflect the viewsand opinions of the Regional EnvironmentalCenter for Central and Eastern Europe.Green Horizon is not responsible for thecontents of paid announcements andadvertising published in the magazine.Green Horizon is available on the Web at<http://greenhorizon.rec.org>.

MAGAZINE TEAMEditor-in-Chief: Pavel AntonovDeputy Editor: Greg SpencerSales Officer: Alex GregorioDesigner: Patricia BarnaProofreader: Eileen BrownAdministrative Officer: Emese GalWebmaster: Tamas Bodai

EDITORIAL BOARDSustainable development: Janos ZlinszkyInformation and research: Jerome SimpsonFunds and investments: Jennifer McGuinnPublic participation: Magdolna Toth NagyEnvironment and security: Marta Szigeti BonifertEnvironmental policy: Oreola IvanovaBusiness and corporate responsibility:Robert NemeskeriEnvironmental law: Stephen StecNew EU member states: Beata WiszniewskaSouth Eastern Europe: Radoje LausevicTurkey: Sibel Sezer

CONTRIBUTORSOs Davis ■ Elisabeth JeffriesWojciech Kosc ■ Sasa PetejanDana Carmen Romanescu ■ Kristina Vilimaite

ARTAntonio Bat ■ BTA Pressphotodaspasimirakli.com ■ Deniz GumuselEC/EPA Photo/CTK ■ Eco Counselling CentreLaszlo Falvay ■ Galati ■ European PolicyCentre ■ Goldman Foundation ■ Laszlo SzaboLubos Pavlicek ■ Magyar Hirlap/MartaHegedus ■ MTI ■ Polish Green NetworkRobert Wawrety ■ UNEP Society-BulgariaVienna Airport

PRODUCTIONPrinting: Typonova Kft, HungaryPre-press: Stuart Repro Kft, HungaryGreen Horizon is printed on Cyclus Printrecycled paper.

SPONSORS AND PARTNERSSponsors of this issue of Green Horizoninclude the Italian Trust Fund, the JapaneseTrust Fund, the Danube Regional Project —UNDP/GEF, the Course for Sustainability(funded by the Italian Ministry for theEnvironment and Territory), the RERePSecretariat, the REEEP Secretariat forCentral and Eastern Europe and Turkey, theSida-funded SECTOR Project (SupportingEnvironmental Civil Society Organisations inSouth Eastern Europe), and the EU-fundedProject for Establishing the REC in Turkey.

Volume 3 Number 2 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | ISSN 1786-0423

C O V E R S T O R Y

12 Finding a solution that will floatRecord floods in recent years have lent urgency to the task ofestablishing water resource management that balances the sundry needsof humankind with those of nature.

I N T E R V I E W

5 Green EU director general prioritises biodiversity and climateA discussion with Mogens Peter Carl, the new director general forenvironment at the European Commission

I N S I G H T

9 Succour for sustainabilitySmall business incubator helps firms seize regional opportunities inenergy efficiency and renewables.

10 Tourist thawIn areas of natural beauty, the holiday industry is following a self-defeating path of over-development.

R E C B U L L E T I N

19 Swedes support urban sustainabilityFour-year, EUR 4 million support programme launched for Balkan NGOs

C O L U M N S

25 Governance goes digitalThe Internet offers a way to widen public participation in decision making

ON THE COVER

Riders on the stormLike an ark full of live cargo,water resource managementmust seek a balance.Competing needs includefishing, irrigation, shipping,flood protection and wildlifehabitat. Without equilibrium,everyone falls into the drink.

COVER ILLUSTRATION Laszlo Falvay

DEPARTMENTS

Forum 4

CEE news 6

REC news 18

EEA Monitor 23

Legal Matters 24

Information Technology 25

Green Literature 26

12

10CONTACTS

Editorial: editor@greenhorizon.rec.org

Advertising: advertise@greenhorizon.rec.org

Subscriptions:subscribe@greenhorizon.rec.org

The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern EuropeAdy Endre ut 9-112000 Szentendre, HungaryTel: (36-26) 504-000Fax: (36-26) 311-294Web: www.rec.org

▼▼

▼

MTI

BTA PRESSPHOTO

3 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

By Pavel Antonov

Ferenc Markus is average-sized, notparticularly athletic and has a dark beardflecked with silver. What strikes you first,though, are his persuasive, penetratingblue eyes. Markus is the director of WWFin Hungary. In June he took a long walkalong the 450 km bank of the Hungarianpart of the Danube. His purpose: tomend friendships between people andthe river.

A tough task indeed. With sand bagsstill lying along the dikes and river-sidestreets, the spring flood has hardly beenforgotten. In April Hungarians workedday and night to save their homes fromthe brown, roaring water. Some did, butmany couldn’t. Images of shatteredrooms and ruined houses illuminated TVscreens for weeks on end, with the policeand soldiers helping affected areas andpoliticians pointing fingers at each other.

The picture was more grim down-stream — where the River Tisza joinedthe river’s rebellion. Serbia’s westernregion Vojvodina, vast parts of Romaniaand a smaller piece of Bulgaria lay underwater. It would seem that the human andeconomic toll has stoked animositytoward the river.

But according to Markus, this isn’t asmuch the case as you might guess. Afterhaving visited more than 270 villages andtalking to 105 experts, he stopped for achat at the REC’s head office, sited on theDanube’s banks in Szentendre. Theground floors of our office buildings werestill drying from the flood, so I reactedsomewhat sceptically as he launched intohis appeal: “People do like the river,” hedeclared.

Markus defended his simple thesis byciting an age-old truth. Have you everheard of anyone who wants a house witha view of a motorway, a parking lot, or ashopping mall? Not really. From Pragueto Ankara, people will tell you theywould choose a house or flat overlookingthe water — whether it be lake, a river, ora pond in a green meadow. And here liesthe source of Markus’ optimism — peo-ple do appreciate water, so they shouldinevitably be able to preserve it and livein harmony with it. Just for the sake ofreaffirming this fact, he chose to walkdown the river, highlighting its virtuesalong the way, and trying to persuadepeople to use it so that neither they, nornature, are harmed.

Coming from someone with morethan 20 years of nature conservationexperience, the point sounds reassuring.Moreover, Markus said that the majorityof people he spoke to had actuallyexpected the flood. They admitted thatthey had built homes near the river ontheir own volition, knowing full well therisks that their choice entailed.

Such attitudes can only be praised. Itremoves the burden from authorities ofraising new and taller dikes — the mostcommon and very short-term response toflooding in CEE. And it encourages deci-sion makers to think and act more strategi-cally, for instance by giving more space forthe rivers to naturally spread and flood cer-tain areas behind the dikes. That was some-thing Romania was forced to do as an emer-gency measure in April anyway, to preventeven higher water from destroying down-stream settlements.

According to Markus, water manage-ment authorities in Hungary seem to be onthe right track. “They are very open to oursuggestions,” he acknowledged, whilepointing out that agriculture still exertsmajor environmental pressures on the river.Hungary has undertaken several politicalinitiatives aimed at environmentally friend-ly management of the country’s major rivers— including the 2001 new Vasarhelyi planfor the Tisza, and the 2002 BudapestInitiative for the sustainable development

of floodplains. The latter was backed byfive prime ministers in the region.

As an EU member, Hungary mustcome into compliance with the EuropeanUnion’s Water Framework Directive,which although criticised by industry andgreen groups, provides a solid legislativeframework.

There is only one problem, whichMarkus calls “fragmentation.” The river isa complex system, and all parts of themosaic must be fitted into the right place,he said. With stronger political will andhorizontal integration of flood control,water supply, agriculture, tourism, trans-port and nature conservation, Hungarystands a chance to achieve sound rivermanagement. And so does the rest of theCEE region.

editorial

FORUM

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 4

OASIS: Bulgaria’s Marchela Ivo Delcheva, 14, drew life as a drop of water for a 2006 children's paintingcompetition sponsored by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

Pavel P. Antonov

Walk of life

COU

RTE

SY O

F U

NEP

SO

CIET

Y —

BU

LGAR

IA

Four months after taking up the positionof director general for the environment,how has your understanding of Europe’spriority environmental issues changed?

The improvement of Europe’s environ-ment has always been a concern of mine.Indeed, whenever I was involved in tradenegotiations in my previous job as directorgeneral for trade, I was of course veryexposed one way or another to many ofEurope’s environmental priorities. So I can-not say that my appointment as a “green”(meaning “inexperienced”) director gener-al for the environment changed my actualunderstanding of Europe’s priority environ-mental issues all that much. The main dif-ference is that I now share the hugeresponsibility of protecting the environ-ment and promoting environmental issues.Indeed, the vast range of subjects whichcome under the heading of “environment”is daunting to say the least, and in fact arerelevant to much of the Commission’s workprogramme. One of the ways I hope toachieve our aims is by encouraging otherDGs to integrate environmental concernsinto their own policies.

Two of our most urgent environmentalpriorities at present are to tackle climatechange and to stop the loss of biodiversity.It is no exaggeration to say that these boththreaten our very survival. We are givingclimate change a lot of priority at theEuropean level, and I personally havemade changes in DG Environment toensure we can meet this challenge by cre-ating a new Directorate for ClimateChange. We have also been promoting theconservation and sustainable use of biodi-versity, and recently adopted a Commu-nication setting out what needs to be doneif we are to halt the loss of biodiversity by2010. In fact, we have most of the instru-ments we need already in place, so ourmain focus will be not so much on intro-ducing new legislation but on ensuring thatthe rules we have are properly applied.

How has the recent enlargementinfluenced the Union’s environmentalpriorities?Enlargement has not fundamentallychanged the Union’s environmentalpriorities. We are working on issues thatare relevant to most — if not all — of the25 member states and our main approach,as set out in our action programme,remains largely unchanged. The newmember states have added significantly tothe EU’s rich biodiversity, but we need tomake sure that entry into the EU does notadversely affect the balance between theireconomic, social and environmentalsystems. For example, many of them havefarmland that is still of high natural value,but this could be threatened by socialchange or market forces. Similarly, theneed to improve transport infrastructurecould damage the environment. This hasprompted the EU to try to find ways ofprotecting their biodiversity andecosystems, while still promotingsustainable economic development. Oneway is to strengthen the ruraldevelopment pillar of the CommonAgricultural Policy. The old memberstates have a lot of experience in this area.They know that supporting farms withhigh natural value can boost their ruraleconomies. It is also important to

minimise the environmental impact ofnew infrastructure.

As I said earlier, it is important to imple-ment existing environment policy properly.This means not only ensuring compliance,but also checking that legislation is actuallyrealistic in terms of the investment needed,the administrative capacities required toimplement it, and so on.

Another big change brought about byenlargement is that some regions of theenlarged Europe have become more rele-vant for EU policy making, such as theBaltic Sea. And after the accession ofRomania and Bulgaria we shall also haveto focus more on the Black Sea.

In May 2005 a Manchester Universitystudy warned there could be significantdamage to the environment from theDoha Round of trade liberalisation. Nowthat you are the director general forenvironment, has your perspective onfree trade changed?

