As international practice clearly shows, environmental problems can only be resolved if the public is actively involved in the process. The principle of public participation is reflected in key international documents and laws such as the Rio Declaration (Principle 10, 1992) and the Aarhus Convention (Articles 6-8, 1998). The latter defines the public as “one or more natural or legal persons, and, in accordance with national legislation or practice, their associations, organisations or groups”. Further, “the public concerned” means the public affected or likely to be affected by, or having an interest in, the environmental decision-making.
Environmental non-governmental organisations (environmental NGOs) in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are very active in finding solutions to the environmental problems existing in the Dnipro Basin. These organisations exist in all parts of the Dnipro Basin, operating at the Oblast, district, municipality and rural level. It is currently impossible to specify the precise number of environmental NGOs operating in the Dnipro Basin due to a number of factors:
· Specialised sociological surveys have not been conducted on this issue;
· Not all environmental NGOs have legal status or are officially registered;
· The situation is continuously changing, with new NGOs emerging and many other ceasing their activities due to legal and financial difficulties;
· Reference books and data sources available in the riparian countries of the Basin (published by various organisations such as ISAR and Counterpart Companies) cover only those environmental NGOs which are willing to provide information on their activities;
· Electronic communication and information exchange is not available in all remote areas of the Basin.
There are approximately 10-25 environmental NGOs in the Belorussian part of the Dnipro Basin, 10 to 50 NGOs in each Oblast of Russia, and 230-250 environmental NGOs within Ukraine.
The activities of public environmental organisations are first and foremost focussed on resolving local environmental problems. Regional organisations are often involved in environment protection initiatives at the regional scale, promoting protection and conservation of regional natural resources (e.g. water bodies, forests and other ecosystems).
The key activity areas of the majority of environmental NGOs in the Dnipro Basin include environmental education, awareness raising, promotion of the environment and implementation of environmental actions. Many environmental NGOs maintain their own public relations and media groups, and/or interact with national and regional mass media. Those NGOs, which employ specialist expertise provided by scientists and professional ecologists, also focus on issues relating to the conservation of biodiversity, establishing and maintaining special protection regimes in nature reserves, participation in environmental impact assessment procedures and environmental monitoring. The scope of many environmental NGOs also includes issues of sustainable development and natural resource use, environmental law, ecology, energy and energy saving. In their environmental activities, all NGOs interact with governmental bodies, although the extent and success of such interactions varies considerably.
By definition, public environmental organisations do not include governmental bodies, industries and businesses.
Although public environmental organisations based on civil environmental initiatives and local community groups are often institutionalised in the form of environmental NGOs, they may or may not be officially registered.
Some estimates in Ukraine put the proportion of the population actively involved in various public initiatives (including political initiatives) at approximately 20% (2000 figures) with about 2% of the adult population actively involved in environmental initiatives. Specific statistics for the Dnipro Basin are not available.
Historically, student environmental teams (or environment protection brigades) operating from science faculties in higher educational institutions were considered the strongest and most independent public movement in the USSR. Since independence, this movement has somewhat lost its exclusive status, as new alternatives for public involvement in environmental initiatives have emerged. However, it should be noted that many highly qualified experts, currently working in various environmental NGOs emerged from this movement during the 1980s-1990s. At the present time, higher education institutions and their student’s environmental initiatives continue to be a major source of specialist expertise, both for NGOs and governmental bodies.
For a relatively long period of time, there has been no or little coordination between different local and regional environmental NGOs. However, the need for close coordination and cooperation is broadly recognised. It is apparent that local environmental NGOs generally benefit from joining national environmental NGOs or NGO groups as they can draw on expertise and information support from their partners, and coordinate their activities with other environmental NGOs. In recent years this has resulted in the establishment of various NGO councils, networks and associations/coalitions. This process has improved the effectiveness of public environmental action and enhanced the position of NGOs as a real political force.
