As the global climate change pact takes hold, transition...

QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE Volume 1 Number 4 | MARCH 2005 | EUR 5.00

Tapped outThe Romanian countrysidefaces a water crisis due toobsolete pesticides

see page 16

Norway spreads the wealthNew eco-funds supplement EuropeanUnion largess to new member states.

see page 22

Mine opponents dig inRosia Montana gold mine proposal is heldup in court pending an archeological study.

see page 29▼ ▼ ▼

As the global climatechange pact takes hold, transition economies gauge new opportunities for foreign investment

The Japan Special Fund of the

Regional Environmental Center for

Central and Eastern Europe (REC), established

in 1993, is a mechanism through which the

Government of Japan supports the REC in its

efforts to solve the environmental problems of

the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region.

In recent years the Japan Special Fund

has turned its major attention to climate

change, one of the most challenging

environmental issues of our generation.

Its aim in this field is to support the CEE

countries’ efforts to comply with the United

Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change and the Kyoto Protocol.

J A P A N S P E C I A L F U N D

Bridging East and East

CONTENTS

Green Horizon is the quarterly magazine ofthe Regional Environmental Center for Centraland Eastern Europe (REC), published from1990 to the spring of 2004 as The Bulletin.

Green Horizon assists the REC in its mission topromote public participation in environmentaldecision making by providing information onthe environment and encouraging cooperationamong regional stakeholders.

Green Horizon reports on the cases andstories that shape the environment andsustainable development in Central andEastern Europe. The magazine is useful forprofessionals from businesses, internationalorganisations, national governments, localauthorities, non-governmental organisations,academic institutions and the media.

The views and opinions expressed in GreenHorizon do not necessarily reflect the viewsand opinions of the Regional EnvironmentalCenter for Central and Eastern Europe.

Green Horizon is not responsible for thecontents of paid announcements andadvertising published in the magazine.

Green Horizon is available on the Web at.

MAGAZINE TEAMEditor: Pavel AntonovAssistant Editor: Greg SpencerArt Director: Sylvia MagyarDesigner: Patricia BarnaProofreader: Steven GraningAdministrative Officer: Emese GalWebmaster: Vadim OstapenkoAdvertising Coordinator: Alex GregorioIT Intern: Evert Lammerts

EDITORIAL BOARDSustainable development: Janos ZlinszkyInformation and research: Jerome SimpsonFunds and investments: Jennifer McGuinnPublic participation: Magdolna Toth NagyEnvironment and security: Marta Szigeti BonifertEnvironmental policy: Oreola IvanovaBusiness and corporate responsibility:Robert NemeskeriEnvironmental law: Stephen StecNew EU member states: Beata WiszniewskaSouth Eastern Europe: Radoje LausevicTurkey: Sibel Sezer

CONTRIBUTORSLaima Galkute ■ Maria KhovanskaiaMira Mileva ■ Jerome SimpsonDaniela Tuchel ■ Kristina VilimaiteMotoharu Yamazaki

ARTVeroen Boterhuis ■ David CarrickAllison Cassels ■ Laszlo FalvayPetur Farkas ■ Fund for Wild Flora andFauna ■ Chad Gore ■ Mugur GrosuPeter Hellebrand ■ IISD/ENB ■ Jill JacksonGabor Kardos ■ Klinkmar ■ Uro LikarMTI ■ Helen Piva ■ PressPhoto BTABenjamin Rancis ■ ReutersStein Andre Saether ■ Toyota Motorswww.rosiamontana.org

Special thanks to Jakob Fischer for the useof his Chinese Takeaway font in this edition.

PRODUCTIONPrinting: Typonova Kft, HungaryPre-press: Stuart Repro Kft, HungaryGreen Horizon is printed on Cyclus Printrecycled paper.

SPONSORS AND PARTNERSThe REC’s Japan Special Fund hascontributed for the publishing of this issue.

Volume 1 Number 4 | MARCH 2005 | ISSN 1786-0423

C O V E R S T O R Y

10 A world of opportunityThe entering into force of the Kyoto Protocol will give transitioneconomies surplus carbon credits that could boost the modernisation ofenergy generation, agriculture and industry in Central and Eastern Europe.

12 No longer just hot airAfter years of guesswork, the carbon trading market has become a reality.

15 US approach good to growThe Bush Administration pursues a policy that will allow economicgrowth while reducing “emission intensity.”

I N S I G H T

16 Tapped outThe overuse of farm chemicals during communism poisoned water wellsacross the Romanian countryside, and help is slow in coming.

18 Lessons to live byA new strategy coordinates Europe's efforts on education forsustainable development.

R E C B U L L E T I N

20 Finding a way forwardRadoje Lausevic, the REC's new regional director for South EasternEurope, talks about environmental challenges in countries whereeconomic development is priority number 1.

21 Enlarged workloadBeata Wiszniewska, the REC’s newly appointed regional director forCentral Europe, says nature protection in the new EU member states willbe a bigger challenge than accession.

22 Norway spreads the wealthNew financing schemes from Norway target environmental projects inthe new EU member states.

ON THE COVER

Kyoto sunrise With Russia’s ratification ofthe Kyoto Protocol, the globalclimate treaty comes into play,opening up a vast new marketin carbon emissions trading. Itpresents Central and EasternEurope a prime opportunity toinvest in environmentalimprovements.

COVER PHOTO Reuters / Kamal Kishore

DEPARTMENTS

Forum 4

CEE/World News 6

EEA Monitor 9

REC News 20

Biodiversity 27

Information Technology 28

Legal Matters 29

Green Literature 30

16

CONTACTSEditorial:

[email protected]:

[email protected]:

[email protected]

The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern EuropeAdy Endre ut 9-112000 Szentendre, HungaryTel: (36-26) 504-000Fax: (36-26) 311-294Web: www.rec.org

▼▼

▼

JER

OEN

BO

TTER

HU

IS

MUGUR GROSU

3 | MARCH 2005 | green HORIZON

22

Business andfairy tales

In fairy tales it is easy to tell good frombad. Real life is different. What is right forone is wrong for the other, and the middleway is often the only choice. People needto decide on their own what’s right orwrong and choose which way to go. TheKyoto Protocol to the UN Convention onClimate Change is solid proof of that.

Activists, scientists and policy makersworldwide, along with governments fromEurope, Japan and other signatory states,celebrated the February 16 entry intoforce of the Kyoto Protocol as a majorachievement of common good will toprotect the world’s climate. Kyoto is goodfor business. It underpins a new globalmarket for carbon emission credits andputs new technologies on the shelf. “Aregulation is required to set up a market,but then the market allows efficiency,”commented Jonathan Lash, president ofthe World Resources Institute. TheEuropean trading system of carbondioxide regulated by Kyoto could serve asa model for the world, Lash said.

The World Health Organization hailedKyoto’s entry into force as a goldenopportunity for the protection of humanhealth. Roberto Bertollini, director of theSpecial Programme on Health andEnvironment at the WHO Regional Officefor Europe, called Kyoto “an opportunityto obtain immediate health benefits forthe people of today through the reductionof other environmental hazards, such asair pollution.”

But the champagne toasts in Kyotowere never a foregone conclusion. Beforethe treaty won the key ratification fromRussia, doubts were cast over theprotocol’s actual effect on global climate— and not only by the United States andAustralia, who complained that it wouldharm their economies while givingdeveloping nations a free ride. Criticalvoices came from the environmentalcommunity, where concerned scientistsand organisations said that Kyoto offeredtoo little too late. Rajendra Pachauri, thechairman of the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC), told a major

international conference in February thathe personally believed that the world has“already reached the level of dangerousconcentrations of carbon dioxide in theatmosphere.” The Independent quotedPachauri as saying that the widespreadmorbidity of coral reefs and the rapidmelting of Arctic ice had driven him to theconclusion that the danger point the IPCChad been set up to avoid had alreadybeen reached.

Alexios Antypas, an environmentalpolicy analyst at Central EuropeanUniversity in Budapest, sees the majorweakness in the protocol elsewhere:“[Kyoto] locks into place the currentdistribution of power and wealth, andtherefore stands little chance to gainsupport from the global South whichaspires to economic development.”

In March the EU’s Council plans todetermine the union’s negotiatingposition for a post-2012 climate regime.Most EU member states want to openinternational negotiations on the future ofthe Kyoto Protocol by suggesting inadvance quantitative targets for futuregreenhouse gas emission targets after2012, according to the EnvironmentalDaily News Service.

Kyoto is clearly favourable for Centraland Eastern Europe. Most countries herehave emissions far below the protocol’squotas, which are based on 1990industrial levels. At present the regionappears to have a net surplus of emissioncredits, which will allow it to attract cash

while expanding its industrial base. Ifbased on renewable energy sources andnew clean technologies, this expansioncould make the region a world leader inclimate change mitigation.

The changes in Central and EasternEurope are a lesson in what can be donein terms of pollution control andprevention, said Lash. “One hopes thatresult is not to follow the whole history ofpollution control that took place in the USor Germany, but to leap-frog to the frontwith extremely efficient, high-technologymeans of production,” he commented.

New technologies seems to be thecommon ground between the proponentsand critics of Kyoto. On February 24, USPresident George W. Bush and GermanChancellor Gerhard Schroeder, picturedabove, agreed to jointly develop anddeploy cleaner, more efficient technologiesto support sustainable development andreduce greenhouse gasses.