Clearly trade and trade liberalisationcan have significant economic, social andenvironmental impacts — both positiveand negative. It is precisely for this reasonthat, back in 1999, DG Trade launched itsSustainability Impact AssessmentProgramme, in which experts fromManchester University played a pivotalrole. It is important to bear in mind thatthe environmental impacts of trade can beboth positive (e.g. through trade in envi-ronmentally-friendly products and tech-nologies or by promoting more efficientproduction processes) and negative (e.g.in cases where increasing trade in agricul-tural commodities such as palm oil orsoya leads to more deforestation). Thechallenge is obviously to maximise thepositive impacts of trade and minimisethe negative impacts. Here again ourBiodiversity Communication makes a sig-nificant contribution by proposing meas-ures like including biodiversity in theimpact assessments of proposed bi- or

multi-lateral trade agreements, and meas-ures under the Convention onInternational Trade in EndangeredSpecies (CITES). Another example of EUefforts in this area is our Action Plan onForest Law Enforcement, Governance andTrade, which includes negotiating specif-ic agreements with partner countries tomake sure that all the wood coming intothe EU is legal.

5 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

FORUM

interview

In November Mogens Peter Carl took up the job ofdirector general for environment at the EuropeanCommission after five years in the same position at DGTrade - a switch in responsibilities that many viewed ascontradictory. In a written interview with Green Horizon,the Danish national explained his work transition andnamed the EU's and CEE's environmental priorities.

Green EU director general prioritisesbiodiversity and climate

‘The challenge isobviously to maximisethe positive impactsof trade and minimisethe negative impacts.’

EUR

OPE

AN P

OLI

CY C

ENTR

E

Continued on page 17

▼

FORUM

interview

Following upon the previousquestion, do you see chances for thenew EU member states and applicantsfrom Central and Eastern Europe toachieve economic parity withoutundue sacrifices of their naturalenvironment and resources?

Biodiversity loss is our loss. It is adrain on our economies and it reducesthe quality of our lives. Obviously ahealthy ecosystem is fundamental to anysustainable strategy for economic devel-opment. And of course, decoupling eco-nomic development from the use ofresources and environmental degrada-tion is not a new issue and not specific tothe new member states. I believe that thenew member states can reach the EU’seconomic standards without damagingtheir natural environment and resourcesif they avoid the mistakes made by theold member states. During the pre-acces-sion process, the Commission empha-sised that as they develop infrastructureand boost their economic developmentthey should pay particular attention tosafeguarding their environment. Sinceaccession, the Commission has continuedto reinforce this message and to monitortheir progress.

Could the EU somehow “reward” newmember states that safeguard aproportionally larger share of theirnatural capital than the EU average?

The idea of rewards for safeguarding aproportionally large area of natural capitalis very interesting¸ but it would be diffi-cult to make an objective assessment.Basically, although member states are ofcourse bound by Community environ-mental legislation, the real reward lies inthe benefits they will enjoy from havinghealthy ecosystems, and the comforting

knowledge that they will be able to sus-tain the flow of goods and servicesderived from those ecosystems, whichunderpin their economies and quality oflife. This is perhaps the key message ofour Biodiversity Communication.

One of the EU’s big achievements issetting up the Natura 2000 network ofprotected sites. This is a very challengingtask and looking at the situation in all 25member states, it is clear that there is stilla long way to go before we achieve fullimplementation of the network — and bythis I mean not just full designation butproper management, too.

In December 2004 you said inStockholm that the EU would pursue a“continued unrelenting push for moremarket access,” except for a few areaswith regard to certain social activitiesand further agricultural reform. Do younow think that protecting theenvironment should be added to the listof areas where fewer concessionsshould be made by the EU?

The EU leads the world when it comesto environmental standards — in mostareas at any rate — so the negative envi-ronmental impacts people are afraid offrom further trade liberalisation are mostlikely to occur outside the EU, especiallyin biodiversity-rich countries with weakenvironmental standards or enforcementsystems. We carry out variousSustainability Impact Assessment studies(e.g. on agriculture and forest-basedproducts) which give us a clearer idea ofthose impacts and help us come up withsuitable measures. The closer such meas-ures are to the root of the problem (e.g.illegal logging) the more effective theywill be. Imposing or maintaining tariffs isa very blunt instrument. If the EU and itstrading partners are serious about protect-ing the environment, they should attackthe problem at its (domestic) root, and notat the frontier.

‘The negativeenvironmentalimpacts from furthertrade liberalisationare most likely to occur outside the EU.’

CAPTAIN’S LOGS: In 2001 police in Hungary investigateda EUR 295,000 illegal logging operation in a protectedwood. The European Commission has pledged to crackdown on such crimes in the new member states.

EU Director General of EnvironmentMogens Peter Carl (Continued from page 5)

▼

◗

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 6

central and eastern europe | world

A G R I C U L T U R E

Poles lead GMO resistance

NEWS

■ President Lech Kaczynski signeda law on May 17 banning the tradeof genetically modified seeds inPoland. Polish environmentalistsand international groups such asGreenpeace praised the law, whichappears to contradict both EUpolicy and a recent ruling by theWorld Trade Organisation statingthat blanket national bans on(genetically modified organisms)violate fair-trade principles.

The Polish act forbids theimport of GM seeds and the regis-tration of genetically modifiedseeds or plants in the nationalplant record. It has come as vindi-cation for the International Coali-tion to Protect the Polish Country-side (ICPPC), which has run acampaign since June 2004 to haveGMOs banned by local andregional governments.

“This is a joint success of therepresentatives of local authoritiesin the provinces, non-governmen-tal organisations, farmers, politi-cians and scientists,” read a state-ment by the IPPCC in the wake ofthe law’s signing. “The passing ofthis act is a remarkable step thatwill set an important precedent forall EU countries and beyond.”

Maciej Muskat, a Greenpeacecampaigner in Poland, said,“Greenpeace will continue towork with and encourage othercountries to follow the Polishexample, which has put environ-mental concerns and sustainableagriculture above the profits ofagro-chemical conglomerates.”

■ The Slovakian government claims that it has taken several steps in response to an NGO boycott this past winter of publicconsultations on the programming of EU structural and cohesion funds.

As reported in the March 2006 issue of Green Horizon, several NGOs in Slovakia had pulled out of government-organiseddiscussions concerning how the state would spend EUR 10 billion of EU funds expected from 2007 to 2013. NGOs complainedthat their input was uniformly ignored in violation of the partnership principle enshrined in EU law.

The Ministry of Construction and Regional Development, which is in charge of the funds’ programming, has since takensteps that address the complaints, and reports that NGOs have returned to the consultation process.

“In response to the decision of some of the NGOs’ representatives to suspend their membership in working groups andmonitoring committees, on December 13, 2005 the MCRD organised a joint meeting of NGO representatives with representa-tives of all ministries involved in programming of EU funds,” reported the ministry’s Lubica Sabadosova.

During the meeting NGO comments on the first draft of the spending plan were discussed and the responsible ministriessaid they were open to discussions about operational plans, Sabadosova said. The second draft of the plan incorporated sev-eral NGO comments and NGO representatives have participated in several ensuing meetings regarding spending of the funds,at both the government and ministerial levels, Sabadosova said.

Particular NGO complaints with how the EU funds would help marginalised communities such as the Roma have also beenaddressed, Sabadosova said. More than 65 percent of the funds are slated for infrastructure and improved accessibility in provin-cial areas, while one of the spending programme’s broad priorities has been defined as “marginalised Roma communities.”

U R B A N T R A N S P O R T

Pollution solution aired ■ Amid a rising tide of citizen complaints about traffic congestion and air pollution,Budapest City Hall has proposed introducing a downtown congestion charge similarto the much-hyped initiative of central London.

City Hall floated the proposal in May as part of a long-term plan to tackle air pol-lution in the capital. However, the mayor of the sub-district that comprises the city’sdowntown core said that rather than a road toll, she would “drastically increase”parking fees and restrict several parts of the city centre to lorry traffic.

“We would like more people to use mass transit or bicycles when coming to thecity centre, or if they come by car, to use underground parking,” said Katalin Molnar,deputy mayor of the city’s District V.

Budapest is one of the most polluted cities in Europe. Average concentrations ofPM10s, small particles known to be a major health hazard, exceed those of Londonand Paris and are only slightly lower than those of Madrid and Rome, according toa 2004 report by the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

Budapest’s civil society pressed the issue hard this spring. On Earth Day, April22, a reported 30,000 to 40,000 people took part in Budapest’s biannual Critical Massbicycle demonstration, setting a new record. Then on May 17, a group calling itselfthe Radical Pedestrians got a crowd of some 200 to stand on the crosswalk of a majordowntown intersection, stopping traffic for three to four minutes during rush hour(pictured above). Organisers cited the environmental friendliness of walking andBudapest’s intolerable air quality as the reasons for the demonstration.

C I V I L S O C I E T Y

Government reaches out to NGOs

MAG

YAR

HIR

LAP

— M

ARTA

HEG

EDU

S

European Union Update

7 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

■ Aarhus rules apply to GMOsThe EU has agreed to apply the Aarhus Convention’srules on access to information and public participation togovernment decisions on genetically modified organisms(GMOs). Peter Carl, director-general of the EuropeanCommission’s DG Environment, said the regulation willapply to all EU institutions.

Among other guarantees, citizens and public interestgroups will be able to request GMO safety evaluationstudies from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA,according to the European Information Service. The com-mission also must release the criteria on which it basesauthorisations of GMOs.

However, it is still unclear how information that couldbe considered “commercially sensitive" will be treated. Carlsaid that the European Commission will examine this issuefurther, hinting at the possibility that further legislationcould be drafted on the issue.

■ Feel-good fill-upsFilling stations in Croatia were required from June 1 tolabel the sulphur content of their petrol and diesel undera decree that aims to reduce sulphur levels to EU stan-dards while promoting biofuel, according to the Environ-ment Daily news service. The country hopes to join theEU in the next few years and Croatian Minister of Envi-ronment Marina Matulovic Dropulic said that some EUR850 million would be invested in Croatia’s two oil refiner-ies to produce sulphur-free fuel from 2010. The Euro-pean Commission has said that a lack of labelling hasstymied sales of low-sulphur fuel.

For more coverage on the Balkan environment, see theREReP Record at <rerep.rec.org>.

■ Fuel for green energySustainable energy projects in Central and Eastern Europecan expect a substantial increase in funding from theEuropean Bank for Reconstruction and Development(EBRD). According to a bank announcement in May, theEBRD plans to invest up to EUR 1.5 billion in energy effi-ciency, renewables and clean energy projects over thenext three years. That compares to about EUR 1 billioninvested from 2001-2005 in efficiency-related projects inpower stations with reduced emissions.

■ Scrape over electro-scrap Bulgaria’s government is defending itself against an upswellof protest by businesses for its decision to adopt the EU’sdirective on the collection, recovery and reuse/recycling ofwaste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE).

Manufacturers, importers and retailers were to fallunder the rules from July 1, but they say they aren’t evenfamiliar with the law’s provisions, let alone prepared to fol-low them.

Industry called on the government to postpone thelaw’s entry into force for at least six months.

