significance and implementation of global environmental conventions … · the international...
TRANSCRIPT
Significance and Implementation of Global Environmental Conventions at National Level
National Capacity Self-Assessment for Global Environmental Management in Hungary
Significance and Implementation of Global Environmental Conventions at National Level. National Capacity Self-Assessment for Global Environmental Management in Hungary
The international project was funded by the Global Environmental Facility.
Project Number: GF/2740-03-4687 GF/3010-03-19
Implementing Agency: United Nations Environment Programme, Global Environmental Facility
National Executing Agency: CEEweb for Biodiversity
National Coordinating Body of the intenational conventions: Ministry of Environment and Water
Year of publication: 2008
Executive summary
The three Rio conventions – the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention to Combat Desertification – aim to give response to global environmental challenges where joint international action is indispensable. Primarily the Parties to these conventions are responsible for the implementation of these conventions. Various measures and programmes have been initiated and fulfilled basically by the governments of these countries, and there are also certain achievements in meeting the objectives of these international legal instruments. However, their implementation has seen also many shortcomings in most of the countries. The globally executed programme of National Capacity Self Assessments (NCSA) supported by the Global Environment Facility and the World Bank, United Nations Environment Programme and the United Nations Development Programme, aims to identify actions to develop the capacities lacking for implementation on national level.
The NCSA project of Hungary involved several hundreds of stakeholders in the field of biodiversity, climate change and desertification, and dozens of experts were closely involved in the analysis of the situation and the development of actions necessary for the future. Special attention has been given to the cross-cutting issues and synergies of the various areas. The available capacities and capacity constraints were analysed on systemic, institutional and individual levels in the following fields: national policy and legal regulatory framework; economic regulatory framework; vertical and horizontal cooperation and subsidiarity; knowledge gaps related to research; information management and data collection; knowledge gaps related to education; and awareness on the three topics and sustainable development. The identified actions should respond to these constraints and contribute to more effective implementation of the requirements of the three Rio conventions and thus enhance the contribution of Hungary to global environment management.
Table of contents
1. Introduction....................................................................................................................4
1.1. Environment and globalisation..........................................................................4 1.2. The Rio Conventions..........................................................................................5 1.3. General objective of the international capacity assessment project...............6
2. The NCSA process in Hungary..............................................................................7
2.1. The coordination of the project...........................................................................7 2.2. Kick-off conference...............................................................................................7 2.3. Situation analysis related to climate change......................................................7 2.4. Situation analysis related to biodiversity...........................................................8 2.5. Situation analysis related to desertification.......................................................9 2.6. Analysing cross-cutting issues.............................................................................9 2.7. Project closing conference.................................................................................10
3. Capacity constraints for global environmental management in Hungary.................................................................................10
3.1. Cross-cutting capacity needs on systemic level...............................................11 3.2. Cross-cutting capacity needs on institutional level........................................14 3.3. Cross-cutting capacity needs on individual level............................................17
4. Capacity Development Action Plan...................................................................17
4.1. National policies and legal regulatory framework.........................................20 4.2. Economic regulatory framework......................................................................21 4.3. Vertical and horizontal cooperation and subsidiarity...................................22 4.4. Knowledge gaps related to research.................................................................23 4.5. Information management and data collection................................................24 4.6. Knowledge gaps related to education..............................................................25 4.7. Awareness on the three topics and sustainable development.......................26 4.8. Implementation of the CDAP.........................................................................27 4.9. Monitoring and evaluation...............................................................................27
5. Annexes
5.1. Annex I – Agenda of the kick-off conference.................................................28 5.2. Annex II – List of experts consulted in the situation analysis related to climate change..............................................................................................30 5.3. Annex III – Members of the Advisory Board................................................31 5.4. Annex IV – Experts of the cross-cutting working group on sustainable development........................................................................32 5.5. Annex V – The program of the project closing conference..........................33
acronyms and abbreviations
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
COP Conference of the Parties
CDAP Capacity Development Action Plan
GEF Global Environment Facility
HAS Hungarian Academy of Sciences
MoEW Ministry of Environment and Water
NDS National Development Strategy
NEP National Environment Programme
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NCSA National Capacity Self-Assessment
NSDC National Sustainable Development Council
UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
3
1. Introduction
1.1. Environment and globalisation
Our world is characterised by increasing uncertainty. We are making huge efforts to tackle all the problems that seem to be the biggest challenges today by stimulating economic growth and increasing competitiveness. All these ongoing processes are causing environmental changes and affect not just one country but the whole Earth and thus force society to face new challenges such as climate change, poverty, environmental degradation or decreasing yields. Changes of the natural conditions bring risks in agriculture, energy, water management and other economic and societal sectors. These processes force decision makers to give responses while they also need to respond to the related social changes.
Though we have accumulated a large knowledge base and expect the daily emerging new technologies to respond to the problems, we are not able to realise the real cause–effect relationships among the economic, social and environmental problems. We take small pieces from the mass of problems and only get to the acknowledgment of the effects and impacts, giving end-of-pipe solutions. The real causes remain hidden and keep on regenerating the problems on wider and wider scale.
One of main causes of the uncertainty is our globalised society. During its history humankind has developed tools for mobilization so people have gradually lost their local connections. Eventually with the “perfection” of transport and communication, they conquered the whole world.
In every previous culture the relationship between society and its own environment was deterministic. Whenever a society abused its environment, the culture fell or declined. Societies adapted to their own territory because they were forced to the adaptation. Nowadays mobility has made it possible to turn locality into space on the scale of the planet and even beyond, and in this way space of adaptation also became globalised. In this globalised society, humankind as such stands against the globe. As we have only one Earth and because adaptation has become globalised, a lot depends on the way of our adaptation. While in previous times when a local culture failed, it did not affect the whole of humankind. Nowadays we have been sharing a common future for a long time.
Ozone depletion and climate change also affect those who have never used CFCs or have not contributed to increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, all species on the planet are forced to strict adaptation courses only because of other species.
Due to globalization there are no national issues any more. Economy was the first that interweaved social structures and only few could remain partly isolated. The expansion of economy brought along the globalisation of environmental problems together with the above mentioned phenomena.
No matter if we consider globalisation good or bad, it is inevitable that humankind has to establish common regulations. Nowadays, it is impossible for a country to introduce any special regulatory system significantly different from that of other countries without putting its society or economy at disadvantage.
4
Based upon this recognition, the cooperation for developing multilateral environmental agreements has started, and under the auspices of the United Nations the Brundtland Report came out in 1987. This report correctly identified that the issues of environment and development are closely interlinked, though it did not reveal the real causes of environmental problems. In terms of multilateral cooperation an important turning point came in 1992 when the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) was organized in Rio de Janeiro. In the same year two new global environmental agreements were adopted: the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and on the occasion of the UNCED these conventions were opened for signature. The Conference also decided to launch negotiations on measures to cope with expanding desertification problems. These negotiations lead to the adoption of the Convention to Combat Desertification. These three agreements are called in short the “Rio Conventions”.
1.2. The Rio Conventions
The objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including appropriate access to genetic resources and appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, as well as appropriate funding.
The full implementation of the Convention, which heavily depends upon holistic approaches and sectoral integration, requires the active involvement of not only governments, but also economic and other stakeholders. Therefore, the Parties shall develop national strategies, plans or programmes for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and integrate these considerations into relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans, programmes and policies. Besides, the Parties shall have the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, but at the same time it is their responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other countries or of areas beyond the national jurisdiction. Moreover, the Convention requires among others the establishment of a system of monitoring biodiversity trends and threats and also a system of protected areas. The CBD also includes the regulation or management of biological diversity inside and outside of protected areas, as well as preventing the introduction of, and the control or eradication of alien species threatening biodiversity. In the case of danger or damage to biodiversity of other countries, the Parties shall notify immediately the potentially affected countries of such danger or damage, as well as initiate action to prevent or minimize harmful effects. The Parties have further commitments in the field of research and training; especially focusing on the knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities.
The objective of the Framework Convention on Climate Change is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perflurocarbons and sulphur hexafluride) concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.