In 2000, the Belorussian office of the International Academy of Ecology established the National NGO Council on Sustainable Development. This provided a forum where Belorussian NGOs could formulate common policy on key issues relating to the transition towards sustainable development and identify practical options for their involvement in the activities of the National Commission on Sustainable Development. In 2001, the National Environmental NGO Forum established the Public Council to the Ministry of Nature Resources and Environment Protection of Belarus, which includes representatives of 17 organisations.
In Russia, regional and national NGO associations, acting as NGO resource centres, significantly contributed to the implementation of specific environmental initiatives and actions at the regional level. More specific resource support is provided to the regional NGOs by specialised Resource Centres. These include:
· The Ecoline Centre (engaged in the implementation of public environmental impact assessments);
· The EcoJuris Centre (providing legal support to environmental NGOs):
· The ISAR Centre (providing institutional capacity building support for environmental NGOs) and;
· The Erika Centre (developing visual materials and videos on environmental issues).
In Ukraine, the Public Council to the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine has operated since 1996 and includes representatives of 20 national environmental NGOs. Similar arrangement exists at the regional level, where Public Councils consisting of local/regional environmental NGO representatives cooperate and interact with the regional offices of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine. This has resulted in the establishment of the national network of NGO Councils, and their continuous consolidation has been demonstrated during three National Environmental NGOs Conferences on Environmental Policy Implementation, held between 2000-2002 and attended by representatives of 160 Ukrainian NGOs. In addition, there are large associations of national and local NGOs. These include:
· The Working Group on Climate Change;
· An NGO network established under the project titled Kyiv 2003;
· The Association of Carpathian Environmental NGOs;
· The Public Association “the Green Movement of Donbas”;
· The Black Sea Environmental NGO network;
· The Azov Sea/Black Sea Waterfowl Work Group and;
· The Ukrainian River Environment NGO Network .
In 2002, the UNDP-GEF Dnipro Environmental Programme supported the establishment of the International Dnipro River Network. This comprised of environmental NGOs from Belarus, Russia and Ukraine whose in-country activities are co-ordinated by the Environmental Initiative “Belaya Rus” in Belarus, the Bryansk Regional Non-Governmental Organisation “Erika” in Russia, and the National Environmental Centre in Ukraine.
Summarising the above, there is capacity in the riparian countries to establish international NGO associations, whose activities could help resolve regional environmental issues in the Dnipro Basin through a basinwide concept of environment management.
A significant proportion of active members of environmental NGOs consist of students of higher and secondary educational institutions, school and university teachers, scientists, and people of pre-pension and pension age. Environmental NGO movements unite and bring together those people who are confident that it is possible change attitudes by bringing environmental issues to the top of societal agenda. Active members see their involvement in NGOs activities as a means for personal development because such involvement provides an opportunity to acquire invaluable practical experience, which can be further utilised in various professional activities, from the state government to scientific research, education, business management etc. Environmental NGOs gradually acquire features characteristic of professional organisations with more and more people employed on the basis of traditional terms and conditions (e.g. salary, work record, social benefits). This is a direct consequence of the existing economic situation, with many citizens having to work for two or more employees in order to earn a living. While undertaking projects, environmental NGOs often create additional jobs and hire professional specialists, which further strengthens their expertise base.
The professional staff of environmental NGOs have very diverse backgrounds. They mainly consist of specialists with university or college diplomas in disciplines close to or associated with environment protection and ecology (e.g. ecologists, biologists, chemists, geographers, soil specialists, forestry and agriculture specialists, journalists, and healthcare specialists). In order to be able to operate in a business and administrative environment, NGOs require specific professional support in such areas/disciplines as management, law and information technology.
The Age structure of NGO membership has never been examined. However, school students represent a target group which has become increasingly involved in environment protection activities. This is considered to be a result of efforts by environmental NGOs in the field of environmental education.
