Environmental Assistance to Eastern Europa - Annual Report 1998

3. The Aarhus Conference

3. The Aarhus Conference

3. The Aarhus Conference

The Aarhus Conference 23 – 25 June 1998

Largest environmental conference in Denmark

The largest environmental conference ever held in Denmark – the Fourth Pan-European Conference of Environment Ministers – “Environment for Europe” with about 1,300 participants and more than 40 environment ministers took place in Aarhus 23 – 25 June 1998.

Part of the “Environment for Europe” process

The Aarhus Conference was the Fourth Pan-European Conference of Environment Ministers held under the title of “Environment for Europe”. The first conference was held on Czech initiative in Dobris in the former Czechoslovakia in 1991, and since then, conferences have been held in Lucerne, Switzerland, in 1993 and in Sofia, Bulgaria, in 1995.

With certain exceptions, the fall of the iron curtain in 1989 revealed a serious neglect of the environment in the former Communist countries. The main purpose of the “Environment for Europe” conferences is to create a co-operation forum for restoration of the environment in Eastern Europe and in the countries of the former Soviet Union pari passu with the economic reform process. Another purpose is to ensure common dynamics in the environmental policies of Eastern and Western Europe. The conferences are referred to as the “Environment for Europe” process, and the overall purpose may be described as creating environmental integration in all of Europe.

Most European countries, including Denmark, see the primary purpose of the process as being that of strengthening the assistance provided in Eastern Europe to protect the environment and nature. A few countries – such as the countries in Southern Europe – emphasise the distinct pan-European parts of the process. For geographical reasons, these countries are traditionally less interested in Eastern European issues.

Results of former conferences – in a historical perspective

Despite the poor basis of the Eastern European countries – economically and environmentally – the first three “Environment for Europe” conferences led to a number of important advances for European environmental policy:

	Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe (EAP). The Eastern European countries are assisted in the elaboration of national environmental action plans attempting to identify the most important environmental problems, prioritising the steps to be taken and suggesting the most cost-effective ways of implementing the policies chosen. The programme is managed by a Task Force with representatives from the countries involved and the OECD-secretariat in Paris. The EAP was presented and adopted at the Lucerne Conference in 1993.
	Project Preparation Committee (PPC). The purpose of the Committee is to create increased dynamics in Western environmental assistance in Eastern Europe. The Committee is composed primarily of donor countries and international financial institutions like the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Nordic Investment Bank and the European Investment Bank. The Committee strives to “match” the donor countries’ donations and the banks’ funds available for lending. The assistance provided under this scheme is aimed primarily at a number of major environmental infrastructure projects. The PPC was established at the Lucerne Conference in 1993 and has since provided financing of 110 environmental projects to a total value of about DKK 4 Bn.
	Common European Strategy for Biodiversity and Landscapes. This strategy strives to promote the implementation of the international Biodiversity Convention signed at the UN Environmental Conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The strategy ranges from traditional protection of landscapes to preventive action for the conservation of the species of nature. The purpose of the strategy is to ensure that, during their economic restoration, the Eastern European countries do not duplicate the natural destruction witnessed in the Western European countries. The situation is that in Eastern Europe there are far more and far larger unspoilt areas than in Western Europe. This is partly the result of less far-reaching industrialisation of agriculture and forestry and partly because extensive nature conservation areas were established at an early stage. The common European strategy was adopted in Sofia in 1995.

Moreover, the conferences have provided the framework for a number of joint discussions of other environmental issues, which have gradually led to a common understanding among the countries – despite their different situations and stages of development. Participants from Eastern European countries often emphasise that the conferences have contributed to a greater sense of environmental awareness in these countries and thus have strengthened the prioritisation of environmental policy issues. All in all, the conferences have thus developed into the most important forum for environmental co-operation between East and West.

Ten items on the agenda of the Aarhus Conference

As the result of several years of preparation for the Conference, the participants agreed on 10 items for the agenda.