According to the government, businesses dealing withelectronics and household appliances can comply with thelaw in two ways: either pay a fee to the government forpublicly managed collection and processing of the waste orform their own private organisations to do the same thing.

According to the Bulgarian news site Dnevnik, a groupof some 1,000 firms are pressing a legal challenge againstthe government order to pay waste packaging recoverycharges after they had already paid dues to packagingrecovery organisations to which they currently belong.

NEWS

■ Greens praised the governments of Poland, Hungary, theCzech Republic and Slovakia for a recent joint statement stat-ing their preference for reusing and recycling solid wasteinstead of incinerating it.

At a meeting of the environmental ministers of the“Visegrad Four” countries May 4-5 in Kosice, Slovakia, theministers issued a statement opposing a recent EU proposalto reclassify municipal waste incinerators as “recovery” ratherthan “disposal” facilities.

The ministers’ statement urged that the preference for“reuse and recycling over energy recovery should be explic-itly specified in the directive on waste; except for caseswhere life-cycle thinking leads to more preferable results.”

The European Environmental Bureau (EEB), the conti-nent’s largest coalition of green organisations, lauded thestatement. “The Visegrad Ministers recognise that the Com-mission’s proposal is unacceptable,” said Stefan Scheuer, EUPolicy Director for the group.

The proposed reclassification “would allow companies tomove waste for burning much more easily,” Scheuer said.“The EU’s waste policy should not make it easier for peopleto burn waste, especially recyclable biowaste.”

M U N I C I P A L W A S T E

Ministers opposeincinerators

■ Ukrainian environmental lawyer Olya Melen was one of this year’swinners of the Goldman Prize, recognising her successful effort totemporarily halt the illegal dredging of a shipping canal through thebiologically protected Danube Delta.

The award, which netted Melen USD 125,000, is dispensed by aSan Francisco-based foundation for outstanding work in environ-mental protection around the world. Some 125 people have won theprize since 1990, including Stephanie Roth, who was recognised in2005 for her campaigning against the proposed Rosia Montana goldmine operation in Romania.

Melen heads the legal unit of Environment-People-Law, anorganisation based in the west Ukrainian city of Lviv.

She was nominated by the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF),which credited her for opposing actions by the former Ukrainiangovernment, well ahead of the Orange Revolution.

“Olya really put her life on the line. She represented the otherside before it became safe to do so,” said WWF Danube-CarpathianProgramme Director Michael Baltzer.

A C T I V I S M

Delta defender strikes gold

GO

LDM

AN F

OU

ND

ATIO

N

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 8

river basin protection

DANUBE WATCH

P U B L I C P A R T I C I P A T I O N

Tuzla gets the facts on factoriesIn a stunning green valley bisected by a river flowing through Tuzla canton lie some highly polluting factories. Concrete cool-

ing towers, ore smelters, and cement plants operate right on the banks of the river, polluting the air and water and, hence, posingserious health risks to the people of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina. The pollution also affects the nearby settlement of Lukavac.

The Bosnian NGO Eko-Zeleni Lukavac believes public information is key to solving these problems. People who live inthe area need to know what’s spoiling their water and air and how pollution affects their lives. This information can be usedto raise general public awareness and lead toward appropriate solutions. With support from a pilot project managed by theRegional Environmental Center in partnership with Resources for the Future and New York University School of Law (andfunded by GEF/UNDP via the Danube Regional Project), Eko-Zeleni Lukavac is carrying out a demonstration project designedto ensure that local residents get the information to which they are entitled under Bosnian law.

The project began with a survey of area residents and interviews with government authorities. This research showed localinterest in receiving regular reports and having the opportunity to make individual information requests. However, the multi-plicity of authorities and layers of bureaucracy impede information flow. Moreover, the information that is available is difficultfor laypersons to understand; it needs to be provided in more user-friendly language and format.

After analysing the interviews, Eko-Zeleni Lukavac held a roundtable discussion and capacity building meeting on Modrac Lakefrom May 23-24. These events examined the problems highlighted in the interviews and survey and also raised possible solutions.

One idea that emerged was to produce and disseminate a “plain language” brochure that will explain rights that citizenshave to information, advise how they can exercise these rights, and give the latest news regarding local pollution. The firstbrochure will provide a clear picture of which authorities are likely to have water-related information, what kinds of informa-tion can be obtained and from whom it can be obtained. Industry representatives volunteered to provide a contact address forthe public which will be included in the brochure along with numbers for public officials at the local, cantonal and ministrylevels. A sample information-request letter will be included.

Eko-Zeleni Lukavac believes the pilot project is an important first step in the process of changing attitudes. Equally impor-tant, the NGO found an important partner in local government who has indicated a willingness to seek further funding so thatthe process of improving communications between public officials, industry and the community will continue.

For more information, contact REC Project Manager Orsolya Szalasi <OSzalasi@rec.org> or Pilot Project Manager HuseinKeran at Eko Zeleni Lukavac <hkeran@yahoo.com>.

For more coverage on the Balkan environment, see the REReP Record at <rerep.rec.org>.

P O L L U T I O N P R E V E N T I O N

Runoff remedies ■ A pilot project using reed beds to filter agricultural runoff hasshown farming communities around the Danube Delta a way tohelp reduce the flow of pollution into the Black Sea.

The pioneering initiative took part in the catchment area of thePrut River, a Danube tributary that flows through parts of Moldo-va, Ukraine and Romania. The work targeted the problem of highorganic pollution that feeds algae blooms in the Black Sea, whichdeprives other aquatic organisms of life-giving oxygen.

The work was supported by a EUR 30,900 grant from theDanube Regional Project, an initiative of the United NationsDevelopment Programme/Global Environment Facility.

The project organisers, Eco Counselling Centre Galati, an NGObased in Romania, and the Ecological Movement of Moldova,identified the main source of pollution in most of the basin’s ruralareas as farm waste that is collected but then deposited directly onthe ground. Excess nutrients subsequently leach into ground andsurface waters. Area farmers not only lack the funds to changetheir practices, but also the necessary knowledge to do so. Thischaracterised the problem in the villages where the pilot work wascarried out, Mastacani, Romania, and Baurci Moldoveni, Moldova.

Meetings addressing the problem were held in both Romaniaand Moldova involving 450 people, including local officials,school staff, farmers and students. Participants selected a fewapproaches for solving the problem: environmental education ini-tiatives, the establishment of composting facilities, and the plant-ing of trees and reed beds to buffer rain runoff into surface waters.

Students and other members of the pilot communities plantedreed beds last year, although unexpected floods destroyed muchof the work. Despite this setback, water-quality tests in the pilotcommunities showed that nitrate levels dropped roughly 50 per-

cent in runoff passing through the surviving reed buffers. Organisers implemented an educational programme that

included the development of educational kits for students andteachers, the training of almost 200 teachers and environmentalclasses that introduced students to biodiversity, water and health,and human impacts on water ecosystems. Theoretical lessonswere combined with practical activities involving water analysesand the organisation of compost facilities at schools.

It is hoped the lessons learned from the project can help guidesimilar initiatives in other communities around the basin.

For more information, please visit: <www.cceg.ro/eng/pro-jectPrut.htm>.

ECO

CO

UN

SELL

ING

CEN

TRE

GAL

ATI

Small and medium-sized enterpris-es (SMEs) will play a critical rolein developing the new EastEuropean energy industries. That,at least, is the thinking behind the

creation of a new business incubatorfocused on energy development.

Founded in 2005 through a joint part-nership between the European BusinessCouncil for Sustainable Development —also known as e5 — and a global groupcalled the Renewable Energy and EnergyEfficiency Partnership (REEEP), the incu-bator will help SMEs in Central andEastern Europe (CEE) capitalise on risingdemand for clean and efficient energy.

Known as the Sustainable EnergyAccelerator, the incubator will bringtogether small companies in each of theEuropean transitional economies via itssmall enterprise energy network and helpdevelop and increase the number of SMEsoperating in this industry.

“It’s a new field not taken over by bigplayers yet, so it provides a particularlygood opportunity for them,” said ZdenekLomecky, who runs the incubator from hisCzech base. He argues that SMEs are betterplaced to take advantage of growth in thisarea because clean energy often lends itselfto the decentralised structure within whichsmaller companies can easily operate.

Within a few months of its foundation,the accelerator attracted 10 member com-panies from the Czech Republic andBulgaria. Potential members pay no initialfee, but go through a screening processmanaged by an independent adjudicator.

Supportive policiesOnce a project is realised, the compa-

ny pays a small fee for services providedby the incubator — such as the acquisi-tion of new finance sources, marketing,an IT platform and access to a team ofadvisors. Four local representatives ineach country serve as a bridge betweendomestic SMEs and international busi-nesses and experts.

The energy sector in CEE is changingrapidly, with demand rising against abackdrop of poor efficiency. While mostof the region still depends on Russia forenergy supplies, governments havebegun thinking seriously about energysecurity. Clean energy, which is groundedin locally available sources, could helpthe region achieve this goal.

National and European Union policiessupport renewables. The EU has allocated

over EUR 134 billion in clean and efficientenergy development for the 10 new EUmember states. The European Bank ofReconstruction and Development(EBRD), too, has publicly stated that itwill invest EUR 1.5 billion in clean energyprojects over the next three years.

Poland, the Czech Republic and othersare beginning to act on the new conditions.The Czech government, for instance, hasset new targets for the next three yearslinked in part to its new renewable energylaw. Renewable energy is to provide 8 per-cent of the country’s energy by 2010, whiletotal energy demand is to fall by 1 percentper year. It has earmarked 8 billion korona(EUR 282 million) during that period forenergy management, and an additional 2billion korona (EUR 70.5 million) to helpthe agricultural sector develop new indus-tries such as biodiesel. Biomass will also bean attractive option for agricultural SMEs,not least because of its decentralised, lowtechnology production units.

Bulgaria’s adoption of EU biogas legis-lation creates a strong need for wastewatertreatment solutions, which will create aunique chance for biogas technology sup-pliers. “The imminent EU accession booststhe development of small hydro in Bulgariaand Romania with a chance for (traditional-ly established) Czech (SME) suppliers ofhydro technology,” said Lomecky.

Big potentialThe incubator aims to change the per-

ception of excessive investment risk creat-ed by difficult business conditions in theregion so that SMEs can take advantage ofthese new opportunities. “These compa-nies are not very professional, thoughthere are of course some exceptions.Sometimes they are not very well connect-ed to the market nor well informed,” saidLomecky in relation to the 1 million SMEsnow operating in his home country. Hethinks many SMEs feel isolated, operateunder unfair market conditions, face toughcompetition from larger companies, andfind it hard to get financing.

The companies already operating viathe incubator include a Czech hydropowertechnology specialist and a Bulgarianwood processing company. However, notmany new indigenous SMEs have beenformed yet apart from some subsidiaries ofGerman and British wind farm developers.

REEEP, one of the main partners in theincubator, is an international partnershipthat structures policy initiatives for cleanenergy markets and facilitates financing forsustainable energy projects.