The Convention requires precise and regularly updated inventories of greenhouse gas emissions from industrialized countries. The Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of
5
present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Therefore, one of the commitments of the Parties is to take climate change into account in such matters as agriculture, industry, energy, natural resources and activities involving sea coasts and they shall develop national programmes to slow climate change. The developed country Parties should take the lead and thus take into consideration the specific needs and special circumstances of developing country Parties. The Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Comprehensive, but at the same time cost-effective scientific research has to be carried out which take into account socio-economic contexts as well. The Parties shall also promote sustainable development through integrated national development programmes to address climate change. Moreover, the Parties have further commitments in the field of cooperation to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to sustainable economic growth and development in all countries with special focus on developing country Parties. Therefore, developed countries shall contribute to enabling developing Parties to address better the problems of climate change.
The objective of the Convention to Combat Desertification is to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought in countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa, through effective action at all levels, supported by international cooperation and partnership arrangements, in the framework of an integrated approach which is consistent with Agenda 21, with a view to contributing to the achievement of sustainable development in affected areas. Achieving this aim shall involve long-term integrated strategies that focus simultaneously on improved productivity of land and the rehabilitation, conservation and sustainable management of land and water resources.
The full implementation of the Convention requires the participation of population and local communities, involvement of NGOs, landowners and other stakeholders, besides creating an empowering environment both at higher and local levels to facilitate actions. Furthermore, the Parties should take into full consideration the special needs and circumstances of affected developing country Parties, particularly the least developed among them. Moreover, those countries affected by desertification shall develop and carry out national, subregional and regional action programmes which must adopt a democratic, bottom-up approach. Further commitments of the Parties include that these action programmes are to be fully integrated into other national policies for sustainable development. The developed Parties are expected to encourage the mobilization of substantial funding for the action programmes, to promote access to appropriate technologies, knowledge and know-how. On the other hand, Parties shall focus on awareness-raising, education and training in both developing and developed countries.
1.3. General objective of the international capacity assessment project
Though in 1992 it seemed that all nations were seriously committed to tackling their common environmental problems, in the coming years the attention turned to other issues and the implementation was insufficient in many aspects. These shortcomings were partly caused by the lack of capacities on national level, which urged for launching a global program financed by the Global Environment Facility.
The National Capacity Self-Assessments projects had run in more than 140 countries with the contribution of UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank. The National Capacity Self Assessment
6
project in Hungary, with the support of UNEP/GEF, assessed the lack of capacities for the implementation of the three Rio conventions.
The tasks identified during the project respond to the most pressing capacity building needs. The basic intention by this analysis and by the identification of capacity related problems is the assistance to the better implementation of these international environmental instruments for protecting the Earth’s climate, preserving its biological diversity, lessening the desertification processes and mitigating the harmful consequences of severe droughts.
2. The NCSA process in Hungary
2.1. The coordination of the project
The National Capacity Self-Assessment project started in Hungary in 2004 with the involvement of the Ministry of Environment and Water, under the coordination of CEEweb for Biodiversity (at that time called Central and Eastern European Working Group for the Enhancement of Biodiversity). The realization of the project was supported by the United Nations Environmental Program / Global Environment Facility.
Thematic working groups were established for each of the three conventions, while the assessment of synergies and cross-cutting issues was ensured by a fourth working group on sustainable development.
During the project special attention was paid to the consultations with various stakeholders. The collection of a wide range of information and opinions happened at conferences, forums, personal interviews and written consultations. The process of consultations is summarised below.
2.2. Kick-off conference
For launching the project a conference was held at the beginning of 2004 in cooperation with the Environmental Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. The participants represented a wide range of governmental, non-governmental and scientific organisations. After the introduction of the project the lecturers looked through the international and national background of the three conventions, the shortcomings of implementation and gave recommendations for the further steps. A separate presentation considered the sustainability context of the implementation of the conventions, and opportunity was also given for debate with the participants. The outcome of the kick-off conference also gave a basis for further assessment. (The agenda of the conference is included in Annex I).
2.3. Situation analysis related to climate change
The situation analysis was first of all based on interviewing governmental experts of relevant state institutions. However, as it was not possible to make interviews with all concerned experts, this
7
method was complemented with an electronic questionnaire with 35 responders involving not only governmental but also non-governmental and private sector experts. After compiling and synthesizing the information received, we sent the results to all the involved experts. In the further consultation they could give their opinion while knowing the view of other experts. The opinions first of all came from national level organisations and bodies. They were further synthesised and gave the basis of the situation analysis. (The list of experts involved is in Annex II.)
2.4. Situation analysis related to biodiversity
During the situation analysis a desk study was made on the most important national, EU and international documents. The study involved the Hungarian reports and analyses on biodiversity; the national, EU and international strategic documents; as well as the sectoral documents related to the biodiversity. The aim was to analyse the possible synergies and shortcomings regarding regulation and implementation. The desk study was conducted with the help of a methodological scheme based on the articles and COP decisions of the convention.
We sent questions via email to approx. 100 experts from the concerned sectors (agriculture and rural development, finance, conservation biology, nature conservation, forestry, etc.). In the first round 60 persons out of the 100 sent back answers. In the second and third rounds the received answers were synthesised and sent out again with additional questions, and the final material was sent to every participant of the process.
We set up an Advisory Board consisting of 15 prestigious experts to support the activity of the working group on biodiversity. (The list of the members of advisory board and expert groups is in Annex III.) We made interviews with each Advisory Board members lasting about two hours. The objective was to explore the possibilities of biodiversity conservation as well as the shortcomings in both nature conservation and other significant sectors.
We organized three regional forums. The aim of the forums was to regionally check and complete the information collected from the previous questionnaires. The following regions and places were chosen for the forums:
• Vác, the region of the Danube-bend (the selection criteria included: agglomeration, hills, river, nature values, tourism, etc.)• Cegléd, the region of the Danube-Tisza (the selection criteria included: agriculture, nature values, traditional land use, cultural heritage, landscape, etc.)• Szolnok, the region of the Tisza-river (the selection criteria included: river, floodplain, agriculture, traditional land use, infrastructural development and intensive agriculture)
For each forum we invited almost 80 participants from the respective region and the following institutions: institutes and other regional bodies of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (e.g. rural development, forestry, animal health, soil and plant protection), Chamber of Agriculture, Environment and Water Directorate, NGOs, local governments, microregional development associations, architectural offices, energy suppliers, mine companies, financial institutes, churches, educational and cultural institutes, national parks, advocacy groups, museums, cultural centres, entrepreneurs, farmers, farm cooperatives, etc.
8
2.5. Situation analysis related to desertification
We started the situation analysis with the desk study of the available documents related to the topic, including the international literature. We focused the situation analysis on almost three dozen personal interviews carried out with relevant experts. We identified the most important areas based on the different opinions and thus some issues turned out to be more important than we had initially thought (e.g. data and information flow during the decision making).
The synthesised information (the outcomes of the questionnaires and strategic proposals) was discussed and completed at three regional roundtables. The roundtables were organised in places where there was willingness for cooperation – providing place, logistics, participation, which were agricultural areas or there was education of agricultural and rural development sciences.
The roundtable locations were:• Soil and Plant Protection Institute of Fejér County with the contribution of the Director, Ottó Pálmai• University of Debrecen, with the support of Zoltán Gyõri• Szent István University, Gödöllõ, with the support of Márton Jolánkai
We prepared the list of invited guests based on the proposal of the Advisory Board and the local organizers. We covered representatives from a wide range of stakeholders: farmers, NGOs, authorities, local governments, educational and research institutes. The participants received background materials before the debate. The materials contained the results of the questionnaires and the synthesised information and further tasks related to the convention. The possible breakout points were presented in a brainstorming way in order not to influence participants.
The meetings had three parts: general introduction about the objectives of the project, the convention, and the results of the two other working groups; kick-off speeches by a member of the Advisory Board (György Várallyay in Velence, Tamás Németh in Debrecen, and because of the absence of Pál Stefanovits, Zsuzsanna Flachner in Gödöllõ); and a debate about which detailed minutes were made.
During the debate participants commented on the received materials and expressed their thoughts about the situation of soil protection, drought, land use and water management, and the possible tasks and problems.
2.6. Analysing cross-cutting issues
The fourth working group focused on the cross-cutting issues and sustainable development. This group comprised of representatives of governmental and non-governmental organisations dealing with sustainable development. The participants are involved in activities related to the NCSA project, including contribution to the assessment of the capacities or building the lacking capacities identified during the NCSA project. (The members of the working group are listed in Annex IV.)
Beyond personal consultations the participants could exchange their experiences, further results, proposals on an e-mail list. The e-mail list is still working: after the closing of the project it provides follow-up on the implementation of the proposed activities. The work of the fourth working group
9
also built upon previous assessments about how different groups define sustainable development, where they see the lacking capacities, the difficulties, as well as the necessary steps for the future.