Today’s global leaders are not likely toagree that Kyoto is good. What is muchmore important is that they agree thatclimate change is bad, that it ishappening, and that they must actdecisively to halt and reverse it. For unlikefairy tales, real life doesn’t automaticallyhave a happy ending.

Pavel P. Antonov

editorial

FORUM

COMING TO GRIPS: Disagreement over Kyoto should not prevent urgent climate action.PRESSPHOTO BTA

Turning 15

The REC has entered its 15th year of assisting Central and EasternEurope in solving environmental problems. In line with its mission theREC has used sustainable development as a connecting thread throughall of its programme development in support of the implementation ofAgenda 21. This is the process linking the the UN MillenniumDevelopment Goals (2000), documents of the UN World Summit onSustainable Development (Johannesburg 2002) and the WorldCommission for Sustainable Development, to cite a few examples.

The REC’s 15th birthday will be formally cel-ebrated on June 27-29. During this friendlyreunion, the organisation would like to usethe occasion to discuss with its partners future activities focusing onsustainability, REC Executive Director Marta Szigeti Bonifert said. The15th anniversary spirit will dominate numerous REC events and inita-tives throughout 2005. Green Horizon readers should look for thespecial anniversary logo to follow the thread.

green HORIZON | MARCH 2005 | 4


FORUM

What is the truth?Despite what was written in “The Good,The Bad and The Rusty” (Vol.1/No.2), and“Dust and Democracy” (The Bulletin,Vol.11/No.4): there is much hope for thefuture in the villages of Rosia Montana in thegold and silver mining region of theApuseni Mountains in Romania. From a sit-uation in the 1990s when unemploymentand lack of prospects had reduced the localpopulation to an all-time low, and whenmining was a synonym to financial loss andenvironmental damage, people have begunto take hope as they undertake the prelimi-nary work being carried out to prepare forthe possibility of a new, but modern, miningoperation. The resulting proposed RosiaMontana gold and silver mining develop-ment will also improve the environment inthe area — a situation verifiable by aninformed site visit and an examination ofthe design of the proposed project.

To clarify what has become a confus-ing situation, the simple facts of the RosiaMontana gold and silver mining develop-ment project are:• It will meet EU and Romanian

legislation.• It offers much more than a mine as it

has considerable cultural heritage pro-tection, and environmental and socio-economic regeneration components.

• The proposed open pits are superim-posed on past and existing miningsites, hence minimising the impact onexisting non-mining land.

• The project will rectify the unaccept-able acid rock drainage problem fromthe impacted zone that is currentlypolluting the Danube river basin.

• Proposed cyanide usage will be to EUstandards and will be under the strictmanagement of the UNEP-facilitatedInternational Cyanide ManagementCode. (Cyanide has already been usedin this region without any of thesesafeguards in the past — the proposedproject ensures this cyanide use willfollow global best safety standards).

• As is normal for a project such as thisin any region of the world, the indirectjobs generated will by far outnumberthe direct jobs.

• The resulting economic developmentin the area will be the start of a newera that will provide a realistic plat-form for sustainable development.

• The success of this development for theregion is also dependent on responsi-ble and positive action by civil society.

Those who oppose the developmentclaim they represent the community.They do not. The developers have contin-uous productive contact with approxi-mately 95 percent of the local community.

The application for the development’senvironmental license was started underRomanian law (which now reflects the EUlegislation in all EIA issues) on December14, 2004 with the submission of a techni-cal report (The Project PresentationalReport) presenting the proposed devel-opment (see www.rmgc.ro for thisreport). This initiates both the EIA process(with its large public consultation compo-nent), and the requiremements of theEspoo Convention. This will provide a

lengthy and professional review processfor the proposed development.

We welcome requests for visits toRosia Montana, and encourage all inter-ested parties to gain first-hand knowledgeof both the current situation of the area aswell as information and facts on what ourRomanian-Canadian joint venture is pro-posing as part of the solution to the manyproblems the area currently has.

John Aston, RMGC Environmental Manager, Rosia Montana, Romania

Sitting in the same puddleRegarding “Films and Chemicals”(Vol.1/No.2) I completely agree with you,Antonov. I hate seeing all these loads ofidentical, shining apples in shoppingmalls. The food is loaded with chemicals— the bread never gets old, milk is freshfor days, etc. Where are we heading? I can’tbe environmentally friendly even if I’d liketo be. Ten years ago we were laughing atWestern Europeans who were buying eco-logical food — it seemed really strange thatthey were spending more money for thefood that is common in Latvia. Now we aresitting in the same puddle — the food isjunked up and we have to take a stepbackwards to return to the food that weused to have 10 years ago. But there isnobody who wants to take this first step.

Agnese Frisenbrudere, Latvia

CorrectionIn Vol.1/No.2, page 30, the cover ofFreshwater in Europe: Facts, Figures andMaps was mistakenly swapped with thecover of Making EU Funds Work forPeople and the Environment: Case Studiesfrom Eastern and Central Europe.

letters to the editor

Please deliver my donation to:

TITLE ■■ MMrr ■■ MMss NAME SURNAME

ADDRESS

POSTCODE COUNTRY

E-MAIL TELEPHONE

Billing or credit card holder address, if different from above:

TITLE ■■ MMrr ■■ MMss NAME SURNAME

ADDRESS

POSTCODE COUNTRY

Choose your method of payment:

■■ I enclose a Western Union transfer receipt (charges paid by sender)

■■ Please charge EUR 18 to my Visa/Mastercard

CARD NO. ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ EXPIRY DATE ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■

DATE SIGNATURE

■■ I enclose a receipt for cash payment issued by a REC office (see list of country offices on page 24)

In line with its mission, the REC offers complimentary subscriptions of Green Horizon to selected environmental stakeholders from Central and EasternEurope. Eligibility is open to non-profit organisations, local and national authorities, businesses, academic institutions and journalists who cannot afford thesubscription donation. To request your complimentary subscription, send this form along with a brief explanation of your circumstances, and tick here ■■

Send this form by e-mail: [email protected] • Fax: (36-26) 311-294

Post: Green Horizon, Ady Endre ut 9-11, 2000 Szentendre, Hungary

See what’s on the Green Horizon

There is only one way to obtain the news, in-depth features, key facts and figures, andexpert opinion that you need for your work— a year’s subscription to Green Horizon.

This subscription fee comprises a donationfor the work of the Regional EnvironmentalCenter for Central and Eastern Europe (REC),a non-partisan, not-for-profit internationalorganisation that works to solve environ-mental problems in this region. The RECpromotes cooperation among non-govern-mental organisations, governments, busi-nesses and others, and supports the freeexchange of information and public partici-pation in environmental decision making.

One year’s subscription (four issues): EUR 18

SUBSCRIPTION FORM


central and eastern europe | world

NEWS

IN THE BALANCE: Economic pressurecollides with natural splendour in theTara River canyon.

REU

TER

S

■ The parliament of Montenegro approved a declaration against plans to dam the Tara Rivercanyon, the deepest and longest canyon in Europe.

Only members of the ruling party opposed the declaration, which was endorsed by 72 non-governmental organisations and 10,000 individuals. The vote was not binding, but puts addedpressure on the government.

The 80-km canyon cuts through Durmitor National Park and features old-growth forests,beaches, cliffs and more than 80 caves. The canyon is a United Nations World Heritage site andone of Montenegro’s main tourist draws.

The dam, which would be built on the Drina River in the Serb part of Bosnia, would flood12 kilometres of the canyon. The Montenegrin government says the project would save therepublic EUR 17 million a year in energy bills.

The hydroelectric project would help power an aluminum plant which consumes about halfthe republic’s total electricity, while also producing some 43 percent of its GDP.

Experts from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, thecanyon’s international guardian, plan to issue a report on the matter this spring.

■ The Polish government hasadopted a 20-year energy planthat seeks to clean up fossilfuel technologies and increasethe use of renewable energy.

But controversially, thedocument raises the prospectof nuclear power develop-ment in its call for “fair infor-mation” on the issue.

The strategy aims toachieve Poland’s target underthe EU renewable electricitydirective of 7.5 percent renew-able electricity share by 2010.It also seeks to use more bio-fuels for transport and to intro-duce green taxes and fees by2008 to promote more envi-ronmentally friendly fuels.

According to governmentfigures, the country relied oncoal for more than 70 percentof its energy needs in 1997.The country has been slowlyshifting to cleaner burning nat-ural gas as well as clean coaltechnologies to meet EUnorms for emissions of sulphurdioxide and nitrogen oxides.The energy plan proposes anational trading scheme foremissions of both pollutants.

According to REC CountryOffice Director Marta Kaczyns-ka, the strategy wins points forsteering Poland toward com-pliance with EU norms. Oneshortcoming, however, is thatits reduction targets for green-house gases refer only toKyoto commitments. Poland’sown climate policy calls for amore ambitious 40 percent cutby 2020, Kaczynska noted.

B A L T I C S T A T E S

Coal cuts forPoland

■ Turkish officials say that they need up to EUR 60 billionto bring the nation’s environment up to European Unionstandards.

“The most optimistic but not very realistic projectionsspeak of a need for investment of EUR 20 billion,” anunnamed Turkish official told Reuters. “But this figure couldrise to EUR 60 billion.”