Elisabeth Jeffries authors articles onenergy/environmental matters and writes for theRenewable Energy and Energy EfficiencyPartnership

energy | INSIGHT

9 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

EC/E

PA P

HO

TO/C

TK/L

UBO

S PA

VLIC

EK

Small business incubator helps firms seize regional opportunities in renewables

Succour for sustainabilityBy Elisabeth Jeffries

CRAFTING SOLUTIONS: Small businesses such as this glassware factory in the town of Svetla nadSazavou, Czech Republic can benefit from energy efficiency investments.

◗

The countries of Central andEastern Europe have never beenshort of picturesque resort areas.Croatia’s 5,800-kilometre AdriaticCoast, Bulgaria’s shoreline on the

Black Sea and Poland’s idyllic northeasternregion of Podlasie all have long traditionsof tourism. But the flood of holiday makersin recent years has strained the naturalattractions that underlie their popularity.

According to the Tourism Programmeof the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP), negative impacts oftourism occur when the level of visitor useexceeds nature’s ability to support it with-in acceptable limits of change. But thatcovers just one side of the issue.

The other concerns the build-up ofsupporting infrastructure. As resort areasstrive to attract ever larger crowds, a char-acteristic variety of urban developmentsprawls across the landscape. Vacationdestinations come under pressure ashotels, summer homes, marinas and otherinfrastructure choke their surroundingswith concrete, pollution and traffic.

Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast offers astriking example of this problem. In

recent years, development has kickedinto warp speed due to unprecedentedinterest in its value as a holiday spot.Resort towns like Slunchev Bryag andZlatni Pyasitsi were popular destinationsunder Communism but the change to amarket economy has revealed a muchgreater economic potential.

Surge in trafficAccording to a report from

Environmental News Service, 4.5 milliontourists visited Bulgaria in 2004, morethan double the number in 1998. Thespike has had drastic effects on SlunchevBryag and Zlatni Pyasitsi, where the num-ber of tourist beds has grown 10 times.The entire Black Sea coastline has comeunder construction, with more than 120hotels in the pipeline. “Parks, gardens,roads, pools — everything literally van-ishes under new construction," said SvetlaPanayotova, a travel agent in Bulgaria forThomas Cook Travel, as reported by ENS.

In Croatia, the issue of over-develop-ment has led the Environment Ministry totake action against Hungarian investorswho have violated building codes in their

efforts to exploit the Dalmatian Coast’scommercial potential. In the last week ofMay, the Ministry began tearing down 18apartment houses owned by Hungariansand 30 other buildings on the island of Vir.

According to Croatian authorities, therazed homes were built without permitsin violation of a law against erecting struc-tures closer than 70 metres from theshoreline. Some of the Hungarian ownersare fighting back with lawsuits.

The impressive coastlines of Bulgariaand Croatia are perhaps the most vividexamples of how tourism and the industry’sresponse to it may inflict too heavy a bur-den on the regional environment. But evenon a smaller scale, scenic natural attractionscan attract suffocating levels of tourismwhich can bring harm to local economies.

According to the Polish NGO ZielonaSiec (Green Network), the region ofPodlasie has found itself in this paradoxicalsituation. The tourism industry is boomingthere on the back of natural draws such asthe Bialowieza ancient forest and theNarew and Biebrza rivers. The resultinghuman traffic is putting an increasing pres-sure on all these natural treasures.

In areas of natural beauty, the holiday industry is following a self-defeating path of over-development

Tourist thawBy Wojciech Kosc

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 10

INSIGHT | tourism

MTI

The Regional EnvironmentalProtection Inspectorate launched severalinspections into the state of tourism infra-structure in the region. The investigationshowed a growing phenomenon of lakeshorelines and riverbanks being takenover by resorts where individual investorscan buy plots with direct access to thewater, which is against the Polish law.

The investigation also showed thatPodlasie lacks basic infrastructure thatcould help the area cope with humanactivity. “In the northern and most attrac-tive part of the region where most lakesare located, a mere two out of 20 holidaycomplexes have waste treatment facili-ties,” said Zielona Siec’s Robert Cyglicki.

EU pros and consOne popular opinion holds that EU

accession — or the impending prospectof it — provides a good safeguard againstenvironmental abuses. It is believed thatthe EU’s strict rules of environmental pro-tection will help the new democraticstates preserve their natural capital.

But the European EnvironmentalBureau (EEB) has warned that western

assimilation also presents environmentalthreats and that the EU has no panaceaagainst them. “Increased adoption ofWestern concepts of deregulation, privati-sation and commercialisation is changingexisting practices of biodiversity protec-tion, agricultural production, and publicservice provision, including in the watersupply, disposal, waste management andpublic transport,” noted the EEB in a 2004report on how accession would impactthe new member states.

According to the EEB’s report, thenew EU member states face a dual chal-lenge of conforming to the Brussels-imposed environmental standards andachieving economic growth. The lattertakes precedence in many countries inCEE, including the biggest, Poland, whereseveral nationwide strategies to boost thedevelopment of transport, agriculture andenergy infrastructure compete with envi-ronmental interests. The EEB also indicat-ed that the greater prosperity that mightfollow accession would bring CEE coun-tries “closer to the consumption patternspredominant in the ‘old’ EU and increasepressures on the environment.”

An EEB survey of its representatives inthe new member states from CEErevealed a widely held opinion that theEU’s rules were not likely to secure long-term benefits to the environment. “Toimprove the environment, economic poli-cy must not be isolated from social andenvironmental policies. In practice, thismeans decoupling economic growth fromresource consumption and this is a seri-ous challenge for the EU and Poland. Butthis radical attitude is missing in the EUitself,” remarked a Polish respondent tothe survey. Similar thoughts wereexpressed by respondents from the CzechRepublic and Hungary.

In the wake of reports in the popularmedia about over-development onBulgaria’s coastline, the tourist count for2005 dropped from the year before.Apparently, developers crossed a thresh-old, and are now building hotels thatscare away their intended guests. As eco-nomic incentives sparked the trend ofover-development, money might alsobring it to an end.

11 | JJUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

PERMIT PLEASE: The Croatian governmentordered the demolition of vacation houses builton the Adriatic coast in violation of a 2004 lawprohibiting construction within 70 metres of thewater. Far left and top middle, as police watchon, the controversial villas, including nearly 20owned by Hungarian nationals, are razed.Above, an owner tries to salvage what he can. At near left, protesters lay in front of tractors toprevent construction of an unpermitted hotel inIrakli, a potential Black Sea Natura 2000 site in Bulgaria.

WWW.DASPASIMIRAKLI.COM

MTI

MTI

◗

tourism | INSIGHT

COVER STORY | water management

BTA

PRES

SPH

OTO

FINDING A SOLUTION THAT

WILL FLOATby Os Davis

The story of a great flood is a seminal talein human lore. Potentially as far back as9,000 years ago, the river-dependentSumerians used their tale of the GreatDeluge to divide their mythology/historyinto two epochs in later texts. In the West,the story of Noah’s Ark is a children’s storywith greater morals regarding belief andthe preservation of life passed on genera-tion after generation.

For much of Europe today, stories ofdisastrous flooding are no myth. Withglobal climate change, a concomitantincrease in extreme weather events, andhuman misuse of natural water sources,every spring may bring news of newflooding. If a Danube or Drava shouldperchance not be running through anation’s territory, citizens may insteadface low drinking-water supplies or dam-age to water-based ecosystems. Noah’sArk, so goes the story, sailed for 40 daysand 40 nights. A look at European waterissues for a similar length of time in spring2006 implies that the struggle and rebirthtold of in those ancient myths may evenrepresent a cautionary tale.

On May 18, theEuropean Environ-mental Bureau(EEB), the largestfederation of envi-ronmental citizens’

organisations, issueda call for Europe’s envi-

ronment ministers to “sharp-en up their act” in light of poor results inimplementing European Union water pro-tection legislation required by the 2000Water Framework Directive (WFD).

The assessment by the EEB and theWorldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) of 25reports from 21 countries indicated that, inthe words of study authors, “Europe is still

far from practising ecologically sustain-able water management.” In their view, astunning 50 percent of surface water bod-ies are at risk of failing to achieve theWFD’s “good ecological status” objective.

The EEB announcement noted that 22reports pinpointed infrastructure such asdams, embankments, channeling, support-ing hydropower, navigation, flood defenseor agriculture, as key sources of environ-mental pressure.

After 10 weeks ofwhat Serbian offi-cials called themost extensive andlong-lasting flood-ing and land ero-

sion in the country,media began to report

a let up in the water-relat-ed damage in that country. As of mid-June, heavy rain, uncontrolled groundwa-ter and melting snow caused the Danube,Sava, Tamis and Tisza rivers to rise, thefirst two to record heights. In Vojvodinaand central and eastern Serbia, approxi-mately 200,000 hectares were flooded.Erosion and landslides are estimated tohave affected 11,000 families.

Underground water ruined some240,000 hectares of cultivable soil and hasdamaged thousands of houses. Shortagesof potable water, particularly in rural areas,could haunt the Balkans until next spring.

The catastrophes of March to Maymade for a hard lesson in disaster pre-paredness. The torrential rains and flood-ing in the Balkans have exposed the lackof financial resources, weak central con-trol, unstable supply lines and poor infra-structure. A story in the Southeast EuropeTimes dated May 22 cited Serbia as anexample of paying a mighty price for itsmeandering pace in building or recon-structing embankments: The agricultureand shipping industries are now certain totake massive losses for the year.

Allocated for disaster relief from theSerbian government is a mere EUR 3.2million. Such an amount looks trivial con-sidering the EUR 1.7 million averageannual cost of mosquito eradication inBelgrade alone (or more than EUR 3.2million in the wake of this season’s heavyflooding, experts estimate). And there

water management | COVER STORY

13 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

MTI

The frequency of big floods in recent years has shown this region the urgency of developing sound water management.Besides money, an approach is neededthat addresses all of water's myriad users.As with a vessel full of live cargo, main-taining balance is crucial.

DAY

11

DAY

55

AQUATIC HABITATS: April flooding devastedlow-lying areas the region over. Above,villagers use a makeshift boat to retrievebelongings from a flooded house in Fetesti, eastof Bucharest.Lower left, during a two-week stateof emergency in northern Serbia, a man surveysthe damage in Smederevo, south of Belgrade. Inthe middle, a a Serb farmer tries to savelivestock in Stari Kostolac. At near left, a mantries to pump flood water from his home in thevillage of Ritopek, southeast of Belgrade.

BTA

PRES

SPH

OTO

BTA

PRES

SPH

OTO

▼

are no significant funds earmarked forcontagious disease resulting from flood-ing and contaminated drinking water.

There may yet be time to get preparedbefore another huge-scale tragedy besetsthe Balkans, however. In late May, Serbia’scapital investment minister Velimir Ilicannounced the allocation of EUR 1 millionfor an embankment project in Zrenjanin.By June, Serbia was well into the processof securing aid from the European Union,international financial institutions andrelief agencies.

