In general, under recent laws, local governments have been given broad, new responsibilities to address problems posing risks to human health, the environment or economy. Municipalities as self-government authorities have been working out long-term development programs: municipalities are responsible for economic, social, and cultural development, and for the creation of a healthy environment.
Former socialist countries which have developed economically are now paying more attention to the integrated approach of economy and environment: at local level, it is obvious that the environment has not been given top priority in municipal agendas. People's concerns have shifted from environmental issues to economic and social ones (unemployment, living standard, security) soon after the political changes.
The system of local government differs in respective countries. Municipality can be either a single unit (town, village, settlement) or a territory encompassing several settlements. In all respective countries, systems of local government are based on similar principles.
The basic rights and powers of the local government are usually executed by the Municipal Assembly and the Council. The Municipal Assembly approves programs for municipal development, budget and municipal regulations. A Municipal Council is the body of local self-governance - the executive organ. It may transfer some of its power to the Mayor.
The municipal office is headed by the Mayor. The Council is authorized to form departments of the municipal office for individual spheres of its activity. The departments of environmental protection (somewhere merged with agriculture or divided in smaller sections according to environmental media or activity) employ a different number of persons usually depending on the size of the municipality and on the decision made by the elected representatives (1-15 employees usually deal with environmental protection). One of the major problems of many local government offices is the shortage of adequate, administrative personnel. This fact, together with the lack of environmental management knowledge and skills, can be an important obstacle in the way of effective environmental protection at local level.
Municipalities control some institutions providing various services: kindergartens, nursery homes, orphanages, museums, elementary and secondary schools, etc. Utilities and physical services provided by municipalities are owned either by municipalities or by contracted private companies.
Municipalities have to take care of their own real budgets and are fully responsible for effective management. The municipalization or privatization of state-owned property by municipalities is one of the most important economic changes at the local level. The formerly state-owned council housing stock, water resources, forest, public utilities and commercial enterprises, public buildings, and land were transferred to local government by law. In general, most municipalities face a lack of money for their development (that is especially true in the case of comprehensive environmental remedy programs, rehabilitation of past damage, etc.)
Municipalities cooperate with other appropriate governmental agencies, other municipalities, and private companies. Partnership between the public and private sectors is newly emerging. Municipalities have some tools (economic incentives, most of all) to attract entrepreneurs to plans for municipality development. These partnerships are established especially in the organization of services for citizens like water supply, waste water treatment, waste disposal, etc. Cooperation between local governments can help to overcome human inability to manage local environmental issues. Associations of municipalities as legally-based bodies for protection and asserting common interests have been established in all the countries. An important aspect of the associations' work is the financial cooperation; in cases of common interest, they can finance matters jointly.
Territorial organs of ministries and other central agencies - regional and district offices - have an important place in coordinating national strategies.
The EAP calls attention to a lack of resources available for environmental improvement and weak institutions in the CEE countries. It provides guidelines to identify the highest priority problems and to develop realistic, efficient and cost-effective solutions. It stresses the importance of consensus-building with a strong participatory approach while planning environmental and economic development.
Policies promoting competition and privatization are used by respective ministries in all CEE countries. A complete, economic restructuring is the most important consequence of this development. As far as environmental regulations are concerned, many CEE countries have worked out a system of environmental standards comparable to those applied in the EU or OECD. These standards require strong enforcement (monitoring, imposing charges, etc.) by institutions at all levels. However, institutional enforcement capacity at local level, most of all, must be strengthened significantly.
One of the EAP requirements is to strengthen local environmental planning. Despite the fact that planning was the most characteristic feature of previous economic systems in the CEE countries, local environmental planning is quite a new challenge. Community environmental planning brings several benefits:
Environmental planning is an open process that uses and combines different instruments and tools. The outcome - LEAP - becomes a part of the entire environmental management system.
Besides the requirement of improving the capacities of environmental institutions (NGOs, research institutions, environmental agencies) and/or institutions that manage the environment (ministries, district offices, local governments), it is also necessary to increase communication and coordination between different levels of government as well as within local government. Municipalities should increase the level of cooperation-operation and coordination with the goal of enhancing the information and experience exchange between local authorities. Local governments can learn from citizens and from local community and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed to formulate the best strategies.
The EAP recognized that the bulk of resources for environmental expenditures in CEE has to be found at the local level (regional and local environmental funds, enterprises, municipalities). Examples from Poland show that a substantial part of environmental expenditure comes from regional and local environmental funds and municipalities (60 percent) and enterprises (30 percent). This shows that local resources may play a decisive role in funding environmental investments. Local governments should work out a domestic system of environmental financing.
A few categories are recommended priorities: operation, maintenance, and repair costs of public environmental services; win-win investments (which can be justified on economic and financial grounds alone, but they bring substantial environmental benefits with them as well; they make sense when financial resources are limited); low cost measures to address long-term priorities where prompt investment can save money in the future.
Financial analyzes - based on a comparison of cost and benefit - of different options should play an important part when setting environmental priorities among different strategic options. To achieve the best results with the available resources, it is necessary to know how much environmental improvement can be achieved at different costs.
CEE countries have, however, developed their NEAPs more or less based on the EAP recommendations, although there are many obstacles resulting in a lack of communication with the public, inconsistencies in setting priorities and hot spots, a lack of a leadership in environmental administration initiating and conducting concrete programs, difficulties with translating strategy papers into action. This has lead some municipalities to prepare environmental plans based on their own priorities.
LEAPs can use the methodology of the EAP. Local level can even easily adopt some recommendations of the EAP because of the compliance of a goals timetable, easier contact with the public, knowledge of local conditions. There are certain limitations in developing individual policies by local governments caused by a division of responsibility between administration bodies at different levels (national governments are supposed to enact laws, regulations and set up a frame for economic instruments as well). In some countries, recently returned tendencies to centralize power can become a serious constraint to democratic, local development.
LEAPs are to be carried out by people living in a given area. Only local people can design the LEAP in a way which really meets local requirements. LEAP offers many forms of collaboration between local administration and the public: public hearings, creation of environmental, project committees, etc. Training designed for citizens working on project committees, as well as the continuous education of the public about evaluation of the condition of the environment, understanding of environmental reporting, and showing links between the environment and economy, are prerequisites if the LEAPs are to continue. Local authorities, environmental NGOs, the scientific community and all concerned have a primary task at the outset: involve the public so that the LEAP can be truly perceived as owned by the majority of citizens.
The LEAP goals are to be realistic and achievable in a certain time limit and with a certain budget. In general, LEAPs focus on short-term priorities. This does not mean that LEAPs compromise a vision of the community with long-term goals. This vision can gradually become reality by implementing achievable, realistic measures. As far as money is concerned, the LEAP is not intended to attract foreign financial assistance to the community. Financial analysis during the priority-setting process is used to chose options bringing environmental improvement at the lowest cost, financed primarily from national and local sources.
LEAP offers a truly democratic way of handling local affairs. From creating a vision for the community, through selecting priorities and designing targets, to implementation of selected programs, the public is given a chance to shape its own future.
Environmental goals should be balanced with economic performance. The impact of proposed solutions on economic and social issues should be acceptable to the community (phasing out a local business can cause unemployment, stop state subsidies, etc.). The interrelationship of the environment and the economy should be recognized. This approach - when progress in environmental protection is achieved along with improvements in economic performance - will ultimately lead to sustainable development.