Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation

FCGS Ekologiya

GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project

Russian FederationGEF Biodiversity

Conservation Project:Outcomes and Prospects

Brief Report on Project Outcomes:1997-2003

Moscow-2003

2

Russian Federation GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project: Outcomes and ProspectsMoscow, Publishing House of the Scientific and Training/Methodological Center, 2003, 48 pp.

The booklet covers the outcomes of the GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project in Russia -a major programme to conserve the wildlife and plant world implemented in the period from1997 to 2003 in the framework of our country's efforts to meet its commitments under theConvention on Biological Diversity.

The publication is intended for those involved in public administration in the area of envi-ronmental protection.

© GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project © FCGS Ekologiya© RF Ministry of Natural Resources© STMC

3

Implementation of the largest investmentproject of the Global Environmental Facility -the Biodiversity Conservation Project - is com-ing to an end in the Russian Federation. In1997-2003, under the direct coordination andsupervision of the MNR, about 750 wildlife pro-tection projects were financed; financial sup-port provided to 82 zapovedniks and 19national parks; the National and RegionalStrategies, and National Action Plan onBiodiversity Conservation were prepared andinitiated; and institutional framework estab-lished to improve the protection of the BaikalRegion ecosystem. The mere perception ofbiodiversity conservation has fundamentallychanged during the above period. Deputiesand CEO of various levels incorporate wildlifeprotection issues in environmental policy docu-ments, including the Environmental Doctrine ofthe Russian Federation (2002), and FederalTargeted Program on Ecology and NaturalResources (2002-2010). Project outcomeswere presented at the World Summit inJohannesburg (2002), Conference of theParties to the Convention on the BiologicalDiversity in Bratislava (1998), Hague (2002).Activities under the GEF BiodiversityConservation Project were approved at thesession of the Global Environmental Forum for

East European countries (Kishinev, 2003).Project materials and findings will be of interestto the participants of the World Park Congressin Durban (September, 2003). Russia is nowviewed in the world as a major "environmentaldonor". Project specialists and experts initiat-ed new financial and economic mechanisms ofnature protection; training aids and popularmaterials on various wildlife protection aspectswere published; the largest in Russia web-siteon biodiversity issues was established -www.biodat.ru. Throughout the whole imple-mentation period, the GEF Project has beenproviding information support of federal envi-ronmental management authorities.

Successful Project implementation is themerit of many people, above all, Project man-agers, consultants, specialists and experts,heads of several divisions and specialists of theMNR, regional Administrations and legislativeauthorities of the Irkutsk, Chita, NizhnyNovgorod and Volgograd Oblasts, Republic ofBuryatia and other regions. I extend my sinceregratitude to all of them. I hope that the com-pletion of the first decade of GEF activities inRussia will become the onset of a new, moreproductive stage of its involvement in biodiver-sity conservation in this country, and, there-fore, the whole planet.

A.M. Amirkhanov,

Project Director, GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project

Director, Department of Specially Protected Natural Areas and Sites andBiodiversity Conservation, Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation

4

Introduction

1. Peculiarities of Nature Protection in Russia in the First Half of 1990-s1.1 The State of Nature Protection System, Transition Challenges, the Need for

New Environmental Policy1.2. GEF Project Objectives and Implementation Arrangements

2. Maintenance, Strengthening and Development of the Unique Russian SPNANetwork

2.1. Strengthening the Institutional Capacity of SPNA Network Management inRussia

2.2. Strengthening the Administrative, Scientific and Methodological, Materialand Technical Capacity of Zapovedniks and National Parks

2.3. Development of Environmental Education Programs Aimed at BiodiversityConservation and Maintenance of Protected Areas in Russia

2.4. Support of Model Activities on the Conservation of Rare Species andUnique Ecosystems

3. Integration of Biodiversity Conservation Requirements in SocialDevelopment Priorities

3.1. National Biodiversity Conservation Strategy3.2. Developing the Principles of Partnership between the State, Business and

Public Community: Public Agreement3.3. Development and Implementation of Regional Strategies and Action Plans3.4. Development of the Strategy and Action Plan on Lake Baikal Biodiversity

Conservation3.5. Local Initiative Program in the Baikal Region

4. Expanding the Socioeconomic Framework of Wildlife Protection4.1. Strengthening and Using the Civil Society Potential for Biodiversity

Conservation4.2. Education Greening, Increasing Public Awareness of Biodiversity

Conservation4.3. Mechanisms and Institutes Facilitating Sustainability of Biodiversity

Conservation Results

5. Information Support of Biodiversity Conservation

6. Significance and Role of the GEF Project in Russia's Environmental Policy:Achievements and Innovations

7. Biodiversity Conservation Priorities in Russia: an Outlook for Future

Annex 1. Priority ActivitiesAnnex 2. Key Project Documents and MaterialsAnnex 3. Structure of Russian Counterpart Funding under the Project

in 1997-2003

Contents

5

66

7

10

11

12

14

16

18

1820

2021

23

2525

26

28

30

34

39

404648

Biodiversity Conservation Project, preparedand implemented in 1992-2003 by the RussianFederation with the assistance of GEF (throughthe World Bank) and Swiss Government(through the Russian WWF representative mis-sion), is among the largest and most successfulnature conservation projects in Europe.

The Project was implemented in the periodof fundamental political and socioeconomicreforms in Russia when the environmental man-agement system underwent several stages ofrestructuring. Nevertheless, the Projectachieved all major objectives in the preserva-tion and strengthening of basic nature protec-tion elements, development of modern biodi-versity conservation mechanisms in the 1/8-thpart of the Earth land territory.

The Project has no analogs in the scale ofpublic participation (over 110 thousand people)in practical activities on biodiversity conserva-tion and restoration, as well as cooperationamong major segments of the society.

The Project has no precedents in terms of theuse, strengthening and development of the avail-able national scientific and technical capacity.

An extensive data set on the state of biodi-versity in Russia was for the first time collected,processed and accumulated as part of Projectactivities. The data was made available to allspecialists and general public, and a mechanism

of participatory data replenishment and updat-ing - BioDat portal - was launched.

The Project has no precedents in the use ofmodern public information instruments toencourage the greening of public conscious-ness, and promote environmental activitiesamong various population groups, especiallythe youth.

Innovative approaches, instruments andmechanisms of biodiversity conservation weredeveloped, tested and recommended for dis-semination.

The aim of the present paper is to open themost important Project outcomes to the widerange of specialists and general public. Themain emphasis in the report is made on thedescription of globally relevant new approach-es and practical results of biodiversity conserva-tion in Russia. This brief report was prepared"hot on the track" of the Project, and has nopretensions to provide a complete and compre-hensive review of Project results, especially interms of its impact on institutional changes in theenvironmental management system that tookplace in 2000-2003. Such a review would bemore appropriate at a later stage, when theoutline of the ongoing administrative reform inRussia will become more explicit, and the sys-tem of public environmental management willstabilize.

Development of management plansCapacity building of protection servicesEstablishment of the information networkTender to award grants for researchModel school projectsThe March of ParksProtection of rare speciesSupport for post-graduate students and applicants

GEF ProjectInvestment in SpeciallyProtectedNatural Areasin Russia

Investmentsin US $

Areas with regional strategiesdeveloped for them

200

100

50

Investmenttargets

1.1 The State of Nature ProtectionSystem, Transition Challenges, theNeed for New EnvironmentalPolicy

The system of nature and biologicalresource protection in the former USSR was

adapted to the centralized management and

strict hierarchical structure of power. Despiteits obvious technocratic orientation and weak

public control, it had a number of positive qual-

ities, ensuring financing for biodiversity conser-vation in protected natural areas, maintenance

of the Red Book, regular inventory of commer-

cial fauna, forest and water biologicalresources, conservation of selection achieve-

ments in agriculture, support of scientific

research, etc.At the same time, the environmental policy

mostly relied on extensive approaches and

methods:

- extension of the specially protected natu-

ral area (SPNA) network (even with the lack of

proper financial support);- monitoring and maintenance of the Red

Book (with no serious attempts to eliminate the

factors of negative impact on disappearing floraand fauna species).

Changes in the political and economic

structure of the country in early 1990-s, growingsovereignty of the subjects of the Russian

Federation, decentralization of power have

seriously disturbed control and management ofbiodiversity conservation.

The Russian network of specially protected

natural areas was facing especially diffi-cult problems during this period.

With the economic crisis

and dramatic aggravation ofthe criminal situation, the

anthropogenic pressure

on zapovedniks and

Area of zapovedniks,'000 ha

Number ofnature reserves

(zapovedniks)

The Development of State Nature Reserves Networkduring the period from 1917 to 2003

national parks has increased and becomemore tangible, which drastically enhanced

the ever high professional risk and physical

hardships occurring in the struggle withpoaching and other environmental law

infringements. Highly insuff icient and

irregular financing of the Russian networkof zapovedniks and national parks in 1990-

s did not allow equipping the Guard

Service, even to the minimum, with mod-ern vehicles and communication means,

observation devices, high-quality field and

special outfit, uniforms, and establish apermanently operating common federal

system of guard upgrading.

Scientific units in all zapovedniks andnational parks (especially the latter given their

short period of existence) suffered from severe

shortage of modern technical devices, scientificequipment, computers, and even sufficient

funds for special literature and scientific trips,

which dramatically undermined the efficiencyand effectiveness of scientific activities. The lack

of funds almost suspended implementation of

international obligations on integrated back-ground monitoring in biosphere zapovedniks

included in the UNESCO international biosphere

reserve network; zapovedniks and nationalparks failed to use their capacity to develop a

Unified Public Environmental Monitoring

System.With rare exceptions, zapovedniks and

national parks failed to use their special capaci-

ties enabling to establish a unique educationalenvironment for the work with general public,

based on both the natural, historical and cultur-

al potential of these areas, and the availablestaff of qualified professionals.

Transfer to the social and economic diversi-

ty required new approaches to nature protec-tion. The society has come to realize the need

for a new environmental policy, adequate leg-

islative framework, new forms of governmentand public support of environmental activities,

including substantial institutional and organiza-

tional changes.In 1995-1996, the State Duma of the

Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation not

only ratified the Conservation of BiologicalDiversity but also adopted some fundamental

Laws: "On Specially Protected Natural Areas",

"On Fauna", "On the Environmental ExpertReview", "On Continental Offshore Areas of the

Russian Federation".

In 1992-1996, the Government of theRussian Federation made decisions on the

establishment of 23 new state zapovedniks with

the total area of 71 000 sq. km, 16 nationalparks with the total area of 31 000 sq. km, 4

new federal nature zakazniks with the total area

of 51 000 sq. km. The territory of other 12zapovedniks were expanded by 25 000 sq. km.

In 1995, the Federal Targeted Program on

the State Support of Zapovedniks and NationalParks for the period up to 2000 was approved

by the Presidential Decree.

The Integrated Federal Program on theProtection of Lake Baikal, and Federal Program

on the Protection of Amur Tiger were also

approved.

1.2. GEF Project Objectives andImplementation Arrangements

In 1992-1994, the Ministry of Environmental

Protection and Natural Resources of the RussianFederation, together with the International Bank

for Reconstruction and Development (the

Bank), developed the FrameworkEnvironmental Program of the Russian

Federation. The main idea of the Framework

Program was the use of globally accumulatedenvironmental policy experience, and coordi-

nated attraction of funds from international

organizations and foreign governments tofinance priority environmental projects.

At the Donor Conference held in the USA

(Washington) in April 1994, representatives ofinternational institutions and foreign states

(IBRD, Global Environmental Facility, European

Union, United Kingdom, Canada, Norway,USA, Finland, Switzerland) declared their com-

mitment to provide the Russian Federation with

loan and grant funds for the total amount ofabout $300 million.

7

A key element of the Framework Program

was the Biodiversity Conservation Project to befinanced by the GEF ($20.1 million), Swiss

Government ($1.1 million for he development

of environmental education and awareness pro-grams), as well as by the Russian side (at least

$4.8 million) through the financing of targeted

biodiversity conservation programs from thefederal budget, and federal, regional and local

environmental funds, as well as compensation of

mandatory taxes and charges.The Bank, as the GEF Implementing

Agency, provided the appraisal of the pro-

posed project, signing of the relevant GrantAgreement with the Russian Federation, and

routine project implementation supervision. In

compliance with the procedural requirementsunder the GEF "pilot stage", the Grant was

legally associated with the Bank Loan to the

Russian Federation for the implementation ofthe Environmental Management Project (EMP),

and included in the EMP as a separate compo-

nent. The major objective of the Project was to

assist the Russian Federation in maintaining the

adequate level of biodiversity based on sustain-able development principles while ensuring

enhanced biodiversity protection both within

and outside the protected areas in compliancewith Government obligations under the

Convention on the Biological Diversity.

The Project included four components:

А. Strategic Overview (13% of the totalamount) intended to provide a basis for the

strategic planning of biodiversity conservation

activities, and establish economic, financial,regulatory, and information mechanisms.

B. Protected Natural Areas (53% of the

total amount), intended to provide support ofthe Government Federal Program of SPNA

development and strengthening, as well as the

restructuring of institutions and mechanisms ofnature complex protection.

С. Baikal Regional Component (25% of the

total amount) was to demonstrate at the

regional level the levers of interagency andadministrative coordination required to inte-

grate biodiversity conservation in the sustain-

able socioeconomic development policy.D. Project Management and Coordination

(9% of the total amount).

The Grant Agreement between the Russian

Federation and the Bank was signed on

September 29, 1996, and became effective onNovember 27, 1996.

By Resolution of the Government of the

Russian Federation No.1130, dated September23, 1996, control of the targeted use of the

Grant funds was vested on the State Committee

of the Russian Federation on EnvironmentalProtection (hereinafter "the SCEP").

Current Project administration was vested

on the Independent Non-Commercial Agency"Center for International Technical Assistance

Project Preparation and Implementation" (here-

inafter "the CPPI"), where a project subdivision- Biodiversity Conservation Unit headed by the

Project Manager - was established.

The Supervisory Committee was estab-lished to provide overall Project supervision,

which included the heads of Departments corre-

sponding to respective Project componentsfrom the SCEP, Federal Forestry Service of the

Russian Federation (FFS), representatives of RF

Academy of Sciences, and nongovernmentalorganizations.

A similar Baikal Supervisory Committee

(BSC) was created to provide the BaikalComponent management. Both Committees

were established during the startup period, and

consisted, on a parity basis, of representativesof the government authorities, scientific com-

munity, and nongovernmental organizations.

Officials of the Buryat Republic Government,Irkutsk and Chita Oblast Administrations, and

respective SCEP (later the MNR) regional

authorities were included in the BSC ex officio.Scientific communities and NGOs from each sub-

ject of the Federation were represented in the

8

BSC on a rotational basis. Administration of the

BSC was entrusted to the SCEP, and later to its

legal successor - the Ministry of NaturalResources (MNR). Figure 1 presents the over-

all Project management diagram.

A.M. Amirkhanov, Deputy Chairman of theSCEP, was appointed the Project Director by

the SCEP decision (later a similar decision was

made by the MNR). Heads of specialized envi-ronmental agency departments, Messrs. V.Yu.