A silver lining wasseen in Poland onMay 31, with theannouncement ofPolish environmen-tal organisations’

success in stoppingillegal use of flood

damage reconstructionproject funding. The project was support-ed by a European Investment Bank loanin the amount of EUR 250 million. Greenorganisations in Poland have maintainedfor some time that the Polish RegionalWater Management Office has misusedfunds and has in fact already damagedbreeding sites of several bird species pro-tected under the EU Bird Directive and bythe Bern Convention.

The site of the dispute was the SolaValley Natura 2000 site, where citizens’groups maintain that work was being con-ducted illegally without necessary permitsand environmental impact assessment.

Last year, several Polish groups noti-fied Polish authorities about several siteswhere flood protection work was beingconducted in violation of existing envi-ronmental legislation and even on sitesthat had absolutely no need of flood pro-tection. Anna Roggenbuck of PolishGreen Network called the River Sola an“extreme example” of misuse of publicmoney, but “by no means an individualcase. ... The EIA Directive and very often,as in the case of the River Sola, theHabitats Directive have been clearly vio-lated.” Roggenbuck also claims that“Poland is spending more money on theunnecessary regulation of its rivers thanon nature protection.”

Natura 2000 sites tend to be a contro-versial issue in Poland among hydro-engi-neers and water agencies, particularly inlight of an expected significant amount ofEU structural and cohesion funds for the2007-2013 period to be earmarked forriver regulation and the construction ofpolders. Those in water-use industriesfear having Natura 2000 sites in rivercatchment areas, believing the protectedstatus us will limit the ways they can man-age water resources.

As a response to seemingly contradic-

tory goals such as nature conservation andflood protection, Marta Kaczynska of RECPoland took up the debate on behalf ofthe Global Water Partnership. Together,GWP and WWF Poland hammered outagreed principles upon which Natura 2000site water management can be done.

The publication, entitled “Regulationsof Natura 2000 site management in rivervalleys,” analyses in detail threats to habi-tats and species connected with waterworks in river valleys (e.g. meliorations,dykes, dams). Assembled with the opin-ions and expertise of engineers andnature conservationists alike, the bookdescribes and recommends ways to min-imise harm to Natura 2000 sites. Theauthors advise a countrywide approach,and say it is essential to boost cooperationbetween hydro-engineers and conserva-tionists to find compromise between eco-nomic, flood protection and nature pro-tection aims.

Unfortunately, notes Kaczynska, thebook is still treated as a discussion paper,which illustrates the difficulty in gettingpeople to accept the requirements of EUbird and habitat directives.

When asked about asituation like that ofPoland’s Natura 2000sites, Janos Zlinszky,a senior advisor atthe REC’s head office,

explained it thusly:Any water ecosystem

may offer a number of‘exploitable services’ — drinking water,cooling water, irrigation, transport corri-dor, ecological corridor for nature, recre-ation, sport, floodplain for flood manage-ment and extensive agriculture, fish —and when too much emphasis is put onone, the others all suffer. Water manage-ment is maintaining this balancing act.”

In Hungary, this balancing act hasalready been planned; it’s just that no one ispaying particular attention. The Danubewas at the centre of major internationalpolitical initiatives as far back as 2002, withthe launch of the Budapest Initiative onSustainable Flood Management.Representatives from the EuropeanCommission joined with those from Austria,the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary,Poland, and Romania in adopting theDeclaration of the Budapest Initiative, ajoint statement calling for strengthening ininternational flood management.

Since then, almost nothing. Sinceentering the European Union in 2004,Hungary could almost implement direc-tives of the EU WFD, but the political willand horizontal integration of currentlywarring goals of flood control, water sup-ply, tourism, nature conservation, agricul-ture and others, are lacking in Hungary.

Even outside the country’s borders,Hungarian water protection proceedsapace. The International Commission forthe Protection of the Danube River(ICPDR) Roof Report for 2004 alreadypraised the country’s “bilateral harmoni-sation with all its seven neighbouringcountries.” (mainly addressing flood con-trol and serious pollution events.)

After all, it’s not as though theHungarian environmental heart is in thewrong place. June 5 also saw the first stepin a journey of 450 kilometres for envi-ronmental awareness. WWF Hungarydirector Ferenc Markus began his walkalong the Hungarian section of theDanube which will take him fromDunakiliti to the Croatian border.

The programme is a response todevelopment of the Trans-EuropeanNetwork for Transport, a navigation routelaunched within the framework of theEuropean Union traffic development pro-gramme that would run throughoutHungary. The WWF maintains that thepresent version of the programme“requires such conditions and interven-tions [that] irreversible consequenceswould be caused and would aggravatealready existing problems.

On his trail-blazing mission, Markushopes to establish that WWF is not neces-sarily anti-Danube development — “Weonly propose not fitting the Danube to theships, but the ships to the Danube,” hesays — and, through daily reports on thethree-week jaunt posted online, seeks toeducate about the history and biology thatruns through Hungary with the river.WWF Hungary’s greater near-future goalis “seeking and working out solutions,where the economic advantages can berealised in a way that they do not severe-ly influence the interests of the environ-ment and people.” Markus’s blog andinformation on the journey can be foundat <www.azendunam.hu>.

Romania was hitalmost as hard asSerbia in the flood-ing of 2006, anddrastic action hasbeen called for by

that country’s govern-ment. On June 7,

Romanian Minister ofEnvironment Sulfina Barbu announcedplans to change the course of the Danubein Romanian territory between 2008 and2012. The reason: to improve flood man-agement and increase the area’s ecologicalpotential. Barbu said the course of theriver should be changed to give it “acoherent defense system against floods,but also a healthy ecosystem, with wetareas, which are very important for ahealthy environment.” A series of consul-

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 14

DAY

1144

DAY

2211

COVER STORY | water management

▼

DAY

1199

tations on the issue with environmental specialists and non-gov-ernmental organisstions (NGOs) is next up for Barbu, with resultsof a study on the matter due by December 2007. The programmeto change the river’s course would begin in 2008.

Back in Hungary, representatives fromthe National Office for RegionalDevelopment announced that the plans forthe Danube Complex Programme werefinally complete, and that the cleanup andgeneral improvement plan for Hungary’s

water resources would soon be underway.The government had announced the pro-

gramme’s launch in March of this year, but concreteplans repeatedly stalled due to slowdown during the recentnational election and a bit of general feet-dragging.

The plan aims to solve the international segmentation ofHungary’s strategic water reserves, with due emphasis on theDanube both in Hungary and across its borders. Domestic ship-ping will increase, as freight traffic crams up roads and railways.Adding this to the sustained increase in foreign trade expectedby the EU member countries, higher levels of have governmentfinally shown some willingness to address the problem.

Some critics in Hungary have questioned the programme’splans with regard to health, environmental and regional cooper-ation issues. But the government touts the programme as a wayto keep the Danube’s water level low without building dams.

Naturally, after such a delay, those concerned with the well-being of the Danube are skeptical about governmental concernfor the environment and international cooperation. One critic isLaszlo Somlovari, CEO of Hungary’s 107-year-old national ship-ping company MAHART Free Port Rt. “I believe,” he said, “thatwhen due to lack of proper damming, the continually deepeningand deteriorating Hungarian section of the Danube will regularlycause enough damage that the cost necessary for repair willbecome higher than our national economic capacity can handle.That’s when we — or our children — will build the first dam.”

June 29 marks the annual Danube Day,an observation of the waterway’s impor-tance with events held across all 13Danube Basin nations: Austria, Bosniaand Herzegovnia, Bulgaria, Croatia, theCzech Republic, Germany, Hungary,

Moldova, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro,Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine. The festivity is

a “tibute to the vital role the river plays in people’slifes: in providing water, power, recreation and livelyhoods”,said Philip Weller of the ICPDR. Aside from the pageantry andfun of events designed to involve whole communities in theissues of the day, Danube Day will also see the release of firstresults from the campaign by the Danube Environmental Forum(DEF) to protect river wetlands.

Launched on February 2, the DEF campaign encourages waterplanners to learn more about wetland protection measures.Though only member states are required to fulfill the EU WaterFramework Directive by 2015, all non-EU countries sharing theDanube Basin have voluntarily agreed to meet EU water law.

“Water cannot be properly protected without protecting wet-lands,” says DEF spokesman Johannes Wolf, and it is a contentionof DEF that national assessments prepared earlier on the status ofDanube water resources did not include adequate attention towetlands. ICPDR, REC, the Danube Regional Project (DRP) of theUnited Nations Development Programme-Global EnvironmentFund, WWF and the Ramsar Convention Secretariat have pro-duced helpful tools to assist planners in their efforts.

DEF, a network of 174 environmental NGOs, supports a newDRP project that will produce guidelines for wetland protection.

As a first step, DEF sees national wetland inventories as crucialand emphasise work to achieve their creation. After all, asks Wolf,“How can you save wetlands if you don’t even have a list of wherethey are?” Danube Day will represent about four months’ worth ofprogress as monitored by DEF, including wetland protection meas-ures in national plans. Final results will be released to markWetlands Day observation in February 2007.

And so go six weeks or so in the latest chapter on the bookof great floods in history and myth. An additional, less com-monly told Noah’s Ark story regards God’s promise to Noah andhis family when the skies finally cleared and human life couldbegin anew. In the skies of the new day was a rainbow, repre-senting a promise that such calamity would never befall thehuman race again. Today, excessive water may bring politicalmachinations, disease and disaster; or it may bring togetherness,personal initiative and even knowledge. What we’d all reallylike to see, though, is the rainbow assuring us that tomorrowwill be sunny.

15 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

◗

DAY

2233

DAY

4400FRONT LINES: At top, in April soldiers laid nearly 80,000 sand bags alongthe flooded Cierna Voda river near Trstice, western Slovakia. Below, floodreconstruction of the Sola River banks in Poland triggered protests.

water management | COVER STORY

BTA

PRES

SPH

OTO

POLI

SH G

REE

N N

ETW

OR

K/R

OBE

RT

WAW

RET

Y

www.rec.org/reeep

Our aim: to accelerate and expand the globalmarket for renewableenergy and energyefficiency technologies.

We are an active globalpartnership that formulatespolicy initiatives for cleanenergy markets and facilitatesfinancing for sustainableenergy projects.

The REC serves as theregional REEEP secretariat for 15 countries in Centraland Eastern Europe as well as Turkey.

The benefits of sustainableenergy are clear: energysecurity, economicdevelopment, social equityand environmental protection.

Join the drive for sustainableenergy!

REEEP a sustainableenergy future

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 18

■ Serbia and Bulgaria moved closer tothe creation of a transborder “peacepark” at Stara Planina with the launchof a public information campaign inBulgaria in May.

The campaign is part of projectimplemented by REC Country OfficeBulgaria and financed by Bulgaria’sMinistry of Environment and Watersand the Swiss Agency forDevelopment and Cooperation. Theinformation campaign promotes thenature park concept and outlines theborders and lands included in theStara Planina park. Local communitieswere invited to a public hearing aboutthe park in June in the Bulgarian cityof Montana.

The ministry launched the cam-paign to designate the Bulgarian halfof the park in 2003, based on an inter-governmental agreement with Serbiaand Montenegro in 1996 to create atransborder park. The Serbian part wascreated in 1997 covering 142,000 ha.