The Publicity Convention

The main event at the Conference was the Publicity Convention, now named the Aarhus Convention. The Convention establishes a number of minimum rights for ordinary citizens regarding access to information about the environment, access to participating in environmental policy decisions through hearings and the like, and access to having the authorities’ environmental decisions tried in court. In many of the signing countries – in the East as well as the West – the Convention will lead to a marked extension of ordinary citizens’ and grass root movements’ access to influencing environmental policy decisions directly.

35 countries signed the Århus Convention – including all EU countries except Germany. There was widespread disappointment that Germany and Russia failed to sign the Convention – especially because during the negotiations, other countries had gone to great lengths in their attempts to secure both German and Russian acceptance. Subsequently, after the change of government, Germany signed the Convention.

Apart from this, the debate revealed great enthusiasm and support for the Convention on the part of the ministers. The NGO’s were considerably more reserved, as they found the Convention much too weak in a number of important areas (living modified organisms not included, very weak section on sanctions for non-compliance, many weak sections, etc.).

NGO’s on the rostrum

As something new, the international environmental grass root movements, the NGO’s, were allowed to arrange a special session in one of the afternoons of the Conference in connection with the debate on the new Publicity Convention. The NGO’s focused on public access to environmental information and the possibilities of participating in environmental policy-making in the European countries. The focus was on good as well as poor publicity practice in the environmental area in the participating countries. As something new, the NGO’s participated directly in negotiations on the Publicity Convention, and they regard the Convention as a very important tool in their future work.

The session resulted in a lively debate between NGO’s and ministers on public access to environmental information and access to participating in environmental policy-making. Subsequently, there seemed to be general approval of letting the NGO’s play a bigger role in the “Environment for Europe” process.

The European Environment Agency had updated a report on the state of the environment in Europe and parts of the former Soviet Union. The report showed that overall there has been progress in the environmental policy, but that this progress has so far led to only modest improvements in the state of the environment.

The report also showed that the nature of environmental problems is very different in Eastern and Western Europe. Western Europe has come a long way in fighting traditional problems like water pollution and waste, whereas diffuse sources of pollution like agriculture and transport cause increasing problems. Eastern Europe faces more or less all the environmental problems also facing Western Europe 20-30 years ago, but in addition, they have increasing problems caused by automobile traffic.

The report was welcomed by everyone as an essential basis of the future environmental agenda in Europe. Several of the EU applicant countries pressed for membership of the European Environment Agency prior to membership of the EU, and this is now being pursued. Besides, in the Declaration by the Environment Ministers, the Agency was requested to prepare a new report based on environmental indicators for the next “Environment in Europe” ministerial conference.

Increased action in the NIS

One of the main items on the agenda of the Conference was a debate on how to put more focus on the environmental situation in the NIS – the former Soviet Republics that have now gained independence (thus the name, Newly Independent States). The CEEC have come further in their efforts to restore the environment than most of the NIS. This is partly because the economic situation in the CEEC is improving again – after a serious economic setback and extensive economic reforms. This has put the countries in an economic position to do something about the environment. And it is partly because ten out of the CEEC are beginning to adapt to EU environmental directives, as this is a prerequisite to EU membership.

Environmental action is much more limited in NIS, and non-existing in many countries. Some of the economies are beginning to stabilise, while the economic recession continues in several of the countries.

It was decided to increase the focus on environmental problems in NIS generally. In concrete terms, it was decided that the two Environment for Europe institutions – the EAP Task Force and PPC – are to concentrate their efforts much more on NIS. It is the intention that the work of the EAP Task Force in the CEEC, to the extent that it continues, shall gradually shift to the Regional Environmental Center in Szentendre, Hungary. In this way, resources will be released for the work in NIS. At the same time, the EU Commission promised that its general support programme for NIS – TACIS – will prioritise environmental projects more highly in future. It presupposes, however, that NIS themselves give higher priority to the environment and improve their ability to identify environmental projects worthy of assistance. Finally, the decision to set up a number of new regional environmental centres in Moldavia, Georgia, Russia and Ukraine was confirmed.