Ilyashenko, V.B. Stepanitsky and V.D.

Brovchak, ex officio were appointed the

Directors of the three Project Components. In

the Baikal Region, in addition to the ComponentDirector who represented the federal-level

interests, Project implementation was moni-

tored by three Regional Component Directors:V.E. Gulgonov in Buryatia, A.V. Vasyanovich

and later M.V. Kadnikov in the Irkutsk Oblast,

and V.F. Senotrusov and later K.I. Karasev inthe Chita Oblast.

9

Project ManagementDiagram

Science

As of the time of Project development, Russia

had about 15 thousand Specially Protected Natural

Areas (SPNA) of various status and rank with thetotal area exceeding 130 million ha (about 8% of

the Russian territory). State nature zapovedniks

and national parks represent the core of the feder-al SPNA network, and it is these areas that were to

be maintained and developed under Component

B - the largest Project component in terms offinancing (over one half of the Project cost).

Despite the complex structure of the

Component, its activities fitted into two majorareas:

- Support the SPNA network, and

enhance its significance in the civil society;- Support and develop major areas of SPNA

activities: protection of natural complexes and

objects, scientific research, environmental edu-cation and awareness through the implementa-

tion of model projects

The validity of prioritization is confirmed by

the fact that during the life of the Project the

SPNA network not only did not reduce but con-siderably increased in number and territory,

despite the economic difficulties the country

was facing. In early 1996, there were 93zapovedniks with the total area of 30.1 million

ha while as of January 1, 2002 their number

grew up to 100, and the area - to 33.712 millionha, including the inland territory with internal

water bodies equal to 27.211 million ha, which

makes up almost 1.6% of the total territory ofthe Russian Federation. The hundredth

zapovednik (Erzi) was established in 2000 in the

Republic of Ingushetiya. In 1996, there were 30national parks in the Russian Federation with the

total area of 6.6 million ha while at present their

number amounted to 35 with the total area ofabout 7 million ha, which makes up 0.4% of the

Russian territory.

10

Structure of the PAs system in Russia

Regional special-purpose reserves (zakazniks)

Other federal PAs

Federal monu-ments of nature

Federal zakazniks

National parksZapovedniks (marine)

Zapovedniks (terrestrial)Local PAs Other regional

PAs

Regional monu-ments of nature

Regional parks

2.1. Strengthening the Instituti-onal Capacity of SPNA NetworkManagement in Russia

GEF Project activities on the institutionalsupport of public authorities facilitated the

establishment of a qualitatively new regulatory

and legal framework of the SPNA system func-tioning, which allowed to:

- establish strict administrative responsi-

bility for any violations of the protectionregime;

- provide zapovednik guard services

with considerable authority to implement con-trol and inspection functions;

- enable zapovedniks to independently

dispose of penalties and claim amounts recov-ered by violators;

- reorganize the Zapovednik Guard

Service, which earlier had the status of theagency-based Forest Guard, into the

Specialized State Inspection.

Holding of annual meetings of federal SPNAmanagers was one of the most important and

successful forms of public governance support.

For the first time in the history of nature protec-tion in Russia all participants were able to feel as

members of a single system, since before such

meetings were introduced many SPNA man-agers had not even known each other. The

meetings encouraged dissemination of experi-

ence and techniques in all aspects of zapoved-nik activities, they annually discussed the find-

ings and results of various model projects. One

of the meetings, held in November 2002 inKrasnaya Polyana, discussed and adopted

Major Areas of Development and Organization

of State Natural Zapovednik Activities in theRussian Federation for the Period up to 2010.

The Project supported implementation of

regular comprehensive inspections in zapoved-niks and national parks. Leading specialists

from the SCEP Department of Zapovedniks, and

invited experts (RASD scientists, NGO repre-sentatives) performed 84 inspection trips to 38

zapovedniks and 10 national parks.

The assignment on the support of regionaland horizontal relationships between SPNA of

various levels also provided substantive results.

8 new Associations of Zapovedniks and

National Parks were established, which organ-

ized 34 regional workshops on coordination ofscientific research, improvements of environ-

mental education, and strengthening of guard

services; the workshops were attended byover 1000 people.

Establishment of the Oryol-Bryansk-Kaluga

Regional SPNA Directorate at the Oblast level,and Taldom SPNA Directorate at the district

level are the examples of innovative decisions

demonstrating a strong potential for improvingthe SPNA efficiency through joined efforts and

resource saving. Establishment of regional

directorates can play a catalytic role to encour-age greater involvement of local governments

in the SPNA network functioning and develop-

ment. For example, an active coordinating roleof the Regional Directorate facilitated the sign-

ing of the Agreement on Interregional

Cooperation to develop specially protectednatural areas in the three Oblasts; decisions of

the Bryansk, Oryol and Kaluga Oblast

Administrations were prepared on the estab-lishment and expansion of protected zones for

the Bryansky Les and Kaluzhskiye Zaseki

zapovedniks, Urga and Orlovskoye Polesyenational parks, which has led to the formation of

a single natural complex.

The project on Establishing the Local SPNAAdministration in the Northern Part of the

Moscow Oblast was supported as another

11

Increasing number of regional PA associations

option to improve SPNA management at the

regional and local levels, and dissemination of

lessons learned. In 1999 the Moscow OblastEnvironmental Committee established the

Taldom SPNA Administration in the northern

part of the Moscow Oblast to ensure protectionof the Zhuravlinaya Rodina natural complex

where over 11 SPNA were established

(zakazniks, monuments of nature, forest sec-tions).

Results of these administrative experiments

demonstrated the importance of continuing toseek new approaches to coordinated manage-

ment of SPNA of different levels, and develop-

ment of ecological networks.

2.2. Strengthening the Admini-strative, Scientific and Methodo-logical, Material and TechnicalCapacity of Zapovedniks andNational Parks

39 model projects on strengthening SPNAguard services were implemented under the

Project for the amount of $40 to $100 thousand

in 35 state natural zapovedniks and 3 nationalparks. Project participants included:

7 SPNA - objects of World Natural

Heritage; 10 SPNA - international biosphere reserves;

7 SPNA referred to wetlands of internation-

al importance under the Ramsar Convention; 2 SPNA included in the list of international

transboundary SPNA.

The territory protected by inspection serv-ices of zapovedniks and national parks (includ-

ing the SPNAs, their protected zones and natu-

ral zakazniks and monuments of nature assignedto SPNA) that participated in these projects

makes up about 14 million ha, which enables to

judge on the scope of the activity.Major resources under Component B (over

88%) were used to procure goods required to

support and directly implement the protectionof natural complexes. As a result, zapovedniks

and national parks were able to replace the fleet

of motor and water transport vehicles, procure

fuel and spare parts for machinery, uniforms,

special clothing and field equipment required for

inspection services to perform their protectionfunctions. The Grant funds were also used to

procure communication means, computers, and

office equipment. New possibilities offered to inspection serv-

ices quickly manifested themselves in their per-

formance. Some zapovedniks and nationalparks increased the number of revealed viola-

tions of the established protection regime.

Procurement of new machinery enabled toextend the period of staying in the field, and

increase protection coverage. The use of video

and photo devices allowed to increase the per-centage of detected violations, and reduce the

level of fraud when drawing up protocols.

Five-year management plans were estab-lished in two zapovedniks and 5 national parks

based on a fundamentally new approach to

work planning. The plans were developed byzapovedniks (national parks), their administra-

tion and staff actively participating in the

process and involving a wide range of expertsand consultants from among the professionals

and specialists from other SPNA. As a result,

the responsibility for the final outcome in theform of the prepared management plan, and,

most importantly, its implementation was vest-

ed on the zapovednik (park) actively assistedby the respective regional executive authority.

A key issue for the organization of protec-

tion activities is the regional planning that shouldprovide for the optimization of the SPNA area

and boundaries, schemes of functional zoning,

boundaries and peculiarities of the protectionregime and the use of individual functional zones

and their sections, as well as the establishment

of protected zones.For example, the management plan of the

Caucasus State Biosphere Zapovednik envis-

aged expansion of the territory through addingnew sections in two ways. First, by adding new

sections with the subsequent extension of the

strict protection regime to their territory (pro-tection core). Second, by adding new sections

with the established biosphere test-site regime

meaning the possibility to implement limited

12

economic activities with a view to test and

introduce methods of sustainable nature useimposing no destructive environmental impact.

In the course of developing the manage-

ment plan of the Kerzhensky State NatureZapovednik, the Environmental Security

Council of the Nizhny Novgorod Oblast

Administration prepared and approved thedecision to reorganize the Kerzhensky

zapovednik into a biosphere one, and establish

the Nizhny Novgorod Zavolzhsky BiosphereComplex on its basis.

The management plan of the Kenozersky

National Park provided for the establishmentof zakazniks along the Park boundaries in the

Plesetsky and Kargopolsy Districts following

the recommendations of the Karelia ScientificCenter of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Implementation of the program is the first

step to expand the Park territory up to 250thousand ha.

The Project provided substantial support of

scientific research in zapovedniks and nationalparks. 62 projects were aimed at supporting

scientific research in 41 zapovedniks and 9

national parks.A major outcome of the activity is that the

Project managed to support the efforts and ini-

tiatives of zapovednik teams in generalizing andanalyzing scientific materials accumulated dur-

ing the decades of SPNA network existence.

Scientific grants enabled to improve the materi-al and technical base of SPNA scientific units,

procure office and scientific equipment, publish

over 30 scientific monographs, and prepareover 500 publications in regional, national and

foreign periodical editions.

Scientific grants have become a sustainablesource of zapovedniks' own resources; budget

financing of scientific research was increased.

For the first time in the history of zapoved-niks in Russia, targeted funds for scientific

research were allocated on a competitive basis.

Thanks to the Project, the majority of scientificteams got access to computer facilities, which

are an indispensable part of zapovednik per-

formance today. This increased the competi-tiveness of SPNA scientific teams, and facilitated

their adaptation to the requirements of modern

scientific community.The Project made an important contribution

to the zapovednik science through opening a

possibility to attract high class specialists fromvarious academic and sectoral scientific institu-

tions and universities to zapovedniks and

national parks. The number of specialists fromvarious scientific research institutions working at

zapovedniks and national parks was gradually

growing, and by 2000 amounted to 1560 peo-ple, which is almost twice as many as in 1996.

13

The Kerzhensky Zapovednik Zoning as ofthe period of preparing the documents toaward it the status of a biosphere reserve

Long-term zoning of the Nizhegorodsky ZavolzhskyBiosphere Integrated Reserve

- Core Area

- Buffer Area

- Transition Area

- Monuments of Nature

- Kerzhensky zakaznik

- Core Area

- Buffer Area

- Transition Area

- Monuments of Nature

- Kerzhensky zakaznik

2.3. Development of Environmen-tal Education Programs Aimed atBiodiversity Conservation andMaintenance of Protected Areas inRussia

SPNA-based environmental education of

schoolchildren is currently viewed as one of themost efficient ways to enhance public support

of zapovedniks and national parks, and address

the challenges of communication with the socialenvironment. Model school projects were

designed to implement school environmental

education programs on the basis of zapoved-niks and national parks, and create enabling

conditions for the environmental and ecological

education of schoolchildren through contactswith nature. Educational activities for school-

children were implemented through environ-

mental camps, lectures, circles, guide trainingcourses, expeditions, and excursions. 156990

schoolchildren participated in such projects dur-

ing five years. (For comparison: 1578 in 1997,

and 73431 in 2001).The Project helped provide the fundamen-

tals of environmental education, and tourist

infrastructure in model territories, and initiatedestablishment of a network of visit centers and

other information/education facilities. Financial

resources invested in the material and technicalbase made up about $750 thousand, or 75% of

the total amount spent on model school proj-

ects. Visit centers include demonstration expo-sitions on the SPNA nature and culture, training

classes, research laboratories, halls for visitors

equipped with adequate facilities for video andphoto presentations. As of the date of this

report, 15 SPNA have been working on the

establishment of 22 visit centers. About 80 000 people visited these centers

since the beginning of Project implementation.

Ecological paths were designed and estab-lished under the Project in Baikalsky, Bryansky

Les, Voronezhsky, Kaluzhskiye Zaseki,

Katunsky, Kostomukshsky, Pasvik, Pinezhsky,Sayano-Shushensky, and Shulgan-Tash

zapovedniks, and Vodlozersky, Kenozersky,

and Meshchera national parks. On the average,there are 487 km of ecological paths and routes

(consisting of 4 paths) established during the 5

years of Project implementation. Over 70% ofthese are pedestrian paths; others are intended

for travel by water, on horseback, and by car.

Over 47 400 tourists visited these ecologi-cal paths during 5 years. The number of visitors

increased by 44 times, as compared to the first

Project implementation year.An integrated environmental education and

information/scientific center was established on

the basis of the museum in the Teberdinskyzapovednik, which attracted additional attention

of the local government to ecotourism develop-

ment in Karachaevo-Cherkessia. TheGovernment of the Karachaevo-Cherkess

Republic issued resolution "On the Program of

Developing Environmental Education andEcological Tourism on the Basis of the

Teberdinsky Zapovednik".

Number of Visitors in the Visit-Centres

Number of tourists visiting the ecological trails

Activities under Component B were cov-

ered by local and regional, as well as central

and international media. 388 papers, 99 TVprograms, 45 radio presentations were pre-

pared in three languages (Russian, Bashkir,

Finnish). Publications included: 60 issues of theZapovedny Vestnik newspaper, 10 issues of

scientific notes Zapovednoye Delo, 18 issues of

Newsletter Zapovedniki i Natsionalnye Parki,books, methodological guidelines on environ-

mental education and guard service, 10 collect-

ed papers, and monographs.A TV group was established and equipped

on the basis of the Bryansky Les zapovednik; TV

series on the Wild Nature was made, which isshown on 10 regional TV channels.

Establishment and successful operation of

the Zapovedniki Environmental EducationCenter was an important contribution to the

Project implementation. The Center is support-

ed from the grant from the Swiss Governmentprovided through the Russian WWF office. The

Swiss Grant was provided in 1996 -2002 in the

amount exceeding $1.2 million.

The Center developed methodologicalbasis for environmental education activities in

specially protected natural areas. Concept

Paper on environmental education activities ofstate natural zapovedniks and national parks of

the Russian Federation was developed, which

was approved by the FFS and SCEP in 1998 andis being implemented within the SPNA network.

In addition, over 50 textbooks, methodological

guidelines, brochures, and booklets weredeveloped and published. All materials were

disseminated among the Russian SPNA, and

government environmental agencies.The system of training in environmental

education activities in SPNA was developed and

has been operational since 1996. Over 200

specialists from 127 zapovedniks and national

parks were trained at professional upgradingcourses (government license for educational

activities No. Г696868, issued in 1997). The

courses' curriculum was officially approved bythe SCEP. After attending the courses, the

specialists get official state certificates. In addi-

tion to Russian specialists, the Center providestraining to the staff of zapovedniks and national

parks from Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz

Republic, UzbekistanIn addition to courses, the Center organ-

izes regular workshop on various areas of

SPNA activities: training, roundtables,exchange of experience, and study tours to

Russian SPNA, inter alia, for foreign special-

ists. Over 500 various specialists from SPNA,as well as representatives of regional envi-

ronmental authorities, teachers cooperating

with SPNA, etc. participated in the Center'straining programs.