State. In the majority of cases, relations with state authorities varies from cooperation to opposition dependent on state activity in the field of environment protection. The potential for conflict in the area of environment management and protection is huge, as it affects the interests of various social groups and their concerns over use of natural resources, which play a vital role in the riparian economies. A common view exists that environmental NGOs, in order to maintain their perceived image as a protesting/opposing force, tend to create conflicts themselves. However, in reality, the NGOs are objective in drawing attention to existing conflicts, with the aim of finding acceptable solutions. In doing so, they represent and protect the interests of those groups which seek to protect the environment rather than exploit it as a profitable resource. As a result, NGO activities that do not fit into a policy pursued by a governmental body or its leader are, in many cases, responded to with hostility.
One has to be realistic in assessing the current role of environmental NGOs in decision-making. The expert view is that in Russia, the role and influence of environmental organisations ranks low when compared to regional government, executive authorities, federal authorities, various economic and financial groups loyal to or supporting the regional government, and mass media.
In Belarus, the prevailing attitude of the Government towards non-governmental activities and initiatives makes their mere existence difficult, let alone the idea of equal partnership between NGOs and the Government. NGO activities are regulated by the Law “On Non-Governmental Organisations” (4.10.1994, amended on 22 June 2001). Its key feature is an extremely complicated founding procedure, featuring a lengthy registration process with significant powers granted to the relevant bodies (the Ministry of Justice and the legal departments of local/regional executive committees) to intervene in the process of registration. Some ambiguous provisions of the Law are open to interpretation, leading to a conflict between NGOs and governmental authorities. The prevailing social model is based on the concept that control over social processes is an undoubted prerogative of the state. Therefore any initiative emerging in a civil society group is treated with prejudice.
In Ukraine, the unwillingness of the state to take the rights, aspirations and demands of NGOs seriously results in a large number of actively working NGOs being unable to perform effectively and having limited influence in society. In Ukraine, professional legal support and advise to NGOs is limited, which is largely caused by a lack of qualified legal expertise in areas other than commercial law, as well as the limited ability of NGOs to pay for this advise. Due to a lack of resources and legal support, very few NGOs use the judicial system to pursue their goals.
The relationship of NGOs with the general population is based on the mobilisation of local populations and the development of their position on issues relating to conservation and protection of the environment. The population pattern in the Basin is diverse. However, it can be generally divided into two major social groups, residents and employees, whose interests with regard to the environment are quite different. Residents demand a healthy environment, while employees, especially in the current economic climate, will protect polluting industries or, in essence, their employment, at any price. This results in support of the former and frequent conflicts with the latter. In this respect, environmental awareness raising is one of the key tasks of environmental NGOs.
The need for raising public awareness on environmental issues is illustrated by the results of several sociological surveys carried out over the period 1995-1998. For example, about 48% of the adult population of Ukraine claimed that they would participate in environmental activities, while 55% expressed their doubt about the efficiency and effectiveness of public involvement in environmental protection, and placed responsibility for managing all environmental issues on state authorities. In total, 58% of population expressed their ‘sympathy’ with public environmental organisations and NGOs.
Confrontation is most pronounced in the relationship between environmental NGOs and major polluting industries. Many industries are currently working below their operational capacity, and their pressure on the environment has therefore reduced. However, there is a serious lack of capital that needs to be invested in order to upgrade and construct modern treatment facilities. Existing economic incentives, mainly represented by fines and various charges, have proved ineffective. As a result, direct actions initiated by NGOs are the only way to influence the decision-making process when the role of the state is weak.
So far, little progress has been achieved in terms of building up a positive and constructive dialogue between environmental NGOs and the industrial sector, industry managers and businesses, because their main priority is maximising profits rather than using the environment in a sustainable manner. In the current economic climate, profits are generated from the intensive exploitation of available natural resources and the export of valuable materials with little or no investment in environment protection. In some instances such as the construction/operation of environmentally dangerous facilities (e.g. nuclear power plants, power generating stations, transport facilities, extracting/processing industries) industrial groups and lobbied sectoral ministries tend to use national security as an excuse, giving rise to criticism from the public. In cases where environmentally dangerous projects are strongly supported and promoted by investors and governmental bodies, NGOs and the public have little say.