The peace park has been toutedas an important instrument for region-al development which will promotetourism, agriculture and small-scaleproduction while preserving the natu-ral landscape.

For more information, email NellyPapazova at REC Country OfficeBulgaria at <npapazova@rec.org>.

■ REC Executive Director Marta SzigetiBonifert discussed future Japanese sup-port for the organisation’s work during anofficial meeting with Japan’s Vice-Ministerfor Foreign Affairs, Professor AkikoYamanaka.

During the meeting, which took placeMarch 23 in Japan, they assessed the activ-ities under the Japan Special Fund andexplored future cooperation possibilitiesin Central and Eastern Europe. Discussionfocussed on work that makes effective useof technology and know-how of Japaneseorganisations.

For more than a decade theGovernment of Japan has supported theCentral and Eastern European region

through the Japan Special Fund, estab-lished in 1993 within the REC. TheJapanese have maintained this ongoingpolitical and financial support for the strat-egy, programmes and activities of the RECwith a view to taking a leading, construc-tive role in the field of international envi-ronmental cooperation.

The support has enabled the REC tobetter address the needs of the environ-mental stakeholders in Central and EasternEurope in the field of climate change,environmental policy, biodiversity, renew-able energy, sectoral integration, law draft-ing, environmental investments and wastemanagement, according to SzigetiBonifert.

■ The former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia will become the next coun-try to get its own Green Pack, the REC’seducational toolkit for teenagers.

The project will be implementedover two years with funding of EUR321,000 from the Austrian Develop-ment Agency. The Macedonian govern-ment will contribute some EUR 20,000.

The Green Pack, comprising ateacher’s guide, CD-ROM, boardgame, video cassette and other instruc-tional materials, aims to give junior-high aged children and others a broadbackground in environmental themessuch as consumer behaviour, climate,pollution and ecology. Since the publi-cation of the pilot Polish version, theGreen Pack has been adapted andtranslated into Hungarian, Bulgarian,Czech, Slovak, Russian and English.Three other versions are also on theway: Turkish, Albanian and Azeri.

O F F I C I A L V I S I T

Japanese cooperation discussed

REC BULLETIN | news

C O N S E R V A T I O N

Peace parkpieced together

■ A research group at the REC is inviting environmental NGOs from SouthEastern Europe (SEE) to take part in a survey for the update of its regional NGOdirectory and to assess needs and problems of these groups.

The research is part of a support project for environmental groups called SEC-TOR being carried out by the REC from 2006 to 2010 and funded by the SwedishInternational Development and Co-operation Agency (SIDA) (See page 14).

NGOs that take part could benefit in two ways. First, it will enable thegroups to be included in the updated directory, which lists NGOs working atboth the national and regional levels.

The directory and its on-line version, comprising the most visited databaseon the REC's website, puts the group's name and contact details out to govern-ment officials, journalists, business people and others who are interested in theregional environmental movement.

Second, it can help NGOs be involved in other support from the REC.Information gleaned from the questionnaire will help in preparation of othersupport given through the SECTOR programme, including organisational assess-ment; grants for community activities and urban sustainability; network devel-opments and NGO training. These support activities are already under develop-ment and will be launched towards the end of 2006.

C I V I L S O C I E T Y A S S I S T A N C E

Survey launched of Balkan NGOs

E D U C A T I O N

Green Pack duein Macedonian

AGREED: Japan’s Akiko Yamanaka andREC Executive Director Marta SzigetiBonifert met in Tokyo.

REC

AR

CHIV

ES

19 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

news | REC BULLETIN

■ Just four years after wallowing throughrecord flooding in 2002, the REC’s head officenear the Danube River in Szentendre suf-fered an even higher flood this spring.

The flood, which crested at 8 cm abovethe 2002 level, arrived at the end of Marchand within days had inundated all the build-ings of the REC’s campus, including guestbungalows, the conference centre and twooffice buildings.

Employees were advised to take a weekoff or, alternatively, work from home, as theflood crested.

Financial damages will exceed EUR25,000, according to REC ExecutiveDirector Marta Szigeti Bonifert. Thatcovers replastering and reinsulating of

the ground floors of the office buildings,replacement of electrical and Internetcables, disinfection of the grounds andother costs. Although the head office’spremises are donated by the Hungariangovernment through a 99-year lease, theorganisation maintains its buildingsthrough its own budget.

The ground floor of the most heavi-ly damaged of the two office buildingswill remain uninhabitable until at leastSeptember, according to Ferenc Andras,head of the REC’s AdministrationDepartment. Fourteen to 15 displacedemployees are working in the mean-time in the centre’s library and else-where on the premises.

C L E A N F U E L S

Serbia trying to get the lead out■ Twenty-nine percent of children in downtown Belgrade and 9percent of those in the suburbs risk having health problems becauseof high levels of airborne lead, according to recent research by theSerbian Institute of Toxicology. Lead dust is five to 10 times moreconcentrated in Belgrade’s air than in other European cities, saidDragana Vujanovic, a professor from the institute. Most of those atrisk live within a kilometre from measurement sites.

The high lead levels in Belgrade’s air — and in the bloodof its residents — stem from the fact that about 58 percent ofthe fuel sold at Serbian filling stations is still leaded. One ofthe very few countries in Europe that has yet to phase outleaded fuel, Serbia remains a place where motorists can fill upwith petrol with 400 milligrams of lead per litre. In the EU,lead in petrol is limited to 5 mg/l.

“There are two forecasts for a date for banning lead fromfuel: 2010 is the optimistic one and 2020 the pessimistic,” saidDragoslava Stojiljkovic from the Faculty of MechanicalEngineering at the University of Belgrade. In early May, theREC and the United Nations Environment Programme’s

Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles gathered severalstakeholders in Belgrade to discuss possibilities for speedingup the phase-out of leaded fuel in Serbia.

According to officials, it cannot happen before 2010because refineries would need some USD 300 million tochange technologies. Refineries are still state-owned thoughprivatisation is expected within a year. An official from theZastava car factory, which commands one of five cars in Serbia,pointed out that some of its models still need leaded fuel. Thiscreated a vicious circle in which refineries produce leaded fuelfor the cars and Zastava produces lead-dependent enginesbecause of the available fuel.

However, according to Elisa Dumitrescu of the UNEP-based Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles, internationalexperience proves lead can be phased out without delay. Thefirst steps include increasing the awareness of the health dan-gers of lead, education on how cars can be adapted for unlead-ed fuel, preferential pricing of unleaded fuel, and the use ofadditives to create the correct fuel octane.

H E A D O F F I C E

Rising river, rising costs

G R A N T I N G P R O G R A M M E

Swedes supporturban sustainability■ NGOs working on urban sustainabilityin the Western Balkans can expect sup-port from a four-year, EUR 4 million assis-tance programme launched by the RECand the Swedish InternationalDevelopment Agency (SIDA).

The initiative, kicked off at a signingceremony April 11 in Belgrade, aims topromote vibrant and democratic environ-mental NGOs in order to nudge societytowards the sustainable development ofand improved living conditions in urbanareas. Beneficiaries are civil societyorganisations from Albania, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Croatia, the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbiaand Montenegro and Kosovo (territoryunder interim UN administration).

The REC has a history of work withSIDA, whose environmental cooperationin South Eastern Europe (SEE) aims atpoverty reduction and European integra-tion through the Stabilisation andAssociation process. The new project,called “SECTOR: Supporting Environ-mental Civil Society Organisations inSouth Eastern Europe,” is built on lessonslearned by the two organisations.

“The project will be a milestone forthe SEE civil society organisations,” saidREC Executive Director Marta SzigetiBonifert. “We are very grateful to Swedenfor funding this significant regional proj-ect and look forward to cooperating withall the stakeholders of the SEE region.”For more information, email RobertAtkinson, director for civil initiatives at theREC, at <ratkinson@rec.org>.

STROKE!: Tamas Janicsek, stern, and CsabaSzabo, port, survey the damage of the springflooding of the REC head office.

LASZ

LO S

ZABO

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 20

ALBANIA Rr. Durresit P. 11 Shk. 2, Ap. 12TiranaTel/fax: (355-4) 239-444E-mail: rec@albania.rec.orgBOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA Kalemova 3471000 SarajevoTel/fax: (387-33) 263-050, 209-130E-mail: nseremet@rec.org.baBanja Luka Field OfficeSlavka Rodica 1 78000 Banja Luka, RS Bosnia and HerzegovinaTel/fax: (387-51) 317-022E-mail: rec.bl@inecco.netBULGARIA Tzar Simeon 42, Ap. 21000 SofiaTel: (359-2) 983-4817Fax: (359-2) 983-5217E-mail: rec-bulgaria@rec.orgCROATIA Djordjiceva 8a Br.10000 ZagrebTel: (385-1) 481-0774Tel/fax: (385-1) 481-0844E-mail: rec@rec-croatia.hrCZECH REPUBLICSenovazna 211000 PragueTel/fax: (420-2) 2422-2843E-mail: rec@reccr.cz

ESTONIA Ravala str 810143 TallinnTel/fax: (372-6) 461-423E-mail: info@recestonia.ee

HUNGARY Ady Endre ut 9-11 2000 SzentendreTel: (36-26) 504-000Fax: (36-26) 311-294E-mail: coh@rec.org

LATVIA Peldu 26/28, 3LV-1050 RigaTel/fax: (371-7) 228-055E-mail: reclat@parks.lv

LITHUANIA Svitrigailos g. 7/1603110 VilniusTel: (370-5) 231-0067Tel/fax: (370-5) 233-5451E-mail: rec@rec.lt

FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLICOF MACEDONIA Ilindenska 1181000 SkopjeTel/fax: (389-2) 309-0135, 309-0135 or 306-0146E-mail: katarina@rec.org.mk

MONTENEGROIvana Crnojevica 16/281000 PodgoricaTel/Fax: (381-81) 210-235, 210-236

POLAND ul. Grojecka 22/2402-301 WarsawaTel: (48-22) 823-8459, 823-9629Fax: (48-22) 822-9401E-mail: recpl@data.plWeb: www.rec.org.pl

ROMANIA Str Episcop Timus nr.4, Sector 1 BucharestTel: (40-21) 316-7344, 316-7345Fax: (40-21) 316-7264E-mail: rec@recromania.ro

SERBIA Primorska 31 11000 BelgradeTel: (381-11) 329-2899 Fax: (381-11) 329-3020E-mail: office@recyu.org

Kosovo (territory under interimUN administration) Field OfficeKodra e Diellit Rruga 3 Lamela 26, PO Box 16010000 PristinaTel/fax: (381-38) 552-123E-mail: info@kos.rec.org

SLOVAKIA Vysoka 1881106 BratislavaTel: (421-2) 5263-2942Fax: (421-2) 5296-4208E-mail: rec@changenet.sk

SLOVENIA Slovenska cesta 51000 LjubljanaTel: (386-1) 425-6860Fax: (386-1) 421-0939E-mail: rec-slovenia@guest.arnes.si

TURKEY Ilkbahar Mah. 15. Cad. 296. Sok. No:806550 Yildiz Cankaya Ankara Tel: (90-312) 491-9530Fax: (90-312) 491-9540E-mail: info@rec.org.tr

The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) is a non-partisan, non-advocacy,not-for-profit international organisation with a mission to assist in solving environmental problems in Centraland Eastern Europe (CEE). The center fulfils this mission by promoting cooperation among non-govern-mental organisations, governments, businesses and other environmental stakeholders, and by supportingthe free exchange of information and public participation in environmental decision making. The REC was established in 1990 by the United States, the European Commission and Hungary. Today, theREC is legally based on a charter signed by the governments of 28 countries and the European Commission,and on an international agreement with the government of Hungary. The REC has its head office in Szentendre,Hungary, and country offices and field offices in 17 beneficiary countries, which are: Albania, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey.Recent donors are the European Commission and the governments of Austria, Belgium, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy,Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, theUnited Kingdom, and the United States, as well as other inter-governmental and private institutions.