Environmental financing

Restoring the environment in Eastern Europe will require large investments, which the countries will find it difficult to raise in their present economic situation. During the Conference, the EAP Task Force presented a study of total environmental investments in Eastern Europe in recent years and of Western assistance. The report showed stagnant assistance from Western donors as a whole – with the exception of Denmark, which is now the largest Western donor of environmental assistance in Eastern Europe – both absolutely and as a share of GDP per capita. About 90% of the investment funds are mobilised – on average – by the countries themselves, and some Eastern European countries which have applied for membership of the EU spend a larger share of their GDP on environmental investments than most Western countries.

NIS and the non-applicant countries in Eastern Europe are in a much weaker position than the applicant countries, and in their case, donations and loans from international banks play a substantially bigger role in environmental investments.

Even though it is clear that the bulk of financing will have to come from domestic sources, it was pointed out from many quarters that contributions from the West in the form of direct donations and loans are important as catalysts for domestic action. Besides, various domestic financing models were discussed – including national environmental funds accumulated through payments of pollution charges and fines for violation of environmental legislation.

The debate ended with the adoption of the recommendations of the Financing Report (annex 3), encouraging especially non-applicant countries to give higher political priority to the environment and to strengthen their institutional capacity to manage environmental investments. Moreover, all the recipient countries are encouraged to improve the generating of investment funds. In continuation of this, the document “Guidelines for the use of financial instruments of control in countries in transition to market economy” was adopted. These guidelines recommend, among other things, implementation of the “Polluter Pays Principle” and the internalisation of environmental costs in prices as a means of generating investment funds for environmental protection.

Two air pollution protocols

Another culmination of the Conference was the adoption of two new air pollution protocols under the ECE-convention “Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution” (CLRTAP). The two new protocols put the signatories under an obligation to limit emissions of heavy metals (lead, cadmium and mercury) and POPs (Persistant Organic Pollutants such as DDT). The emission of heavy metals and POPs has gradually come to be identified as the main cause of a large number of diseases and damage to human beings, animals and plants. Since the protocols were signed in Århus, they were named the Århus Protocols. The protocols have been negotiated since 1990 and will extend the strict restrictions on the emissions of these substances which have already applied for some years in the EU and in North America.

34 countries signed the two protocols and a Declaration on the Phase-Out of Leaded Petrol. Furthermore, the Ministers adopted a “Declaration on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution” and a “Declaration on Persistent Organic Pollutants”.

Many ministers advocated an increase in the number of substances comprised by the two new protocols and intensified efforts to ensure that countries that have signed the protocols also comply with them. The debate also concentrated on securing financing of the continued development of the Convention, including the necessary scientific research, which has so far – to a great extent – relied on voluntary contributions. Furthermore, there was broad support for expediting negotiations of a new acidification/sulphur emission protocol. The new protocol will comprise acidification, eutrophication and ozonization at the surface of the earth and all major sources of these environmental effects in contrast to the former NO_x -protocol from 1988 comprising acidification and NO_x only. The new protocol aims at fixing emission levels by region on the basis of a principle of critical load.

Since then, negotiations of a new global agreement have been patterned on the POP-protocol.

Phasing out leaded petrol

In connection with the Protocol on Heavy Metals, a common European strategy for the complete phasing out of leaded petrol in all European countries was elaborated under Danish management. Surveys conducted in connection with the strategy show that technically as well as economically, it is possible to phase out lead in petrol completely by around 2005.

The common European strategy for the phase-out of leaded petrol by 2005 was adopted. In continuation of this, 32 countries signed a special declaration on the phase-out of leaded petrol in connection with the signing of the Protocol on Heavy Metals, cf. above. Another two countries have subsequently committed themselves to phasing out leaded petrol by 2005. The Declaration is not legally binding, but according to the Declaration, the 32 signatories undertake to phase out the use of leaded petrol as early as 2005, ie somewhat earlier than they committed themselves to by their signatures on the Heavy Metal Protocol, which does not require this phase-out to have been finalised until 2012. The parties agreed to evaluate the implementation of the strategy at the next “Environment for Europe” conference.

