Gábor Figeczky WWF Hungary

1. Evaluating NSRFs with regards to preserving biodiversity and maintaining favourable conservation status of species and habitat types of European importance Gábor Figeczky WWF Hungary Nature Conservation and the EU policy for sustainable land management in the new EU Member States Bonn, 18 June, 2007

2. Scope, methodology • assessment conducted for NSRFs, OPs and RDPs in 7 CEE countries • special focus: integration of the Habitats and Birds Directives in the programs • scoring system from -3 to 3 • narrative comments - certain degree of subjectivity

3. SWOT analysis conducted • each environmental element examined • conservation status of species and habitats of Community importance examined. • factors threatening the favourable conservation status of species and habitats of Community importance explored • level of environmental awareness of the affected people examined • situation and efficiency of the institutional system of environmental protection and education explored • public participation during the planning process • strategic environmental assessment completed for the plan Environmental situation analysis

5. situation in different sectors (e.g. water management, forestry, agriculture, industry, tourism) properly described from an environmental point of view • environmental aspects integrated into other sectors • Natura 2000 and biodiversity conservation (2010 target) are pointed and described as an important condition of development • plan complies with environmental legislation • ‘polluters pay’ principle applied • no investments mean a potential danger for Natura species, habitats or sites • environmental considerations are included in the projects / investments evaluation criteria Integration of nature conservation in planning

7. rehabilitation and preservation of the damaged ecological systems dealt with • provisions for establishing the coherence of habitats, decreasing isolation and the conservation of the ecological network dealt with • problems caused by invading species from further spread dealt with • financial assistance given to habitat restoration, species conservation, and ecological corridors restoration • Financial assistance possible for other activities / investments important for Natura 2000 sites management and conservation • amount of investments in Natura 2000 is adequate to maintaining the favourable conservation status Operational programmes - environment

9. Education, environmental awareness • institutional development connected to expanding the environmental knowledge dealt with • raising of environmental awareness dealt with • raising of awareness about the Natura 2000 network dealt with • raising of awareness of affected people (e.g. farmers, foresters, fishers) about Natura 2000

11. maintenance of favourable conservation status of species and habitats on agricultural land ensured • preservation of the traditional extensive farming taken care of • agri-environmental programmes for HNV areas and Natura 2000 sites • provisions which aim at the creation of large agricultural fields or / and monocultural farming excluded • provisions for propagating the biological farming present • complex ecological land use and the multifunctional use of the natural assets enhanced • active involvement of local stakeholders into the conservation, integrated cooperation and conciliation of interest Agriculture

13. Forestry • sustainable and multifunctional use of forests promoted, with special respect of the immaterial value of the forests • conservation of forest species and habitats promoted through protection measures and sustainable forestry • continuous forests remain untouched, rehabilitation provided if needed

15. Water Framework Directive approach accepted and used and provides the preservation of the water quality as well as the sustainable water supply management in the whole catchment area • wetland habitats protected from water-related developments, which are potentially dangerous for conservation • flood-plain of an appropriate size protected together with the rehabilitation of the plant communities along the rivers to avoid floods • in seaside countries, establishment of marine Natura 2000 sites and the protection of marine habitats and species dealt with • fishery activities do not affect negatively Natura 2000 species and habitats Water management, fisheries

17. Tourism • touristic carrying capacity of the areas considered, no novel environmental tourist load of areas that have already reached or exceeded it • support for ecologically friendly tourism • positive effect of conservation and Natura 2000 on tourism development considered

19. green field investments avoided • no industrial development wherethe manufacturing process or product significantly endangers nature • no industry development that harm designated Natura 2000 sites, species and habitats • environmental considerations are included in the projects / investments evaluation criteria • strategic environmental assessment completed for the plan Industry and energy sector

21. Development of linear infrastructure • measures to decrease transport present • cease of habitats’ isolation and the functioning of ecological network considered • development of linear infrastructure doesn’t negatively affect the conservation of species and habitats • when linear infrastructure development negatively affects the conservation of species and habitats measures are taken to minimise or compensate these effects

23. Main findings - general • NATURA 2000 has high priority in the conservation politics of the new member countries • biodiversity objectives do not have a high priority in national development planning in general • no integration of conservation into sectoral planning, conservation and environmental protection is still dealt with as a separate issue • some positive examples – but too few to achieve the European biodiversity targets

24. Main findings - general • target to halt biodiversity loss by 2010not integrated into the NDPs • WFD objectives not integrated in the plans in Latvia, Poland, Romania • marine Natura 2000 not dealt with in Poland, Romania, Estonia, Latvia • threat for Natura 2000 species and habitats outside the network clearly shown • no integration: biodiversity considerations hardly mentioned in many plans / sectoral and regional OPs

25. Main findings - tourism • carrying capacity of natural areas and potential threats to natural resources created by intensive tourism are not considered in most cases • large tourism development projects are planned in areas with high biodiversity values • high mountain regions there are plans to develop ski infrastructures in biodiversity rich areas and also in protected areas and proposed Natura 2000 sites (Romania, Slovakia, Poland)

26. Main findings - agriculture • intensification of agriculture encouraged by European subsidies • NDPs and RDPs do not exclude provisions which aim at the creation of large agricultural fields and monocultural farming • European policies (e.g. the requested milk quality) make the actual farming financially unsustainable, so more and more people will abandon farming • structural changes applied will probably overweight positive effects of agri-environmental measures • agro-biodiversity loss will probably not be stopped, even till 2013

27. Main findings - infrastructure • high number of planned developments affecting protected areas and Natura 2000 sites • development of road infrastructure is assessed to be a major threat • weak system of EIA in some countries • financial resources might be used for destroy rather than to restore wetlands

28. Main findings – education, awareness raising • very low priority in most countries • public awareness raising is not focused on nature conservation (Natura 2000 or 2010 target) • the information of stakeholders is neglected: • lack of knowledge of farmers working in Natura 2000 areas • lack of capacity to apply for the subventions • opposition towards nature conservation

29. Main findings – institutions • lack of a well working managing administration - real threat in Romania, Poland • disorganized protected areas result in: • illegal logging • illegal/not controlled hunting • uncontrolled tourism, • inefficient monitoring system

30. Main messages Message from the previous report still relevant: “The results of the project shows, that the pattern of development which the accession countries are likely to follow is the same as of present member states of the European Union. This is the development which has lead to the deterioration of the natural environment. Thus it can be predicted, that nature will not be sufficiently taken care of the accession countries either, should they follow this pattern.”

31. CEEWEBKuruclesi út 11/AH-1021 BudapestTel:+36-13980135 Thank you for your attenttion! Q&A @ceeweb.org