The fourth working group analysed the situation analysis of the three working groups on the Rio conventions. The synergies and cross-cutting issues were identified and based on them the action plan for building up the cross-cutting capacity shortcomings developed. The action plan was also consulted with the other three working groups.
Several activities started during the NCSA project which are related and stimulated by the findings of the project. Thus the project has not been carried out in isolation – in fact it contributed to several related actions.
2.7. Project closing conference
The project was closed with a conference organised together with the Environmental Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in June 2008. The lecturers presented the capacities available for implementation, as well as the main tasks identified during the project in the field of capacity building related to the three conventions. Katalin Szili, Chair Speaker of the Hungarian Parliament presented the recently established National Sustainable Development Council which is related to the implementation of the three conventions through tackling the cross-cutting issues of sustainable development. (The conference agenda is included in Annex V.)
3. Capacity constraints for global environmental management in Hungary
The thematic assessment reports related to biodiversity, desertification and climate change have identified capacity constraints for each thematic area. Most of these capacity constraints are, however, relevant for more than one area. Thus the cross-cutting assessment identified capacity deficits which hinder the full implementation of the requirements of the Rio Conventions and meet the objectives contained therein.
The NCSA process has identified seven priority areas of cross-cutting capacity constraints on systemic, institutional and individual levels.
Systemic level:• National policy and legal regulatory framework;• Economic regulatory framework;
Institutional level:• Vertical and horizontal cooperation and subsidiarity;• Knowledge gaps related to research;• Information management and data collection;
10
Individual level:• Knowledge gaps related to education;• Awareness on the three topics and sustainable development.
3.1. Cross-cutting capacity needs on systemic level
When identifying the systemic needs for the implementation of the three Rio conventions, there is a need for assessing the objectives and measures of the three Conventions, as well as the necessary enabling environment for the proper implementation. Clearly the three Conventions identify ambitious objectives for global environmental management.
The objective of the UNFCCC:
• to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.
The objective of the UNCCD:
• to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought in countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa, through effective action at all levels, supported by international cooperation and partnership arrangements, in the framework of an integrated approach which is consistent with Agenda 21, with a view to contributing to the achievement of sustainable development in affected areas.
The objectives of the CBD:
• the conservation of biological diversity,• the sustainable use of its components, and• the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies, and by appropriate funding.
The achievement of these objectives clearly requires an integrated approach to environmental management based on the principles of sustainable development – as it is explicitly highlighted in the text of the UNCCD. Thus there is a need for careful consideration of the concept and principles of sustainable development, as it was discussed in the working groups and the stakeholder conferences of the NCSA process.
Sustainable development is the realisation of social welfare without damaging the carrying capacity of the environment. This idea recognises that an economy serving the material wealth and growth of human society cannot have uncontrolled priority over the natural environment. Material wealth can be ensured neither without preserving the quality and the sustaining function of the environment, nor without a reliable economy and a well-organised, democratic society.
11
There are four basic criteria to ensure sustainability. We need a holistic approach in order to understand social, economic and environmental connections and consider them in our decisions. Ensuring equal access to resources is a precondition of social justice. Sustainable use of resources is important in order to preserve the carrying capacity of the environment and to make durable, long-term use possible while leaving enough resources for future generations. Ensuring environmental quality is inseparably connected to the ecological conditions all living creatures require for their existence. Most of these criteria also appear (at least to some extent) in the three Conventions, and they set out programmes for their national level implementation.
The criterion of holistic approach requires the utmost consistency between and within the conventions. It is also mentioned in the UNFCC (article 2 on the need for an integrated approach which is consistent with Agenda 21), in the CBD (article 6 on the integration of biodiversity into relevant sectoral and cross-sectoral plans, programmes and policies).
Because of the need for a holistic approach the cross-cutting working group investigated the relationship of three topics: climate, soil and biodiversity. Climate means a basic ecological framework for the soil and biodiversity. Climate determines the changes in biodiversity, and affects it not only directly, but also indirectly (for example via the conditions of the soil). Biodiversity also influences soil conditions, and both have an impact on climate.
The balance between global and local aspects under the three conventions was also considered. The global aspect of soil degradation is indeed climate change. It is not only the local community that is responsible for soil degradation, but also climate change – it is an external factor, similarly significant as the management practices applied by the local community. The UNCCD highlights the responsibility of the local community in the sustainable use of the soil, but it is also important to consider the global, external factors. The same applies to biodiversity. An important and crucial external factor such as climate can cause irreversible changes, even when the local community deals with biodiversity in a sustainable way. Climate change, too, has innocent victims, when a community does not cause any environmental damage, but due to their geographical location they suffer from the effects at an increased degree.
All these interlinkages require a holistic approach in the elaboration of national policies aimed for achieving the objectives of the three conventions and have implications for systemic capacity development.
The necessity of the sustainable use of natural resources (components of biodiversity, ecosystems) is mentioned in all three conventions (article 1 of CBD, para 2 of article 2 of UNCCD and para 1.d of article 4 of UNFCCC).
The basis of sustainable use is the application of management practices adapted to the local ecological conditions, while the use stays within the carrying capacity of ecosystems and is justified by social needs. This includes the quantitative regulation of natural resources use, the control of emissions and invasive alien species, while also considering the spatial structure of ecosystems. These requirements are to be ensured – among others – with the support to the technology transfer and the provision of financial resources called for in the three conventions.
The criterion of social justice also appears to some extent in the three Conventions. The CBD calls for the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. The UNCCD, although it does not speak about equity, expects improved living conditions, while the
12
UNFCCC tries to contribute to the sustainable development of developing countries via clean development mechanisms. However, in order to realise social justice as a criterion of sustainability, sharing benefits and equal access to natural resources should be considered not only among, but also within nations.
Ensuring the quality of environment seems highly relevant for all Rio conventions. However, it is important to consider that the environment is a single entity and is undividable, as none of its elements can exist without the other. The environment is the interaction of all these. Consequently, it is a mistake to split the environment into different parts and to distinguish environmental elements like water, air, soil, living nature and built environment. From the viewpoint of sustainability, the one and undividable environment has three attributes: the quality of environment, the amount of natural resources and the spatial structure. If measures aimed to improve the state of environment do not consider these three attributes equally, they will have a negative impact on the other two attributes of environment, and the original negative effects will be shifted in space or time and multiply the environmental burdens. The shifting of environmental burdens can be attributed to environmental regulations applying a sectoral approach. Regulations targeting certain elements of the environment improve the quality of one element at the expense of an other. The same applies for the whole system; easing the burdens at one point shifts them onto others.
One example is climate change mitigation and adaptation measures which are ultimately contradictory without an appropriate regulatory framework. While mitigation measures require the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation measures aimed at the treatment of the effects (weather extremes like heat waves, floods, storms, etc.) imply the use of natural resources and energy (leading to greenhouse gas emission increase) and thus cause a positive feedback.
Consequently, there is a need to consider environmental problems in an integrated way, through addressing the root causes behind them and not merely tackling their effects. Decreasing biodiversity, global climate change and desertification are some of these effects, while behind these environmental problems lie the production and consumption patterns, urban institutional and infrastructures, legal and economic regulations, as well as cultural drivers and the social values.
These criteria of achieving the objectives described in three Conventions imply several cross-cutting systemic capacity development needs in the harmonisation of legal and economic regulatory framework.
The assessments of the three thematic working groups with the involvement of various stakeholders in the whole process revealed several capacity constraints which underline the above discussed criteria. The systemic, institutional and individual capacity constraints identified during the consultations of the NCSA project are listed below.
Systemic constraints related to CBD:
• Political will for tackling the root causes behind biodiversity loss is missing, profit- orientation and economic concerns dominate the public and private sectors.• Legal gaps, their inner contradictions, unsubstantiated and frequent changes, unclear regulations. Insufficient enforcement. Unpreparedness and lack of funds of prosecutors and law courts. Prosecutors get the necessary quality and quantity of information neither from citizens nor from the (non-)governmental organizations to initiate legal action.
