Several of the governments express interest in education and training programs. Preparing and implementing curriculums for kindergarten through the university level far exceeds the capability of any NREC. Seminars, workshops and training seminars pose more realistic options and even they would prove expensive. Common areas for training needs include:
Finally, all the governments expressed interest in developing "modern" environmental laws. In this regard, legal assistance needs to reflect the realities in a country, and new laws should emphasize phased goals and compliance. Adopting a law from the EU or US will likely not prove effective.
They also would appreciate assistance with developing environmental legislation that incorporates economic principles. In particular, examples of how this has been done in the United States and Western Europe.
MEPNR would like financial and technical assistance to further develop a television network to broadcast environmental information. The network currently serves 130 subscribers.
Organizational and financial assistance for officials working on environmentally oriented economic, technical and land-use planning projects. Russian experts would like to have a better understanding of modern principles and standards in these areas in order to prepare projects for implementation, for which they need donor funds.
Funds are required for high level officials from energy-related ministries and departments to visit the United States to study energy companies and how they use modern principles of integrated resource planning. A more nebulous need is for international environmental expertise on concepts for a model of sustainable development.
Many government officials envision a positive role for a NREC, and see it as providing information on modern environmental management techniques and equipment, as developed in Western countries. The organization could play a significant role in developing innovative approaches to solving environmental problems. Finally, the organization could conduct environmental surveys of the northern regions, Siberia and the Far East. The organization could mobilize the intellectual and NGO resources in these regions.
Pessimistic views of a NREC hold that the organization would have to pay for services to be rendered by government officials in support of the organization. Specifically, the organization would have to establish a business that is advantageous for government officials and maintain advantageous contacts in Moscow.
Some government officials view a NREC as being just another international NGO. They believe too many international NGOs already operate in Russia and they question what these organizations have done to improve the environment. Moreover, they believe that much of the organization's resources would be siphoned off to pay for endless international conferences for government and NGO leaders.
Some MEPNR officials see a NREC as an organization subordinated to the ministry. The NREC would coordinate the actions of NGOs and steer them in the "proper" direction. The State Duma's representative suggests that a NREC should be under the jurisdiction of the Duma's Committee for Ecology. The Interdepartmental Commission for Ecological Safety believes that it should develop the orientation for a NREC. One respondent proposed locating the organization at a large university - such as Moscow State.
The majority view was that a NREC should be established by neutral people and not housed within an existing organization. They stressed the importance of finding the right person to lead the organization. The person need not have an environmental background, but must be politically neutral, highly principled and have a positive vision for Russia's future. The recruitment for such a leader should be done on a competitive basis.
Some authorities believe a NREC's charter should reflect Russian environmental policy. Other respondents stated that the charter should reflect the issue of sustainable development and in particular, the issue of structural reconstruction of production and management. Officials at MEPNR proposed that there should be a single NREC established in Moscow and that this organization would cover the CIS region.
MEPNR also suggested that a NREC could work with the Inter-Governmental Ecological Council (IGEC) of the CIS. The IGEC was established in 1992 pursuant to the CIS treaty "On Interrelationships Concerning Environment and Nature Protection." The IGEC has three-four full-time personnel at its head office in Minsk who gather information concerning the state of the environment and of environmental policy in the CIS. The member states submit their annual national reports on the state of the environment. The office has close contacts with the UN INFOTERRA organization. The IGEC has established working groups to:
The local authorities' attitudes regarding a NREC fall into three basic categories. Some authorities had no opinion. Many were interested, but wanted to reserve judgment until they knew what concrete projects a NREC would undertake. The majority of the respondents expressed a positive attitude, but they all had a different vision for a NREC. Generally, the authorities take a pragmatic, realistic view regarding international assistance and consider: (1) will it help the region, (2) will it help the governmental body for which particular authorities work and (3) will it benefit themselves.
Based on the REC-Budapest example, the authorities recognize that a NREC would likely have a strong NGO focus and said this would prove constructive. In this regard, many authorities thought a NREC could coordinate the activities of various NGOs. The authorities believe that NGOs are especially effective at raising the environmental consciousness of society. Some officials did express concern that a NREC could undermine the existing NGOs if the NREC conducts activities that the local NGOs have traditionally performed and does not solicit their input.