Recommendations for energy efficiency

A number of studies of and recommendations for energy efficiency had been prepared under Danish management. The background to the initiative was decades of subsidizing energy consumption and failure to carry out technological renewal, which has left Eastern Europe with a very high and inefficient energy consumption. The initiative was intended to support the implementation of the European Energy Charter’s Protocol on Energy Efficiency which entered into force in April 1998. Energy efficiency must be seen as a very important step towards compliance with the Kyoto-agreement under the Climate Convention. It requires limitation of industrial countries’ greenhouse gas emissions, which consist chiefly in carbon dioxide from incineration of fossil fuels.

The Ministers adopted a Policy Statement on Energy Efficiency and presented Guidelines on Energy Conservation in Europe. Some of the recommendations were that all energy price subsidies should be removed by 2005, that environmental externalities ought to be increasingly internalised in energy prices and that the countries should introduce efficiency standards for certain types of energy-consuming equipment. The USA and Canada chose not to endorse the guidelines, one of the reasons being that they had certain reservations about following the recommendations for removal of subsidies for energy consumption.

The Pan-European Biodiversity and Landscape Strategy

Since the adoption at the Sofia Conference of the Pan-European Biodiversity and Landscape Strategy, work has been undertaken nationally as well as internationally to implement the strategy. The strategy is very comprehensive, and there have been problems financing it – especially in Central and Eastern Europe. One of the most important – and most controversial elements of the strategy is the integration of biodiversity considerations into agricultural policies, which was also reflected in the debate at the Conference.

The Ministers adopted a Resolution on Biological and Landscape Diversity emphasising, among other things, the importance of better integration of biodiversity and landscape protection into sectoral policies and announcing initiatives in this respect – especially in relation to the agricultural policies in connection with the EU enlargement. The Resolution also expresses a positive attitude to a ministerial conference on agriculture and environment.

Role of private enterprises

A very large part of the pollution in Eastern Europe stems from industry, which has generally been run down and using obsolete technology. An important and necessary prerequsite to economic restoration in these countries is the modernisation of industry. Private enterprises from Western Europe investing in Eastern Europe can contribute to a substantial improvement of the environment by respecting the same environmental standards in Eastern Europe as in Western Europe. This will entail a considerable extra gain for the environment.

The debate at the Conference took the form of a dialogue between ministers and representatives of industry. There was general agreement that the Eastern European countries stand a good chance of taking advantage of the development towards a cleaner environment which many years of environmental politics have resulted in in Western economies in connection with the renewal of industry. As emphasised by means of a number of examples, this can be effected both by Western enterprises investing directly in Eastern Europe and by promoting the efforts made by Eastern European enterprises to introduce cleaner technology through the environmental policies pursued in these countries. With a view to accelerating this process, an advisory committee with representatives from industry will now be set up under the EAT Task Force.

Importance to Denmark

The Aarhus Conference ought to be seen in conjunction with the Danish support provided for the restoration of the environment in Eastern Europe. After the liberation in 1989, Denmark was one of the first countries to provide support for the restoration of the environment in Eastern Europe and is still one of the countries providing the greatest assistance – in absolute as well as relative terms – measured by the size of the population. The background to providing the assistance has been the wish to improve environmental conditions in Eastern European countries as well as the wish to reduce transboundary pollution from these countries which also affects Denmark.

In concrete terms, the “Environment for Europe”-process has helped target-orient the Danish assistance provided to Eastern Europe. The preparation of national environmental action plans in the Eastern countries has thus made it easier to identify the most environmental projects most worthy of assistance, and it has also become easier to join up with other Western donors and lenders for such projects.

In many ways, the “Environment for Europe”-process, which was originally based on an Eastern European initiative, has led to higher priority being given to environmental action in major parts of Eastern Europe. This has been possible only because of the creation of a common forum with participation of all the most important actors for restoring the Eastern European environment: governments, the EU Commission, international financial institutions, grass root movements, several UN organisations, etc.

This has ensured an exchange of information and mutual influence on attitudes and co-ordination of the steps taken.

The signing of the Aarhus Convention on citizens’ environmental rights has ensured citizens substantially better possibilities of exercising their influence on environmental policy-making in all of the signing countries. This will be the best guarantee of continued development of environmental protection in future.