13
• The criteria to preserve biodiversity are not considered in financial decision-making processes. Economic and financial incentives and the tax system pay no regard to these criteria.• The protection categories of protected areas are not harmonized, the necessary tools are not defined, and regulation of buffer zones has not been completed. Feedback of experiences on protected species and landscape management is missing. The appropriate technical guidance concerning landscape protection and the necessary tools for landscape management planning are missing.• Irrational land use, growth of man-made environment. Instead of the restoration of brown fields, the prevalent practice today is green field investments.• National and regional developments do not consider biodiversity as a baseline condition and thus do not adapt to it.• Assessment of plans and programmes concerning their potential impact on biodiversity are not carried out for all decisions (e.g. for budget proposals). The financing regulations and the tax system do not consider biodiversity.• Local governments are often not concerned about natural environment at all. There is low political will to conserve biodiversity on local level.• Economic regulations do not favour the approach of long-term return on investments, which can bring environmental benefits, and thus economic players seek imminent profit instead. Players of economy are becoming more and more vulnerable towards financial institutions (banks) due to not having the proper amount of liquid assets. But financial institutions do not take the conservation of biodiversity and the sustaining of ecosystem services (soil formation, climate regulation) as a condition of financing.
Systemic constraints related to UNFCCC:
• Contradictions within national policies related to climate change and energy (e.g. National Climate Change Strategy and the National Energy Policy).• Inefficient incentives for renewable energy production.• There is no consensus and appropriate cooperation among the various sectors on the impact of the different climate change mitigation and adaptation measures on biodiversity and land degradation (e.g. biomass production).
Systemic constraints related to UNCCD:
• Appropriate long-term national policies on tackling land degradation and drought are still missing.• Decision-makers and society as a whole are not aware and informed enough to discuss the issues of complex soil protection.• Assessment of plans and programmes concerning their potential impact on soils are not carried out for all decisions.• There is no sufficient political will to tackle the problem of land degradation.
3.2. Cross-cutting capacity needs on institutional level
The three thematic assessments also revealed some cross-cutting capacity constraints on institutional level. The most important ones are related to the insufficient cooperation and sharing of responsibilities among institutions and authorities vertically and horizontally, data
14
collection and management, as well as knowledge gaps, which hinder both policy development and implementation.
Institutional constraints related to CBD:
• The Ministry of Environment and Water takes delegated responsibility to ensure the realization of the CBD, even though the law announcing the Convention mentions five Ministries to be in charge. There is no real strategic coordination among the various ministries.• Planning and programming procedures are not open to public participation at the early stages, often not even in the final ones.• There is no overall strategy for biodiversity research. Biodiversity monitoring is not an essential and integrated part of overall research strategies and special research projects.• Decline in financing research, research programmes are often resource-driven.• There is no developed framework to process and apply the results of the biodiversity monitoring system. Monitoring the effects of agricultural subsidies and other sectoral processes on biodiversity does not take place at present or it does not have a systematic framework.• There are no developed biodiversity related information databases which include data about the state and trends in genetic diversity, species and habitats, as well as landscapes and could be used by nature conservation professionals and the public. Linking these biodiversity data with water management, agricultural use, infrastructures would be also necessary. The Strategy on Information Society does not contain any goals regarding this issue.• There is no proper feedback on the realization of the National Environmental Programme. The annual assessments and the ones after the programmes do not lead to real results through influencing the favourable or unfavourable processes.• There is no proper institutional and financial background for institutions specialized in gene-conservation. Research on genetic resources exclusively happens with profit- oriented purposes.• Local government and the public are not involved effectively in biodiversity conservation.• Despite a slight increase in the last two years, the immense decrease of personnel capacity in the central and regional nature conservation institutions have lead to human capacity problems. National parks are not able to cope with their growing tasks because of lack of human resources.• Regional development experts and regional development councils do not have environmental experts while at the same time the competence of regional planning councils is extraordinarily narrow. Local governments rarely employ qualified environmental experts.• Teachers are neither motivated to be interested in, nor are encouraged to teach BD with particular attention to a hands-on approach. The field of teacher training misses complex problem-solving and cognitive techniques and skills of familiarization with the various species and locale. Teachers’ knowledge of species and terrain is usually not proper. The development and familiarization of teaching techniques due to utilizing traditional and conservational farming are also lacking (except for open-air schools).• The insecure financial background of NGOs makes their situation instable and enables lower involvement in biodiversity conservation, agriculture (soil protection) and climate change.• Profit-oriented organisations rarely employ biodiversity experts as advisors and analysts.• The financial sources of nature conservation bodies are insufficient for carrying out all the
15
tasks. There is no horizontal financing system for biodiversity conservation which would include other sectors (e.g. agriculture, regional and rural development, infrastructure development) and local authorities as well.• The education system does not teach systemic approaches or develop problem-solving skills. Subjects are isolated, practical visualization and realization are missing. Placing learning on the basis of personal experiences is delayed. Presentation of relationships between culture and biodiversity is missing from all levels of education, including vocational training and adult education.
Institutional constraints related to UNCCD:
• A well-formed institutional system is available, but the tasks related to the Convention (in a wider sense to soil protection) are not clarified; there is no coordination between respective institutions and levels, the harmonization of objectives and definition of priorities are missing.• Although in general the experts of the authorities are well-educated on soil protection, they are few in number and their activities and coordination is ineffective.• The legal background of implementing the Convention is not well developed; the tasks related to the Convention are not defined, broken down or scheduled. Financial planning, its inclusion in the budget, and the implementation of already existing laws are improper. Contradictions emerge (water management and nature protection) and political intentions (or the lack of political will) have an influence legislative processes.• A poor, unstable and ill-distributed financial background has caused many institutions to fall into a defenceless situation.• Information management and research processes are imperfect at the institutions and related to the Convention. There is also a lack of complex and process-oriented approaches. The existing Soil Information and Monitoring System is in danger because of a lack of stable financial resources. The processing of data takes years. The publication of results depends on experts’ “willingness to publish” and at the same time the publications written for experts are not available and comprehensible for everyday people.• The development of a modern, integrated monitoring system and GIS database which could include territorial data bases, monitoring and dynamic modelling (e.g. related to erosion and deflation, as well as farming and land use) has not happened yet.• Even though access to information is improving, sometimes it can be difficult and very costly.
Institutional constraints related to UNFCCC:
• The decision-makers of various ministries are rarely the same as the individuals delegated to the interministerial committee, which should ensure intersectoral coordination of the implementation of UNFCCC. The information flow and coordination within the Ministries are not always proper, and thus climate change considerations are not always integrated properly into sectoral decisions.• The organizations investigated are understaffed, especially the agency responsible for the annual inventory preparation.• The executive tasks concerning the Convention were included in the official Rules of Organization and Operation only at a minority of the institutions concerned.• There is limited access to data on emissions by companies due to business confidence provisions. Laws inhibit the use of data for secondary purposes even if it would be
16
beneficial for the data provider as well (with no extra administrative cost). There is a differentiation between natural and legal persons when dealing with data management and confidentiality.• The 63/1992 law on the protection of data and the public access to data is not harmonized with the Aarhus Convention adopted into the Hungarian legal system with the 81/2001 law.
3.3. Cross-cutting capacity needs on individual level
Individual capacity constraints related to the three Conventions concern the generally low awareness of the people on environmental issues, although there has been some improvement regarding climate change in the past years. However, there is no general understanding of the linkages among the environmental pressures originating from the various sectors, the changes in the state of environment (biodiversity, soil, climate) and the underlying socio-economic processes, drivers behind these pressures. This lack of understanding and holistic approach results in the development of often contradictory policies and legislation. These capacity constraints can be linked to the shortcomings in the education system, the messages and prevalent values of society (also communicated by the media).
Individual constraints related to the three Conventions:
• Lack of holistic approach towards environmental problems. People do not understand the relationships between the various socio-economic processes, human activities, including their own lifestyle and the state of environment.• There are no widely accepted values of sustainability, and moral responsibility is also missing. Forming and reinforcing the values of conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services (climate regulation, soil formation) is not a primary goal when compared to material wealth.• ‘Biodiversity’ is an uninteresting and unknown term for the public.• People do not see the relationships between cultural heritage, biodiversity and sustainable use. Traditional and adaptive land management techniques are forgotten. People feel less and less linked to their local environment.• There is a lack of long-term approaches in farming – instead a speculation-driven approach prevails. There is a lack of respect in society as a whole towards farming.• Churches do not properly emphasize the responsibility towards our companions and descendants. Teachings of churches do not stress enough the basic principles that society can rely on also for biodiversity conservation.• The media is dominated by negative news but does not reveal the relationships among the various activities, processes and phenomena related to environment.
4. Capacity Development Action Plan
The three thematic assessments related to climate change, biodiversity and land degradation, as well as the cross-cutting analysis revealed several capacity constraints in the implementation of the three Rio Conventions. The Capacity Development Action Plan (CDAP) identifies the vision, goal, objectives, principles and actions for capacity development for the three Conventions in a holistic manner.