The Center initiated establishment of public

centers, foundations, clubs and other associa-

tions to develop public support of SPNA; a net-work was established consisting of 40 such

branches operating at zapovedniks and nation-

al parks in various regions of Russia. These non-governmental organizations are making increas-

ingly significant contribution to environmental

education efforts, and cooperation of SPNAwith the local population.

The Zapovedniki Center developed a

model Program of environmental education andecotourism development in the Teberdinsky

zapovednik. The Program was approved by

the Government of the Karachaevo-CherkessRepublic, and disseminated among all zapoved-

niks and national parks in Russia.

15

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TotalUsed 335 290 256 169 97,4 42,7 18,5 1208,6

Project co-financing from the Swiss Grant, USD thousand

The following programs were implemented

with a view to promote zapovednik activities inRussia, and biodiversity conservation ideas:

Traveling photo exhibition "The World of

Russian Protected Nature" was established, andis regularly updated.

With the assistance of the Komsomolskaya

Pradva newspaper, the all-Russian competition"Zapovednoye Ekho" for regional media is con-

ducted on an annual basis, as well as other

activities aimed at attracting attention to SPNAoperations. Regional and district newspaper

that took part in the competition represent

almost all Russian regions; the total number ofarticles by regional journalists dealing with pro-

tected areas as reviewed during 5 years

exceeds 12 000. Monthly environmental education newspa-

per Zapovednye Ostrova dealing with protect-

ed areas is being issued during 6 years (3 thou-sand copies).

Server WildNet - zapovednik data network

on http://www.wildnet.ru presents data on allzapovedniks and national parks in Russia.

The Zapovedniki EcoCenter initiated, and

supports youth movement Friends of SecretIslands. The First all-Russian rally of the Friends

was held in September 2001 in Moscow on

Vorobyevy Gory, and was attended by over400 movement participants representing 22

Russian regions and Moscow.

The Volunteer Program is underway, whichencourages formation of voluntary assistant

groups consisting of university students and

schoolchildren performing field works inzapovedniks and national parks.

Environmental education program

Zapovedniks in Moscow for schoolchildren isbeing implemented since early 2000. The pro-

gram is supported by Moscow City

Government agencies: Education Committee,Department on Nature Use and Environmental

Protection, Committee for Family and Youth

Affairs, etc.

The Zapovedniki Center continues to oper-

ate on a sustainable basis assisting zapovedniksand national parks in their efforts to increase the

awareness of the Russian society of the role and

importance of protected areas in biodiversityconservation. The Center receives financial

support from Moscow City Government,

Institute for Sustainable Communities, USAgency for International Development, Mott

Foundation, Dutch Embassy, Federal

Environmental Fund, US Fish and WildlifeService, IUCN, UNDP, Association of Bavaria

Forest National Park Friends, Van Melle AG

company, and others.

2.4. Support of Model Activities onthe Conservation of Rare Speciesand Unique Ecosystems

Operational SPNA systems supporting bio-

logical diversity at the species and ecosystemlevel were established in several model regions

under the GEF Project. Some projects were

aimed at improving methodologies of regionalnature protection, and their dissemination

among specialists.

The following regions were selected asmodel territories in terms of establishing pro-

tected area systems (environmental networks)

to preserve full value biota within the geo-graphic region: Mountain Altay (Altay

Republic), South-Western Russia (Central Black

Soil Region), Russian Valley Center, and Volga-Urals Region. Strong or critical fragmentation of

natural landscapes in the majority of RF subjects

located in these regions, and existence ofunique natural areas provided rationale for the

selection.

Draft Environmental Framework of theRussian Valley Center was developed, which

includes annotated list of key protected natural

areas with the required transit and buffer zones,and the list of existing SPNA. Environmental

condition assessment was performed in over

16

200 key natural areas, including SPNA of region-

al importance; 89 key natural areas of various

importance were identified. Proposals wereprepared (draft proposals and passports, envi-

ronmental justification, cartographic materials,

etc.) on the establishment of 109 new SPNA ofdifferent level with a view to preserve the

known and newly identified key natural areas.

Draft documents on the protection of key natu-ral areas were submitted for agreement to envi-

ronmental authorities and other concerned

agencies. Establishment of 26 new SPNA wasagreed with district administrations or land

users; new zakazniks (Forest Tract Obolensky

Les and Kablukovo) were established in theVladimir Oblast.

Draft Environmental Framework of the

Volga-Urals Region was developed, as wellas the annotated list of 942 known and newly

identified valuable natural areas and objects,

including SPNA, which was used as a basis toidentify key protected natural areas. An

annotated list of 44 transit areas was estab-

lished; field trips to monitor compliance withthe environmental legislation were imple-

mented within 10 key protected areas, includ-

ing some SPNA. Proposals were prepared(draft proposals and passports, environmen-

tal justification, cartographic materials, etc.)

on the establishment of 6 new large SPNAwith a view to preserve the known and newly

identified key natural areas. Draft documents

on the protection of key natural areas weresubmitted for agreement to environmental

authorities and other concerned agencies.

Regional and local governments demonstrat-ed willingness to co-finance project activities.

Important methodological and practical

results were obtained under several modelprojects on Biodiversity Restoration.

Ecosystem restoration is among the most

complicated tasks of wildlife protection. Theissue is most urgent in regions with strong and

critical fragmentation of the natural framework.

As part of the Project, the Central Black Soil

state biosphere zapovednik restored the native

condition of black soil steppe sections. Thearea of the Black Soil zapovednik was signifi-

cantly expanded during the Project (by 861.4

ha), protection, studying and restoration of thenatural steppe flora and fauna being initiated in

new sections.

Model task on reintroduction of specieswith disappeared wild populations was

addressed based on the example of free-living

aurochs populations. As a result of the Taskimplementation, draft national Strategy of

aurochs conservation in Russia was developed,

which was taken as a basis for further activitiesby the Russian aurochs and bison group. A

free-living aurochs population (60 heads) was

established on the basis of the OrlovskoyePolesye national park.

Model task on the support of natural popu-

lations through nursery-based breeding of rarespecies (Far East cranes) was performed by the

Khingan state natural zapovednik. Station for

rare bird species reintroduction was re-equipped; several hatches of crane chicks were

grown and released. Observations showed a

stable increase in the number of breeding pairsreturning to the zapovednik after winter, which

evidences to the success of the experiment.

Works are underway to breed other birdspecies (Far East stork, black stork, whooper

swan, mandarin duck).

Conservation of wild ancestors of domesticanimals based on traditions nature use was test-

ed by the Shulgan-Tash state natural zapoved-

nik that implemented the model task on assist-ing the stabilization of wild honey bees in the

Republic of Bashkortostan. As a result, a stable

population of wild-hive honey bee was estab-lished; the number of bee families in wild-hives

in 1999-2000 was the highest throughout the

whole period of zapovednik existence, and themonitored habitat of wild-hive bees increased

4-fold.

17

3.1. National Biodiversity Conser-vation Strategy

Prioritization of the national policy and

development of the National Biodiversity

Conservation Strategy (hereinafter "theStrategy") was one of the most important

Project outcome. As part of Strategy prepara-

tion, special analytical studies were performed,some of them having their own separate impor-

tance:

- survey and analysis of the attitude ofvarious social and population groups to biodi-

versity issues, which identified a relatively low

awareness of wildlife protection problems;

- identification of the most significant

socioeconomic problems (poverty reduction,resource orientation of the economy, domestic

business interests, inadequate tax policy, etc.)

affecting biodiversity conservation;- review of positive biodiversity conser-

vation experience in forestry, agriculture, hunt-

ing and fishery, protection and use of freshwa-ter ecosystems, flora and vegetation cover,

rare species protection, etc.

The system of interagency coordinationand interaction between government authori-

ties and other agencies concerned with wildlife

protection was established during the prepara-tion of the Strategy and Action Plan. The

Interagency Commission (IAC) on Biodiversity

was the leading government agency at the firststage of the work. Subsequently, the leader-

ship was taken over by the Strategy

Coordination Group, which included specialistsfrom the SCEP Department of Biodiversity

Conservation, Ministry of Science, FFS, Ministry

of Agriculture, GEF Project PIU, RAC, and otheragencies. In addition to traditional part-

ners, Strategy preparation also

involved the Ministry of Defense, StateCommittee for Land Resources,

Federal Frontier Service, Customs

Committee, Ministry of Culture,Ministry of Education, and representa-

tives of various religious organizations.

The Strategy was discussedthrough a wide dissemination of mate-

rials, and collection of proposals from

all concerned sectors of the civil socie-ty. Strategy papers were repeatedly

sent for comments and proposals to

various agencies, NGO, major busi-

18

Cover pages ofbasic Component

A documents: the Strategy,

National ReportAction Plan (p.19)

ness structures, scientific institutions. The State

Duma discussed the draft Strategy twice (bythe Higher Environmental Council, and during

the roundtable at the Environmental

Committee). An online electronic conferenceand discussion were also held.

The National Strategy, and major directions

of the Action Plan on Biodiversity Conservationin Russia were approved by the National Forum

on Wildlife Conservation in Russia in June 2001.

The Forum was attended by over 230 partici-pants from various sectors of the society: aca-

demic and university scientists, representatives

of legislative and executive authorities, busi-ness community and military forces, environ-

mental nongovernmental organizations and

foundations, creative unions, mass media.The Strategy as approved by the 2001

Forum is viewed as an aggregate of expertly

identified priority wildlife conservation activitiesof government, commercial, scientific and pub-

lic organizations. The adopted paper has a sta-

tus of a framework document for the wholeRussian society. Each sector or group of the

society - be it the state, business, nongovern-

mental organizations, church, creative unions orindividuals - may check their actions, program

documents and activities with the Strategy. In

doing so, they may refer to the Strategy provi-sions relevant to the interests and terms of ref-

erence of each participant. The Strategy was

officially submitted to the Russian Government,major ministries and agencies, heads of adminis-

trations of the RF subjects, sectoral committees

of the State Duma, regional environmentalauthorities, major business structures, non-

governmental organizations.

The National Strategy of BiodiversityConservation in Russia was presented to the

Conference of the Parties to the Convention on

the Biological Diversity (Hague, April 2002) as amajor confirmation of Russia's compliance with

its obligations under Article 6 of the

Convention. Strategy provisions on the need to estab-

lish partnership between the countries for

wildlife conservation purposes, and on theimportance of economic and financial evaluation

of the contribution of Russian natural ecosys-

tems in maintaining the global sustainability

were included in the National Report of theRussian Federation on the fulfillment of the XXI

Century Agenda, and formed the basis of the

Russian position at the Rio +10 Summit inJohannesburg (September 2002).

The Strategy formed the basis for the

National Action Plan on BiodiversityConservation, which was elaborated according

to the rules and procedures recommended by

the Russian Government for the preparation ofdraft Federal Targeted Programs, and repre-

sents a portfolio of project proposals (currently

about 1500 activities) to be implemented in thefield, by various agencies, companies and

NGO. The Action Plan portfolio is used by the

Russian Government, various agencies andregions to prepare respective programs. For

example, when working on the Federal

Targeted Program on the Ecology and NaturalResources (2002-2010), it was used to develop

three subprograms: on the conservation of rare

flora and fauna species, specially protected nat-ural areas, and Lake Baikal protection. The

same sets of project proposals are used as a

source of factual data during in bilateral negoti-ations on environmental cooperation, for exam-

ple, with Germany and Japan, as well as in the

preparation of specialized environmental actionplans, for example, the Peatbog Plan. Thus, the

National Action Plan orientation towards com-

plementary funding sources and counterpartfinancing is implemented.

The Strategy and Action Plan were pub-

lished in Russian and English in 2001; their texts,as those of many other

official documents pre-

pared under the Projectare available on

www.biodat.ru and the

site of the Secretariatof the Convention on

Biological Diversity -

www.biodiver.org.

3.2. Developing the Principles ofPartnership between the State,Business and Public Community:Public Agreement

Given the great interest of various society

sectors in the National Strategy, the concept of

environmental partnership was adopted as akey approach to its implementation. The con-

cept was realized in the form of the Public

Agreement on Wildlife Conservation in Russia -an agreement open to all layers of the society:

government authorities, producers associa-

tions, civil society structures concerned aboutthe conservation of national wildlife.

Major ideas of the Public Agreement on

Wildlife Conservation in Russia were submittedand discussed at the First National Biodiversity

Forum (May 30-31, 1999), and the Second All-

Russian Nature Protection Congress (June 2-6,1999, Saratov) where the issues of biodiversity

conservations were addressed by a separate

session (about 100 participants). The impor-tance of the Strategy and Public Agreement

was stated in the Resolution of the Congress.

Presentation of the Public Agreement was

combined with the Congress with a view tomaximize the use of mass media coverage iner-

tia to bring the notions of "biodiversity",

"wildlife", and "National Strategy" to the atten-tion of those public groups who, actually defin-

ing the state of biodiversity, remained organi-

zationally excluded from participation in wildlifeprotection. At the initial stage (from June

through November 1999), the campaign facili-

tated 23 demonstrative signings of Protocols ofaccession to the Pubic Agreement on Wildlife

Conservation at various administrative and sec-

toral levels. The process involved: administra-tions of RF subjects, individual districts and

cities (Pskov and Volgograd Oblasts, etc.),

regional environmental authorities, large indus-trial companies (Siberian Aluminum, East

Siberian Railway, Irkutskenergo, etc.) and their

associations, educational institutions, scientificresearch institutes, political associations, etc.

3.3. Development and Implemen-tation of Regional Strategies andAction Plans

The model of regional biodiversity conser-

vation strategy was developed and implement-ed under the Strategic Component. Nizhny

Novgorod Oblast was selected as a model

region where in 1998-2000 the BiodiversityConservation Strategy and detailed Action Plan

on Wildlife Conservation were developed and

-Kerzhensky State NatureReserve-Planned biosphere naturereserve

ZAKAZNIKS:

-integrated

-ornithological

-game management

-planned integrated

-monuments of nature

approved by the Oblast Administration. Other

activities included the drafting of legislativedocuments, plans of developing the regional

SPNA network, preparation of the Red Book of

the Nizhny Novgorod Oblast for publication,proposals on new forms of inter-sector coordi-

nation of biodiversity conservation.

Nizhny Novgorod model results wereadapted and replicated (to a varying extent and

in different forms) in other Russian Oblasts and

regions. For example, in the Volgograd Oblast,the Legislative Assembly adopted the

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action

Plan, a series of Oblast laws were drafted, workinitiated on the establishment of new SPNA,

large actions implemented on environmental

education and awareness. In Penza, Saratov, Vologda Oblasts,

Republics of Yakutia and Northern Ossetia, as

well as in other regions regional BiodiversityConservation Strategies and Action Plans pro-

vided the basis for regional targeted programs.

Some regions generated experience in thepreparation of Red Books, development of

regional environmental networks, use of local-

budget funds to support wildlife protection.Voronezh, Yaroslavl, Lipetsk, Tomsk, Moscow,

Kaliningrad Oblasts, Krasnoyarsky Kray and

other regions initiated economic evaluation ofthe regional nature capital and its integration in

the regional wealth, which allows justification of

alternative options of biodiversity and ecosys-tem use, development of ecotourism and envi-

ronmentally oriented business.