In its 2004 enlargement report on Turkey, the EuropeanCommission concluded, “Despite some progress, the overalllevel of transposition of the environment acquis remains low.Moreover, weaknesses in implementation and enforcementare still sources of major concern.”

Kerem Okumus, senior project manager of special pro-grammes for REC Country Office Turkey, agrees that envi-

ronmental work connected to Turkey’s EU accession wouldcost “a fortune.” The burden would be especially heavy forthe private sector, which won’t get help from EU funding,Okumus said.

For the moment, European Union help for the govern-ment is also skimpy. Turkey received around EUR 250 mil-lion last year in pre-accession aid, compared to about EUR 15.3 billion that Poland will have received for the peri-od from 2000 to 2006.

However, Okumus noted that Poland and the other newmember states only received big money after they enteredinto official accession negotiations with the EU. AlthoughTurkey is a candidate state, it will not begin accession nego-tiations until this October.

T U R K E Y

Turkey faces cash crunch

H Y D R O - P O W E R

Dam project draws fire

European Union Update


■ Cars could face carbon cutsMembers of the European Parliament in January calledfor the European Commission “urgently to put forwardproposals for binding CO2 limits for new vehicles.”

European, Japanese and Korean car manufacturersare already carrying out a voluntary agreement toreduce fleet average CO2 emissions to 140 grams perkilometre by 2009. But some EU governments havebeen pressing for compulsory reductions to help meetEurope’s political target of 120 grams per kilometer by2012, according to the Environmental Daily.

The average new car sold in the EU in 2001 emitted168 grams per kilometer, according to the websitewww.acidrain.org. At the two extremes were Swedenwith 200 grams per km and Italy with 157 grams per km.

In Central and Eastern Europe, cars are not as muchan environmental menace as in Western Europe.According to a 2003 EU report, Western Europeans haveabout 450 cars per 1,000 population — almost doublethe CEE figure. However, the number of cars per capitain CEE rose more than 60 percent from 1990-1999 com-pared to 20 percent in the old EU.

■ Hungary defends chemical industryA compromise proposal by Hungary and the UK has

gained support in the EU Parliament toward a simplified,more industry-friendly proposal on chemical policy reform.

EU ministers have been warming to the idea of a sim-plified substance registration procedure that cuts costs toindustry connected with the proposed REACH (Registra-tion, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) directive.

The ministers agreed on the need for mandatory costand data sharing in REACH’s registration stage, but con-cerns remained over the proposal’s effect on competi-tion and intellectual property.

The proposal suggested by Hungary and the UK callsfor “one substance, one registration” or “OSOR.” The Euro-pean Council’s legal service backed the idea, on conditionthat it require compensation for firms forced to reveal com-mercial data for joint registrations.

■ New farm policy launched Ten EU member states this January introduced a

basic reform of the union’s farm policy — one that sup-porters say is more environmentally friendly and inkeeping with market principles.

The reformed Common Agriculture Policy (CAP)changes the way the EU supports agriculture, allowingfarmers to produce what the market wants, according tothe EU. Key elements include:• a single farm payment independent from production; • a link between payments and respect of environ-

mental, food safety, animal and plant health and ani-mal welfare standards;

• a stronger rural development policy with more EUfunding;

• a reduction in direct payments for bigger farms; and • a mechanism to prevent overspending.

“The CAP at the beginning of 2005 is nothing like itspopular caricature,” said Mariann Fisher Boel, Commis-sioner for Agriculture and Rural Development. Sheadded that it would allow farmers “to become trueentrepreneurs.” The 10 states entering the new paymentscheme are Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ire-land, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Sweden and the UK.The remaining EU states are to be gradually phased inover the next four years.

NEWS

■ A regional agreement on the Sava River basin entered intoforce in December, setting out guidelines for sustainable useof the largest tributary of the Danube. With Bosnia andHerzegovina’s ratification, a pact was sealed with fellowriparian states Croatia, Slovenia, and Serbia and Montenegro.

The Sava has some of the best preserved floodplainsin Europe. The natural landscape hosts abundant wildlifeand serves a vital role in flood control.

The agreement seeks to protect these values by: • resuming navigation of the Sava and its tributaries;• promoting integrated water quality management

and preservation of ecosystems; and• coordinating protection against floods, droughts and

supporting sustainable development.

The signatories agreed to appoint an internationalcommission, with a Zagreb-based permanent secretariat,to oversee the agreement’s implementation.

■ The popular revolt that swept in a new government in Ukrainemay have exacerbated one of the country’s most pressing envi-ronmental crises.

As Viktor Yuschenko rode into the presidential office on atide of public support, the government of outgoing Prime Minis-ter Viktor Yanukovych was apparently racing to seal the fate ofthe UNESCO protected Bystroe Estuary on the Danube delta.

With the initial dredging of the shipping canal completed thispast fall, and phase 2 hanging in the balance, bureaucrats shiftedinto overdrive to wrap up the necessary permitting. A UN sourcesaid it wasn’t certain if the deal was sealed before the governmentleft office, although it wouldn’t have come as a surprise.

The Bystroe Estuary is protected under the UNESCO Manand Biosphere Programme, and is home to hundreds of speciesof fish and birds, including the pygmy cormorant, the rare white-tailed eagle and several varieties of migrating pelicans.

Over protest by Ukrainian and international NGOs, as well asthe neighboring state of Romania, which has pointed up theneed for a transboundary EIA, Ukraine went ahead in the fallwith the original dredging. A delegation of experts from the EUand UN visited Ukraine in October and issued a report criticisingthe government for its “opaque” decision-making process and itsfailure to engage with international stakeholders.

REU

TER

S / M

IHAI

BAR

BU

CORRODED RELATIONS: The Romanianvillage of Periprava lies at the heart of aborder dispute stemming from Ukraine’sdredging of the Bystroe Estuary.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L C O N V E N T I O N S

Delta dredging goes forward

M U L T I N A T I O N A L A G R E E M E N T S

Sava agreement kicks in


central and eastern europe | world

NEWS

■ Shepherds from the village of Razdol insoutheast Bulgaria have started insuringtheir flocks against wolves in a successfulpartnership between a local conservationgroup and an insurance company.

Bulgarian insurer HDI Zastrahovanehas lent a hand to the Fund for Wild Floraand Fauna, a group working to protectendangered wolves and birds of prey.

Before HDI Zastrahovane got onboard, the conservation group had beendirectly compensating shepherds for live-stock losses to wolves in order to removethe incentive to shoot or poison them.The campaign helped birds of prey,because raptors had also been taking thepoisoned bait.

Local farmers began to see the ben-efits of protecting their livestock inways other than killing wolves. “Wegained the trust of people who thenstarted insuring their livestock — thuscreating new market opportunities,”said Emilian Stoyanov of the Fund forWild Flora and Fauna.

HBI Zastrahovane’s DetelinaZhivkova confirmed that the fund’s ini-tiative had helped grow its livestock-insurance business. This is a positivestep for HBI Zastrahovane in terms ofprotecting nature, Zhivkova explained.

“This (insurance) is a model of a

successful partnership between busi-ness and NGOs,” Stoyanov said.

■ A law took effect in Bulgaria in Januaryrestricting public smoking.

The law bans smoking in schools, cine-mas, theatres, Internet cafes, taxis and on citytransport. Larger restaurants are supposed tohave separate dining areas for non-smokersand smaller eateries are obliged to have ven-tilation systems.

According to 1997 data from the WorldHealth Organization, about 39 percent ofadult men smoked in Bulgaria compared to18 percent of women. Ironically, more than52 percent of physicians lit up.

The law has provoked an outcry amongbar owners fearful that compliance will betoo expensive and drive away business.

However, at least one public officialhas embraced it. The mayor of the smalltown of Madan announced an increase insalaries for the non-smoking municipalofficials, according to the Sofia NewsAgency. The approximate 10 percentsalary boost is intended to reward non-smokers who stay at their desks while co-workers take cigarette breaks.

According to WHO, 80 percent ofEuropean member states have anti-smok-ing laws that ban or restrict smoking inmajor public places.

E U A C C E S S I O N

Wolf insurance a hit with shepherdsB U L G A R I A

Smokers out of luck

COUNTING SHEEP: Shepherds are now receiving directcompensation for lost animials in Strumyani, Bulgaria.

FUN

D F

OR

WIL

D F

LOR

A AN

D F

AUN

A

■ Elected officials representing most of the political parties incentral and northern Moravia have expressed concerns abouta plan by the Czech government to build a canal joining theDanube, Oder and Elbe rivers. The concerns were brought tolight in a survey by the NGO Hnuti Duha just before regionalelections in November. It asked candidates in the region abouttheir stance on the project in regional land-use plans.

Hnuti Duha is leading a grassroots national campaignagainst the waterway, a centuries-old idea about linking theDanube to the Baltic and Northern seas through a canal and theOder and Elbe rivers. Hnuti Duha sees the project as a majorthreat to the Morava River floodplains, including several Ramsarsites and key habitats of endangered species. If constructed, itwould increase flood risks and hamper natural filtration process-es that keep nutrients from the Danube, the campaigners warn.

Hnuti Duha has filed a lawsuit against the country’s transportministry, charging it has denied the public access to informationrelevant to a feasibility study for the Czech section of the canal.Hnuti Duha’s campaign received a REC-managed regional grantas part of the United Nations Development Programme/Glob-al Environment Facility Danube Regional Project.