17
The vision of the CDAP is that Hungary develops systemic, institutional and individual capacities for the integrated implementation of measures that are necessary for the achievement of the objectives of the three Rio Conventions.
Realisation of the CDAP vision will be realised with the application of the following strategic principles:
• Ensuring national ownership and leadership;• Adopting a holistic approach in capacity building within the context of sustainable development;• Building on ongoing work and cross-sectoral coordination mechanisms, such as the National Sustainable Development Council;• Ensuring multi-stakeholder participation, consultation and decision-making through appropriate institutional arrangements;• Taking a “learning by doing” approach in building individual capacities;• Ensuring feedbacks to the capacity building process for learning from experiences.
The NCSA process has identified seven priority areas of cross-cutting capacity constraints on systemic, institutional and individual levels.
Systemic level:• National policy and legal regulatory framework;• Economic regulatory framework.
Institutional level:• Vertical and horizontal cooperation and subsidiarity;• Knowledge gaps related to research;• Information management and data collection.
Individual level:• Knowledge gaps related to education;• Awareness on the three topics and sustainable development.
Based on the prioritised areas of capacity development the objectives of the CDAP have been identified as follows:
• Create coherent and consistent national policies and legal regulatory framework which can tackle climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation in a holistic approach through targeting the root causes behind.• Create an economic regulatory framework which includes economic incentives for the reduction of the total environmental pressure and thus contribute to tackling climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation in a holistic approach.• Enhance better vertical and horizontal cooperation among institutions and authorities.• Fill knowledge gaps through research in areas relevant for climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation with special emphasis on the interlinkages.• Improve data collection and information management for environment and sustainable development.• Fill knowledge gaps through education with special emphasis on the interlinkages among climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation as well as the various sectors.
18
• Raise public awareness on climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation also in a view to generate public support and a higher political will in the long term.
The priority actions to realise these targets were identified by the working groups and stakeholders during the consultations. Activities were prioritised which can give a response to the various identified constraints under the three Conventions in a holistic manner at the same time. The expected costs of the particular capacity development actions were based on rough estimations of the required man-hours.
19
4.1.
Nat
iona
l pol
icie
s and
lega
l reg
ulat
ory
fram
ewor
k
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Inco
nsis
tenc
ies i
n na
tiona
l pol
icie
s, la
ws,
plan
s and
pro
gram
mes
bet
wee
n an
d w
ithin
th
e th
ree
conv
entio
ns a
nd o
ther
sect
ors,
rela
ted
to in
ter a
lia:
– no
t all
norm
ativ
e an
d de
velo
pmen
t de
cisi
ons a
re a
sses
sed
for t
heir
impa
cts
on b
iodi
vers
ity, c
limat
e ch
ange
and
soil
degr
adat
ion
(e.g
. the
nat
iona
l bud
get);
– th
e th
ree
attri
bute
s of e
nviro
nmen
t (n
atur
al re
sour
ces,
envi
ronm
enta
l qua
lity
and
spat
ial s
truct
ure)
are
not
con
side
red
toge
ther
and
equ
ally
in th
e en
viro
nmen
tal
regu
latio
n;
– th
e di
ffere
nt p
lans
and
pro
gram
mes
(e
.g. r
elat
ed to
clim
ate
chan
ge m
itiga
tion
and
adap
tatio
n, e
colo
gica
l net
wor
k,
infr
astru
ctur
al p
lans
) are
ass
esse
d in
depe
nden
tly fr
om e
ach
othe
r, w
hich
do
es n
ot a
llow
for t
he a
sses
smen
t of
syne
rgis
tic e
ffect
s;
– on
ly si
gnifi
cant
and
loca
l/nat
iona
l en
viro
nmen
tal i
mpa
cts a
re c
onsi
dere
d in
en
viro
nmen
tal a
sses
smen
ts, b
ut g
loba
l an
d in
sign
ifica
nt o
nes a
re o
ut o
f the
scop
e,
whi
ch d
oes n
ot a
llow
for t
he a
sses
smen
t of
cum
ulat
ive
effe
cts.
Dev
elop
and
use
sust
aina
bilit
y as
sess
men
ts w
hich
con
side
r en
viro
nmen
tal,
soci
al a
nd e
cono
mic
im
pact
s, fo
r eac
h no
rmat
ive
and
deve
lopm
ent d
ecis
ion
(incl
udin
g bu
dget
ary
and
tax
regu
latio
ns).
Bui
ld c
apac
ities
to a
sses
s tho
se p
lans
an
d pr
ogra
mm
es w
hich
bui
ld u
pon
or a
re
linke
d to
eac
h ot
her a
s one
syst
em in
ord
er
to a
sses
s syn
ergi
stic
effe
cts a
nd tr
ade-
off
rela
tions
hips
.
Bui
ld c
apac
ities
to in
trodu
ce re
gula
tions
, w
hich
can
add
ress
all
envi
ronm
enta
l pr
essu
res,
incl
udin
g on
nat
ural
reso
urce
s us
e, e
mis
sion
s and
the
spat
ial s
truct
ure
of e
cosy
stem
s as a
n in
tegr
ated
resp
onse
to
all
thre
e R
io C
onve
ntio
ns. T
his s
houl
d in
clud
e la
ndsc
ape
man
agem
ent r
egul
atio
ns
base
d on
his
toric
al e
xper
ienc
es a
nd
ecol
ogic
al c
ondi
tions
, as w
ell a
s a c
radl
e to
gra
ve p
rodu
ct p
olic
y fo
r tra
nsfo
rmin
g pr
oduc
tion
and
cons
umpt
ion
patte
rns.
Bui
ld c
apac
ities
to a
sses
s the
pot
entia
l an
d in
trodu
ce in
put s
ide
regu
latio
n fo
r env
ironm
enta
l man
agem
ent a
s ap
prop
riate
.
Dev
elop
and
use
sust
aina
bilit
y in
dica
tors
fo
r mon
itorin
g th
e lo
ng te
rm e
ffect
s of a
ll re
gula
tions
.
Dev
elop
ing
the
met
hodo
logy
of t
he
sust
aina
bilit
y as
sess
men
t:50
00 U
SD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o as
sess
the
pote
ntia
l of i
nput
side
regu
latio
ns:
20 0
00 U
SD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o de
velo
p an
d us
e su
stai
nabi
lity
indi
cato
rs:
40 0
00 U
SD
The
envi
ronm
enta
l and
soci
al a
spec
ts o
f no
rmat
ive
and
deve
lopm
ent d
ecis
ions
im
prov
es, t
he c
onsi
sten
cy o
f pol
icie
s in
crea
ses a
nd th
us th
e co
st-e
ffect
iven
ess o
f th
eir i
mpl
emen
tatio
n im
prov
es a
s wel
l.
Dec
isio
n-m
aker
s are
requ
ired
to in
tegr
ate
envi
ronm
enta
l and
soci
al a
spec
ts to
de
cisi
ons,
whi
ch e
nfor
ces a
cha
nge
in
attit
ude
and
appr
oach
, clo
ser c
oope
ratio
n am
ong
the
vario
us se
ctor
al in
stitu
tions
, an
d co
ntrib
utes
to p
uttin
g en
viro
nmen
tal
targ
ets g
et in
to th
e ce
ntre
of a
ttent
ion.
20
4.2.
Eco
nom
ic re
gula
tory
fram
ewor
k
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Pric
es d
o no
t refl
ect t
he re
al e
nviro
nmen
tal
and
soci
al c
osts
.
The
econ
omic
fram
ewor
k do
es n
ot fa
vour
ac
tiviti
es w
ith lo
ng-te
rm e
nviro
nmen
tal
and
soci
al b
enefi
ts (e
.g. e
nviro
nmen
tally
fr
iend
ly fa
rmin
g an
d pr
oduc
tion)
, but
fa
vour
s act
iviti
es w
ith sh
ort t
erm
retu
rn.