As a result, some 20 regions joined theprocess of preparing regional Biodiversity

Conservation Action Plans, which was viewed

as the first stage of the National Action Planimplementation. Several projects included in

the approved regional Action Plans were

selected on a competitive basis for financingunder the GEF Project Small Grant mechanism.

Their positive results, public response and

socioeconomic effects have provided an impor-tant basis for revaluation and further develop-

ment of environmental projects in Russia, defin-

ing their priorities and methods of providinggovernment support of wildlife conservation.

3.4. Development of the Strategyand Action Plan on Lake BaikalBiodiversity Conservation

Elaboration of a common biodiversity con-

servation policy for three administrative parts ofthe Baikal Natural Territory (BNT), and coordi-

nated steps for its implementation were the

major tasks of the Interregional Subcomponentunder the Baikal Component of the GEF Project.

The Subcomponent started with the develop-

ment of the Interregional Strategy of Lake BaikalBiodiversity Conservation, and arrangements

for its public discussion and agreement.

Representatives of the key stakeholders wereinvolved both in the Strategy development and

implementation. An important innovation was

the use of the LI Program as an instrument toencourage local community initiatives and

establish feedback between the communities

and BNT management system - through theBaikal Supervisory Committee. The series of

competitive selections provided an extensive

portfolio of practical measures on Baikal wildlifeconservation (over 1500 project proposals),

and allowed identification of major directions

and priorities of the Strategy and Action Planwith due regard for the priorities of

the BNT population. Public discussion

and resultant finalization of theStrategy took almost four years. The

process involved about 200 represen-

tatives of various target groups: gov-ernment authorities, agencies and

enterprises, scientific and environ-

21

Baikalendemics

Baikalendemics

68%

Baikal homes 2,635species of livingorganisms

The number of fish species and the role of theBaikal endemics in the faunas of Russia and Baikal

Russia Baikal

Other endemics

Baikalendemics

Other species225

22

31

31100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

mental community, business, residents of Baikal

coastal areas. Developers of the NationalBiodiversity Conservation Strategy (Moscow),

representatives of well known Russian and inter-

national public associations also took part in theprocess.

As a result, a package of strategic docu-

ments was developed consisting of the BaikalDeclaration, Strategy of Lake Baikal Ecosystem

Biodiversity Conservation, Action Plan on Lake

Baikal Biodiversity Conservation, and PublicAgreement on Lake Baikal Biodiversity

Conservation. The documents were published

in Russian and English in 1999-2002 (see the Listof Project Publications in Annex 1), and are

available on www.biodat.ru.

The Strategy of Lake Baikal EcosystemBiodiversity Conservation is the most general

strategic planning document defining major

principles of Lake Baikal conservation, priorityactions, and new approaches to addressing

biodiversity conservation. The Action Plan

consists of two parts: long-term action plan,and priority action plan.

The strategy was integrated in the

existing system of decision-making: thedocuments were approved by the

Government of the Buryat Republic,

Irkutsk and Chita OblastAdministrations, and MNR.

Government authorities on their

own behalf disseminated theStrategy and Action Plan to their

subordinate offices and key users

in the Baikal Region. The Strategy and Action

Plan were used to develop the Subprogram onthe Protection of Lake Baikal and Baikal Natural

Territory under the FTP on the Russian Ecology

and Natural Resources (2002-2010). ActionPlan activities provided the basis for numerous

programs and plans of socioeconomic develop-

ment designed for enterprises, agencies,administrative structures, and Baikal Region

areas.

Development of the Baikal BiodiversityConservation Strategy and Action Plan with the

wide participation of various target groups is

the first example of such efforts in Russia. Theprocess involved an innovative mechanism of

public involvement in the implementation of

Baikal Biodiversity Conservation Strategythough joining the Public Agreement and Baikal

Declaration. At present, over 70 Protocols of

accession have been signed, and several inde-pendent enterprise-based conservation pro-

grams have been approved for implementation

in the Baikal Region.The Strategy was designed with due

regard for environmental peculiarities of individ-

ual ecosystem components, as well as the eco-nomic and political conditions in the three RF

subjects located within the BNT. Each BNT

region used model areas to implement biodiver-sity conservation principles. The Goloustnaya

River basin was selected as a model area in

Irkutsk Oblast, Tugnuy-Sukhara River basin - inBuryat Republic, and Khilok River basin in Chita

Oblast.

22

Detailed biodiversity assessment, as well as

practical Project activities in model areas

enabled to identify medium and long termnature protection priorities, and implement full-

scale planning of economic activity. Thus, activ-

ities in Khilok model basin included develop-ment of the land use strategy, forest use plan-

ning, environmental audit of the area, and rec-

ommendations on nature use managementimprovements. Activities in Tugnuy-Sukhara

basin involved indicator-based planning of agri-

cultural development and planning of SPAdevelopment. The Plan of environmentally safe

socioeconomic development was prepared and

adopted for implementation in the IrkutskOblast Administration (Goloustnaya basin).

Establishment of environmental services

market in the Baikal Region was an importantoutcome of model activities. The value of

ecosystem resources was for the first time esti-

mated based on their contribution to the forma-tion of environment and climate, carbon

sequestration, recreational capacity, etc.

Given the typical nature of existing prob-lems, the lessons learned in model areas under

the GEF Project could and should be replicated

in other parts of the Baikal Natural Territory.

3.5. Local Initiative Program inthe Baikal Region

Local Initiative (LI) Program implementedthrough the mechanism of small grant competi-

tions and performance monitoring has beecome

an element of efficient biodiversity conservationmanagement in the Region. Underlying princi-

ples of the Program included the widest possi-

ble participation of target groups in Baikalwildlife conservation, independent expert

review of proposals, and transparency of deci-

sion-making and regulatory bodies. The lack ofany "grey field" in the working procedures, and

their strict fulfillment were the major condition of

the Program. The essential role was played bythe Expert Council established following the

example of classic expert bodies providing the

widest possible parity-based representation of

specialists and BNT areas. Closed evaluation

was performed by independent (often alterna-tive) experts, and envisaged double-checking.

The results were declared in public, which

enhanced the responsibility of specialists con-cerned about "keeping the face". As a result,

rating lists covering over 1500 projects were

never disputed.LI Program had two major objectives: (i)

attract the widest possible range of participants

to wildlife conservation in the Baikal Region; and(ii) identify and formulate the civil society posi-

tion in respect to Baikal conservation priorities.

LI Program was noted for its comprehen-sive nature and variety of innovative approach-

23

Numbers of applications to participatein the second round of the LocalInitiatives from urban vs. rural areas

Rural

Urban

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

70

60

50

40

30

0

Mini-competition

Generalcompetition

Thematiccompetition

Number of applications from various categoriesof applicants (August - September, 2000)

20

10

Mini-competition

Generalcompetition

Thematic competition

Private persons

Organisations

Temporary cre-ative teams

Private entre-preneurs

24

With a view to protect rare species, new

breeding places were established for white-tailed

eagle, osprey; activities implemented to protect

such species as red duck, golden-eye, fish duck

and some other waterfowl in the Selenga and

Goloustnaya river deltas. Populations restored

and/or protected of cormorant in Chivykuisky

bay, common crane and musk rat in Lake Dikoye,

Mongolian toad in the Goloustnaya delta,

Mongolian lark in Buryatia. A shoal of juvenile

sturgeon was bred at the Selenga fish-farm.

Tarbagan was reacclimatized in Buryatia; to

restore populations of indigenous fauna species, a

flock of reindeers were introduced in the northern

Baikal coastal area. 11 plantations of medicinal

herbs and wild plants were established for subse-

quent resettlements in natural habitats; activities

implemented in the southern part of Baikal coast to

preserve and disseminate endemic species

Tridaktylin kirilov. Natural areal of Sayan ecotype

dwarf sea buckthorn was restored. Measures

taken to preserve local populations of bird cherry

Padus avium Mill., licorice Glycyrrhiza uralensis,

Siberian apricot, Altay onion, Viola incise,

Hedysarum zundukii, Oxytropis, Crylovia ere-

mophila.

With a view to provide habitat protection, 8

new SPNA of different status were established

with the total area of 21.7 thousand ha. Among

these, Mindalnaya Roscha botanical zakaznik,

Japanese elm Relict Grove monument of nature,

Posolsky Sor natural park, Kalipso botanical monu-

ment of nature. Environmental network sections

were established: 9 sections subject to special use

and protection regime mapped in the Goloustnaya

basin; management plans developed for monu-

ments of nature in Kochergatsky zakaznik and a

section in Pribaikalsky national park. Regulatory

documents prepared for approval of five SPNA. A

es and instruments of wildlife protection

ranging from new SPNA establishment to

wide-scale information campaigns in massmedia. Some of the Program achievements

in environmental education and awareness

are presented in Section 4.2, however, ofgreatest importance are the methodologi-

cal and practical results of over a hundred

projects on the conservation and restora-

tion of natural complexes in the Central Partof the BNT. The results deserve active pro-

motion for further replication both within

the BNT and in other regions in Russia andthe world.

refugium network to preserve wetland and flood-

land communities established in deltas of the

Selenga, Goloustnaya, Zunduk rivers. 12 pack-

ages of documents to establish monuments of

nature and attain the SPNA status to areas cover-

ing over 300 thousand ha were prepared for

approval; recommendations prepared to establish

11 more SPNA. The movement of volunteer assis-

tance to SPNA was supported in Baikalsky,

Barguzinsky, Dzherginsky zapovedniks, and

Kabansky zalaznik, and Pribaikalsky national park.

A network of public inspectors and operational

groups established in Pribaikalsky, Atsulsky and

Angirsky zakazniks, Pribaikalsky national park,

Kochegarsky zakaznik. The operational group

established in the Baikalsky State biosphere

zapovednik helped to reduce the number of pro-

tection regime violations by 31%. Protection

measures were taken in respect of many other

unique natural objects.

Natural landscapes were restored in Myngei

locality, near Maisky settlement, in Zagustaisky

valley, and unique natural complex Verkhnyaya

Berezovka. Mad-made mechanical pollution was

liquidated along the coasts and in beds of over

thirty rivers and lakes.

New technology of oil product waste detoxi-

fication with biological agents was introduced

within Lake Baikal watershed area: biological

agents were used to treat the ground polluted

with mazut along the 4-km section of the railway.

200 tons of oil sludge was detoxified at the

Ulan-Ude oil base of AO Buryatnefteprodukt.

Project funds were used for recultivation of Baikal

coastal areas; over 150 thousand saplings were

planted. Grayling spawning grounds in the

Goloustnaya river were cleaned from obstructions

and sunk logs; 47.2 ha of forest ecosystems were

restored in the Khilok river-head.

Practical Results of the LI Program on Biodiversity Conservation

4.1. Strengthening and Using theCivil Society Potential forBiodiversity Conservation

Changes in the public perception of wildlifeprotection issues facilitated by wide public par-

ticipation are among the essential Project out-

comes.The Project has no precedents in the

involvement of various society segments, first

and foremost, children and youth, in wide-scaleProject activities: in 1997-2001, 700-800 thou-

sand people and almost all Russian zapovedniks

and national parks annually took part in theProject-supported March of Parks; about 100

thousand people joined the Public Agreement;

over 20 thousand people participated in Daysof Baikal, Baikal environmental festivals and

marathons.

Since 1997 through 2003 over 110 thou-sand people were directly involved in the

implementation of 750 projects and assign-

ments (80 thousand under the BaikalComponent, 14 thousand under the Strategic

Component, and 18 thousand under the

Protected Areas Component). The participantsincluded:

- up to 300 administration officials, 350-

400 scientists and up to 2000 staff members ofzapovednik and national park guard services;

- several hundreds of wildlife protection

practical workers (in the field of forestry, hunt-ing and fishing management, rare species pro-

tection, etc.) from the regions, especially the

Baikal Region;- specialists from federal and regional

environmental agencies, local administrations,

legislative assemblies who participated inProject implementation, preparation and dis-

cussion of essential strategic documents, elabo-

ration of proposals to the National Action Plan,and respective sections of the Federal

Targeted Program on the Ecology and Natural

Resources;- participants of the Forums, confer-

ences, seminars and working meeting under the

Project - representatives of various society seg-ments and sectors of economy (1600 people

under the Strategic Component, over 1000

people took part in seminars organized by theRegional Association of Zapovedniks and

National Parks, etc.);

- several hundreds of scientists from aca-demic and sector institutes, including the

experts and reviewers, members of evaluation

committees, authors of reviews and recommen-dations, training program developers and

workshop trainers (for example, about 50

experts of the First National Report onBiodiversity Conservation);

- over 1000 members of various environ-

mental NGO, both existing and establishedunder the Project within the Center and in the

regions.

Nongovernmental organizations (NGO),academic and sectoral scientific research insti-

tutes, higher educational institutions took the

most active part in Project implementation.Among the Russian and international NGO that

actively participated or assisted in Project

implementation one could mention the follow-ing ones:

Wildlife Protection Center; IUCN

Representative Mission for CIS Countries;

25

26

Center for Environmental Policy; Russian World

Wildlife Fund office; Socioecological Union;Zapovedniki EcoCenter; ISAR, Ecoline; Dront

Environmental Center in Nizhny Novgorod;

Regional Center of Biodiversity Studies andConservation in Volgograd; Sacred Land

Charity Foundation; Khabarovsk Wildlife Fund;

All-Russian Nature Protection Society; BaikalFoundation, Baikal Biodiversity Conservation

Center, and many others.

In addition, noteworthy is the indirectinvolvement of the multi-million audience of

central and regional mass media (newspapers,

journals, radio, TV).

4.2. Education Greening,Increasing Public Awareness ofBiodiversity Conservation

Support of initiatives related to environ-

mental education, awareness and promotionoccupies a special place among the instruments

of environmental policy development and

implementation. These activities were givenpriority attention under all three major Project

Components. Chapter 2.3 above presents

some results of SPNA and Zapovedniki Centerwork on environmental education. However,

the widest coverage was ensured under the

Baikal Component, which included over 200projects and assignments directly or indirectly

related to environmental education, awareness

or promotion. This work facilitated the devel-opment of "Baikal ideology" in the region, i.e.,

such a perception of the need to protect BNT

wildlife that becomes part of everyday life ofthe society and individuals.

Media-based information flow was organ-

ized on a continuous basis. Over 300 papers

and materials, about 100 TV and 600 radio pro-

grams were devoted to biodiversity conserva-tion issues in the Baikal Region.

103 educational programs, methodolog-

ical guidelines and training materials weredeveloped. 60 specialized educational edi-

tions with the total circulation over 65 thou-

sand copies were published and widely dis-seminated throughout the Baikal Region.

Irkutsk Oblast developed a system of contin-

uous environmental education, BaikalScience curriculum, upgrading programs for

education workers. Chita Oblast developed

and impemented the Regional Standard onecology based on modern information tech-

nologies. This is a significant and innovative

step in the development of environmentaleducation contributing to biodiversity con-

servation, since it represents a long-term

system aimed at educating a personality withenvironmentally oriented mentality.