The Civic Democratic Party dominates the two Moravianregions covered by the survey, explained Pavel Pribyl, theHnuti Duha project manager. But in southern Moravia, a slightmajority favours the Christian Democrats, a member of thenational ruling coalition. During a public discussion with thecandidates in Moravia, only the Green Party voiced environ-mental objections against the canal, according to Prybil.

The survey proved that major parties have reservations

about the project, so critics have room to negotiate to excisethe canal from land-use plans, Prybil told Green Horizon.

Hnuti Duha, together with BUND, DAPHNE – Institute ofApplied Ecology, Arnika, CEPA, SOVS, and Veronica, hasformed the Life for the Danube, Oder and Elbe Rivers Coalition.In a 2003 position paper, the coalition demanded a full strategicenvironmental assessment and cost-benefit analysis vis-a-visother transport modes.

Danube Dispatch is published within the REC’s contribution to theDanube Regional Project, funded by UNDP/GEF

D A N U B E D I S P A T C H

Trench warfare

Polling the polsParty candidates were asked: “Are you ready to question the presenceof the Danube-Oder-Elbe Canal in the regional land-use plan?”

Central Moravia Northern MoraviaCivic Democratic Party (ODS) Yes/Don’t know YesSocial Democrats (CSSD) Don’t know YesChristian Democrats (KDU) No reply Don’t knowGreen Party (SZ) Yes No replyUnion of Freedom (US-DEU) Yes YesCommunist Party (KSCM) No reply YesIndependent candidates (SNK) Yes No replyEuropean Democrats (ED) No reply No replySource: Hnuti Duha

The landscape of Europe is on themove. Landscape change may seem aslow process to the naked human eye,but technology allows us to understandthat the broader picture of the Europeanmap is one of evolution.

Europe has been shaped, inter alia, bycenturies of traditional farming practices,resulting in a wealth of different land-scapes with high cultural and naturalvalue. Landscapes are the physicalexpression of the way we use naturalresources and meet our human needs. Ina way, the landscape tells us who we are.This helps explain why there is such akeen interest in preserving the variety ofEuropean landscapes and supporting therural economies that have created them.Ultimately, rural development is aboutreinforcing regional identity.

Land in Europe at the start of the cen-tury is now a scarce resource. Only withcareful spatial planning will we be effec-tive in creating opportunities for innova-tive land use that will optimise conditionsfor society, the economy and nature alike.

That is why the European Environ-ment Agency (EEA), together with ourmember countries, have recently updateda unique, trans-boundary tool that makesit possible to map a decade of land coverchanges across Europe. Using a commonmethodology, Corine Land Cover (CLC)2000 provides the first standardised surveyof Europe’s land cover at the turn of themillennium. It highlights the changes thathave taken place over the decade sincethe first CLC was undertaken in the late1980s as part of the European Commissionprogramme to CooRdinate Information onthe Environment (Corine). It is based onthe results of IMAGE2000, a satellite imag-ing programme undertaken jointly by theJoint Research Centre ( JRC) of the Euro-pean Commission and the EEA. The largevolume of data from both Corine LandCover and the satellite imagery at the JRCis now available and can be downloadedfor free. Data on CLC2000 can be accessedat http://dataservice.eea.eu.int and dataon IMAGE2000 can be accessed athttp://image2000.jrc.it.

CLC is unique in that it makes it possi-ble to measure the dynamic relationshipbetween the many uses of our landscapesand the impacts — and unfortunately alltoo often the conflicts — that arise fromdifferent policies, such as agriculture,regional policy and transport. For exam-ple, in the agricultural field it can high-light where major structural changes arecontinuing or intensifying, such as theconversion of pasture to arable land (orthe contrary), expansion or reduction in

the area of fallow land and land taken outof production (“set aside”), or the aban-donment of farming altogether.

The current projections indicate majorchanges in crop growing potential andflooding risks. The 30-year perspectiveshows that climate change will certainlyinfluence agriculture and settlement pat-terns. We will therefore need to “climateproof” our current policies to adapt tothese changes.

But monitoring and understandingland use change is also very relevant for arange of European policies. Land is ascarce resource that needs careful man-agement and consideration in the contextof the reviews of the Lisbon Strategy, theEU Sustainable Development Strategyand 6th Environment Action Programmeas well as the EU financial perspectivesfor 2007-2013. The majority of EU budgetexpenditure is currently linked to landuse (Common Agriculture Policy, Struc-tural and Cohesion funds, Trans-Euro-pean Network, etc.), and this will contin-ue to be the case.

CLC2000 is designed to be a multi-pur-pose product, able to highlight issuesaccording to the needs of a range of users.

Already there are requests coming in fromtransport, agriculture, planning, consumerbodies and policy makers. CLC will helppolicy makers develop more appropriatepolicies for a more viable future. Policiesin general, and rural development meas-ures in particular, must be judged againstlong term context changes relating notonly to the economy but also to climatechange and demography. The data andtools are now available for detailed analy-sis of current land cover, land use andtrends — all very helpful for integratedassessments and policy analyses.

We are now looking to take the nextsteps in developing CLC. The updatingfrequency of the database is currentlyevery 10 years. But the intensity of poli-cy interactions, the pace of change andtechnological advances all point in thedirection of a more regular updating ofthe database.

Corine Land Cover 2000 is a powerfultool for mapping Europe’s dynamic land-scape. I invite you to make use of it.

Professor Jacqueline McGlade is the ExecutiveDirector of the European Environment Agency,the sponsor of this column.

Mapping Europe’sdynamic landscape

By Jacqueline McGlade

LAY OF THE LAND: Earth’s landscape undergoes changes by man and nature. At top, a windstorm sweeps soil fromnorthern Africa into the Mediterranean. Above from left: the forest of Celje in Slovenia; wetlands near Wrodaw,Poland; and rocky cliffs in Slovenia’s Gorica Mountains.

PRES

SPH

OTO

BTA

BEN

JAM

IN R

ANCI

C

HEL

EN P

IVA

UR

O L

IKAR


EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY MONITOR

COVER STORY | climate change


Environmental diplomacy hit a newhigh-water mark on February 16with the entering into force of theKyoto Protocol. Eight years after

opening for signature in 1997, the conven-tion finally met its daunting requirementsof ratification (at least 55 parties to the con-vention responsible for 55 percent of total1990 carbon dioxide world emissions). Infact, 141 countries responsible for 61.6 per-cent of global emissions, have ratified theagreement formally known as the KyotoProtocol to the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

The critical ratification came onNovember 16 from the Russian Federation,responsible for almost 15 percent of worldCO2 emissions. On a larger scale, the ratifi-cation means that the international com-munity recognises the threat that globalwarming poses to the environment andhumanity. The world has committed todrastic steps to mitigate its major cause, i.e.human-caused emissions of greenhousegases (GHG).

The stakes in the climate change miti-gation process vary among the countriesof Central and Eastern Europe (CEE).Economic opportunities positively corre-late with the obligations a country hasadopted. According to their obligations,countries are divided into differentgroups; the most relevant for the REC’scountries are Annex B countries to theKyoto Protocol and Annex I countries tothe Climate Change Convention.

Annex B countries have committed tospecific GHG emission cuts below levelsestablished for a baseline year. Seven out

of 10 new EU-member states (the CzechRepublic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,Lithuania, Slovakia and Slovenia) as wellas two accession states (Bulgaria andRomania) belong to Annex B. On the onehand, a specific emissions target chal-lenges countries to make their economiesmore energy efficient and to make neces-sary investments into institutional capaci-ties to see the process through. That’s thecost of cutting global GHG emissions. Onthe bright side, specific targets open thedoor to new foreign investment opportu-nities and advanced technologies throughthe “flexible mechanisms” of the Protocol.

The Protocol identifies modalities andmechanisms through which the conven-tion’s parties cooperate. All Annex B coun-tries have their own GHG emissions quo-tas for the first commitment period (2008-2012). A country’s quota is calculatedaccording the following procedure: theamount of GHG emissions during thebaseline year is decreased by the country’scommitment rate and multiplied by five(five years of the first commitment period).The quota itself is measured in assignedamount units, which equal one tonne(1,000 kilograms) of CO2 equivalent.

The assigned amount units refer tothe upper limit for the six greenhousegases emitted in five sectors (as identifiedin Annex A of the Protocol): energy,transport, agriculture, industry, andhouseholds.

Meeting these goals will cost money.In some cases, it will mean the rehabilita-tion of existing technologies, in others theimplementation of more advanced

SMOKING GUN: The scientific mainstream agrees that human activity such as industrial activity(upper left/photo by David Carrick) has accelerated a trend in natural global warming.

The knock-on effects include more extreme weather, such as recent flooding of the Sava River(top/REUTERS/Ranko Cukoviv), melting polar ice (Jill Jackson), and droughts (Chad Gore).

At right, the scene at the Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December in Buenos Aires (IISD/ENB-Leila Mead).

By Maria Khovanskaia

▼

Continued on page 13

climate change | COVER STORY


The entering into force of the Kyoto Protocol could accelerate the modernisation of energy generation, agriculture and industry in Central and Eastern Europe

Oith the entry into force of theKyoto Protocol, the carbonmarket has evolved from thearena of risky speculation to a

real business opportunity. Central andEastern European (CEE) countries havesubstantial emissions surplus relative tothe Kyoto target due to the shift away fromheavy, energy-intensive industries. By oneestimate, Central and Eastern Europe willhave an annual surplus of 300 milliontonnes of greenhouse gas (GHC) emis-sions during Kyoto’s first commitmentperiod (2008-2012), which comparesfavourably to the nearly 400 milliontonnes of deficit by the old EU-15 andJapan. This differential translates into newincome opportunities for CEE businesses.

