Regional Overview

I. Background

General Situation in Environmental Protection in the CEE Countries

Development in Transition

During the transition from central planning to market-based economies, governments in the CEE countries have faced the difficult task of balancing environmental concerns with economic development. The initial focus has primarily been on restructuring the economy and restoring private ownership and economic competition. However, environmental protection has become increasingly accepted as an element in developing national policies. Most governments consider it essential to the successful completion of economic reforms. Governments now face a myriad of complex and often conflicting priorities between economic reforms, privatization activities and environmental protection.

Most of the countries are struggling with declining economies due to the loss of markets resulting from the break up of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). After this split, former CMEA members had to reorganize economic agreements and identify new markets. Industrial production suffered the greatest decline and has only recently recovered in a few CEE countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland). While in other countries, the decrease in industrial output has not yet stopped nor has it reached bottom.

During the same period, some of the CEE countries (Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary) have seen a significant increase in the share of privatized enterprises in industrial, agricultural and service sectors. They experienced the creation of a large number of new enterprises, mainly small and medium, over the past few years. Mass privatization was expected to improve environmental conditions. Yet these new commercial enterprises often lack experience in responsible environmental management and face strong competitive pressures to 'profit now' and cut costs.

Only very recently has an integrated approach to the economy and environment gained more attention from some national governments. These approaches utilize both regulatory ("command and control") and economic ("market incentives") mechanisms for environmental protection. This is especially evident in countries with significant achievements in economic reform, such as market liberalization and macroeconomic stabilization (e.g. Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Slovak Republic and Slovenia).

In countries that have experienced more severe economic hardships, both public and government priorities focused less on environmental protection and education and more on wealth creation, social security, employment, health care, public safety and housing. Recent gains have been made, but public awareness of environmental issues remains low. As a result, two main trends have emerged that illustrate the position of environmental issues relative to economic and social problems in the CEE countries:

In Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia the public and governmental concern for environmental issues was very high, but has decreased over the past four years and been replaced by economic and social issues. This process is seen as an adjustment in attitude due to economic hardship. However, it is not an indication that these countries have solved previously identified environmental problems.
In Albania and the FYR Macedonia, environmental problems are only recently gaining some attention. This is due to the increased availability of information demonstrating the relationship between the environment, human health and the economy. Important environmental issues are still under evaluated and need to be recognized and properly addressed.

Both trends point to the complex task that lies ahead as the CEE countries identify and prioritize development goals and environmental issues during the transition period. Their ability to effectively address these environmental issues depends not only on the level of public support, but also on the ability of each environmental administration to act.

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEAP PROCESS

Albania Bulgaria Croatia Czech Republic Hungary Latvia Lithuania FYR Macedonia Poland Romania Slovak Republic Slovenia

I. Environment as a national priority

1990 No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No

1994 Yes No No No No No No No No Yes No No

II. Environmental Policy Making

Environmental Frame Act 1993 1991 1994 1992 1976, 1995 1990 1992 to be enacted 1980 1989 1993 1993

Environmental Strategy Document 1993 1992 to be completed 1990 1971, 1994 1995 to be completed to be completed 1991 1992 1993 to be completed

III. Capacity for Environmental Administration

a) Individual skills

Technical expertise No Yes * * Yes * * Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Managerial skills No No * * No * * No No No No No

b) Institutional framework

Adjusted functions and structures Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Special training programs No Yes No No Yes No No No No No No No

IV. Priority Fields for Environmental Investments

#1 Drinking water supply Air pollution control Industrial waste management Air pollution control Industrial waste management Waste water treatment Waste water treatment Drinking water supply Air pollution control Drinking water supply Drinking water supply Air pollution control

#2 Domestic waste management Drinking water supply Drinking water supply Transport, traffic Industrial waste management Air pollution control Waste water treatment Drinking water supply Forest management Air pollution control Waste water treatment Domestic waste management

#3 Waste water treatment Domestic waste management Domestic waste management Waste water treatment Domestic waste management Domestic waste management Transport, traffic Industrial and domestic waste management Waste water treatment Nuclear and other highly hazardous material Waste water treatment Transport, traffic

V. Priority in Development of the NEAP Components

Environmental policy development 3 3 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 1 2 2

Institutional strengthening 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 1