Implementation of projects facilitated con-

solidation of the most active participants intonongovernmental environmental organizations.

73 nongovernmental environmental organiza-

tions were established under the BaikalComponent, including the Environmental

Initiative in Petrovsk-Zabaikalsky, ChROO

Pussy Willow in Krasky Chikoy village, Friendsof Baikal environmental and aesthetic associa-

tion in Zaigrayevsky district (Buryatia), Baikal

Center of Public Environmental Expert Review,Baikal Environmental Center, etc.

The Project provided invaluable contribu-

tion to higher school greening through prepar-ing and publishing by the Moscow State

University Ecocenter of a unique series of train-

ing materials on Biodiversity Conservation (15materials in 4 volumes).

The total circulation of participating periodicals exceeds 1 million copies. Thematic radio programs are broad-cast on Europe-Plus Radio in Ulan-Ude. Chita Oblast radio issued 12 radio programs on Lake Baikal biodiversityconservation, and performed two rounds of radio quizzes. Chita State TV Company, together with Altes TVCompany regularly demonstrate environmentally oriented films that were also shown on Irkutsk TV and TVC cen-tral channel. Siberian Information and Analytical Agency "Baikal Region Ecology" (SIAA EcoBR) was established,registered and equipped in Irkutsk Oblast; Oblast newspaper organized an information campaign, and Oblast radiostation issued a serried of programs on Lake Baikal biodiversity conservation. A series of TV programs dealing withBaikal Region environmental problems was issued under the thematic program "Our Environment" (IGTRK).

27

Media coverage at the initial stage of

National Strategy development (1997-1998)was generally limited to the publication of

brochures, books collected materials dealing

with highly specific topics and intended for asmall range of specialists. Later, given the

growing interest to Project activities, and lack of

access to electronic data sources for generalpublic, the GEF Project started seeking the

ways to publish Project materials in editions with

broader audience. For example, the Zeleny Mirnewspaper published the brief version of the

First National Biodiversity Report. The newspa-

per also published the first works on the princi-ples of developing the National Biodiversity

Conservation Strategy, some information and

analytical Project materials, as well as advertise-ments of newly published Project books. The

latter were also published on a regular basis in

periodical editions of the Environmental PolicyCenter, such thematic editions as ZapoVestnik

and Prirodno-resursnye Vedomosti. Mass

media have gradually developed an interest tothe Project and its activities.

Several dozens of local environmental education programs were developed for children of different age. Inparticular, in Mukhorshibirsky District, training programs on continuous environmental education are being imple-mented in 21 secondary schools and 14 kindergartens.

Data/advice units were established in cities of Ulan-Ude, Chita, Petrovsk-Zabaikalsky, Severobaikalsk,Baikalsk, villages Krasny Chikoy, Chernorud, Ust-Barguzin, Sosnovoozersk, in Baikal-Lensky and Baikalskyzapovedniks, as well as mobile extension units for rural areas. Resource and information centers including environ-mental libraries, videotecs and slidetecs we also established (7 centers).

Over 30 environmental camps were organized along the Baikal coast offering integrated programs includinglectures, practical training and seminars, excursions along environmental paths, competitions and quizzes, cleanupactivities and wildlife studies; the camps were attended by over 3 thousand children.

Over 100 items of printed products with the circulation over 100 thousand copies were published (brochures,booklets and newsletters). Interesting experience was gained though involvement of religious communities inwildlife protection. This resulted in the publishing of two books (Buddhism: a Man in Harmony with Nature, andEnvironmental Ethics of Buddhism.

36 video films and 112 video materials were made and widely disseminated across the Region. 134 exhibi-tions and expositions on Baikal wildlife were organized, and visited by over 23 thousand people.

Regular work with mass media was initiated with the information campaign aimed at promoting the PublicAgreement, which was organized by the International Press Club. Information campaign involved lots of specialactions for media (roundtables, press tours and press conferences) attended by journalists from Zeleny Mir, VsyaRossia, Rossia, Bereginya newspapers; Business and Finance, Business and Investment in Russia, Environment andLife, Business People, Entrepreneur's Companion, Compatriot magazines; representatives of the Journalist Union,Federal News Agency, information agencies Economic News, Russian Photo News, Bloomberg, Ekos PublishingHouse.

Publications at this stage were mainly focused on the possible roles of various sectors of Russian society inwildlife protection. Press tours to Pskov and Volgograd Oblasts were organized for media representatives. Apress tour to Primorsky Kray to Far East leopard habitat was organized for two central TV channels (RTR and NTV)and Radio of Russia. Thanks to these efforts, and the established contacts, biodiversity conservation issues havebecome a regular theme for radio, TV and printed media.

At the final implementation stage the Project was actively involved in the preparation of information pre-prod-ucts (plots, information for press, press releases). The most popular themes included materials on the Red Book ofthe Russian Federation, Russian zapovedniks, MNR role in zapovednik activities and wildlife protection in general,notes on biodiversity conservation prepared for the Biodiversity Day (December 29).

Educational materials:- Singing birds of CentralRussia (CD)- Biodiversity geogra-phy and monitoring- Biodiversity conserva-tion basics- Social, economic andlegal frameworks forbiodiversity conserva-tion- Biodiversity conserva-tion and restoration

28

4.3. Mechanisms and InstitutesFacilitating Sustainability ofBiodiversity Conservation Results

Project implementation enabled to make a

considerable progress in the improvement ofexisting and creation of new economic and

financial mechanisms of biodiversity conserva-

tion. This assignment was aimed at identification

and adaptation to the needs of biodiversity

conservation of mechanisms capable of provid-ing economic incentives for wildlife protection,

and improving the efficiency of environmental

activity financing: - identify economic value of biodiversity

and its components, including the value of

"ecosystem services";- generalize the available Russian and for-

eign experience in using economic mechanisms

of biodiversity conservation;- support and disseminate positive expe-

rience gained in the period of developing the

new economic policy in the area of wildlife pro-tection and restoration, use of biological

resources;

- establish and introduce new economicmechanisms to implement the above policy.

It is at this stage of Project implementation

that Russia formulated new approaches andmethods of biodiversity conservation econom-

ics. In addition to introducing positive interna-

tional experience ("green accounts", environ-mental and economic evaluation of "ecosystem

services", "debts for nature" arrangements,

etc.), the Project actively encouraged Russiandevelopments: improvements in the tax sys-

tem, environmental insurance, establishment of

funds, calculation of compensation payments forimplementation of biosphere functions, etc.

Findings of this work were summarized in publi-

cations that were in great demand among spe-cialists.

The main emphasis when introducing new

economic methods of biodiversity conservationwas made on the work in the regions and sup-

port of regional initiatives. For example, over

40 organizations from almost 20 Russian regions

rook part in the competitive selection for dis-semination of new economic mechanisms. 19

projects were selected and implemented,

which were aimed at implementation of newwildlife valuation methods, techniques to

account for ecosystem services in the planning

of alternative economic activities, ecotourismdevelopment, preparation of management

plans for environmentally friendly business, etc.

In addition, under the biodiversity econom-ic activities, the Project generalized Russian and

foreign experience in using economic mecha-

nisms in ex-situ wildlife conservation. The sur-vival of centers for wild animal breeding

becomes especially urgent under developing

market conditions. The review of availablemethods of maintaining viability of animal breed-

ing units indicated the need to seek new finan-

cial arrangements and economic mechanisms toensure their long-term functioning.

Generalization and improvement of

approaches and methods of economic evalua-tion of damage caused to biodiversity was an

important part of Project activities. A set of

regulatory and legal documents was preparedunder the Project. The Project initiated the

work on estimating the value of biodiversity

(mainly for SPNA) based on the concept ofoverall economic value. The studies allowed an

important conclusion that a major part of the

economic value (cost) of many SPNA will consistof the indirect utilization value: carbon seques-

tration, water regulating functions, erosion pre-

vention, etc. Carbon sequestration may play aspecial role in the economic evaluation of SPNA

based on indirect utilization value. The effec-

tiveness of the Kyoto Protocol will provide con-ditions for developing a world market of carbon

emissions trading while the price may amount to

several dozens of US dollars per ton of carbon.Calculations showed that the indirect utilization

value may equal up to 100% of the economic

value of an individual SPNA. Methodological support of the State

Methodology for Cadastre Evaluation of

Lands Intended for Environmental Purposes

(Roszemkadastr, 2002) was another impor-

tant Project outcome. The Methodology

included three criteria of economic differenti-ation of land value depending on the produc-

tive properties of ecosystems and their biodi-

versity. The approach, which was previouslyapplied only to zapovednik lands, has been

extended to other valuable natural areas:

national and natural parks, lands intended forenvironmental purposes.

The above methodological approach has

been already used in evaluation of lands in indi-vidual regions. The use of "biodiversity unique-

ness factor" and "ecosystem value factor" may

lead to a 5-7-fold increase in the cadastre valueof lands in protected natural areas, as compared

to evaluation of similar utilized lands.

The innovative role of such approacheswill become especially explicit in case the land

taxation proposals of the President

Commission on Administrative Reforms areadopted. According to these proposals, all

categories of land users will have to pay land

taxes based on the cadastre land evaluation.However, in respect of federal objects, taxes

should be paid from the federal budget and

received by the municipal budget in the placewhere the given object is located - in our

case, a zapovednik or national park.

Increasing coefficients (as compared to sur-rounding territories) will convert land taxes

paid to SPNA into a substantial source of addi-

tional revenues to the local budget. The taxamount will directly depend on the natural

properties of ecosystems and their biodiversi-

ty, which will actually transform taxes into sub-

ventions to municipalities for ecosystem serv-

ices provided by the protected natural area.Local communities and, most importantly,

local authorities will have substantial econom-

ic incentives for wildlife protection, and will bedirectly interested in maintaining the protec-

tion regime within the federal SPNA, which, if

eliminated, could deprive the region of anadditional source of budget revenues.

Implementation of the above approach

would fundamentally change the institutionalframework, and financial and economic relations

between the SPNA and government authorities

of different level.Noteworthy is still another innovative activ-

ity under the GEF Project: analytical notes and

proposals on international financial arrange-ments related to payments for ecosystem serv-

ices provided by environmentally diligent coun-

tries. So far the world community failed toestablish mechanisms to identify and compen-

sate the damage related to conservation of nat-

ural ecosystems and their biota to ensure thehighest efficiency of their global biosphere func-

tions. For Russia, this is a matter of highest pri-

ority, since over 65% of the Russian territory isoccupied by pristine, mostly tundra and taiga

ecosystems. Proposals developed under the

Project were used by the Russian Governmentin the preparation to the Rio+10 Summit on

Sustainable Development in Johannesburg

(September 2002). Details of these activitiesare presented in Project publications, and avail-

able on www.biodat.ru.

Financing of zapovedniks (State Nature Reserves - SNR)and national parks (NP) from the federal budget andextra-budgetary sources over time ($/man/year)

NP from other sources

NP from the federal budget

SNR from other sources

SNR from the federal budget

30

Successful introduction of new manage-ment approaches to wildlife protection is large-

ly dependent on the availability of biological

monitoring information systems and modern ITdevelopment level. Efficient coordination of the

environmental policy at the federal, regional

and local levels is dependent on the capacity forreal-time collection, accumulation, analysis and

transmission of data on biodiversity status.

A much better information support ofnature protection in Russia is one of the key

results of the Project. Other major results are

summarized below.The Project allowed the establishment and

equipment of the biodiversity conservation

Data Analysis Center (DAC), which is function-ing as a data exchange and scientific and tech-

nological cooperation mechanism: a Clearing-

House Mechanism under the Convention onBiodiversity. The DAC is equipped with modern

hardware, software and IT, and has qualified

staff. Upon the completion of the Project, theData Analysis Center will be transferred to an

entity accountable to the MNR with a view to

ensuring the continuity of information support ofbiodiversity conservation measures.

To meet its commitments under the

Convention on Biodiversity Russia preparedtwo National Reports on biodiversity conserva-

tion (in 1997 and 2001), and 6 thematic analyti-

cal reports on compliance with specific clausesof the Convention: nonnative species; forest

biodiversity conservation; access to genetic

resources; biodiversity conservation in protect-ed areas; and mountain biodiversity conserva-

tion. The First National Report was issued anddisseminated in Russian and English. All docu-

ments are available in the electronic format in

the BioDat Portal.In response to requests from federal execu-

tive authorities, the DAC prepared over 200

information and analytical materials, includingthose to be considered at the meetings of the

Government, Management Board of the State

Environmental Committee and the Ministry ofNatural Resources, and the State Council of the

Russian Federation.

The Center established a portal(www.BioDat.ru), which is a shared information

system of an open Internet community. The

community includes interested data analysisunits of ministries, agencies, research institutes,

and HEIs, as well as individual experts (informa-

tion complex). The Portal will become a majorinstrument and mechanism of the DAC opera-

tion upon completion of the GEF Project, and a

forum for the intersectoral and interdepartmen-tal exchange of information on wildlife conserva-

tion issues in Russia.

The BioDat Portal houses all information col-lected within the framework of the GEF Project:

executors' reports, databases, information

materials, methodologies, training aids, hand-books, maps, forms, etc. BioDat also presents

technological means to integrate users and pro-

vide them with information available to themembers of the Internet community: catalogs,

classifiers, search systems, engines to dissemi-

nate information on new materials, opportuni-ties to establish direct contacts with data hold-

31

ers and users, etc. The server houses metadata: names of information resources available

to organizations and specialists; lists of indica-

tors; conditions on which information or analyti-cal services may be provided. In addition to

meta data, information partners submit samples

of their databases and other materials whichthey allow to disseminate free of charge. The

server tools may be used to get access to the

partners' information and interact with the part-ners via interactive systems.

A similar conceptual framework was used

to establish a biodiversity information manage-ment system for the Baikal Region. A meta data-

base was developed, which forms the basis for

the operation of a Web server which provides afree access to information on the current status

of wildlife and natural resources in the Baikal

Regions (http://www.baikalregion.ru). Acommon Internet-based Biodiversity

Conservation Centre was opened at the RAS

(Siberian Branch) Research Center in Irkutsk. Aninterregional analytical center (Information

Society Analytical Network) was also estab-

lished and registered. Creation of a tourist industry database for

the Central Zone of the Baikal Nature Area was

a special assignment which resulted in theestablishment and/or further development of a

few data centers in cities and rayons. A com-

mon data bank was organized which is present-ed in a specially established and publicly acces-

sible ecotourism site (http://baikal.net/trav-

el). Another achievement is the publication ofthe Atlas of Protected Nature Areas in Lake

Baikal Basin which shall be treated as an initial

database on the current state and potentialdevelopment of the established protected area

network in Lake Baikal Basin, including

Mongolia. The Atlas is available both as a hardcopy and as an Internet-based information sys-

tem (www.baikalia.ru) which has been trans-

ferred for further administration to theAssociation of Specially Protected Nature Areas

in the Baikal Region.