Through foreign investments underJoint Implementation ( JI) and the cleandevelopment mechanism, GHC emissioncuts will be rewarded with reduction cred-its. JI and the clean development mecha-nism differ only in the location of the proj-ects: if a project is located in an Annex Icountry to the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (i.e. an

industrialised country) it is subject to JIrules; otherwise it follows the strictures ofthe clean development mechanism. InCentral and Eastern Europe, all new EUmember states, Romania, Bulgaria andCroatia are JI countries, whereas theWestern Balkan counties are subject toclean development mechanism rules. Thetwo mechanisms follow similar proce-dures, but stricter rules apply to the latter.

Alternatively, energy trading allowscountries to simply sell and buy emissioncredits without linking them to projects. Allcountries in Central and Eastern Europe cantrade emission credits. Since being a partyto the Kyoto Protocol is a pre-condition totaking part in these mechanisms, countriesthat have not yet signed the Protocol (e.g.Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatiaand Serbia and Montenegro) are encour-aged to accede soon.

JI and the clean development mecha-nism provide economic benefits for bothinvestors and host entities. Investors canreceive emission reduction credits whichhave monetary value, while host entitiescan have their old facilities replaced, refur-

bished or fitted with modern technologies.Financing for such projects, through localbanks, for example, is very difficult other-wise. Some 40 JI projects have alreadybeen launched in Central and EasternEurope, but huge potential remains.

Energy trading comes into play when abusiness reduces its GHC emissionsthrough its own efforts and is left withunused emissions quotas. It can then sellthose government-allocated credits to otherentities, be they foreign of domestic. TheEU started its emissions trading system inJanuary; it covers major CO2 source sectors(e.g. power generation, steel, ceramic, pulpand paper). Based on the allocated CO2allowance of 2.2 billion tonnes and the lat-est per-unit value of EUR 7 per tonne, theEU energy trading market is worth aboutEUR 15.4 billion. International energy trad-ing will be established sooner or later.

JI and the clean development mecha-nism are rather cumbersome processes.As early as the project preparation stage,project developers must show that the ini-tiative will yield net emissions reductions,while taking into account various uncer-


By Motoharu Yamazaki

After years of guesswork, the carbontrading market has become a reality


tainties in the future (e.g. conduct a base-line study). The developers must monitorthe results throughout the crediting peri-od, get verification from an independententity and win approval from the hostcountry government. The difficulty of thebaseline study lies in setting the baseline,i.e. the scenario under which the projectdoes not go forward. This is pure specu-lation, and therefore easy to criticise.These administrative procedures can bewell out of proportion to the actual proj-ect, which makes small ones less attrac-tive for investors. In Central and EasternEurope, the transposition of EU directivesgenerally lowers the number of emissionscredits because applying stricter environ-mental and energy standards lowers thebaseline emissions. Nevertheless, theseprojects still offer attractive benefits forboth investors and host entities.

One idea that may help overcomethese difficulties is the Green InvestmentScheme (GIS), a concept originally devel-oped for Russia and recently consideredby the World Bank for applications inBulgaria. It wasn’t defined by the KyotoProtocol, but it doesn’t run counter to theProtocol either. Under the GreenInvestment Scheme, GHG emissionscredits would be sold by a government inCentral and Eastern Europe on conditionthat the income is spent for “green” pur-poses, particularly for GHG emissionreductions. Investor countries can receiveemission credits in a more flexible man-ner, while ensuring their money is spentfor environmental purposes in the sellercountries. Hence, they minimise the riskof being blamed for resorting to financialpower to meet their Kyoto target.

All these mechanisms have pros andcons, and will therefore be used compli-mentarily. The GHG emission credit (car-bon) market has just opened, offeringsubstantial opportunities to be exploitedby businesses.

Tips for businesses• Many types of projects result in

reduced GHG emissions. Always con-sider the possibility of developingthem under JI and the clean develop-ment mechanism.

• Do not stick to one mechanism, andchoose the best one depending onthe nature and scale of the project.

• The domestic procedures for themechanisms in the host countries willevolve over time. Contact the climatechange focal point of the target coun-try to get updated.

MONEY MILLS: Investments in clean energy can help polluters meet their Kyoto reductiontargets. Wind farms (far left/photo by PeterHellebrand) and other alternative energysources can expect a surge in interest due toKyoto, as can hybrid cars built by firms such asToyota (left bottom/Toyoto Motor). The treatywill intensify pressure to replace fossil fuelplants such as the Soar power station in centralEngland (near left/REUTERS/Darren Staples).

◗


ones. During the October parliamen-tary debates in Russia, the questionboiled down to a stark choice betweenfast economic growth (doubling theGDP in 10 years, as proposed byMichael Illarionov, economic advisor toPresident Putin) or commitment to GHGmitigation. At the end of the day, parlia-mentarians decided to ratify theProtocol unlike, for example, theAmericans, who withdrew from theKyoto process in 2000 stating that thenecessary steps to achieve the goalwould harm the US economy.

However, for the seven new EU-member states and the two accessioncountries in Annex B, the situation dif-fers from that of highly developedcountries. For the latter group, tech-nologies are more advanced, meaningthat further emission cuts cost more.The Annex B countries in this regionhave undergone the transition from theplanned to market economy. At thebeginning of the changes, they all sawdramatic decreases in their GDPs andconcomitant reductions in GHG emis-sions. Economic recovery started onlyin the mid-1990s. Still, the forecastsshow that these counties are unlikely touse up their quotas during the first com-mitment period, which will leave roomfor emission trading.

Another opportunity arises from therelatively low costs of abatement inCentral and Eastern Europe compared tothe West. This region still has an abun-dance of obsolete technology and ener-gy-wasting industry that can be cleanedup through simple investments. As far as

the climate change process is con-cerned, it doesn’t matter where emissioncuts take place; a kilogram of carbonreduction in Slovakia has the same effecton climate change as a similar cut madein Japan. However, the location canaffect the costs of abatement significant-ly. This is the basis for the flexible mech-anisms under the Kyoto Protocol — acountry acquires the necessary emissionreduction in another country with lowerabatement costs. The flexible mecha-nism (JI) represents considerable oppor-tunities for foreign investment in GHG-saving projects in the CEE Annex Bcountries, resulting in a synergybetween economic modernisation andclimate change mitigation.

iimilarly, if a CEE country hastrouble complying with its tar-get, it can invest in a JI projectin an Annex B country with

even lower abatement costs. This sort ofinvestment can be made under theclean development mechanism.

The current JI projects in Central andEastern Europe include adoption ofenergy saving technologies, alternativesources of energy and extensive renova-tion projects involving district heatingand waste management. These projectssimultaneously advance the region’s eco-nomic modernisation, including that ofthe power and heat generation sector.Although the potential of JI goes beyondthe energy sector, investors like energyprojects because they offer the most reli-able chances for GHG reductions.Sometimes the dual requirements ofmodernisation and climate change miti-gation lead to product change, such


▼

Continued from page 11

▼

Emissions and targets for Central and Eastern Europe

Country Base year Base year 2002 Kyoto targets 2010emissions emissions 2008-2012 projections

(million tonnes (million tonnes (million tonnes (million tonnes of CO2 eq) CO2 eq) CO2 eq) CO2 eq)

Bulgaria 11998888 114411..88 6622..44 113300..44 7799..00**

Czech Republic 11999900 119911..88 114422..88 117766..44 113355..22--115522..66

Croatia 11999900 3311..66 1188..99 3300..00 3300..00--3377..44

Estonia 11999900 4433..55 1199..44 4400..00 99..11--2255..00

Hungary 11998855--8877 111133..00 7788..00 110066..22 8899..88--9955..00

Latvia 11999900 2288..00 1100..77 2255..88 1122..55--1144..88

Lithuania 11999900 5500..11 1100..22 4466..11 2266..44--3333..44

Poland 11998888 556655..22 337700..22 553311..33 440088..00--441133..00

Romania 11998899 226622..99 113366..55 224411..88 116644..00**

Slovakia 11999900 7722..44 5511..22 6666..66 4455..99--5533..66

Slovenia 11998866 2200..66 2200..44 1188..99 2200..11--2211..66

The emission data was submitted in 2004; the latest available year is 2002. Data does not include sinks. The GHG emission projections are based on older data included in the latest national communication, except for Bulgaria and Romania. Bulgaria’s projected value is based on recent data provided by EnEffect, Bulgaria. For Romania projected emission value is based on a document prepared by the Czech Institute of Meteorology.

SSoouurrccee:: UNFCCC.

National Inventory Reportshttp://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/2761.php

National Communications http://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_natcom_/items/1095.php

as the lowering of clinker content in thecement industry. According to a number ofstudies, JI potential exists in mining, pulpand paper, steel, transport, and agriculture(methane abatement).