Another area of potential conflict relates to the establishment of various joint ventures and partnerships with foreign companies, where the latter are interested in finding export outlets for obsolete technologies or heavily polluting processes.
Regional environmental authorities have lost much of their influence due to severe budget constraints. In order to successfully fulfil their tasks, they seek to establish partnerships and alliances with various stakeholder groups, including environmental NGOs. This is considered as a positive development that helps to expand the range of stakeholders and social groups involved in the environmental management decision-making.
Research and educational institutions are facing serious difficulties in fulfilling their tasks due to a strong reliance on scarce budget funding. Significant support in the form of organisation and sponsorship of conferences and workshops is provided to the scientific community in the regions by environmental NGOs. Scientists are invited to attend these events, and grants are often provided to cover the costs of travel, accommodation and report preparation. Another essential type of support relates to publishing activities of environmental NGOs enabling scientists to publish their work in specialised scientific journals. In many cases, environmental NGOs share their electronic communication facilities with scientists and teaching staff. Because of drastic cuts in central budget funding, research institutions often opt for close cooperation with environmental NGOs and the use of NGO expertise to implement specific research projects. On the other hand, environmental NGOs are drawing on the technical capability and available staff from various research institutions. The research community is also often provided with access to various grant facilities available via environmental NGOs.
At the same time, scientists and specialists working in research institutions often express their scepticism about the research and educational activities of environmental NGOs, claiming that they are not professional. This is not true in the majority of cases and can be attributed to a lack of information on the activities of environmental NGOs. The truth is that many research-oriented and educational NGOs attract highly qualified specialists from centrally managed research institutions by providing better conditions to realise their professional interests.
International organisations have somewhat lost their interest in NGO activities in recent years. Organisations such as Greenpeace International and WWF have closed their country offices in Ukraine. The EU Tacis Programme and the Soros Fund have also reduced the scope of their environmental activities and programmes. Full-scale operations of the Regional Environmental Centre in Kyiv have been impeded for several years, and the IUCN National Committee has practically ceased to operate. A large number of grant facilities and technical assistance programmes have shifted their focus from the environment to the development of democratic institutions, support for market reform and entrepreneurship. Technical assistance policies of larger donor agencies such as the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the US Agency for International Development are tailored to meet their own priorities, rather than the environmental priorities of Ukraine. At the same time, the professional skills and capabilities of Ukrainian environmental NGOs are broadly recognised by the international community. Many Ukrainian NGOs are active partners and/or members of international environmental organisations, such as IUCN, EUCC, WWF, CEE Bankwatch Network, the Black Sea Network, BirdLife International.
Resources and issues. Environmental NGOs need to have access to various types of resources for the implementation of their environmental actions. A key resource is people, both active NGO members (staff and volunteers) and supporters. The environmental movement can be no longer called a mass movement in terms of membership and campaign participation. Today, people are more concerned about their basic life needs rather than environmental priorities. In the majority of cases, staff of environmental NGOs are limited to 3-5 persons. Organisations employing 10-15 persons are considered a successful business. In this situation, new approaches and solutions are needed to attract people into the environmental movement.
Another important and always scarce resource is cash. Many environmental NGOs have experienced serious problems in attracting financial support from internal sources. Very few NGOs receive financial support from local environmental funds. Financial support from foreign sources used to be strong in the early 1990s. In that period, some environmental NGOs managed to procure office equipment and space, and develop and establish themselves as reputable partners in the field of environmental policy. They’ve gained practical experience of cooperation with international donor agencies and grant facilities, established a solid reputation as applicants capable of preparing strong project proposals, implementing proposed projects, and meeting reporting requirements. However, successful examples are limited, especially in remote areas. Some expert estimates suggest that 21% of the Ukrainian non-governmental organisations have no funding sources or budget, and another 28% of NGOs have to make do with an annual budget of less than UAH 5,000 (about USD900). Many environmental NGOs have no office space, computer equipment and communication means, severely impeding their activity.