A NREC could also work to establish cooperative relationships with counterparts abroad, and scientific and commercial organizations. Finally, the authorities propose that a NREC could sponsor seminars, conferences, festivals, exhibitions, ecological camps and similar events. Generally, the officials believe that a NREC should provide information, funds and technical assistance in the areas discussed below.
As part of the NREC Feasibility Study, the MEPNS conducted a workshop, where specialists from a number of official bodies and governmental experts discussed options of possible international cooperation within the frameworks of a NREC. The summary of discussed governmental needs is as follows:
In particular, the workshop discussed what services a NREC-like organization could deliver and made the following recommendations:
The ministry states that public participation has to be considered as an important element in the democratic development of Ukraine and in solving environmental problems. Baseline information is needed on the adequacy of the public participation provisions in the law. Regardless of their adequacy from a legal drafting perspective, however, the public has not been engaged significantly in environmental decision-making and activities. Mechanisms for implementing the laws and fostering public participation need to be developed. A NREC could help in this task. In particular, the organization could:
A NREC should work with the business community. Ukraine does not have sufficient experience with a market economy. The process of developing the business sectorŠprivatization in particularŠinvolves many environmental issues. A business information service would provide a tremendous contribution to the private sector.
The point of view of senior officials at the MEPNS is that Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia, and Armenia have a strong need for support from Western countries. A NREC could be established in Ukraine to service these areas. Under this scenario addressing the needs of Russia prove problematic. Taking into account the present political, economic and social situation in the countries of the CIS, the diversity of their problems and huge territories, a single NREC in Russia could not serve effectively all the countries.
A NREC-like organization should be a new organization, and not built around an existing NGO. Nevertheless, the organization cannot start from ground zero and should work with the resources available from the existing organizations.
The views of the local and regional authorities coincide with regard to their particular needs and their views of what a NREC should do. In many instances, they would be willing to turn their responsibilities over to a NREC. The type of activities for which they seek financial support and technical assistance or which they believe a NREC could undertake are listed below.
A NREC could work with Parliament and the executive branch in drafting environmental legislation. Moldova would like to harmonize its environmental laws with those of the European Union. The laws need to provide for new sanctions, introduce the polluter pays principle and set market prices for natural resource use. Licenses for natural resource use could include public review and comment on licensing procedures.
Moldova's economy is based on agriculture. A plethora of environmental problems have resulted from unsustainable agricultural practices. The government would like to develop and implement an organic farm project and publicize the results. The government believes NGOs could play an important role in this project.
NREC could design and implement programs for environmental education for government employees in the following areas:
The government would like assistance in creating databases on the environmental situation in the country and information on toxic compounds - especially pesticides. The government wants to increase public awareness about the use of agrochemicals.
The government will elaborate a Moldovan (National) Environmental Action Plan (NEAP). NEAPs represent a participatory process involving all sectors of society in identifying environmental priorities and initiating a law reform process. A NREC could serve as a facilitator to bring the different sectors together and assist with the public participation aspects of a NEAP.
EIA affords a new environmental legal regime with a mechanism for a potentially major, widespread impact. It can serve as a flexible tool for improving planning, generating awareness, and building environmental information, but it must be planned and phased in carefully, and be consistent with national priorities and available resources. NGOs could participate with EIA and in particular be involved at the feasibility stage of the projects and then follow its implementation. The proposed oil refinery on the Danube offers a good test case for EIA.
With regard to local authorities, the needs varied in the various zones. Nevertheless, many of the zones face similar problems and identified similar needs.
The environmental legislation is incomplete and mixed. Many government Acts lack rules for implementation. Legislation is mixed, since some laws and acts of the former USSR are still in force. Lawmakers now want to reform the law to international standards and to the principles of a market economy. While these defects make it difficult to enforce the law, regional and local authorities still do little to engender compliance. A more significant legal impediment is that a law on local self-governing and territorial administration has not been passed. Compounding the problem is that the current long-term Republican Ecological Program which runs from 1987 to 2005 was based on a centralized economy and a budget which is no longer available. Other indications are that the law is adequate, but not implemented and not in compliance.