C L I M A T E C H A N G E

Green House gas inventoriesround-up■ National authorities on greenhouse gas(GHG) inventories from 12 countries inthe Balkans and Eastern Europe, theCaucasus and Central Asia (EECCA) andinternational experts participated in aregional workshop on the topic at the REChead office in Szentendre from May 10-12.The workshop was organised by the REC.

The workshop was the last in theseries of six workshops that served as aforum for information exchange within theregion and to assist countries in improvingthe quality of their national inventories.The workshop allowed participants topresent results and to learn from the indus-trialised countries comprising the Annex Istates of the Kyoto Protocol.

The workshop sought to build thecapacity of national inventory experts,so they could help achieve the immedi-ate objectives of the project and to con-tinue with training on implementation ofgood practices in national GHG inven-tory systems.

Further can be found at<www.rec.org/REC/Programs/UNDP-GHGInventories/Default.html>.

■ A new publication, Handbook onStrategic Environmental Assessmentfor Cohesion Policy 2007-2013, hasbeen released by the EU-fundedPartnership of Greening RegionalDevelopment Programmes. The bookhas been endorsed by the ECDirectorate General (DG) REGIO andDG Environment, who recommendedit to local and regional authorities as auseful tool in planning in theCohesion Process.

The handbook explains the requirements of the Directive2001/42/EC, which are relevant to the EU Cohesion Policyprogrammes in 2007-2013. It also suggests a simple approachand methodology for strategic environmental assessment(SEA) that is tailored to regional development planning. Lastly,the book provides information, resources and proceduralguidance to those who will be conducting SEA of the respec-tive programming document and illustrates the benefits thatsound SEA can provide to the Cohesion Policy programmes,and to regional development generally.

The handbook was developed in collaboration between30 partners from eight EU states. The primary authors wereJiri Dusik, Ausra Jurkeviciute and Jennifer McGuinn from theREC’s Environmental Assessment Team but the concept andframework for the text were designed by a team of expertsfrom the Environment Agency for England and Wales andthe Spanish Environmental Authorities Network in coopera-tion with Terra. You may download the book at<www.grdp.org>.

P U B L I S H I N G

SEA handbook released

REC BULLETIN | news and country offices

C A P A C I T Y B U I L D I N G

Journalists learn in the field■ Green Horizon and the Guardian Foundation provided training in environ-mental reporting to Turkish journalists in May near Ankara. The training was partof the REC’s EU-funded operations in Turkey.

The journalists practised newly learned techniques while investigating astory about environmental threats to Mogan Lake, Ankara’s best preserved fresh-water recreation basin. The session aimed to help journalists write more storiesabout the environment and in a more authoritative manner, explained DenizGumusel, capacity building manager at REC Turkey. For more information see<http://media.rec.org>.

BUDDING TALENTS: Turkish journalistsshot pictures of endemic flowers during

a media training in Ankara.

DEN

IZ G

UM

USE

L

BULLETIN BOARD

21 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

CALL FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE SURVEY OF CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS (CSO)

Help us assess the challenges and needs CSO face in South-East Europe

Are you a representative of a civil society organization? Is your organization based in Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia,fYROM, Kosovo (UNMIK), Serbia or Montenegro? The REC and the Swedish International Development Agency (Sida) have

launched a project called SECTOR: Supporting Environmental Civil Society Organisations (CSO) in South Eastern Europe (SEE).We start the project with a survey focused on updating the REC’ directory of environmental organizations and assessingtheir needs and challenges. CSOs from the involved countries are encouraged to take part in the survey by filling in and submitting the questionnaire to the REC. Copies of the questionnaire are available on request or may be downloaded at

www.rec.org/sector/assessment.

The results will be published in the next edition of the NGO directory and will be used to publicise the work of environmental groups in SEE, analyse challenges and opportunities they face, and to outline ways of assisting them in preparing and planning other forms of support through the SECTOR

programme (namely an organisational assessment tool; a grant programme for projects focussed on community activities, urban environment and sustainability; assisting the development and operation of CSO networks; and in providing training on key CSO skills).

For more information, please contact Richard Filcak (Rfilcak@rec.org), REC Project Manager, tel: (36-26) 504-000, fax: (36-26) 311-294

EUR 500 Place your ad here for

Advertise your event, job opening, funding

opportunity, campaign, workshop, seminar,

conference, exhibition, or anything else you

want to reach more than 20,000 environmental

professionals in Central and Eastern Europe.

Call us: (36-26) 504-000

E-mail: classified@greenhorizon.rec.org

Web: greenhorizon.rec.org

The Japan Special Fund of the

Regional Environmental Center for

Central and Eastern Europe (REC), established

in 1993, is a mechanism through which the

Government of Japan supports the REC in its

efforts to solve the environmental problems of

the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region.

In recent years the Japan Special Fund

has turned its major attention to climate

change, one of the most challenging

environmental issues of our generation.

Its aim in this field is to support the CEE

countries’ efforts to comply with the United

Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change and the Kyoto Protocol.

J A P A N S P E C I A L F U N D

Bridging East and East

EEA Monitor

The record floods that washed overCentral and Eastern Europe (CEE) in Aprilcame as no surprise. Just this past January,the European Environmental Agency(EEA) warned that climate change, andthe attendant problem of increasedextreme weather, will lead to morefloods, especially in central, northern andnortheastern Europe. One of the EU’snewest members, Slovenia, has takennotice of the warning, but more must bedone for the country to respond effective-ly the next time the rivers rise.

If the earth is reaching its “tippingpoint,“ Europe isn’t excluded. In MarchExecutive Director of the EuropeanEnvironment Agency (EEA) JacquelineMcGlade announced at the EuropeanParliament that some 100 destructivefloods caused about 700 fatalities and dis-placed half a million people between 1998and 2005. Floods during that period cost atleast EUR 25 billion and affected 1.5 per-cent of Europe’s population, McGlade said.

Deaths caused by storms are returninghumankind to prehistory, said LuckaKajfez Bogataj, a Slovenian bio-meteorol-ogist and a member of theIntergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange (IPCC).

The message is clear, Bogataj said:“Living in Europe is more dangerous thanin the past. We are more exposed to nat-ural disasters than in the past.“

Slovenia, a country of 2 million locat-ed at the convergence of the Alps and theMediterranean and Pannonian plains, hassuffered its share of recent floods. Thecountry must accept that climate changehas arrived and is more and more a local,

everyday experience. And it must act.Disasters are part of life — they

always have been and always will be,skeptics say. No matter what defenseshumankind may devise, there’s no escap-ing nature’s might, they argue. But surelythat’s no excuse not to do whatever pos-sible to minimise human and economicloss. Locally and globally the question isthe same: Is it possible to create a systemthat helps us understand, predict andrespond to catastrophic natural events?The answer is yes, at least according toJacqueline McGlade. Comprehensive,integrated and sustained infrastructure forobservation and early warning is a majorprecondition for a strong response toextreme weather, according to the EEA.

On the level of climate change pro-grammes, flood defenses, financial stabil-ity, forest fire monitoring, civil protectionand a wide range of European financialand legislative gauges, Slovenia is oftencited as a good example. But becauseextreme weather is driven by globalrather than local phenomena, integratedobservation and warning systems areneeded at the global, regional and locallevels, McGlade warned. She identifiedlong-term funding and global collabora-tion as key challenges for building thenecessary infrastructure.

Slovenia’s achievements against thesemeasures is less reassuring. Take, forexample, Slovenia’s meteorologicalrecords, which date from 1850. The coun-try collects the data, but it cannot share itbecause it hasn’t been standardised.

According to the EEA, divergentnational policies on the sharing of data

and information can also underminecapability. “We must rise above these dif-ferences if we are to build and sustain thebest possible capacity to observe theEarth and respond effectively to the threatof natural disasters that have no respectfor national boundaries,“ McGlade said.

Sasa Petejan is an environmental journalist basedin Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Storm busting takes timeGlobally integrated information systems a prerequisite for flood preparation

23 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

COLUMNS

Sasa

Pet

ejan

HOLY WATER: Early warningsystems could help protect naturaltreasures like Slovenia’s Lake Bled.

EC/E

PA P

HO

TO/A

NTO

NIO

BAT

COLUMNS

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 24

Mediation in MitteleuropaCourts not always the best place to solve environmental disputes

The citizens of Szentgal near the north-ern shore of Hungary’s Lake Balaton stillawait the resolution of a prolonged legalbattle over the establishment of a regionallandfill near their town. When the propos-al first surfaced, neighbouring settlementsjoined the town in opposition to the plan,but developers received several of thenecessary permits. It’s one of many exam-ples in Central and Eastern Europe inwhich the fate of an environmentally sig-nificant project will be settled by a judge.Environmental conflicts in the region tendto be resolved through the classical judicialor administrative review procedure, whilesimilar cases in Western Europe areincreasingly being settled through environ-mental mediation, a recent study proved.

The expansion of the Vienna airportprovides an example. A public presentationof the master plan in March 1998 triggeredcitizen protest and criticism from the media.

The conflict involved nearby commu-nities, the project developers, citizens’ ini-tiatives, local authorities, political parties,chambers of commerce and a multitudeof other interested parties. With no easyway to please all the antagonists, theVienna Airport sought the help of a pro-fessional mediator.

Five years later a package of legallybinding agreements was signed by some50 parties. The package set out obligationsand procedures to be followed during fur-ther developments of the airport, includingregulations for night flights, technicalmeasures for noise reduction, environ-mental impact assessment, and the estab-lishment of an environmental fund.

Kaidi Tingas, environmental mediationexpert at the REC, sees this case as proofthat mediation can settle even extremelycontroversial issues. Environmental media-tion is a consensus-oriented procedure

which strives for solutions acceptable toall, Tingas explained.

In 2004 the EnvironmentalManagement and Law Association (EMLA),a Hungarian advocacy group, attempted touse environmental mediation to solve theconflict in Szentgal. Although none of theparties favoured the approach, EMLA facil-itated a negotiation meeting in whichopposing sides had the opportunity to heareach other’s arguments and look for amutually acceptable solution.