Taxation represents a special issue for NGOs. In Ukraine, all legal entities are taxed on the basis of the Law of Ukraine “On Taxation of the Companies’ Profits” Article 7.11 of the Law sets out a framework for taxation of those NGOs that have a non-profit (non-commercial) status. On one hand, this Law provides VAT concessions to NGOs but on the other, imposes severe restrictions in terms of profit-raising even if the profits are not distributed among the organisation’s members but used to finance activities stipulated in the organisation’s charter. This means that the development of an NGO becomes virtually impossible, unless such cost items as indirect expenses, administrative costs, communication costs etc., are explicitly included into a standard budget for projects funded by any grant facility. In real terms, the administrative costs (e.g. staff salaries) of the majority of environmental NGOs are less than 1% of their annual budget. It is generally accepted that the minimum requirement is 8-10%.
International financial support to NGOs in the form of grant funding has reduced dramatically. In many cases, donor agency technical assistance policies do not suit the interests of environmental NGOs and the real needs of society in tackling specific environmental issues. Many environmental NGOs, seeking to receive financial resources for their day-to-day operations, tune their activities to the donor’s requirements, drifting away from their own policies and the actual needs of the public. This has undermined the public image of environmental NGOs, and given rise to the public perception that the environmental movement is now a big business, operating with huge revenues in the interests of Western countries. The issue of financing seriously affects the public attitude towards environmental NGOs. Many Ukrainians, including active public groups with an environmental agenda, believe that foreign funding will not help improve the environmental situation in Ukraine and in fact could even lead to further environmental degradation. This particularly relates to environmental projects sponsored by various sectoral ministries and funded by foreign technical assistance programmes, which are perceived as lobbying/pursuing the interests of one country to the detriment of another. In most cases, the donor agency’s technical assistance policies remain non-transparent to the public. There is no effective mechanism for public participation in evaluating the efficiency of the project selection process or grant funding disbursement.
Building institutional capacity represents a difficult task for many NGOs. People in the three riparian countries that make up the Dnipro Basin are at a very early stage of learning how to organise and manage public activities. New skills and knowledge are required to set up and operate an efficient and stable public organisation with a proper structure and arrangements for the management of its day-to-day activities, the allocation of functions and responsibilities, attraction/mobilisation of people for action and maintaining effective accounting/reporting procedures. Many regional environmental NGOs have succeeded in this respect, although they face serious difficulties relating to the interaction of members within an organisation, as well as between organisations that are pursuing different goals. Achieving consensus is not a simple task. Any action is likely to be ineffective, unless the people involved are driven by a common philosophy and environmental values. As the public environmental movement evolves, there is a need to formulate common policy that embodies basic values and ideals, defines priorities, methods, means and tools for action.
Information resource. The weak technical capability of environmental NGOs operating in the Dnipro Basin puts significant constraints on their access to, and dissemination of, environmental information. Approximately half of all NGOs do not have access to the Internet and electronic mail, and their information sources are limited to mass media, contacts by phone, personal contacts and correspondence by mail.
Special attention has to be drawn to a number of specific problems that impede the effective involvement of environmental NGOs in the implementation of the Dnipro Basin Environment Rehabilitation Programme. These are largely attributed to:
· Lack of practical experience in the area of interregional cooperation and interaction;
· Lack of practice in the joint implementation of environmental projects in the transboundary areas;
· Lack of a common environmental NGO information network;
· Lack of local and regional capacity for the implementation of projects aimed at developing Agenda 21 issues at the local and regional level.
At the same time, it should be noted that the UNDP-GEF Dnipro Environment Programme has provided new opportunities for the public and NGO involvement in environmental decision-making, as well as for building the institutional capacity of the environmental movement itself.