Investments 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 1 3

VI. Number of local language EAP copies delivered 350 700 800 1000 1500 350 378 520 3500 2500 500 1000

	Albania	Bulgaria	Croatia	Czech Republic	Hungary	Latvia	Lithuania	FYR Macedonia	Poland	Romania	Slovak Republic	Slovenia
I. Environment as a national priority
1990	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
1994	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	No
II. Environmental Policy Making
Environmental Frame Act	1993	1991	1994	1992	1976, 1995	1990	1992	to be enacted	1980	1989	1993	1993
Environmental Strategy Document	1993	1992	to be completed	1990	1971, 1994	1995	to be completed	to be completed	1991	1992	1993	to be completed
III. Capacity for Environmental Administration
a) Individual skills
Technical expertise	No	Yes	*	*	Yes	*	*	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Managerial skills	No	No	*	*	No	*	*	No	No	No	No	No
b) Institutional framework
Adjusted functions and structures	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Special training programs	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
IV. Priority Fields for Environmental Investments
#1	Drinking water supply	Air pollution control	Industrial waste management	Air pollution control	Industrial waste management	Waste water treatment	Waste water treatment	Drinking water supply	Air pollution control	Drinking water supply	Drinking water supply	Air pollution control
#2	Domestic waste management	Drinking water supply	Drinking water supply	Transport, traffic	Industrial waste management	Air pollution control	Waste water treatment	Drinking water supply	Forest management	Air pollution control	Waste water treatment	Domestic waste management
#3	Waste water treatment	Domestic waste management	Domestic waste management	Waste water treatment	Domestic waste management	Domestic waste management	Transport, traffic	Industrial and domestic waste management	Waste water treatment	Nuclear and other highly hazardous material	Waste water treatment	Transport, traffic
V. Priority in Development of the NEAP Components
Environmental policy development	3	3	2	3	3	3	1	1	2	1	2	2
Institutional strengthening	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	2	1	2	3	1
Investments	2	2	3	2	2	2	1	2	3	3	1	3
VI. Number of local language EAP copies delivered	350	700	800	1000	1500	350	378	520	3500	2500	500	1000

Key Actors in Environmental Protection at the National Level

There are a wide variety of actors involved in environmental protection at the national level. Although their status and activities differ considerably in each country, the most significant actors are:

Parliaments - top legislative bodies enacting fundamental legal rules of environmental protection; environmental parliamentary commissions review the acts and regulations which are to be passed by the Parliament.
Government and public administration bodies at the national level (Ministry of Environment, other relevant ministries and inter-ministerial bodies) - top decision-making bodies responsible for policy and legislation, supervision of implementation and enforcement, setting investment priorities, distribution of resources and disseminating information. Other ministries dealing with industry, trade, privatization, physical planning, agriculture and transport often have a separate department for environmental protection or at least some individual officers.
Inter-institutional coordination at the national level including environment councils (for example Inter-Institutional Committee for Priority Projects - Bulgaria, Council for Sustainable Development, Environmental Council to the President, Inter-ministerial Team for Addressing Environmental Problems in Privatization - Poland, Inter-ministerial body for Implementation of Agenda 21 and EAP - Croatia). Their members are prime ministers, ministers, business, science and NGO representatives. Advisory bodies have also involved independent environmental experts (Albania, Slovenia).
Financial institutions including national and commercial banks and national (extra-budgetary) environmental funds.
Businesses performing environmental protection activities in industry. Associations of manufacturers and chambers of different economic sectors have been involved in developing new legislation and in revising existing legal regulations and environmental standards.
Science, research and education institutions either subordinated to the relevant ministries or associated with the National Academy of Sciences. Environmental research has been carried out at the universities and technical high schools as well.
Non-governmental organizations (associations, clubs, foundations, etc.), both national and international. Non-governmental organizations are usually citizens' associations or environmental groups or members of the scientific (academic) sector. Their primary task has been to foster public awareness via education, campaigns and distribution of environment-related information. Some NGOs are involved in various grant projects focused on environmental improvements or environmental capacity building.
Mass media. They also have an increasing role in the majority of the CEE countries. There are a number of specialized magazines and daily newspapers printing articles dealing with the environment. Also, there are TV channels reporting on environmental issues and broadcasting environmental education programs.

The actors differ not only in their goals, but also in the influence they have on the decision-making process. The influence of regional government agencies and businesses has increased over the last few years while the role of the others has diminished.

The Concept of the Environmental Action Program

The goal of common principles for environmental protection in Europe has led to the development of the Environmental Action Program (EAP) for Central and Eastern Europe. Adopted by the Lucerne ministerial conference in April 1993, the EAP articulates the methodology for creating strategic environmental priorities at the national level.