28 information resources were established,including those devoted to specially protected

nature areas:

- Live Sable, a multi-media handbook on theBarguzin Zapovednik

http://baikal.net/livingsable;

- Baikalsky State Biosphere Zapovednikhttp://baikal.net/zapovednik;

- Zabaikalsky National Park

http://zabaikal.boom.ru,http://ngo.burnet.ru/znp;

- Multi-media Handbook on Pribaikalsky

National Park http://baikal.net/pribpark;

- web server for Baikal issues

www.baikal.net; - a virtual gallery of Baikal scenic photos

www.berill.ru/eger-gallery/

homepage.buryatia.ru/eger-gallery/; - an interactive reference book on rare and

endangered flora and fauna species in the

Buryat Republic based on the Buryat RedBook

www.berill/ru/redbook/,

homepage.buryatia.ru/redbook/; - a Clean River web site which reviews the situ-

ation in the Khilok River basin

www.chita.ru/HilockWeb; - Colored Identification Atlas of East Siberian

Butterflies

http:/babochki.narod.ru; - a laser disk under the same name;

- a full-text library Biodiversity Conservation in

Lake Baikal Ecosystemhttp:/library.isc.irk.ru;

- Nature of Baikal Siberia

www.taiga.irk.ru; - Flora of Southern Baikal Region

http://cultura.baikal.ru/flowers;

- Baikal Ecological Wavehttp://www.baikalwave.eu.org.;

- Identification Atlas of Cottoid Fish

http://nti.lin.irk.ru/cottoidei/; - a database on major industrial polluters in the

Baikal Region

http://www.oresp.irk.ru:8080/bd2htm.

32

BioDat Portal Structure and Contents

Subject Group 1. Done under the GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project- Documents relating to the National Strategy and Action Plan on biodiversity conserva-

tion.- Documents describing the outcomes of Project activities in zapovedniks and national

parks. - GEF Project archive: altogether over 800 MB.- GEF Project bibliography.

Subject Group 2. Environmental Protection Activity (projects and people)- Environmental protection organizations. - Environmental experts.- Positive experience in biodiversity conservation. - Environmental projects: Database on international environmental projects implemented

in Russia. - Applications for environmental projects: Database of applications for environmental

projects- Economic mechanisms of biodiversity conservation.- Financial mechanisms of biodiversity conservation.

Subject Group 3. Protected Nature Areas- Regulations on the establishment of zapovedniks.- All specially protected nature areas (SPNA) in all regions of Russia.- Environmental framework of Central Russia (maps and databases of SPNA within the net-

work).- Size of protected nature areas.- Changes in the area of individual zapovedniks in 1917-2000. An economic assessment

methodology for zapovednik lands.- Synopses of research in zapovedniks. Bibliography of research in zapovedniks.

Improving the environmental monitoringsystem is a key component of the development

of biodiversity conservation information base.

Entities operating within the Integrated StateMonitoring System (ISMS) in the Buryat

Republic, Irkutsk and Chita Oblasts are

equipped with modern technologies, and theirmonitoring capacity has been enhanced.

Monitoring studies were conducted in the

Tugnui-Sukhara basin, and their results were

included in the current state monitoring: agro-

chemical soil surveys, hydrochemical water

quality analysis, and ambient air analysis. TheIrkutsk Oblast designed a new monitoring

approach: they established a system integrat-

ing environmental monitoring activities of pub-lic, academic and nongovernmental entities. A

multilateral cooperation agreement was pre-

pared and signed to implement comprehensivemonitoring in a model area.

33

Subject Group 4. North Eurasia Biodiversity Atlas- Taxon lists for 89 subjects of the Russian Federation and 30 biological nature regions, by 8

taxonomic groups of Russia's flora and fauna: 500 subgenera of ground beetles, 295species of bark beetles, 120 species of bumblebees, 310 species of freshwater fish, 40amphibian species, 170 reptile species, 820 bird species, 350 mammal species, and23,500 species pf vascular plants.

- Schematic maps of the habitats of 11 taxonomic groups: 1,710 genera of vascular plants, 550 species of arboreal plants, 59 families of macromycetfungi, 320 genera of lichens, 500 subgenera of ground beetles, 295 species of bark bee-tles, 120 species of bumblebees, 310 species of freshwater fish, 40 amphibian species, 170reptile species, 820 bird species, 350 mammal species.

- Game mammals: 160 photos and pictures, 81 maps and diagrams.- Introduced species: Database on animals and plants.- The Red Book of Russia: Animals.- The Red Book of the RSFSR: Plants.- Biodiversity of the Far East Ecoregion (a review of and cartographic database on the distri-

bution of 356 arboreal plant species, 307 lepidopterous species (butterflies), and 318 birdspecies for 85 nature regions).

- Summer abundance of birds in West Siberia.- Plant cover productivity in Russia. The Regional Red Books (availability and status of the

Regional Red Books, lists of protected species and publications for 89 subjects of theRussian Federation).

- Russia's waterfowl resources and their use (a review of 50 species in 47 nature regions; adatabase on the numbers and hunting yield in 89 subjects of the Russian Federation; 35maps; bibliography: 350 publications on the topic).

- The following sections are at the preparation stage:- Adventive flora of Eastern Europe,- Biodiversity of European Russia,- Finds of locust species,- Multiyear biological monitoring (in 13 zapovedniks, with an observation period of up to 40

years).

Subject Group 5. Handbooks, Textbooks, and Monographs- The First National Report on Biodiversity- The Second National Report on Biodiversity- Positive Experience of Biodiversity Conservation- Lands of the Russian Federation: categories and ownership- Economic Assessment of Lands and Wildlife: methodology- Economic Assessment of Lands and Wildlife: typical cases- Biodiversity textbooks (Zip-archive)- A Glossary of Environmental Terms Used in Legislation- Main regional development statistics for the Russian Federation (6,000 maps)- Nature and People in Russia: environment, religion, politics, and action. A social analysis- Russia as a System (Web atlas) - Environment and Health of the Russian People (Web atlas)

ic realities in Russia. Over 750 Project activitiesimplemented between 1997 and 2003 signifi-

cantly enhanced the involvement of businesses

and households in wildlife protection in theworld's largest country whose land is equal to

1/8 of the global land, and forests constitute

up to 25% of the global forest area. The scope and geographic coverage of

activities implemented in the vast territory of

North Eurasia within Russia's national borders,which encompass 8 nature zones and large

global biodiversity centers from the Atlantic to

the Pacific Oceans, allows to state that theProject contributed to the improvement of the

global environmental situation. The Project laid

innovative development approaches, instru-ments and mechanisms that would ensure fur-

ther improvement of the national environmental

Major achievements and innovations of theGEF Project may be summarized as follows:

The Project allowed to preserve and

largely enhance one of the world's best SPNAsystems established over the last 80 years,

which occupies about 2% of the country's terri-

tory and forms an essential component of theglobal network of international protected

areas. Support of the most urgent activities in

the transition period made it possible toimprove the efficiency of wildlife protection and

create prerequisites for SPNA integration in

regional socioeconomic development process-es as a foothold of the emerging sector of

ecosystem services.

The Project allowed to develop and intro-duce up-to-date biodiversity conservation

mechanisms consistent with new socioeconom-

The PAs System in Russia

Area in '000 ha

Nationalparks

Zapovedniks

Biodiversity Conservation: the Most Significant Innovative Approaches, Instruments and Mechanisms

Innovation

Biodiversity conservationstrategy which builds uponthe partnership of the state,businesses and various seg-ments of the society

The Public ConservationAgreement as a mecha-nism to implementStrategic Tasks

Small grants programs

Information partnership inwww.biodat.ru

Preparation of a publicmethodology for cadastreassessment of SPNA landsproceeding from biodiver-sity indicators and produc-tion characteristics of natu-ral ecosystems

Introducing indicatorsreflecting the environmen-tal status of lands into stan-dard reports on lands

Competitions for researchprojects in zapovedniks

Future Implementation Mechanism

Action Plan that takes into account voluntarycommitments and proposals of regions

One of the most effective mechanisms toimplement the Biodiversity ConservationStrategy. Partnership based on voluntarywildlife protection commitments made by therepresentatives of different segments of thesociety. Signature of Agreement AccessionProtocols. Establishment of regionalAgreement development centers

Rationalization of financial support and encour-agement of cofinancing; involvement of thepopulation in biodiversity conservation

An interactive cooperation of all stakeholders;a free access to information on Russia wildlifefor decision-making purposes; "informationsite" partnership: public authorities, business,science, and NGOs.

Dissemination of the methodology amongRoszemcadaster regional offices, and its usefor SPNA land assessment in regions

Following the introduction of the new method-ology for state cadastre assessment of lands indifferent types of SPNA, regions would collectstatistical data on land value with due regardfor biodiversity

SPNA that are far away from research centershave got a mechanism to receive competitiveresearch grants within their corporate commu-nity for the implementation of priority studies:biota inventory, continuation of multi-yearobservation series, study of unique nature fea-tures, GIS preparation, etc.

Preliminary Results and Assessment of TheirEfficiency

The first phase of the Strategy and Action Plan imple-mentation; development of regional biodiversityconservation strategies and programs; and smallgrants programs as the first phase of the Action Planimplementation

Demonstration signatures in more than 20 regions;interest in the Agreement in 45 regions; over 10,000participants; accession by the Administrations oflarge regions; a rapid development of regional PublicAgreement dissemination centers (in Murmansk,Volgograd, Irkutsk and other Oblasts). Developmentof the Baikal Declaration, and its independent imple-mentation in the years to come.

The small grants programs in the Baikal region,Volgograd and Nizhny Novgorod Oblasts had anexclusively strong impact since they involved severaldozen thousand people in wildlife protection; estab-lished growth centers at the local level; disseminatedbiodiversity-related information and knowledge,etc.

One of the largest environmental sites in Russia: ahigh visit rate and an active participation of regionalusers (12,250 visits over the 6-month period of itsoperation).

Economic assessment of nature protection fund landsin a number of regions within the Central FederalDistrict (Kursk, Lipetsk and other Oblasts). Use of theresults at Roszemcadaster regional training work-shops.

Preparation of a preliminary list of the biospheric func-tions of natural ecosystems has been initiated (seeAttachment to the Methodology); the list of manda-tory statistical indicators relating to SPNA landassessment includes data on flora and fauna speciesdiversity, availability of species included in the RedBook of Russia, productivity of natural ecosystems,etc. Russia is developing criteria for state assess-ment.

Zapovedniks and national parks submitted over 500applications within the Project lifetime. Support wasgiven to 70 research projects that involved regionalscientific and training organizations, and individualexperts from RAS institutes and HEIs.

35

36

The Baikal component allowed to developstrategic approaches to biodiversity conserva-

tion in the unique ecosystems of the Baikal

Nature Area, and utilize modern mechanisms,ways and methods to ensure sustainable envi-

ronmental management in a region of global

significance.The Project was a powerful factor that

caused greening of the socioeconomic develop-

ment process in regions within the Baikal NatureArea. The most important implication is the

involvement of businesses and civil society in

wildlife conservation, and the introduction ofnew environmental policy implementation mech-

anisms. The Lake Baikal Protection Legislation

Development Concept elaborated under theProject was supported by the State Duma,

which drafted more than ten legal acts required

for efficient implementation of the Federal Lawon Lake Baikal Protection.

The Baikal Component of the Project was

used as a framework to pilot a model of interre-gional management and efficient interaction

with the federal center. Experience thus gener-

ated was further developed in the region.Regional Administrations of the Baikal Nature

Area (BNA) formed the Baikal Council, a coor-

dinating body whose principles are similar tothose of the GEF Project management system.

It was designed as a principal political mecha-

nism to ensure a unified environmental policy inthe BNA. Establishment of the Baikal

Interregional Territorial Authority of the MNRwas an important step to strengthen state con-

trol and ensure the implementation of the

Federal Law on Lake Baikal Protection. Financial impact of the Project activities is also

very substantial. Direct Project financing is estimat-

ed at US$ 39.7 million in spite of the changes in thecosts of some assignments and the reallocation

among the items of expenditures in accordance

with the changing priorities under the Project.Moreover, a most important output of the Project

is the assistance in attracting new financial

resources to conservation activities in Russia.The Table presents expected disburse-

ment of the GEF proceeds under the Project by

component cross-section. The Table showsthat the amount of about US$ 18.1 million

(which is equivalent to SDR 13.8 [see the Note

below]), will be fully disbursed by the GrantClosing Date - September 30, 2003.

The main changes to the plan were

accounted for by the necessitated reduction infinancing for some assignments under the

Project due to the denomination of the allocat-

ed funds in SDR*. The almost two-year exten-sion of the Project life increased its administra-

tion costs under Component D. Apart from

that, upon agreement with the steering entities(the MNR and the World Bank), the grant funds

were reallocated among selected tasks within

the Components. For purposes of finalising theNational Strategy (Sub-Component А.1.), a

Biodiversity Conservation: the Most Significant Innovative Approaches, Instruments and Mechanisms

Innovation

Management plan prepa-ration for zapovednik andnational parks

]

Establishing SPNA regionalassociations and regionaldirectorates

Future Implementation Mechanism

Partnership and cooperation between SPNA,local authorities, NGOs and other stakeholderswith a view to SPNA development

A new mechanism to provide institutional sup-port to the SPNA system, which integratesregional SPNA with their corporate interests inmanagement, environmental education,research development, mass media operation,etc.

Preliminary Results and Assessment of TheirEfficiency

Preparation of management plans for 3 zapovedniksand 5 national parks. Development of approaches,methods and demonstration materials to disseminatethe experience; organization of specialist training.The Wildlife Protection Center used the Projectexperience to develop the SPNA management planpreparation Strategy and Recommendations.

Establishment of 8 new regional SPNA associations;organization of training workshops and conferences;exchange of experience; publication of collected vol-umes of scientific works, etc. High efficiency due tothe opportunity to overcome isolation, exchangeinformation, etc.

no-objection was given to use Sub-ComponentA.2. funds for the contract with the Institute of

Ecology and Evolution under the Russian

Academy of Sciences (US $149,300) and itsimplementation co-ordination. One task of Sub-

Component B.4. (establishment of new pro-

tected areas) was cancelled with its intendedfunds reallocated to more successful tasks

under Sub-Components В.2. and В.3.

(Strengthening the Protection Services, ModelSchool Projects, Competition of Research

Teams for Grants, and Support to the March of

Parks Campaign). The Table gives somewhatapproximate costs of a number of items under

different sub-components since the work wasshared by the Components, and it was impossi-

ble to differentiate the costs exactly. E.g., in

the Baikal Component, selected tasks of somesub-components were financed out of the small

grants scheme, and in operational documents,

they were referred to Sub-Component С.5.Assignment В.5.2. (preparation of text-books

for zapovedniks) was co-ordinated by

Component А Manager, with the costs referredto the latter Component. The final table shows

these costs in those sub-components to which

they are referred as per the contents of activi-ties rather than administration arrangements.