These types of projects demand largeup-front investment and the acceptanceof risks associated with new technologies,especially in the energy sector. Wind andbiomass power generation are goodexamples. This requires both internation-al structured financing and, more oftenthan not, host countries’ regulatory sup-port, including at times statutory subsi-dies. Joint Implementation investment,called carbon financing, is a vital elementof a regular project financing scheme.Without these monies, regional progresson renewable energy and energy efficien-cy would be much slower.

The importance of JI and the cleandevelopment mechanism was recog-nised long ago by the governments ofthe developed countries and interna-tional organisations. Even when the fateof Kyoto looked uncertain, several gov-ernmental programmes came into exis-tence to promote JI and several projectswent forward. The programmes includ-ed: Prototype Carbon Fund’s JointImplementation programme; the ERUPTprogramme of the Government of theNetherlands; and the Danish and FinnishJI programmes. Denmark implemented aproject in Romania, and Finland did onein Estonia. The Prototype Carbon Fundand, to a greater extent, ERUPT, con-tributed to JI projects in many sectorsacross the region. Over last two years,Austria, Japan and Spain establishedsimilar programmes.

In recent years, more private compa-nies from developed countries have takenan interest in flexible mechanisms. On theone hand, they come under domestic emis-sion caps and are willing to trade invest-ment for cheap abatement credits. On theother hand, they’re on the prowl for marketniches for their technologies and products.Again, climate change mitigation proves itcan work in synergy with the traditionalbusiness needs of private investors.

Lne should keep in mind that theEuropean Union Emission TradingScheme created an extra market forreductions through flexible mecha-

nism projects. According to the LinkingDirective, reductions can be traded on thismarket. Any European enterprise under thescheme can cover its GHG emissions notonly with its European allowances but alsothrough emission reductions acquiredthrough the JI or clean development mech-anism schemes.

The countries in Annex I to the ClimateChange Convention form a larger groupthan Annex B. Annex I includes all theAnnex B countries and other countrieswhich recognise their historical liability ofaccumulated GHG pollution. Among theREC’s beneficiary countries, Turkeybelongs to Annex I, but not to Annex B.These countries do not adopt exact targetsbut have pledged to:• submit regular reports, known as

national communications, detailingtheir climate change policies and meas-ures (now that Kyoto has come intoforce, Annex I countries must submittheir fourth national communication);

• submit annual inventories of GHGemissions and withdrawals; and

• establish and maintain a GHG nationalregistry to track and record the transac-tions under the flexile mechanisms.

The requirements for the countries par-ticipating in JI are stricter than for thoseparticipating in the clean developmentmechanism. However, every country isobliged to ratify the Protocol, to set-up anational authority to approve projects, toestablish a system for GHG inventorypreparation and to establish a registry sys-tem for the transfer of acquired emissionreductions and/or assigned amount unitsprior to January 1, 2007.

Following the ratification of Kyoto, theissue of compliance has become morepressing for Annex B countries. Each partyis now required to submit a report byJanuary 1, 2007 to calculate its assignedquota. The submission of this reportlaunches a 16-month period to establisheligibility to participate in the mechanisms.Therefore, the earlier this report is submit-ted, the earlier the country will be eligible.

The Tenth Conference of Parties(COP10) was held in December in BuenosAires, and raised issues relating to the his-toric ties between the United States andEurope. The issue at stake was climatechange mitigation after 2012, when thefirst commitment period expires. The USopted out of the first period, and ItalianEnvironment Minister Altero Matteoli sug-gested that post-2012 greenhouse gas tar-gets should be voluntary to attract the US.This met opposition from other EU coun-tries, particularly Germany, which insistedon halving global emissions by 2020 anddeclared German readiness to make a sig-nificant contribution in this effort.

The historical discrepancies over howto deal with climate change will persist,

▼

▼

Continued from page 13



with the US arguing it is too early to speakof a common position and that future talksare needed. This dispute clouds the hori-zon for carbon investment, as well as thefuture of JI and the clean developmentmechanism. Many current projects, includ-ing biomass electricity initiatives in CEE,will carry on producing emission reduc-tions beyond 2012. Such emission reduc-tions are currently not recognisable forabatement credits, which lowers theirinvestment appeal.

Climate Change mitigation is a nexusof business and environment, andinevitably so because the cost of undoingthe past wrongs is high. Kyoto’s flexiblemechanisms are aimed at cost-optimisingemission reduction. The costs of abate-ment are lowered by mixing abatementwith technological change and moderni-sation where they are most needed.Though the road ahead looks bumpy, it isalso replete with exciting opportunitiesfor profit and non-profit players. Climatechange mitigation may become a modelof business involvement in greening theglobal economy.

Maria Khovanskaia is a climate change projectsmanager at the REC

◗

PACT HOUSE: Joke Waller-Hunter (oppositepage/photo by REUTERS/Kimimasa Mayama) ofthe United Framework Convention on ClimateChange spoke at a February 16 celebration in Kyoto, while Japanese MPs and activists(top/PressPhoto BTA) made merry nearby. Just above, a celebration of the same event in Slovenia (Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning, Slovenia).


Ilthough it rejected the KyotoProtocol, the government of theUnited States has pledged to sub-stantively address climate

change. At a Buenos Aires meeting, asenior US climate negotiator explainedthe administration’s go-it-alone strategy.“We believe in an approach that has astrong scientific and technological base,”said Harlan Watson, alternate head of theUS delegation to the UN FrameworkConvention on Climate.

The US rejected Kyoto on groundsthat to meet its reduction quota it wouldhave to actually cut 30 percent of its emis-sions which would severely impact the USeconomy. The first major advantage of theUS approach is that it is good for the USeconomy, Watson told Green Horizon.“The countries of Central and EasternEurope and Russia have achieved theirKyoto targets due to a severe collapse oftheir economies — something unaccept-able for most countries and the US,” hesaid. The second advantage according toWatson is that the US provides a way toengage the large developing countries inthe process.

The US has criticised Kyoto for notimposing any obligations on developingcountries to reduce their emissions.

Domestically the US is implementinga climate change policy formulated byPresident George W. Bush in February2002 — an 18 percent reduction of thegreenhouse gas intensity of America’seconomy by 2012. This approach doesn’trequire emission cuts in absolute terms;rather it would reduce the rate of emis-

sions per GDP while allowing for eco-nomic growth. Nonetheless, Bush hasclaimed that the scheme would “pre-vent” emissions of roughly 500 millionmetric tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2112.

To achieve this the White House haslaunched a presidential committee onclimate change science and technology,and proposed a USD 5.8 billion budgetfor climate programmes and energy taxincentives in 2005. Nearly USD 3 billionhas been allocated for the ClimateChange Technology Programme, andUSD 2 billion for the Climate ChangeScience Programme.

According to John H Marbuger III,science advisor to President Bush anddirector of the Office of Science andTechnology Policy in the ExecutiveOffice of the President, the climate poli-cy of the US has three primary aims. First,it will encourage new technologies thatdramatically decouple economic growthand greenhouse gas generation. Second,it will improve scientific tools andknowledge on climate change. Andthird, it will foster cooperation with othernations to address the entire spectrum ofclimate change issues.

The US climate-oriented technolo-gy initiatives address three challenges,according to Marburger. These are thedevelopment of hydrogen technolo-gies for carbon-free transport means,new “FutureGen” coal power genera-tion plants which do not release car-bon into the air, and other carbon-freepower generation technologies,including nuclear.


Io help meet its Kyoto target for greenhouse gas emission cuts, the Austriangovernment is investing approximately EUR 200 million in the Vacha Cascadehydroelectric works in Bulgaria. The joint implementation project aims toachieve a reduction of generated emissions of 1.14 million tonnes of CO2

equivalent over 50 years. The project will allow Bulgaria’s National Electric Company(NEC) to construct the Tsankov Kamak Hydro Power Plant in the Rhodopi Mountainsand to rehabilitate four existing hydro dams in Teshel, Devin, Orpheus and Krichim.

Financing will come from the Austrian JI/CDM Programme, which funds bothjoint implementation and clean development mechanism projects. In 2003, theAustrians launched the programme for the purchase of emission reductions toachieve compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. Priority projects related to the con-struction of combined heat and power plants, cleaner fuels, renewable energyresources, energy recovery of landfill gas, waste management and energy efficiency.Kommunalkredit Public Consulting was appointed to manage the programme.

The environmental pressure group Balkani has been fighting the Vacha Cascadeproject for damaging a precious river ecosystem. All joint implementation projectsneed to strictly comply with national environmental regulations, said Zsuzsa Ivanyi,a climate change project manager at REC.

US approachgood to grow

Kyoto creditsBulgarian dam

◗

◗

On the bank of the Danube nearthe three-state juncture of Bul-garia, Serbia and Romania liesthe village of Garla Mare, once amajor grain producer for Roman-

ia. Since the fall of the communist regime,its 3,500 inhabitants have slid into poverty.

Dozens of the settlement’s single-levelhomes, each surrounded by a small yard,now lie empty. Young people havemoved to nearby cities to find work.Farming, until 1989 the main activity inthe area, is now done only by those veryfew who have access to land, but eventhose operate at subsistence level.

A pernicious legacy of the communistera is a high level of pesticides in theaquifer, which is the only source of drink-ing water in the area. Ioana Iacob, thedoctor of the village, says that more andmore people have fallen ill in recentyears. Hepatitis is wide-spread in GarlaMare, and everyone here suffers fromconstant gastrointestinal diseases.

