| |
Recommendations
These recommendations
(MSWord, 18 KB) have been formulated based on the survey performed
by the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern
Europe during February 2001 and titled Electronic Tools
to Implement the Aarhus Convention - A "snapshot" of Priorities,
Challenges and Case Studies in the UNECE Region. The survey
examined UNECE countries' priority wishes (or "gaps")
with respect to electronic tools and the Aarhus Convention,
and the challenges associated with their implementation.
Based on the conclusions of the report
the following short recommendations have been formulated by
the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern
Europe. It should be noted that this is an incomplete list,
and is being made available for wider discussion and feedback.
Thoughts can be left at the Task
Force discussion board and will be circulated among the
Electronic Tools Task Force.
Recommendations for Policy-makers
The Internet is highly rated as a publishing tool (useful
for article 5 of the Convention). However, increasing attention
should be shown by the UNECE region toward the Internet as
a 2-way communications medium, because of its usefulness
for interacting with citizens and enhancing the practice of
"online governance" (and supporting compliance with article
6, 7 and 8).
This could be considered a logical step forward given the
direction environmental policy is taking in regard to community
participation and environmental awareness (shown for instance
under the 6th EAP, eEurope2002, Agenda 21/Rio
Declaration etc.). The expected increase in multi-media
Internet technologies and access via digital TV sets and WAP
enabled mobile phones provides further justification. Interest
in the Internet as a 2-way communications tool has only just
begun to be shown in the west European region and will need
to be supported in the CEE and NIS region in the future work
of the Task Force.
In the NIS region, the liberalization of the telecommunications
market would help to bring down the high cost of online
access, and in turn the high cost of computer and electronic
equipment. This would help begin to alleviate the economic
obstacles that were most commonly cited and enhance use of
electronic media to disseminate environmental information.
For west European countries, further progress should be
made toward standardizing environmental monitoring and
reporting. Implementation of the Convention should help
stimulate discussion in these areas, and help foster the harmonization
of local, regional, and national practice in the exchange
(and dissemination) of environmental information. The European
Environment Agency may take the lead in sponsoring the uptake
of environmental monitoring and reporting standards, first
in EEA member countries, and subsequently in the CEE and NIS
region, thereby adding a trans-boundary context. These activities
could be tied to efforts being undertaken to develop pollutant
release and transfer registers and the respective legal instrument.
The adoption of educational strategies, providing
citizens and children with useful information on how to access
environmental information electronically, i.e. through the
Internet, television, and email, besides non-electronic mechanisms
such as public libraries, and telecottages should be encouraged.
It was noted in Moldova for instance that a common cultural
obstacle was the limited understanding of users and citizens
regarding personal computer equipment.
Recommendations for the Electronic Tools Task Force
"Good practice" case studies are perhaps one of the most
practical mechanisms for helping to overcome a number of the
obstacles cited by the CEE and NIS regions, particularly with
respect to the shortage of time to explore and implement electronic
tools.
Improvement in the quality and quantity of case studies
by assuring:
- representation of all applicable articles of the Convention;
- more detailed content - including user feedback;
- local through to transboundary examples; and
- multi-sectoral coverage and multi-stakeholder involvement
would provide UNECE countries with tangible reference data
on the electronic tools that have already been used to implement
the Convention.
The practical demonstration of case studies through
sub-regional capacity building workshops (tailored
to regional needs, and in local languages) can further help
to alleviate the above constraints, bridge shortfalls in expertise,
and improve domestic (and regional) cooperation. By also raising
awareness to the Aarhus Convention, this may assist countries
harmonize environmental data collection and dissemination
rules.
Given the popularity of the Internet, and interest in using
the Internet to disseminate environmental information, future
work of the Task Force may be oriented toward developing
good practice web-based solutions bound by a common terms
of reference. This might incorporate issues related to content,
quality, and currency of information, for instance. This should
be developed in cooperation with environmental data users.
Such initiatives might work toward implementing specific paragraphs,
supporting trans-boundary exchange or multi-sectoral coverage,
for example with respect to article 5, e.g. state of the environment
reporting, or pollutant release and transfer registers, or
article 6 on EIA procedures.
In order not to overlook the value of alternative mechanisms,
further attention may also be devoted to enhancing awareness
to non-electronic opportunities (during capacity building
workshops for instance), particularly in light of the economic
constraints highlighted in the CEE and NIS regions. Demonstrations
of case studies such as the Estonian Telecottage concept,
Internet centres, public information kiosks, and suitably
equipped libraries and cultural centres can be considered
a useful starting point. Countries where legislation has been
passed in support of this could be showcased.
In line with the item 1 above, attention may be focused
on highlighting benefits and identifying bottlenecks in
specific countries. Specific issues may also be focused
on, for example improving access to information during the
decisionmaking process, with regard to procedures, scenarios,
decisions, reports, impacts, feedback etc. The benefits of
this in terms of improved decisionmaking, transparency and
reduced administration can be advantageous to public authorities,
and future work may concentrate on stressing the benefits.
|
|
 |
|
Convention
Article and Paragraph Priorities
Priorities
for Electronic Tools
Challenges
and Obstacles to Implementation
Case
Studies
Recommendations
|