Bui
ld c
apac
ities
to re
view
cur
rent
ec
onom
ic re
gula
tions
(inc
ludi
ng in
ter a
lia
taxe
s and
subs
idie
s) a
nd in
trodu
ce o
nes
that
refle
ct th
e tru
e pr
ices
of p
rodu
cts a
nd
serv
ices
, int
er a
lia:
– bu
ild c
apac
ities
to u
se e
cono
mic
re
gula
tions
for c
ontro
lling
tota
l en
viro
nmen
tal p
ress
ures
, in
parti
cula
r the
us
e of
nat
ural
reso
urce
s;
– bu
ild c
apac
ities
to p
riorit
ise
prod
uctio
n an
d co
nsum
ptio
n pa
ttern
s with
low
ene
rgy
and
mat
eria
l dem
and
and
base
d on
the
use
of lo
cal r
esou
rces
;
– bu
ild c
apac
ities
for a
tax
refo
rm w
hich
pr
iorit
ises
hum
an la
bour
with
low
neg
ativ
e ex
tern
aliti
es o
ver n
atur
al re
sour
ces w
ith
high
neg
ativ
e ex
tern
aliti
es.
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o re
view
cur
rent
ec
onom
ic re
gula
tions
:20
000
USD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o us
e ec
onom
ic
regu
latio
ns:
15 0
00 U
SD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o pr
iorit
ise
prod
uctio
n an
d co
nsum
ptio
n pa
ttern
s:20
000
USD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties f
or a
tax
refo
rm:
20 0
00 U
SD
The
tota
l env
ironm
enta
l pre
ssur
e is
co
ntro
lled
whi
ch h
as a
pos
itive
effe
ct fo
r al
l Rio
Con
vent
ions
.
With
dec
reas
ing
mat
eria
l and
ene
rgy
use
the
gree
nhou
se g
as e
mis
sion
, as w
ell
as p
ress
ures
on
biod
iver
sity
(thr
ough
tra
nspo
rt, m
inin
g, e
tc.)
is d
ecre
ased
.
Mor
e co
nsci
ous c
onsu
mpt
ion
deci
sion
s ar
e m
ade
as a
resu
lt of
cha
nges
in p
rices
.
Hum
an la
bour
bec
omes
favo
ured
dur
ing
the
prod
uctio
n, w
hich
lead
s to
low
er
unem
ploy
men
t.
21
4.3.
Ver
tica
l and
hor
izon
tal c
oope
rati
on a
nd su
bsid
iari
ty
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Low
coo
pera
tion
amon
g th
e di
ffere
nt
sect
oral
inst
itutio
ns.
Low
invo
lvem
ent o
f sub
natio
nal
(reg
iona
l and
loca
l) in
stitu
tions
on
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
thre
e co
nven
tions
.
Rev
iew
the
man
date
s of i
nstit
utio
ns
on d
iffer
ent l
evel
s and
bet
ter s
hare
re
spon
sibi
litie
s. In
clud
e th
e ta
sks r
elat
ed
to th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e th
ree
Con
vent
ions
into
the
by-la
ws o
f the
in
stitu
tions
and
the
desc
riptio
n of
task
s w
ithin
staf
f con
tract
s.
Esta
blis
h/en
hanc
e cr
oss-
sect
oral
in
stitu
tions
(e.g
. int
erm
inis
teria
l co
mm
ittee
s) fo
r bet
ter s
ecto
ral i
nteg
ratio
n.
Prov
ide
train
ings
and
trai
ning
mat
eria
ls
on g
loba
l env
ironm
enta
l man
agem
ent
and
sust
aina
bilit
y is
sues
for o
ffici
als a
t re
gion
al a
nd lo
cal l
evel
s.
Intro
duce
the
EMA
S fo
r mor
e re
gion
al
and
loca
l aut
horit
ies.
Use
the
new
inst
itutio
n of
the
Om
buds
man
of
Fut
ure
Gen
erat
ions
to it
s ful
l pot
entia
l th
roug
h pr
ovid
ing
the
nece
ssar
y fin
anci
al
and
hum
an c
apac
ities
.
Bui
ld c
apac
ities
to e
nabl
e th
e pu
blic
to
take
par
t in
deci
sion
-mak
ing
proc
esse
s on
deve
lopm
ent s
trate
gies
, pla
ns a
nd p
roje
cts,
and
to p
ract
ice
thei
r rig
hts u
nder
the
Aar
hus C
onve
ntio
n.
Dev
elop
ing
train
ing
mat
eria
ls fo
r of
ficia
ls a
t reg
iona
l and
loca
l lev
els:
20 0
00 U
SD
Esta
blis
hing
cro
ss-s
ecto
ral
inst
itutio
ns:
20 0
00 U
SD
Prov
idin
g tra
inin
gs a
nd tr
aini
ng
mat
eria
ls fo
r loc
als:
150
000
USD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties f
or th
e in
trodu
ctio
n of
EM
AS:
30 0
00 U
SD
It st
ated
in th
e bu
dget
of
Om
buds
man
’s o
ffice
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties o
f the
pub
lic:
50 0
00 U
SD
Clo
ser c
ross
-sec
tora
l coo
pera
tion
and
bette
r sec
tora
l int
egra
tion
in p
olic
ies a
nd
deci
sion
s.
A g
reat
er in
volv
emen
t of t
he se
ctor
al a
nd
subn
atio
nal i
nstit
utio
ns a
nd a
utho
ritie
s in
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
Rio
C
onve
ntio
ns.
A h
ighe
r aw
aren
ess o
n cl
imat
e ch
ange
, bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
nd la
nd d
egra
datio
n an
d th
e co
mm
itmen
ts u
nder
the
conv
entio
ns.
The
prec
autio
nary
prin
cipl
e w
ill b
e be
tter
take
n in
to a
ccou
nt in
dec
isio
ns, p
lans
and
pr
ogra
mm
es.
22
4.4.
Kno
wle
dge
gaps
rela
ted
to re
sear
ch
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Ther
e is
insu
ffici
ent k
now
ledg
e on
the
pote
ntia
l im
pact
s of t
he v
ario
us d
ecis
ions
, te
chno
logi
es a
nd in
nova
tions
on
soci
ety
and
envi
ronm
ent,
incl
udin
g on
clim
ate,
bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
nd so
il.
Dev
elop
a st
rate
gic
appr
oach
to re
sear
ch
on b
iodi
vers
ity a
nd e
cosy
stem
serv
ices
(s
oil f
orm
atio
n, c
limat
e ch
ange
) and
pr
ovid
e su
ffici
ent fi
nanc
ial r
esou
rces
for
rese
arch
on
inte
r alia
:
– th
e in
terli
nkag
es o
f the
var
ious
sect
ors
and
effe
cts o
f the
var
ious
mea
sure
s and
de
cisi
ons o
n cl
imat
e ch
ange
, bio
dive
rsity
an
d la
nd d
egra
datio
n;
– su
stai
nabl
e us
e of
reso
urce
s;
– ca
rryi
ng c
apac
ity o
f the
env
ironm
ent.
Inve
stig
ate
and
intro
duce
as a
ppro
pria
te a
su
stai
nabi
lity
filte
r for
new
tech
nolo
gies
an
d in
nova
tions
to a
sses
s the
pot
entia
l im
pact
s of t
heir
appl
icat
ion
on so
ciet
y an
d en
viro
nmen
t, in
clud
ing
on c
limat
e,
biod
iver
sity
and
soil.
Dev
elop
ing
a m
etho
dolo
gy fo
r a
sust
aina
bilit
y fil
ter f
or n
ew
tech
nolo
gies
:50
000
USD
Mor
e kn
owle
dge
on th
e in
terli
nkag
es a
nd
caus
e–ef
fect
rela
tions
hips
whi
ch p
rovi
de a
so
und
basi
s for
pol
icie
s and
mea
sure
s.
Bet
ter a
nd m
ore
cons
iste
nt –
and
co
nseq
uent
ly –
mor
e co
st-e
ffect
ive
mea
sure
s will
be
impl
emen
ted.
23
4.5.
Info
rmat
ion
man
agem
ent a
nd d
ata
colle
ctio
n
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Vario
us in
stitu
tions
invo
lved
in th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e R
io C
onve
ntio
ns
have
no
free
acc
ess t
o da
ta re
late
d to
cl
imat
e ch
ange
, bio
dive
rsity
and
land
de
grad
atio
n.
Dat
a ar
e no
t suf
ficie
ntly
inte
grat
ed fo
r the
pr
oper
man
agem
ent o
f nat
ural
reso
urce
s (e
.g. d
ata
on sp
atia
l pla
nnin
g, e
colo
gica
l ne
twor
ks, i
nfra
stru
ctur
e de
velo
pmen
ts a
nd
land
use
).