Recent tests showed the water to be sofull of microbiological pollution, it would-n’t meet EU standards for bath water. “Themain drinking well, which according tothe villagers was ‘clean,’ had extremelyhigh levels of pollution with nitrate andatrazin, a persistent pesticide,” saidMihaela Vasilescu, of the Bucharest-based

Medium et Sanitas (Environment andHealth Association), which coordinatedthe tests. Nitrate can be reduced to nitrite,which causes a condition that inhibitsblood cells’ ability to carry oxygen.

In addition to pesticides, the villagehas no sewage system, which has givenrise to high levels of faecal bacteria in thesame water. Village physicians havewarned local health inspectorates aboutthe alarming health effects of the environ-mental pollution, but until recently noth-ing was done. NGOs involved in projectsaddressing environment-related healthproblems are the only bodies trying tohelp Garla Mare or any other Romanianvillage. Medium et Sanitas recently devel-oped a project dealing with health prob-lems caused by polluted drinking water.

“Under the project we managed toorganise the installation of a water filter inthe village school to provide drinking waterfor vulnerable groups, such as young chil-dren and pregnant women,” Vasilescu said.Sanitary toilets have been installed andmeetings have been organised betweenfarmers and experts, so that inhabitants canfind out about the dangers they face.

During the communist period, big fac-tories, most of which are still state-run,leaked insufficiently treated toxins intothe ground for more than 50 years.

Intensive agricultural practices exacerbat-ed the degradation, as synthetic fertiliserscontaminated the groundwater.

‘Accidental’ releasesWhile legislative gaps have gradually

been closed since the adoption of aframework environmental protection lawand a waters law in 1996, the public hasfrequently questioned the laws’ imple-mentation. Controversy has centered onmedia coverage of several “accidental”releases of oil and other hazardous chem-icals into surface and ground waters.

“The hope of environmental officialsand civil society leaders alike is that with-in the next decade, Romania’s alignmentwith EU standards will make the ‘goodwater status’ a reality for most ofRomania’s aquifers, rivers, lakes andcoastal waters,” says Lucian Ionescu,director of REC Country Office Romania.“For example, both Romanians and theCommission’s representatives acknowl-edge that Romanian water institutions stillneed to be strengthened with new logisti-cal and human capacities to be able toproperly identify all the priority pollutantsunder article 16 of the Directive.”

Ionescu says that local governmentsneed a better understanding of integratedriver basin management and stakeholder

Overuse of farm chemicals during communismpoisoned water wells across the Romanian countryside, and help is slow in coming

Tapped outText Daniela Tuchel | Photographs Mugur Grosu

INSIGHT | hazardous waste

green HORIZON | MARCH 2005 | 16green HORIZON | DECEMBER 2004 | 16

VILLAGE LIFE: Oppositepage, Ecaterina Sutru, 72,and her grandson, live inthe village of Garla Mare.Despite studies blamingpesticides for local waterproblems, they keep bagsof farm chemicals in theirhome. At near left, thevillage well, the residents’only sources of water,contains unsafe levels ofnitrates. Below left, somevillagers in front of one ofGarla Mare’s manyabandoned homes and,below right, childrenplaying on the school’s steps.

consultation before any river manage-ment plan can be implemented. In 2003,REC Romania began providing technicalsupport to the environmental and wateragencies and NGOs in the Prut and Siretwatersheds (which together cover most ofRomanian Moldova), to prepare them forthe directive’s requirements. A publica-tion entitled, Technical Handbook forImplementing the WFD, was printed anddistributed, three workshops were held inGalati, Suceava and Bacau and promo-tional materials were published to explainthe directive to ordinary people.

Billions neededStill, more efforts and money are

needed in the long term. A report issuedin 2003 by the US Department ofCommerce’s Central and Eastern EuropeBusiness Information Center estimatedthe cost of Romania’s compliance with EUstandards at USD 20 billion over 20 years.

“We have the right legislation but wedo not have the capacity to put the law intopractice,” said Petruta Moisi, president ofthe environmental NGO, Eco CounsellingCentre Galati (ECCG). “We do not haveenough resources to control and monitorpolluted water sources.” Moisi believespublicity is another problem. “The authori-ties have not financed any campaigns to

inform the population. Only the NGOshave tried to solve this, but the results havenot been satisfactory, as the NGOs dependon foreign aid to inform communitiesabout environmental hazards.”

The government’s latest measure hasbeen to adopt a World HealthOrganization action plan to reduce theimpact of environmental hazards to health.Bucharest was a signatory to the FourthMinisterial Conference on Environmentand Health in Budapest, in June. One ofthe goals set there was access to cleanwater and sanitation by 2015.

“We are confident that by 2015 wewill reduce the portion of the populationwithout access to safe drinking water byhalf,” says Alexandra Cucu, deputy direc-tor of the Public Health Department of theMinistry of Health and Family. This will bedone through a national strategy onaccess to safe and affordable water andsanitation facilities, with a focus on ruralareas, Cucu added.

The first step would be to change thelaw on monitoring drinking water. Untilrecently, the Ministry of Health and Familydid not monitor water from private andpublic wells because the law did notrequire it. That was changed in July. “Fromnow on we will be able to get exact infor-mation concerning pollution levels in allaffected areas and, consequently, proper

measures are going to be taken,” Cucu said. Garla Mare is not an isolated case. Just

18 percent of the rural population hasaccess to improved drinking water sources,according to a WHO/UNICEF JointMonitoring Programme for Water Supplyand Sanitation. Seven million people livingin villages take water from wells whosequality is not assured. Sixty-two percentconsider water pollution the country’sworst environmental problem and morethan half of Romanians believe that thegovernment does not care about the envi-ronment, the WHO-UNICEF study says.

Situation ‘not dramatic’The government says these worries

are overplayed, with Cucu putting thepolluted portion of the country’s drinkingwater at no higher than 3 percent. “It istrue we have not monitored the water inpublic and private wells in most ruralareas, but overall the situation is not dra-matic,” she said. “I believe we do betterthan many other European countrieswhen it comes to water pollution.”

Yet, intensive farming is blamed for thehigh levels of nitrates found in the groundwater in Calarasi, a mainly agriculturalcounty in southeast Romania. In 1997,every case of acute nitrate poisoning in thecountry occurred in Calarasi, including


hazardous waste | INSIGHT

several hospitalised children younger than15. According to government sources, of59 samples from the area’s public wellsand other water supply sources between1996 and 1999, nearly 80 percent exceededthe drinking water nitrate standard.

Health and the local environment arenot the only victims. The Danube River isa drain for the excess manure, chemicalfertilisers and pesticides from the farm-lands in Calarasi County. Eventually, thosenutrients wash into the Black Sea.

According to a recent study, Romania con-tributes 27 percent of all nutrients enteringthe Black Sea, mainly from farms.

Several projects are running to tacklethe worst problems. Since 1999, the WorldBank has been funding one aimed atimproving drinking water in CalarasiCounty through the promotion of “environ-mentally friendly agricultural practices.”

Another project, aimed at helpingRomania comply with EU standards,will be carried out in the eastern SiretRiver basin. The US Trade andDevelopment Agency, meanwhile ,awarded almost USD 600,000 to theRomanian Ministry of Environment andWater Management this June. The planis for the ministry to select four munici-palities to examine ways to improvedrinking water and wastewater treat-ment facilities by the end of 2004.

The inhabitants of Garla Mare nowconsider themselves lucky for the helpfrom Medium et Sanitas. It resulted in amarked improvement of their water andsanitation infrastructure. MihaelaVasilescu, coordinator of the project, saysthat the challenge is to ensure that “theproject results can be replicated . . . notonly in this village but in other rural areasof Romania.”


INSIGHT | hazardous waste

Ageing chemicals a regional hazardThe United Nations has recently warned that high quantities oftoxic chemical waste from obsolete pesticides are posing a greatthreat to all Central and Eastern European countries. Moreover,the UN agencies that deal with hazardous-waste issues in devel-oping countries are running out of funds for cleanup operations.

“Affected countries are calling for assistance to remove theirobsolete pesticides stocks. The problem . . . is that there is nofunding for us to develop and continue work in regions outsideAfrica,” said Mark Davis, coordinator and chief technical advisorof Obsolete Pesticides Plant Protection Service, a division of theFood and Health Organisation (FAO).

With a total of 40,803 tonnes, Bulgaria has the most ageingchemicals in the region, according to data released by FAO dur-ing a meeting held this year by the Basel Convention Regional

Centre in Bratislava. Bulgaria is followed by Moldova (36,600tonnes), Poland (29,100 tonnes) Ukraine (19,301 tonnes) andArmenia (19,000 tonnes). The least affected is Latvia, with 341tonnes of toxic chemical wastes.

Ageing chemical pesticides come in three types, said GarislavShkolenok, with the Chemicals office of the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) in Geneva. The first are eitherbanned or have severely restricted uses, Shkolenok told GreenHorizon. The second are past their date of expiry, and the third haveunidentified contents or their labels are lost or packages destroyed.

Even the first type are referred to as obsolete; the decisionsto ban or restrict their use were made 10 to 30 years ago. Thethird type may amount to 40 or even 50 percent of such stocks,Shkolenok says.

“There is a problem with such pesticides in Central and EasternEurope, which in a broader sense includes all the former republicsof the USSR,” Shkolenok said. “The problem appears more acutein the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States(CIS), where dozens of thousands of tonnes of obsolete stocks arescattered around the country in poor storage conditions.”