37

* The data are presented in compliance with the rate of the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) relative to US $ as of June 22, 2003

GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project Budget Follow-Up during the Project Implementation Period (as of June 22, 2003 *)

Disbursement of Grant TF 28315 RU of the GEF Biodiversity Conservation Project (US $ '000)

Structure of Grant TF 28315 RU of the GEF

Biodiversity ConservationProject

(US $ '000)

Components

A

B

C

D

Initial ProjectBudget, US$ '000

Budget withapprovedchanges, US$ '000

Disbursement,as of

31. 05.2003,US$ '000

Project Component

Component А. Strategic OverviewА.1. National and Regional Biodiversity StrategiesА.2. Biodiversity Policy SupportА.3. Information Support for BC ActivitiesComponent В. Protected AreasВ.1. Institutional SupportВ.2. Operations and PlanningВ.3. Public Support and Education ProgrammesВ.4. Ecosystem ProtectionВ.5. TrainingComponent С. Lake Baikal Regional ProgrammeС.1. Inter-regional ActivitiesС.2. Regional Model Watershed ProjectС.3. Model Watershed Project in the Tunguy-Sukhara River basin (Buryatia)С.4. Model Watershed Project in the Khilok River basin (Chita Oblast)С.5. Local InitiativesComponent D. Project ManagementD.1. Project Management Unit (Moscow)D.2. Regional Sub-Component Management Units (Baikal)Total

2695370

1390935

9257832

187522153970

3656340

950890

1135865

250018061462

34420098

2269,2442,5886,9939,8

8847,3832,8

4481,02525,4

700,7307,4

5105,9704,8664,2962,4666,7

2107,81928,61644,3

284,318151,0

2269,2442,5886,9939,8

8815,6832,7

4452,62523,0

699,9307,4

5047,3696,8656,6951,3659,1

2083,51727,01472,4

254,617859,1

1928,6 2269,2

5105,9 8847,3

38

The Project allowed to initiate a number oflarge investment projects totaling over $110 mil-

lion and, inter alia, receive the World Bank loan

proceeds in the aggregate amount of $87 millionfor the following purposes:

- The Sustainable Forestry Pilot Project (the

total project is $75 million, including a World Bankloan of $60 million);

-The Krasnoyarsk Emergency Silkworm

Outbreak Control Project (about $5 million wereallocated under the NPAF in 1997);

- The Baikal PPP Modernization Project to

convert the enterprise to a closed-loop watercycle (the total project cost is $33 million, includ-

ing $22.4 million of loan funds allocated under the

NPAF).

The Project was a powerful trigger for new

GEF projects. The PMU prepared a project enti-tled Implementation of a Comprehensive

Approach to Ecosystem Management in 3 Model

Areas with a View to Biodiversity Conservationand Minimization of Biotope Fragmentation in the

Russian Arctic (GEF/UNEP, 2001), which was

supported both by the Russian Government and

The Special Drawing Rights is a currency pool settlement unit of the international financial institutions. The SDR

is used to denominate certain groups of the International Monetary Fund credits, World Bank loans, and GEF

grants extended via the World Bank. As of the Project approval in 1996, the US dollar equivalent of the GEF Grant

was $20.1 million. Due to a sustainable growth of the US dollar exchange rate relative to the SDR currency pool

throughout the principal Project disbursement period (1999-2001), the US dollar equivalent of total planned and

disbursed Grant expenditures under the Project was $18.1 million. The difference between the above amount and

$20.1 million is not GEF Grant "underdisbursement" under the Project: it is accounted for by the variations of the

exchange rate.

GEF. The MNR is currently reviewing a number of

project applications, including those that rely uponenvironmentally sustainable land use to develop

biodiversity conservation in the process of land

market formation in Russian regions with a long his-tory of land use.

The Project outcomes were also used to pre-

pare a number of GEF projects in 1997-2003,which are currently implemented via the UN

Development Program, including:

- Conserving Globally Significant Biodiversityof Taimyr including its Keystone Population of Wild

Reindeer: A Demonstration

- Conservation and Sustainable Use ofBiodiversity in the Altai-Sayan Mountain

Ecoregion;

- National Action Plan to Protect MarineEnvironment from Anthropogenic Pollution in the

Russian Arctic;

- Conservation of Wetland Biodiversity in theLower Volga Region;

- Conservation of Globally Significant

Wetlands and Migration Corridors for WhiteCrane and Other Globally Significant Waterfowl.

Russia's counterpart funding is $9.4 million (Annex 3).

The amount consists of:

- State budget funds allocated for the implementation of tasks under the Federal TargetedPrograms: $6.005 million;

- State budget funds allocated for payment and reimbursement of mandatory state taxes and

charges on the Project activities. The amount of counterpart funds allocated under that categorybetween the Project launch and December 31, 2002 exceeded $970 thousand;

- Cofinancing of the preparation and implementation of Regional Strategies, Action Plans and

Small Grants Programs, as well as money from various sources mobilized by the SPNA in 1997-2002: $13.42 million.

39

The Project outputs allow to outline key areas of wilderness protection in Russia under thecurrent conditions requiring participation of all sectors of the Russian society, and may yield max-imum short-term benefits for nature conservation in our country.

1. Flexible public awareness activities aimed at dissemination of nature protectionideas among the population and Russian higher management, and wide-scale promo-tion of support to Russian zapovedniks and national parks.

2. Using the underdeveloped land market conditions and regulations to improveenvironmental efficiency of land use, and establish environmental networks in themost agriculturally disturbed Russian regions.

3. Transfer from methodology to practice in the wildlife protection system orienta-tion towards "ecosystem services", and developing a market of actual trade-offsbetween countries and regions for maintaining environmental sustainability.

4. Developing new instruments of public influence on private business using theeconomic and financial mechanisms of wildlife protection (greening the cadastre landvaluation, environmental rating of companies, etc.)

5. Using the international "image" of Lake Baikal to promote socioeconomic devel-opment of the Region, and transform its world status from an investment constraint intoan advantage for environmentally acceptable activities.

6. Support and development of information connections, and cooperation withinthe Internet community of wildlife data producers and users, which unites data analy-sis units of agencies, research institutes, HEIs, individual specialists, and ordinary ama-teurs.

The aforesaid priorities should be supported through a set of investment programmesand individual projects of different scale, including full-fledged projects of internationalfinancial institutions, including GEF medium-sized grants. Under large and medium-sizedprojects, there is a need to ensure support to local initiatives using such mechanisms asprogrammes of small grants and/or micro-credits.

The civil society and governmental entities (both Russian and foreign ones) shouldbetter know the Russian PAs and their conservation activities. To this end, it is nec-essary not only to improve and expand the Russian network of PAs, strengthen their humanresource, protection and research capacity, but also make them famous, well-known and loved, -a pride of all Russian people.

Annex 1. Priorities

1.

The March of Parks

Use the infrastructure and lessons learnt from the publicawareness activities under the GEF Project: the estab-lished video and film studios, series of documentary films,radio and TV programmes, and publications aboutRussian zapovedniks and national parks.

41

In the framework of further development of the ecological networks in the RussianFederation, a principal task should be the establishment of an ecological frameover earlier developed regions of the Russian Federation by the year 2010 as setforth in the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy. The following priorityregions are recommended for expanding the scope of work to establish ecological networks:southern areas of European Russia, southern areas in the Ural and Western Siberia, Ciscaucasia,and North-Eastern Caucasia

Under the changing land use conditions, the designing of ecological networks is a chance whichshould be taken by ecologists, particularly, in areas where natural ecosystems are on the verge ofdisappearance. This activity could be implemented under the Project called "Strengthening theTerritorial Biodiversity Protection Based on Greener Land Use in Earlier-Developed AgrarianRegions in Russia through the Land Market Development". An application for this Project has beenprepared to be submitted to the GEF.

Land areas stripped of naturalvegetation (1965-2001)

The degree of necessity to develop the territorial nature conserva-tion activities based on greener systems of land use and the estab-

lishment of an ecological network

Disturbed land, '000 ha

Construction sites and roads, '000 ha

Arable land, '000 ha

Prioritisation of invest-ments in the establishmentof an ecological frame and

networks of PAs

Annex 1. Priorities

2.

- L o w- Medium- High- Very high- Priority

Follow-up methodological and practical activities to develop international mechanismsof compensating for the costs of countries and regions related to natural ecosystem con-servation. Defining an institutional framework and sources of financing for such activities. Search forpartners among countries and international organisations interested in formalising the global market ofecosystem services.

Annex 1. Priorities

3.

Contributions of countriesin the preservation of

global terrestrial ecosys-tem sustainability, %.

42

Nature liabilities (-) and assets (+) of theFederal Districts (US $./man)

Area of Natural Ecosystems (ha per1,000 population)

Correlation between the area of zapovedniksand the level of regional economic development

Gross Product Production (% of the totalfor Russia) per 1 million km2

Russia renders its main ecosys-tem services through supportingthe functioning of natural ecosys-tem and PAs networks. There is aneed to expand these networksand integrate additional ecosys-tems therein. By the year 2010, thearea of PAs (IUCN ClassificationCategories I-IV) may be increasedby 50 %.

In the ecoregions with pre-served natural biodiversity, activi-ties to develop the PAs networks isin the focus of another applicationfor a GEF project which has beenalso prepared in Russia.

-Ecosystem losses-Additional heating-Air purification-Water purification-Losses of working abil-ity-Ecosystem services-Carbon credit-Growing stock-Water supply savings-Agro-climatic

Far-Eastern

Siberian

Ural

Volga

Southern

North-Western

Central

There is a need to introduce new tools to influence private business, economic andfinancial safeguards for nature conservation, including cadastral land assessment of PAswith due regard to the value of their biodiversity and ecosystem services. It is necessary to greenthe basic economic tools to influence business practices:

Annex 1. Priorities

4.

43

Ratings of environmental costs in leadRussian companies

The mix of sources of financing the costs of natureconservation in Russia in 1996-2001 (%)

Proceeds from enterprises and otherextra-budgetary sources

Regionalbudgets

Foreignsources

94%

1% 3%2%

Federal budget

Credits, soft, targeted

Subsidies and donations

Trade tariffs and duties

Environmental insurance

Suits, fines, revenues from selling confis-cated goods

Maecenasship and sponsorship

Payments for resource use

Taxes and excise duties

Increase the budget revenuesfrom natureresourceuse

Norilsk NikelUnified Energy SystemDiamonds of Russia-SakhaKuzbasrazrezugol Rosneft SeverstalSurgutneftegasLukoilYUKOSSidankoGaspromRUSSIA on the averageVAZGAZ

Company Rating of the costs

16,4815,6211,48

9,597,577,555,635,344,933,883,571,000,370,17

GlobalWealth

Nature20%

Capital16%

Man 64%

RussianWealth

Nature 83-88%

Capital7-10%

Man 5-7%

Sources ofproceeds tothe Russian

budget in1998

Nature13% Capital 38%

Labour - 49%

Nature and Profit.Manual for Childrenand Ministers onEnvironmentallyResponsibleBusiness.

Follow-up and up-building of efforts to preserve the unique ecosystem of LakeBaikal.

Annex 1. Priorities

5.

Growing global attention to Baikal (increasing number of publications)

44

A principal scheme of establishing anInternational Fund to be called Living Baikal

Participation in the Baikal protectionthrough buying securities of the Fund

Capital investment in environmentally admis-sible production operations and its return

The Living Baikal Fund

Capital Gains

Fixed Capital

%

Reimbursement forlosses and financingof sanation of harm-ful production oper-ations

Improve the state of theBaikal ecosystem

Preserve Lake Baikalas a World NaturalHeritage site

the Black Sea

Baikal

Managerial decisionsMaintain and support the activity in all sectors of the society, involving resources of the Government of Russia,

Subjects of the Russian Federation, and international donors to apply the approaches outlined in the BaikalBiodiversity Conservation Strategy.

Establish and support an inter-regional Baikal co-ordination council and restore the Federal Baikal Committee.Resolve the problems with meeting the international commitments of Russia concerning Lake Baikal as a site of

World Natural Heritage, and develop model of sustainable social and economic development of the areas with-in the borders of this site.

Financial decisionsFinancial compensation for global ecosystem services rendered by the Baikal natural area. Financial mechanisms of supporting civil society initiatives: the programme of small grants, micro-credits, soft

loans, investment in infrastructure …, including those for purposes of combating the poverty as a threat tobiodiversity.

Orientation towards activities which cannot exist without "clean" Baikal (water bottling, tourism, sale of "Baikal"trade marks, etc.)

Support the re-focusing towards environmentally acceptable management practices.

Image-related decisionsUse the Baikal international "image" to promote the

social and economic development of the regionand to convert its global status from an investmentrestriction into an advantage for environmentallyadmissible activities.

The approval of the Baikal Purity mark by the Tradeand Industry Chamber of the Russian Federationwill allow to sell its ecologically-pure Russian andinternational products.

Use the Baikal region as a nation-wide testing groundfor environmental education and fostering meth-ods to be replicated.

Developing the principles of information partnership among organisations andindividual specialists based on an infrastructure of interactive co-operation andjoint development of information products under the BioDat system.

Annex 1. Priorities

6.

45

All together wehave a deeperinsight into the

Nature whilealone we are

more frequentlymistaken

Edit

Participate

-yourself, -information, -partners, -colleagues, -allies, -clients, -projects,-job

Assess

Add

Unite

Discuss

Communicate

Copy

Order

Contact

PlaceCorrect

The experience in providinginformation services for

administration and man-agement bodies shows thatprimary information should

be analysed, the mostimportant things singled

out, and possible solutionsoutlined

The BioDat and Internetallow to meet informa-tional and analyticalneeds of managementin a fast manner

Promotion of shared knowl-edge and understanding ofcomplex living systems is an

efficient form of participatingin management processes

Ministries and Agencies, Research and Higher Education Institutions,

Non-Governmental Organisations

Orders

Requests

Instructions

AnalysisInformation

Reports

Draw your own map

Put your dot

Annex 2. Key Project Documents and Materials

46

1. Первый национальный доклад "Сохранение био-разнообразия в России", М., Госкомэкологии России, Про-ект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия", 1997, 170 с. Thefirst National report of Russian Federation "Biodeversity con-servation in Russia", Moscow, GEF Project "Biodiversity con-servation", 1997, 170 p.

2. Глобальная инициатива в области таксономии ивозможный вклад России в ее осуществление. ДарвинскаяДекларация. М., Госкомэкологии России, Проект ГЭФ"Сохранение биоразнообразия", 1998, 39 с.

3. Сохранение биологического разнообразия Рос-сии. Правовая и нормативно-методическая документация.Авторы-составители: В.А. Орлов, К.К. Ковалев, В.И. Пере-рва. М.: Госкомэкологии России, Проект ГЭФ, ОкаЭкос,1999, 470 с.

4. Сохранение биологического разнообразия: пози-тивный опыт. Редактор А.А. Тишков. М., Проект ГЭФ "Со-хранение биоразнообразия", 1999, 115 с.

5. Амирханов А.М., Тишков А.А. Национальнаястратегия и национальный план действий по сохранению би-ологического разнообразия в России. Бюлл.: Использова-ние и охрана природных ресурсов России, 1999, №5-6,с. 87-93.

6. Изучение и охрана разнообразия фауны, флоры иосновных экосистем Евразии. М.: РАН…, Проект ГЭФ "Со-хранение биоразнообразия". Материалы Международнойконференции, г. Москва, 21-23 апреля 1999 г. , 381 с.