Dat
a on
the
tota
l env
ironm
enta
l pre
ssur
e ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e so
ther
e is
no
feed
back
on
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of a
ll en
viro
nmen
tal
mea
sure
s.
Dev
elop
pro
per l
egis
lativ
e re
gula
tion
on
the
shar
ing
of st
ate-
owne
d in
form
atio
n am
ong
stat
e in
stitu
tions
and
on
thei
r pu
blic
acc
ess.
Spee
dily
real
ise
the
Nat
ure
Con
serv
atio
n In
form
atio
n Sy
stem
.
Dev
elop
sust
aina
bilit
y in
dica
tors
, in
clud
ing
on to
tal e
nviro
nmen
tal p
ress
ures
as
wel
l as a
n in
vent
ory
of n
atur
al
reso
urce
s.
Har
mon
ise
data
col
lect
ion
as n
eces
sary
an
d en
hanc
e co
oper
atio
n am
ong
the
vario
us in
stitu
tions
invo
lved
in d
ata
colle
ctio
n an
d m
anag
emen
t.
Send
des
crip
tions
of a
ll te
chno
logi
cal
inno
vatio
ns a
nd su
stai
nabl
e m
anag
emen
t te
chni
ques
that
are
dev
elop
ed fr
om
stat
e re
sour
ces t
o ce
ntra
l ins
titut
ion(
s)
whi
ch c
an e
nsur
e th
eir w
ider
spre
ad a
nd
mul
tiplic
atio
n.
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o de
velo
p an
d in
trodu
ce p
rope
r leg
isla
tive
regu
latio
n:50
000
USD
Rea
lisin
g th
e N
atur
e C
onse
rvat
ion
Info
rmat
ion
Syst
em:
150
000
USD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties t
o de
velo
p an
d us
e su
stai
nabi
lity
indi
cato
rs:
40 0
00 U
SD
Har
mon
isin
g da
ta c
olle
ctio
n:20
0 00
0 U
SD
Bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ties f
or th
e ce
ntra
l co
llect
ion
of d
escr
iptio
ns o
f te
chno
logi
cal i
nnov
atio
ns:
100
000
USD
Ther
e ar
e cl
ear i
ndic
ator
s on
sust
aina
ble
deve
lopm
ent w
hich
als
o pr
ovid
e a
feed
back
on
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
Rio
C
onve
ntio
ns.
Inst
itutio
ns h
ave
bette
r acc
ess t
o (in
tegr
ated
) inf
orm
atio
n ne
cess
ary
to
impl
emen
t the
ir ta
sks u
nder
the
thre
e C
onve
ntio
ns.
The
publ
ic h
as a
bet
ter a
cces
s to
envi
ronm
enta
l inf
orm
atio
n an
d ca
n be
tter
parti
cipa
te in
dec
isio
n m
akin
g.
Tech
nolo
gies
and
man
agem
ent t
echn
ique
s be
com
e m
ore
wid
espr
ead.
24
4.6.
Kno
wle
dge
gaps
rela
ted
to e
duca
tion
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Prof
essi
onal
s in
deci
sion
-mak
ing
as w
ell
as th
e ge
nera
l pub
lic d
o no
t hav
e su
ffici
ent
know
ledg
e of
the
vario
us c
ause
–effe
ct
rela
tions
hips
of e
nviro
nmen
tal,
econ
omic
an
d so
cial
issu
es, a
nd th
us d
o no
t hav
e a
holis
tic a
ppro
ach
for t
ackl
ing
glob
al
envi
ronm
enta
l man
agem
ent i
ssue
s ef
fect
ivel
y.
Adj
ust n
atio
nal c
urric
ulum
and
th
e ed
ucat
ion
syst
em fo
r the
bet
ter
inte
grat
ion
of th
e va
rious
issu
es a
nd
for i
nter
disc
iplin
ary
stud
ies b
ased
on
a ho
listic
app
roac
h.
Incl
ude
met
hodo
logi
es fo
r the
de
velo
pmen
t of p
robl
em so
lvin
g in
ed
ucat
ion,
and
pla
ce th
e le
arni
ng m
ore
on
the
basi
s of p
erso
nal e
xper
ienc
es.
Dev
elop
met
hodo
logi
es fo
r edu
catio
n w
hich
can
mee
t the
abo
ve n
eeds
in
wor
ksho
ps w
ith th
e in
volv
emen
t of
expe
rts fr
om v
ario
us p
rofe
ssio
ns.
Adj
ust t
he tr
aini
ng o
f tea
cher
s for
the
need
s of a
n ed
ucat
ion
syst
em d
escr
ibed
ab
ove.
Org
anis
ing
wor
ksho
ps fo
r the
de
velo
pmen
t of m
etho
dolo
gies
:15
0 00
0 U
SD
Prep
arin
g m
etho
dolo
gies
for
educ
atio
n:50
000
USD
Adj
ustin
g th
e tra
inin
g of
teac
hers
:20
0 00
0 U
SD
The
educ
atio
n sy
stem
bet
ter e
duca
tes
for l
ife a
nd su
ppor
ts v
alue
s whi
ch
prio
ritis
e he
alth
y ec
osys
tem
s and
goo
d en
viro
nmen
tal q
ualit
y.
Stud
ents
lear
n sy
stem
ic th
inki
ng a
nd
are
bette
r pre
pare
d fo
r mak
ing
holis
tic
deci
sion
s in
thei
r pro
fess
iona
l and
priv
ate
lives
.
25
4.7.
Aw
aren
ess o
n th
e th
ree
topi
cs a
nd su
stai
nabl
e de
velo
pmen
t
Iden
tified
cap
acity
con
stra
ints
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d co
sts o
f im
med
iate
ac
tions
Exp
ecte
d ou
tcom
es
Ther
e is
a lo
w le
vel o
f aw
aren
ess o
n th
e im
porta
nce
of th
e th
ree
topi
cs, e
spec
ially
on
land
deg
rada
tion
and
biod
iver
sity
am
ong
deci
sion
-mak
ers.
Ther
e is
a lo
w le
vel o
f und
erst
andi
ng
of th
e im
pact
s of n
atio
nal p
olic
ies a
nd
indi
vidu
al d
ecis
ions
(life
styl
es) o
n cl
imat
e ch
ange
, bio
dive
rsity
and
land
deg
rada
tion.
The
valu
es o
f soc
iety
and
indi
vidu
als d
o no
t prio
ritis
e he
alth
y ec
osys
tem
s and
goo
d qu
ality
of e
nviro
nmen
t as c
ontri
butio
n to
hu
man
wel
lbei
ng.
Awar
enes
s-ra
isin
g ca
mpa
ign
on th
e in
terli
nkag
es o
f ind
ivid
ual d
ecis
ions
and
th
eir i
mpa
ct o
n th
e en
viro
nmen
t.
Bet
ter r
egul
atio
n of
adv
ertis
emen
ts a
nd
com
mer
cial
s for
pro
mot
ing
cons
ciou
s co
nsum
er d
ecis
ions
.
Trai
ning
for t
he m
edia
for t
he b
ette
r co
mm
unic
atio
n of
link
ages
am
ong
the
vario
us p
robl
ems.
Trai
ning
s org
anis
ed fo
r loc
al p
eopl
e on
issu
es a
lso
rela
ted
to su
stai
nabl
e de
velo
pmen
t bio
dive
rsity
and
eco
syst
em
serv
ices
.
Use
the
conc
ept o
f eco
logi
cal (
and
carb
on)
foot
prin
t on
natio
nal a
nd lo
cal l
evel
s for
aw
aren
ess-
rais
ing.
Publ
ish
regu
lar r
epor
ts o
n th
e ch
ange
s in
tota
l env
ironm
enta
l pre
ssur
es a
nd
othe
r ind
icat
ors r
elev
ant f
or su
stai
nabl
e de
velo
pmen
t.
Prep
arin
g tra
inin
g m
ater
ials
for t
he
med
ia:
15 0
00 U
SD
Org
anis
ing
train
ings
for t
he m
edia
:20
000
USD
Prep
arin
g tra
inin
g m
ater
ials
for l
ocal
in
divi
dual
s:50
000
USD
Org
anis
ing
train
ings
for l
ocal
s:20
0 00
0 U
SD
Publ
ishi
ng re
gula
r rep
orts
on
envi
ronm
enta
l pre
ssur
es:
20 0
00 U
SD
Dec
isio
n-m
aker
s and
the
publ
ic a
re m
ore
awar
e of
the
vario
us c
ause
–effe
ct li
nks
rela
ted
to c
limat
e ch
ange
, bio
dive
rsity
and
la
nd d
egra
datio
n.