All the CEE countries signed a declaration in Kiev last year,in which they expressed their concern about the complexproblem of deteriorating, obsolete pesticides. One of the mainissues is the ownership of the refuse. The governments in theregion have committed to a plan of action to enable concertedmeasures, including public education and awareness raisingand outreach to civil society. In the Kiev Declaration, the CEEcountries asked for help from the international community.

The declaration “is seen as an endorsement by countries in theregion to progress with the development of a project for the coor-dination of activities related to obsolete pesticides in the region,”Davis said. FAO is currently collaborating with NGOs and govern-ments in the region to develop a coordination project to help CEEcountries to quantify and address the problem, he said.

According to FAO, the cleanup of just one tonne of obsoletepesticides costs around USD 3,500. Most developing countrieslack facilities for safe hazardous waste disposal.

◗

◗

RISKY BUSINESS: The Sutrus keep stockpiles of aging fertilisers in a back room of their home.

Stockpiles of toxic waste (in metric tonnes)

Obsolete POPs PCBs HCB TOTALpesticides pesticides

Armenia 1,000 500 18,000 0 19,000Bulgaria 5,333 29 32,198 40,803Czech Republic NA NA 4,029 NA 4,029Hungary 314 59 536 0 850Kazakhstan 1,560 500 680 NA 2,180Latvia 112 229 341Lithuania 1,565 1,100 2,665FYROM* 10,002 2 NA NA 10,002Moldova 6,600 82 (935**) 30,000 36,600Poland 15,000 14,100 0 29,100Slovakia 300 31 3,500 0 3,800Romania 1,260 877 1,326 2,566Ukraine 19,300 NA 1 19,301

*Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia **Unofficial amount based on preliminary data.Source: Based on country responses compiled by Ekotoxikologicke Centrum Bratislava in May 2004

Ecologia is the word still usedthroughout Central and EasternEurope (CEE) to describe theenvironment. This dates from the1970s and early ‘80s, when envi-

ronmental education first entered schoolcurricula as knowledge about ecosystems,nature and species. The more contempo-rary subject of sustainable development,first defined in the late 1980s and still theanchor of global discourse on the environ-ment, requires a new type of education —one that it includes the human impacts onenvironment and the responsibility of soci-ety to balance its needs with the earth’scapacity. Education for sustainable devel-opment poses a challenge for educators,governments and societies.

Many educators and institutions in theregion still believe that education is allabout the accumulation of knowledge,said Kliment Mindjov, who has managedone of the REC’s major environmentaleducation projects, the Green Pack, since2001. According to Mindjov, while educa-tion in CEE has focused on obtaining the-oretical knowledge, it doesn’t build valuesor develop practical skills. “That is why Ialways prefer to present the Green Pack asan educational tool on environment anddevelopment,” Mindjov explained.

InteractivityInteractivity in education is becoming

essential, said Mindjov. Children getaccustomed to interactivity from an earlyage, thanks to the Internet and the enter-tainment industry. An interactive educa-tional process through games, role-play-ing and dilemmas enables children to pre-pare for real-life situations in which envi-ronmental and development concernsarise from conflicts in society.

According to Robert Atkinson, theREC’s director for civil initiatives, educa-tion for sustainable development must per-meate all subjects, including politics, eco-nomics, chemistry, physics, sociology andeven philosophy. It needs to be taughtfrom kindergarten through adulthood.

“It is not only about knowledge, butabout building the skills of people tomake decisions in every area of work andlife,” Atkinson explained.

Ministers and high level governmentofficials from all over Europe will meet inVilnius March 17-18 to endorse the pan-European strategy on education for sus-tainable development. The Joint High-

Level Meeting of Environment andEducation Ministries will confer on a draftstrategy under development since October2003 by a task force jointly led by Swedenand Russia. The fifth UNECE Environmentfor Europe ministerial conference in Kiev,2003, green-lighted the strategy to promoteeducation as an agent for change.

Cooperative approachEnvironment and education min-

istries, educational institutions, UNESCO,international organisations, NGOs, otherstakeholders and the REC have beeninvolved in the development of the strate-gy, which is meant to be adapted to thedifferent countries.

The strategy involves awareness rais-ing and promoting a new way of thinking,said the task force chair Jon Kahn, a direc-tor at the international division ofSweden’s environment ministry. Whenasked how the strategy supports the EU’saquis on sustainability, Khan commentedthat even though the strategy’s implemen-tation works on national level it wouldhelp if the EU discussed how to relate to it.

The development of a sub-regionalprocess and the provision of funding andexpertise are sorely needed in CEE,emphasised Atkinson. He said the RECwould contribute with curriculum build-ing, training of teachers, sharing experi-ences from other countries and facilitatingthe exchange of regional experiences.


education | INSIGHT

A new strategy coordinates Europe’s efforts on education for sustainable development

Lessons to live byBy Pavel Antonov and Laima Galkute

LASZLO FALVAY

REC contributions to sustainable developmenteducation, 1990 – 2005

• Development of ESD materials and corresponding teacher training programmes such as the Green Pack (in Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic,Hungary, Poland, Russia, Slovakia andTurkey) and guidelines on developing and practicing a sustainable lifestyle atschool and in the local community (in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania).

• Contribution to the development andimplementation of the ESD strategy andaction plan for the Baltic Sea Region (ten countries) within the Baltic 21Education Sector; the REC CO Lithuania inthe period of 2000-2004 was nominatedby the Lithuanian Ministry of Educationand Science as a national ESD coordinatorand representative in the Baltic 21.

• Training for Young Environmental Leadersand their NGOs to deal with organisationaland management problems.

• Specialised sustainable development trainings for environmental professionalsfrom government, municipalities, business, media and universities throughout CEE, including the InternationalCourse for Sustainability for senior government officials of eight CEE countries.

◗

BRAINSTORM: Environmental consciousness has to be nurtured over a lifetime.

Look closely at any point in Europe and you‘ll see somethingunique. Stand back, however, and general patterns emerge thatare distinctly European. Central and Eastern Europe offer a similarblend of topography, rivers and species — each unique, yet eachan inseparable part of our living world.

The REC has studied the region’s environment and guided its stakeholders for 15 years. REC experience and knowledge, gained in concert with its donors and beneficiaries alike, represent both an asset for future work and a responsibility of everyone involved.Bringing sustainability to the region’s environmental mosaic has neverbeen in sharper focus.

Main events of the REC’s 15th Anniversary

• Implementation of Sustainable Development in Central Europe JJaannuuaarryy 2200,, 22000055

• Briefing for the Ambassadors of the Signatory Governments to the Charter of the REC JJaannuuaarryy 2288,, 22000055

• Senior Officials Preparatory Meeting AApprriill 77,, 22000055• Earth Week AApprriill 1155--2233,, 22000055• 15th Anniversary Ministerial Meeting of the General Assembly

of the REC JJuunnee 2288,, 22000055• Climate Change: Impacts and Responses in East-Central

European Countries NNoovveemmbbeerr 55--88,, 22000055

The big picture.


◗

What will happen within the new mem-ber states’ environment now that thecountries here have achieved theirlong-awaited EU membership?It is essential at this stage to make surethat development and nature protectioncan coexist. In all parts of the economy— trade, industry, agriculture, andtourism — people should have theopportunity to make a living while main-taining certain environmental qualitystandards. Development should nolonger come at the cost of preservation ofnature. The region now faces the chal-lenge of implementing all those regula-tions that were adapted from the EU. Thisprocess requires a huge amount of worknot only by a small group of decisionmakers at the central level but effort andcapacity on the regional and local levels.This is an even bigger challenge thanaccession itself, especially for central andlocal authorities. I believe the REC will beable to offer them adequate assistancethroughout this process.

Where do you see the region’s immedi-ate environmental priorities?There are fields of work where our coun-tries still have a lot to learn, and fieldswhere they are better. We have a very richenvironment and a high level of biodiver-sity and there have been protected areasin Central Europe for more than 100 years.But the mechanisms and instruments topreserve this are different from what haveused up to now. That is why the NATURA2000 network will be quite a challenge.Things are similar with the environmentalassessment directive. In addition, the newmember states have other obligationswhich are important for the state of theirenvironment — like the UN conventionson biodiversity and climate change.

How will the REC address these priori-ties in Central Europe?Throughout the EU accession process, theREC has been working with all stakehold-ers, including NGOs. We need to build onthis work and continue with the implemen-tation of accession requirements. The RECwill further strengthen the capacity of localand regional authorities and communica-tion between them, other stakeholders —such as businesses and NGOs — and con-cerned citizens. Such communication is

essential because more and more adminis-trative procedures today require public par-ticipation. My experience from Polandshows that the authorities really do notknow how to deal with the new conditions,and they have begun to realise that theyneed tools and mechanisms that the RECcan offer. The REC’s role in the region is to

continue building communication betweenNGOs, businesses and government author-ities to achieve a functioning civil society.

What are your preferred approaches asa regional director?Our new regional strategy for the newmember states is based on the principleof building internal capacities in RECoffices. We have eight offices that arerather small but possess very diversified

expertise. Virtual teams will be createdwhich will work on the topic areas with-in the broad area of REC operationswhere Cen

Date post:	21-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

As the global climate change pact takes hold, transition...

Documents