The absence of the project developerundermined that effort, but at least oneimportant outcome was achieved:Hungary’s Ministry of Environment agreed

to conduct a new geological survey of thelandfill’s site based on information provid-ed by the project opponents.

The REC and the Austrian Society forEnvironment and Technology analysedcases of environmental conflict and com-pared the use of environmental mediationin Austria and Germany versus its applica-tion in CEE. The study, published in 2006,showed that in complicated environmentalcontroversies traditional forms of conflictresolution often prove ineffective, whileconsensus-oriented ones are more fruitful.

The Szentgal case in Hungary illus-trates the lack of confidence in the use ofmediation and other alternative methods tosolve environmental conflicts. But CEE haslearned its lessons, the study proved. Arecent ongoing mediation procedure inSlovenia gives hope for mediation’s futurein the region. The main objective of thecase is to find a community that will agreeto host a radioactive waste landfill.

Metka Kralj, a mediator for the Agencyfor Radwaste Management in Slovenia, hasprovided information to prospective com-munities about the project’s implications,collected feedback from interested partiesand helped local communities decidewhether to host the landfill. The candidatesites were subject to a pre-feasibility studyand further work is being carried out toidentify the landfill’s final location.

Dana Carmen Romanescu is a project managerin the REC’s Environmental Law Programme. Formore information, see <www.rec.org/REC/Programs/PublicParticipation/Mediation/Default.html>.

Legal Matters

◗

Dana

Car

men

Rom

anes

cu

TAKING OFF: Negotiations solved an impasseconcerning an expansion of Vienna’s airport.

VIEN

NA

AIR

POR

T

Pictures ofimprovementEnvironmental Snapshot of South Eastern Europe: REReP Country Profiles provides a follow-up to the first book produced under the Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme,Building a Better Environment for the Future of South Eastern Europe, published in 2001.Following the same structure, the new book gives updated country profiles showingsubstantial progress in environmental policy, legal and institutional reforms, regionalcooperation and relations with the European Union and international financial institutions.

The snapshot reflects the situation at the end of 2005, with information provided bynational environmental ministries.

Considerable input also came from experts at the Regional Environmental Center, whilecomments and feedback were given by the DG Environment of the European Commission.The EU Commissioner for Environment welcomed the volume as a tool for betterunderstanding of the environmental state of play and priorities of the countries of SouthEastern Europe.

The pdf version is available athttp://www.rec.org/REC/Programs/REREP/docs/rerep_country_profiles.pdf

Information Technology

COLUMNS

25 | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | green HORIZON

Jero

me

Sim

pson

Governance Goes DigitalInternet offers a way to widen public participation in decision making

In December 2005, DG Environmentlaunched an eight-week Internet consul-tation on measures to reach the EU’s goalof halting biodiversity loss by 2010. As afollow-up to a broad stakeholder reviewheld from 2004 to 2005, the process gavethe general public and experts an addi-tional opportunity to participate online.

The results showed agreement withthe 10 highlighted challenges (e.g. increas-ing “earmarked” funding) and responses(e.g. raising public awareness), not tomention a high level of satisfaction withthe online questionnaire. However, 9 per-cent complained the questionnaire gaveno opportunity to explain their responsesor suggest alternative challenges orresponses. In short, the survey offered astructured means of rubber-stamping theEC’s shortlisted priorities and fell short ofbeing a true two-way consultation.

UNESCO currently hosts an onlineconsultation, planning for the multi-stake-holder implementation of the action planof the World Summit on the InformationSociety. It invites reaction from globalstakeholders on various action lines andposts these online for others to read.Although it will take more time forUNESCO to analyse the results, it givesparticipants greater freedom of speech.

DG Environment and other politicalinstitutions increasingly use the Web tolisten to their constituents and discusspolitical initiatives and local develop-ments. However, it remains to be seenwhether online consultation represents anew paradigm for open governance.Some argue the use of information and

communication technologies (ICTs), par-ticularly the Internet, contributes to anincreasingly fragmented civil society char-acterised by lower voter turnout andindifference to government.

On the other hand, it may also be thecatalyst for a “new” civil society, as notedas early as 2004 by the EuropeanCommission’s (EC) Joint Research Centre.People use ICTs more and more in theireveryday lives and most civil societyorganisations use them. Online communi-ties flourish around countless topics notjust locally but inter-entity (e.g. inKosovo/a) and transnationally. TheInternet enables loosely organised anddecentralised forms of commitment andparticipation. It is informal, low key, easi-

ly accessible and carries fewer obligationsthan in the real world. So, as is argued byPippa Norris, Director of the DemocraticGovernance Group at the United NationsDevelopment Program (www.pippanor-ris.com), the transition to the Internetseems to be altering ways of doing things— like lobbying, communication andorganising — thereby subtly tipping thebalance of power and resources amongintermediary political actors.

Will online consultations replace otherforms of consultation? “No,” argues the ECat its interactive policy making web portalcalled “Your Voice in Europe”<europa.eu.int/yourvoice>. “This newform of consultation will be complementa-ry to the traditional forms of consultation,such as written responses to a White Paper.Online consultations add a new and impor-tant dimension, but are one of a range oftools … to increase stakeholders’ involve-ment in the policy-making process.”

The statistics from the online biodiver-sity consultation show that the Internethelps involve concerned stakeholders ofall ages in political initiatives, particularlythose who would not have had thechance to participate in the broadbasedstakeholder review. Secondly, the factthat 26 countries contributed is no smallfeat, including two accession countries.The only surprise was the absence ofEstonia. That Internet-besotted countryhas earned the nickname e-Estonia.

The Information Society is upon us! Yourfeedback and suggestions for inclusion arewelcome to: ITColumn@rec.org

Meeting the public online— EC biodiversity consultation

FACTS AND FIGURES

Responses: 1,469

Citizens (not organisations): 82%

National or local NGOs: 6%

Biodiversity activists: 69%

Evenly aged 18-55: 93%

Number not previously in the broad stakeholder review: 88%

Participating EU and accession countries: 26 Leading CEE countries (top 15): Bulgaria (9th),Czech Republic (12th) and Slovakia (13th)

C r e a t i v i t y . F l e x i b i l i t y . V a l u e

Who is moving your ideas? REC Publishing.

REC Publishing puts ideas in motion.Whether it’s hard copy or electronic,

long or short, simple or elaborate, our professional team will find the

right way to package your message.

w w w.rec.org/publishingTo put your ideas in motion, contact • REC Publishing •The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

Ady Endre ut 9-11 • 2000 Szentendre Tel: (36-26) 504-000 • Fax: (36-26) 311-294 • E-mail: publishing@rec.org

◗

Green Literature

COLUMNS

green HORIZON | JUNE-AUGUST 2006 | 26

Kris

tina

Vilim

aite

Renewable policies that workHandbook identifies 10 key features of effective instruments for change

Renewable Energy Policy andPolitics: A handbook fordecision-makingEdited by Karl Mallon. Earthscan, 2006. 268 pages.

This handbook makesgood bedside reading forpolicy makers not onlybecause it offers a deepunderstanding of theunderlying mechanismsfor a successful design of

renewable energy policies but alsobecause it is entertainingly written.

Mallon, the author of the first fivechapters, starts the book by showing thefailures of policies that intended to devel-op renewable energy, including putting“the dirty washing out for all to see,” as hewrites. Based on these errors, he suggests10 key features of successful renewableenergy policy. The author identifies anddescribes key stakeholders who are key towinning policy change. He then providesa model for effective engagement toachieve positive outcomes. The interplaybetween government, industry and socie-ty is discussed with insight into politicalcampaigning on energy. Then come inter-national case studies from the UK, the US,India, Spain, and Cambodia, and an exam-ination of photovoltaics in Germany.

“Used wisely, the intelligence broughttogether by the international authors in thisbook can unlock the full potential of ourrenewable resources,” said Corin Millais,CEO, European Wind Energy Association.

Targeting the EnvironmentalInvestment Challenge in SouthEastern EuropeWritten by Joanna Fiedler and Eniko Artim.REC, 2005. 310 pages.

This analysis ofpreparing environmentalinfrastructure projectsshould help public offi-cials and others throughthe myriad challengesthey inevitably face in thecontext of EU accession.

The book addresses commonlyencountered obstacles, best practices andthe particular investment challenges facedin carrying out such projects in theWestern Balkans.

It explains whom one shouldapproach for a grant or a loan and whatthe priority environmental investmentprojects are in the countries of the region.

The book is the final outcome of thesecond phase of the PriorityEnvironmental Investment Programme forSouth and Eastern Europe.

For a free-of-charge copy, in electron-ic or printed format, contact JoannaFiedler at <jfiedler@rec.org>.

Manual on Compliance with and Enforcementof Multilateral Environmental AgreementsUNEP. May 2006. 640 pages.

More than 700 international agreements have been maderelated to environmental issues, according to estimates. Thecountries that are party to those environmental treaties, con-ventions, protocols, and other multilateral environmentalagreements (MEAs) struggle to implement them with the lim-ited resources available.

This manual was developed as a tool supporting the effective and efficientimplementation of the MEAs. Treaty negotiators, politicians, lawyers, police, cus-toms officers, researchers, and legal drafters in governmental, non-governmental,academic, and professional institutions will find this publication useful.

In 2002 the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and severalother stakeholders developed guidelines on the subject. This freshly publishedmanual explains how to use the guidelines and provides case studies from spe-cific countries and examinations of specific MEAs.

◗

The Italian Trust Fund (ITF) is a targeted contribution to the Regional EnvironmentalCenter for Central and Eastern Europeby theMinistry for the Environment and Territory ofItaly. The ITF is committed to a sound environment in the region. From renewable

energy to sustainable agriculture, from climate change to hot spots, the ITF is a stepahead in supporting sustainable develop-ment in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). For more information on the ITF�s work and proj-ects in CEE visit www.rec.org/rec/programs/itf.

A Step AheadTHE ITALIAN TRUST FUND

The REC Conference Center sits in a peaceful, woodedground on the banks of the Danube in the historic town ofSzentendre in Hungary. The architect�s model of the recon-structed Conference building (above) will supplement thecenter�s energy load by the use of solar panels. The newREC building, together with many other projects, shows theITF�s dedication to energy effiency in the region.

C O U R S E F O R S U S T A I N A B I L I T YSTRATEGIES, METHODOLOGIES, POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

Ministry for the Environment and Territory

The Course for Sustainability aims to empower key governmentofficials in the target countries to create more sustainable policies and programmes. The project partners are pleased toannounce that there will be a fourth round of the Course, starting in October, 2006, and running until July, 2007.

Applications will be accepted from key government officials from Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia,Hungary, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia,Slovenia, and Turkey working in ministries and agencies competent for, and influential in, theintroduction of the various dimensions of sustainability into policy making and implementation

- including, but not limited to, environment, water, energy, health, regional development, transport, economy, interior and agriculture.

The deadline by which applications must besubmitted to the REC is August 1st, 2006.

For more information and an application form, please visit:

www.sustainablecee.net

• • •MINISTRY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND TERRITORY OF ITALY

VENICE INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

AGROINNOVA

CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY

COURSE IV - APPLICATION PROCESS NOW OPEN