The main goal of the EAP is to help countries of Central and Eastern Europe find realistic, efficient and cost-effective methods of improving the environment. Setting environmental priorities, assessing risks and involving the public in environmental decision-making are the foundation of a proper strategy for environmental protection. This strategy can determine investments and propose measures for accomplishing social and environmental objectives in the most efficient manner.

The EAP proposes a methodology that may help to accomplish this goal. The main obstacles facing the CEE countries are the lack of financial resources and institutional background. Therefore, the EAP proposes to concentrate on the following activities:

Environmental planning to include setting priorities, identifying tools and measures of effective environmental management and involving the public in environmental decision-making;
Institutional strengthening to increase efficiency in environmental administrations and to improve environmental monitoring, control and enforcement of environmental regulations;
Environmental investments that address immediate local and regional problems and identify long-term sustainable solutions.

Recommendations and guidelines provided by the EAP aim at rational allocation of limited financial resources. It stresses the importance of consensus-building while planning environmental and economic development. These plans, coupled with policy, investment and institutional reform, can maximize the efficiency of environment-related spending. Only such an integrated approach to environmental protection can maximize the use of natural resources.

In addition to maximizing efficiency, the EAP stresses public participation in environmental policy development and implementation. Attention is paid to the role of different units of the state administration (especially on the national level) as well as to the business community. Active public participation is required in both the development and implementation of national environmental policies.

From EAP to NEAP

The EAP is not a final document with specified objectives that have to be precisely followed and implemented by the countries. It is rather an instrument or methodology that countries can use to draft viable environmental protection plans. The role of the EAP methodology is also to show that environmental planning can be a creative and mobilizing tool of environmental policy. Therefore it is important to use the methodology when writing a National Environmental Action Program (NEAP). If successfully implemented, the NEAP can then provide a comprehensive framework for environmental policy, institutional strengthening and investments. The process of creating the NEAP in line with the EAP methodology has several significant features:

countries should prepare their own environmental protection program based on the state of the country's environment and the country's own priorities reflecting the level of economic, social and political development;
countries are expected to design their own system of environmental information (monitoring), information dissemination, comprehensive environmental legislation, public administration including inspection to supervise implementation of the program as well as adequate technologies;
the NEAP should be drafted to assure a combination of regulatory (command-and-control) instruments and economic (market incentives) tools which have not been properly balanced in the region before;
drafting the NEAP is coordinated from above, usually by the Ministry of Environment, and by its specialized environmental policy department if established. It usually helps to combine international, national and regional aspects of environmental protection;
the NEAP is drafted in close cooperation with other governmental authorities responsible for other sectors of the country's development (economy, industry, finance, transport, agriculture, etc.); this way the NEAP is not a document of the Ministry of Environment but an Environmental Action Program of the whole Government (Cabinet). This approach provides an opportunity to integrate environmental requirements with other aspects of the country's development, particularly social and economic ones, which may lead to initiating a sustainable development path;
public participation in drafting and implementing the NEAP applies not only to businesses but also to academics and to NGO representatives. They should play a more responsible role in all stages of the NEAP's development and implementation;
free access to information regarding the environment and on the development of the NEAP document is to be highly emphasized. It is considered a precondition of a successful implementation of environmental policy.

Real Meaning of the NEAP Process

The NEAP should not be another concept document which demonstrates the country's ability to write policy papers. Likewise, the aim is not to mobilize foreign financial support for the country. The goal of the planning process is to develop a comprehensive program for reducing environmental pollution and improving the environment at the lowest cost. Drafting the NEAP should lead the country from drafting vague "strategic" concepts to implementing the problem-oriented programs designed to achieve particular goals in a certain time limit and with a certain budget. NEAPs are also to encourage the efficient use of available financial and human resources, to strengthen the environmental capacities of public administrations, polluters and non-governmental organizations. Although the plans should be very specific, they should also contribute to the implementation of sustainable environmental policies.

According to EAP principles, the process of drafting NEAPs must involve the country's own financial and human resources. The environmental goals identified in the NEAP should be tied to the sustainable development of the economy, thereby introducing market mechanisms and integrated economic planning to the environmental protection program. Developing the NEAP is a significant step towards an efficient environmental protection program.

The NEAP process does more than integrate economic information with environmental activities. It encourages an open and democratic procedure in selecting targets and choosing objectives in environmental protection. This process can encourage the country to consciously adopt sustainable development principles while implementing a viable plan to solve the most urgent environmental problems.

REC * PUBLICATIONS * STATUS OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROGRAMS * REGIONAL OVERVIEW