7. Мартынов А.С. Природа и люди России. Эколо-гия, религия, политика и действие. Т.2. М.: Проект ГЭФ"Сохранение биоразнообразия", 1999, 132 с.

8. Общественный Договор о сохранении живой при-роды России. Декларация об общественном согласии в об-ласти сохранения живой природы России. Материалы 2-гоВсероссийского съезда по охране природы (3-5- июня 1999г., Саратов). ЭКОСинформ. Федеральный вестник эколо-гического права. № 8-9, 1999.

9. Состояние биоразнообразия европейской частиРоссии. Под Редакцией А.Ю. Пузаченко. Москва, Изд."Страховое ревю"., 2002,174 .

10. Международное сотрудничество в области со-хранения биоразнообразия и вопросы гармонизации дан-ных. "Страховое ревю", М., 2002, 67 с.

11. Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия": чтодальше..? Под ред. А.С. Мартынова. Москва, НУМЦ,2002, 69 с.

12. Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия".Крупнейший в последнее пятилетие инвестиционный проектпо охране живой природы России. Буклет, 2002 г.

Component А13. Стратегия сохранения биологического разнооб-

разия России. Компонент А Проекта ГЭФ "Сохранение би-оразнообразия". Редактор - Тишков А.А. М.: ЦПРП, Про-ект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия", М.: 1998, 62 с.

14. Национальная Стратегия сохранения биоразнооб-разия. РАН, МПР России, Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение био-разнообразия", 2001, 75 с. National Strategy of BiodiversityConservation in Russia. RAS, MNR of Russia, GEF Project"Biodiversity Conservation", 2001, 73 p.

15. Национальный План Действий. Приоритетные на-правления. РАН, МПР России, Проект ГЭФ "Сохранениебиоразнообразия", 2001, 24 с. National Action Plan forBiodiversity Conservation in Russia. RAS, MNR, GEF Project"Biodiversity Conservation", 2001, 73 p.

16. Основные положения Национальной Стратегиисохранения биоразнообразия России. Буклет. РАН, МПР,Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия", М., 2001.National Strategy of Biodiversity Conservation in Russia. MajorProvisions. RAS, MNR, GEF Project "BiodiversityConservation", 2001.

17. Современное состояние биоразнообразия Ниже-городской области. Нижний Новгород, Проект ГЭФ, 1999,Департамент по охране природы и управлению природо-пользованием Администрации Нижегородской области,Лаборатория охраны биоразнообразия при экоцентре"Дронт"., 1999, 66 с.

18. Подпрограмма "Сохранение редких и исчезаю-щих видов животных и растений" Федеральной целевойпрограммы "Экология и природные ресурсы России (2002- 2010 годы). С. 121-132.

19. Методика государственной кадастровой оценкиземель особо охраняемых природных территорий и объ-ектов (Росземкадастр, 2002).

20. Обзор национальных приоритетов России в сфе-рах деятельности, приоритетных для ГЭФ, и их региональ-ного распределения на основе объективных индикаторов.Методические материалы для территориальных органовМПР России. М.Я. Яковенко, 2002.

21. Экономика сохранения биоразнообразия. Подред.: С.Н. Бобылева. М.: Министерство охраны окружаю-щей среды и природных ресурсов РФ, 1995.

22. Бобылев С.Н., Гусев А.А., Мартынов А.С., Тиш-ков А.А. Экономика для защиты природы России. Буклет.РАН, МПР, Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия",2001, 12 с.

23. Экономическая оценка биоразнообразия. Подред.: С.Н. Бобылева и А.А. Тишкова. М.: ЦПРП, ПроектГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия", 1999, 112 с.

24. Экологические проблемы и товаропроизводите-ли: обзор фактов и примеров на российском и мировомрынках. Авторы-составители - Перерва В.И., МартыновА.С., Тишков А.А. М.: Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биораз-нообразия, 1999, 48 с.

25. Гусев А.А. Может ли экономика спасти природу?Экономические механизмы сохранения биоразнообразия.М.:РАН, МПР России, Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразно-образия", 28 с.

26. Сохранение биологического разнообразия Рос-сии. Правовая и нормативно-методическая документация.Авторы-составители: В.А. Орлов, К.К. Ковалев, В.И. Пере-рва. М.: Госкомэкологии России, Проект ГЭФ, ОкаЭкос,1999, 470 с.

27. Методы оценки ущерба биоресурсам. Сборникнормативно-методических документов и их аналитическийобзор. М.: Госкомэкологии России, ЦПРП Проект ГЭФ"Сохранение биоразнообраия", АО "Окаэкос", 2000, 240 с.

28. Новый взгляд на богатство народов. Индикаторыэкологически устойчивого развития. Авторы: Дж. Диксон,Ж. Бэккэс, К. Гамильтон, А. Кант, Э. Латц, С. Педжиола,Ж.Х. (Перевод с английского). М.: ЦПРП Проект ГЭФ "Со-хранение биоразнообразия" , 2000, 175 с.

29. Мартынов А.С., Артюхов В.В., Виноградов Г.В.Куда направлять средства? Бюлл. Использование и охранаприродных ресурсов в России, №8, 2000, с. 83-95.

30. А. Мартынов, Н. Доманова, Д. Люри, Е. Симонов,А. Тишков. Сколько стоит живая природа? Пособие для де-тей и министров. М.: 2000, 31 с. (A.Martynov N. Domanova,D. Luri, E. Simonov, A. Tishkov. What price of living nature?

Annex 2. Key Project Documents and Materials

47

A guide for children and ministers. Moscow, 2000, 31 p.)31. Мартынов А., Рыжова Н., Рыжов И. Природа

и/или прибыль? Пособие для детей и министров. М.: РЭ-ФИА, НИА-Природа, 2001, 36 с.

32. Система финансирования охраны живой природыв России. Анализ и базы данных по экологическим проек-там. М.: Изд. Дом "Страховое ревю", 2002, 151 с.

33. Финансовые источники, механизмы сохранениябиоразнообразия в России и международный рынок экоси-стемных услуг. Анализ и методические рекомендации. М.:Институт проблем рынка РАН, ЦЕМИ РАН, МПР России,НИЦ "Экопроект", Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнооб-разия", 2002, 48 с.

34. Методические рекомендации по созданию фон-дов поддержки сохранения биоразнообразия. М.: Инсти-тут проблем рынка РАН, ЦЭМИ РАН, МПР России, НИЦ"Экопроект", Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообра-зия", 2002, 48 с.

35. Новые финансовые механизмы сохранения био-разнообразия. Под ред.: Е.В. Рюминой и Г.А. Моткина.М., Институт проблем рынка РАН, 2002 , 210 с.

36. Принципы и методы экономической оценки зе-мель и живой природы: Аналитический справочник. Подред.: Нестерова О.А., Тишков А.А. Сост.: А.С. Мартынов.М.: Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия", Институтэкономики природопользования, 2002, 101 с.

37. Экономические механизмы разведения диких жи-вотных в неволе. М.: Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразно-образия", Институт эеономики природопользования, ЗАО"Ока-Экос", 2002, 52 с.

38. Экономика сохранения биоразнообразия. Подред.: А.А. Тишкова. Научные редакторы-составители:С.Н. Бобылев, О.Е. Медведева, С.В. Соловьева. М.: Про-ект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия", Институт эконо-мики природопользования, 2002, т.т. 1 и 2.

39. Сохранение биологического разнообразия горРоссии. А.М. Амирханов, А.А. Тишков, Е.А. Белоновская.М.: МПР России, Институт географии РАН, Проект ГЭФ"Сохранение биоразнообразия", 2002, 75 с. (материалы кнациональному докладу по биоразнообразию гор Россий-ской Федерации).

Component В40. Охраняемые природные территории. Компонент

В проекта Глобального Экологического Фонда "Сохране-ние биоразнообразия". Редакторы Е.А.Шварц, Л.Н.Алей-никова. Москва. Диалог - МГУ, 1998.

41. Охраняемые природные территории. КомпонентВ Проекта Глобального Экологического фонда (GlobalEnvironment Facility) "Сохранение Биоразнообразия Рос-сийской Федерации". Москва, Диалог-МГУ, 1998 г, 60 стр.

42. Степаницкий В.Б. Научно-исследовательская дея-тельность российских заповедников- взгляд из Управления.Доклад на совещании "Анализ многолетних рядов наблю-дений и компьютеризация ведения "Летописи природы" вгосударственных заповедниках и национальных парках. Пу-щино-на-Оке, 3-9 декабря 1997 г.

43. Степаницкий В.Б. Современное состояние и про-блемы организации службы охраны в государственныхприродных заповедниках. Выступление на совещании ди-ректоров заповедников в заповеднике "Чазы". Шира, сен-тябрь 1998 г.

44. Шварц Е.А. История, особенности, состояние и

проблемы реализации компонента В. "Охраняемые при-родные территории" проекта Глобального ЭкологическогоФонда "Сохранение биологического разнообразия Россий-ской Федерации". Информационный бюллетень для запо-ведников и национальных парков. №24-25, 1998г., с.33-34.

45. Подпрограмма "Поддержка особо охраняемыхприродных территорий" Федеральной целевой программы"Экология и природные ресурсы России (2002 - 2010 годы).С. 107-120.

46. Основные направления развития и организации де-ятельности государственных природных заповедников Рос-сийской Федерации на период до 2010 года. М.: МПР Рос-сии, 2001, 37 с. (одобрено Всероссийским семинаром-со-вещанием директоров государственных природных запо-ведников, 24 ноября 2000 г., п. Красная Поляна, Красно-дарский край).

Component С47. Декларация целей, задач и основных принципов

стратегии сохранения биоразнообразия экосистемы озераБайкал. Группа управления Проектом ГЭФ "Сохранениебиоразнообразия", под ред. Л.С. Катковой. - Иркутск,1999, 28 с., Declaration of objectives, tasks and main princi-ples of Lake Baikal Ecosystem biodiversity conservation strate-gy. GEF Project Implementation Group. Ed.: L. Katkova,Irkutsk, 2000, 28 p

48. Стратегия сохранения биоразнообразия экосисте-мы озера Байкал. Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнооб-разия", Байкальский компонент. - Москва: Ойкумена,2001, 48 с. Lake Baikal Ecosystem Biodiversity ConservationStrategy. GEF "Biodiversity Conservation Project". - Moskow:Oykumena, 2002, 48 p.

49. План действий по сохранению биоразнообразияозера Байкал. Проект ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообра-зия", Байкальский компонент. - Москва: Ойкумена, 2002,32 с.

50. Красная книга Иркутской области: сосудистыерастения. Под ред А.М. Зарубина. Иркутск: Изд-во "Обл-машинформ", 2001, 200 с.

51. Савенкова Т.П. Охраняемые природные террито-рии бассейна озера Байкал. Атлас. - Иркутск: Изд-во "От-тиск", 2002, 96 с., 228 ил.

52. Аннотированные списки фауны озера Байкал и еговодосборного бассейна: в 2-х томах.- Новосибирск: Наука,2001.- т.I: Озеро Байкал, кн. 1.-832 с.

53. Байкал - проблемы и пути решения/ Участники-составители Каткова Л.С., Мартынов А.С., МирутенкоМ.В., Рыжов И.Н., Тишков А.А. - Иркутск, 2002, - 22 с.

54. Доржиев Ц.З., Намзалов Б.Б. Байкал. Мир живойприроды: фотоальбом. - Санкт-Петербург: Изд-во "ИванФедоров", 2001.-136 с, 211 илл.

55. Думова И.И. и др. Частные и общественныевыгоды и потери сохранения биоразнообразияв Байкальском регионе.-Иркутск: Изд-во Институтагеографии СО РАН, 2002.-77 с.

56. Ландшафтное и биологическое разнообразиебассейна реки Хилок: опыт изучения и управления.-Новосибирск: Изд-во СО РАН, 2002.- 308 с.

57. Обзор результатов Байкальского компонентаПроекта ГЭФ "Сохранение биоразнообразия: цифрыи факты".-Иркутск, 2002.-19 с.

58. Юридическая ответственность за экологическиеправонарушения в Байкальском регионе (Под ред. БуяноваР.В., Никитина С.В. Москва, 2002.-139 с.

FundingPeriod

1997-2000

2001-2002

1997-20002001

1997-2000

2001-2002

2002

2002

1997-2000

2002

1997-2002

1997-2002

2001-2002

1997-2001

1998-2002

1997-2002

Annex 3. Structure of Russian Counterpart Funding under the Project in 1997-2003

Financial Source

Federal Targeted Program Comprehensive FederalProgram for Lake Baikal Protection and Rational Useof Natural Resources in the Baikal Basin

Federal Targeted Program Conservation of the AmurTiger

Federal Targeted Program Public Support of StateZapovedniks and National Parks till 2000

Federal Targeted Program Environment and NaturalResources (Subprogram Support of SpeciallyProtected Nature Areas in Russia)

Federal Targeted Program Environment and NaturalResources (Subprogram Conservation of Rare andEndangered Animal and Plant Species in Russia)

Federal Research and Technology Program Researchand Design in the Priority Areas of Civil Science andTechnology (Subprogram Biological Diversity)

Federal Research and Technology Program Researchand Design in the Priority Areas of Science andTechnology for 2002-2006

Assistance in the preparation and implementation ofRegional Biodiversity Conservation Strategies andAction Plans

Funds received by SPNA from regional sources

Cofinancing in the context of the Small Grants Program implementation in the Baikal Region

Cofinancing of conferences, workshops and forums

Russian donor contributions to SPNA support

Russian counterpart funding under the Project

Total

Major Outcomes

Assessment of the current status of Lake Baikalbiodiversity; selection of unique ecosystems forSPNA development; and estimate of landscapecapacity for tourism development, etc.

Establishment of 11 poaching control teams, andtwo tiger protection zakazniks; and tiger popula-tion monitoring

Establishment of 15 new SPNA covering an areaover 2.5 million ha; and support of the GEFProject implementation in 82 zapovedniks and 19national parks

Scientific support of biodiversity conservationactivities : 5 projects in elaboration of actions sup-ported by the GEF Project

Scientific support of biodiversity conservationactivities: implementation of specific tasks underthe National Action Plan

A Project-consistent scientific support of biodi-versity conservation activities: implementation ofspecific tasks under the National Action Plan (aspecial resolution by the Subprogram ScientificCouncil)

Scientific support of biodiversity conservationactivities: implementation of specific tasks underthe National Action Plan

Cofinancing of the GEF Project activities in thecontext of Regional Action Plan preparation andimplementation (establishment of new SPNA,publication of the Red Books, environmental edu-cation, etc.)

Support of the GEF Project actions aimed atenhancing protection, research and environmen-tal education

Support of the GEF Project actions aimed at thedevelopment of the SPNA regional network (10new SPNA were established), preparation of bio-diversity inventory, ecotourism development,and promotion of environmental education andawareness

Contribution through the allocation of funds torent premises, cover participants' traveling costs,publish materials, etc.

Support of the GEF Project actions aimed atenhancing protection and environmental educa-tion and awareness

Payment or reimbursement of mandatory taxesand charges due to the state budget in relation tothe procurement of goods, works and services

ThousandUS Dollars

620

155

17060

2200

1600

115

95

840

150

350

1300

11500

100

170

970

20395