Mor
e co
nsci
ous c
onsu
mpt
ion
deci
sion
s ar
e m
ade
by th
e pu
blic
.
Envi
ronm
enta
l iss
ues r
ecei
ve h
ighe
r pr
iorit
y on
a n
atio
nal l
evel
(in
polit
ics,
at
elec
tions
, etc
.).
26
4.8. Implementation of the CDAP
The identified cross-cutting capacity development actions require high political support and a cross-sectoral coordination for effective implementation. Although the active involvement and support of the Ministry of Environment and Water is indispensable in the implementation, the coordination requires a cross-sectoral institutional background. Clearly, the most appropriate body for that is the recently established National Sustainable Development Council (NSDC) which comprises representatives of the government, the parliament, the academic, private and civic sectors. The actions identified in the CDAP will be discussed in the NSDC and within the framework of a future National Sustainable Development Strategy (NSDS).
4.9. Monitoring and evaluation
The monitoring and evaluation of the actions will be provided by the relevant rules of procedure of the NSDC. They will provide feedback on the extent to which the actions are implemented and regularly evaluate how much the CDAP vision and goal and objectives are achieved. Besides, some of the identified actions target monitoring and evaluation themselves, like the development of sustainability indicators and regular reports on tendencies of total environmental pressure and an inventory of natural resource
27
5. Annexes
5.1. Annex I – Agenda of the kick-off conference
The situation of the implementation of the Rio conventions related to biodiversity, climate change and desertification in Hungary
29 January 2004, Budapest
10.00 – 10.15 Opening Attila Meskó, President, HAS, Environmental Science Committee Erzsébet Schmuck, President of CEEWEB
10.15 – 10.40 The main objectives and tasks under the Rio conventions, and situation of implementation Miklós Persányi, Minister, Ministry of Environment and Water
10.40 – 11.00 The role of UNEP in the support of global conventions implementation Abdul-Majeid Haddad, Task Manager, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP, Nairobi)
11.00 – 12.00 The national and international situation of the implementation of the Conven-tion on Biological Diversity, shortcomings and suggestions for further tasks Speakers: László Haraszthy, State Secretary for Nature and Environment Protection at the Min- istry for Environment and Water Gábor Vida, Director, HAS, Ecological and Botanical Research Institute
Panel discussion
12.00 – 12.30 Coffee-break
12.30 – 13.30 The national and international situation of the implementation of the
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, shortcomings and suggestions for further tasks Speakers: Tibor Faragó, Head of the Working Group, Ministry of Environment and Water István Láng, László Csete, Márton Jolánkai, Project coordinators of VAHAVA
Panel discussion
13.30 – 14.30 The national and international situation of the implementation of the
Convention on Combat Desertification, shortcomings and suggestions for further tasks Speakers: Gábor Kolossváry, Main Department Officer, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural De velopment
28
Dóra Kulauzov, UNCCD national coordinator, Min. of Environment and Water László Vermes, Professor, Corvinus University of Budapest, UNCCD expert György Várallyai, Academician HAS, Soil and Agrochemistry Research Institute
Panel discussion
14.30 – 14.45 Sustainability correlations between the conventions Speaker: Iván Gyulai, Director, Ecological Institute for Sustainable Development
14.45 – 15.00 Closing of the Conference
29
5.2. Annex II – List of experts consulted in the situation analysis related to climate change
Personal interviews were made with following experts:• Tibor Faragó (Ministry of Environment and Water)• Miklós Poós (Ministry of Economy and Transport• László Gáspár (Environment and Water Directorate)• Teréz Szabó (EU Delegation, Centre of Energy KHT.)• Gabriella Pál (Corvinus University of Budapest, Regional Energy Research Institute)• Zoltán Somogyi (Institute of Forestry)• Gábor Takács (Energy Club)• Anikó Pogány (Pannonpower, presently Ministry of Environment and Water)
Participants at consultations:• László Gáspár (Environment and Water Directorate)• Teréz Szabó (EU Delegation, Centre of Energy KHT.)• Gabriella Pál (Corvinus University of Budapest, Regional Energy Research Int.)• Péter Kardos (Energy Club)• Zsuzsanna Flachner (HAS, Soil and Agrochemistry Research Institute)• Farkas Szilvia
Additional written comments were received from:• Tibor Faragó (Ministry of Environment and Water)• Gábor Takács (Energy Club)
30
5.3. Annex III – Members of the Advisory Board
Members of the Advisory Board related to CBD: József Ángyán, Csaba Aradi, Gyula Bándi, Katalin Botos, Katalin Czippán, Tibor Faragó, László Gáspár, László Karas, Péter Kardos, Sándor Kerekes, András Lányi, Gábor Locsmándi, Gábor Nechay, Tamás Németh, Gabriella Pál, Ottó Pálmai, Anikó Pogány, Miklós Poós, Szabolcs Sajgó, Pál Stefanovits, Zoltán Somogyi, Teréz Szabó, Gábor Szilágyi, Gábor Takács, Zoltán Varga, György Várallyay, Anna Vári, Gábor Vida
Members of the working group related to CBD:Working group coordinator: Zsolt Szilvácsku, MME-Birdlife Hungary, Nature Conservation Advisory Service
Working group members: Zsolt Szilvácsku, Klára Hajdu, Dorottya Papp
Members of the working group related to UNFCCC:Working group coordinator: Sándor Szabó, Corvinus, University of Budapest
Working group members: Sándor Szabó, Zsuzsanna Pató, Anna Iványi
Members of the working group related to CCD:Working group coordinator: Zsuzsanna Flachner, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Soil and Agrochemistry Research Institute
Working group members: Zsuzsanna Flachner, Szilvia Farkas, Melinda Jencs
Expert on Sustainable Development: Iván Gyulai, Ecological Institute for Sustainable Devel-opment
31
5.4. Annex IV – Experts of the cross-cutting working group on sustainable development
Coordinator of the working group: Iván Gyulai
Experts involved: Ágnes Bogdányiné Mészáros (Environment Authority) Alexa Botár (National Society of Conservationists) Tamás Cselószky (E-misszió Association) Ákos Éger (CEE Bankwatch Network) István Farkas (National Society of Conservationists) Zsuzsanna Flachner (HAS, Soil and Agrochemistry Research Institute) Zsuzsanna F. Nagy (Network of Environmental Counsellors) Róbert Friedrich (National Society of Conservationists) Gyöngyvér Gyene (National Development Agency) Éva Gyúró (University of Western-Hungary) Klára Hajdu (CEEweb for Biodiversity) György Kasza (National Development Agency) Zsuzsanna Rudi (consultant) Erzsébet Schmuck (National Society of Conservationists9 Ágnes Somfai (VÁTI KHT.) László Zalatnay (National Society of Conservationists) Iván Urbán (futurist) Gusztáv Vágvölgyi (Dialogue Association)
32
5.5. Annex V – The program of the project closing conference
“The situation of the Rio conventions and their influence on environmental policies and institutions”
25 June 2008, Budapest
10.00 – 10.10 Opening Erzsébet Schmuck, Co-President (National Society of Conservationists)
10.10 – 10.25 Establishing the institutions for sustainable development, possibilities and dif-ficulties Katalin Szili, Chair of the Hungarian Parliament
10.25 – 10.55 The institutional system of environment and its role in the governmental work and raising the awareness of the society Lajos Oláh, State Secretary (Ministry for Environment and Water)
10.55 – 11.05 The implementation of CBD in Hungary and the institutional system of biodi-versity conservation, and possibilities for improvements László Haraszthy, State Secretary (Ministry for Environment and Water)
11.05 – 11.35 The implementation and institutional system of the Framework Convention on Climate Change, planning the necessary tasks and capacities for the implementation of the National Climate Change Strategy Tibor Faragó, Director (Ministry of Environment and Water)
11.35 – 12.05 The main conclusions of the NCSA project related to the implementation of the Rio conventions Zsuzsanna Flachner (Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Soil and Agrochemistry Re search Institute) Klára Hajdu, Executive Director (CEEweb for Biodiversity)
12.05 – 12.35 The main conclusions of the NCSA project related to the sustainable develop-ment and its implementation in Hungary Iván Gyulai, President (CEEweb for Biodiversity)
12.35 – 13.00 Discussion
13.00 Closing the Conference
Chair of the conference: Erzsébet Schmuck, Co-president (National Society of Conservationists)
33