The Study on Environmental Management Plan Location of Study Area for Lubana Wetland Complex in the Republic of Latvia JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY THE STUDY ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR LUBANA WETLAND COMPLEX IN THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA
FINAL REPORT
Volume III Supporting Report
Table of Contents Location Map Page PART I CURRENT SITUATIONS OF THE STUDY AREA CHAPTER 1 SCOPE OF THE STUDY...... 1-1 1.1 Objectives...... 1-1 1.2 Study Area...... 1-1 1.3 Framework of the Study...... 1-1 1.4 Organization for the Study...... 1-2
CHAPTER 2 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS ...... 2-1 2.1 Administrative Conditions ...... 2-1 2.1.1 Regional Administration...... 2-1 2.1.2 Relations between Central and Regional Government...... 2-2 2.1.3 Budget and Expenditure...... 2-4 2.2 Population and Social Conditions ...... 2-5 2.2.1 Population...... 2-5 2.2.2 Labor Force ...... 2-7 2.2.3 Settlements and Living Standards...... 2-8 2.3 Economic and Financial Conditions...... 2-9 2.3.1 National and Regional Economy...... 2-9 2.3.2 Employment and Income ...... 2-10 2.3.3 Industry...... 2-12 2.3.4 Financial Sources for Environmental Management ...... 2-15 2.4 Infrastructure...... 2-19 2.4.1 Water Supply and Sanitation...... 2-19 2.4.2 Transportation...... 2-20 2.4.3 Energy...... 2-20 2.4.4 Environmental Education...... 2-20 2.4.5 Activities of Donors, NGOs, and NPOs ...... 2-21 2.5 Land Use...... 2-23 2.5.1 Land Use Status and Change...... 2-23 2.5.2 Constraints on Land Use...... 2-26 2.5.3 Land Tenure and Privatization...... 2-26 2.5.4 Present Land Use Plan ...... 2-28
i CHAPTER 3 POTENTIAL ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT...... 3-1 3.1 National and Regional Policy on Socioeconomic Development ...... 3-1 3.1.1 Review of Development Policy...... 3-1 3.1.2 Current Socioeconomic Status of the Study Area...... 3-3 3.1.3 Current Regional Development Plans...... 3-4 3.2 Agriculture...... 3-9 3.2.1 National and Regional Development Policy...... 3-9 3.2.2 Trends and Characteristics...... 3-10 3.2.3 Potential and Constraints...... 3-12 3.2.4 Intentions of Stakeholders ...... 3-16 3.3 Forestry...... 3-17 3.3.1 National and Regional Development Policy...... 3-17 3.3.2 Trends and Characteristics...... 3-18 3.3.3 Potential and Constraints...... 3-19 3.3.4 Intention of Stakeholders...... 3-21 3.4 Fishery...... 3-21 3.4.1 National and Regional Development Policy...... 3-21 3.4.2 Trends and Characteristics...... 3-24 3.4.3 Potential and Constraints...... 3-27 3.4.4 Intention of Stakeholders...... 3-31 3.5 Tourism and Others ...... 3-31 3.5.1 National and Regional Development Policy on Tourism ...... 3-31 3.5.2 Trends and Characteristics on Tourism...... 3-32 3.5.3 Potential and Constraints on Tourism ...... 3-33 3.5.4 Intention of Stakeholders on Tourism...... 3-36 3.5.5 Other Industry...... 3-37
CHAPTER 4 WATER QUALITY ...... 4-1 4.1 Water Quality Conditions ...... 4-1 4.1.1 Current Water Quality...... 4-1 4.1.2 Conditions of Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Plans ...... 4-2 4.2 Direction for Water Quality Conservation...... 4-3
CHAPTER 5 BIRDS AND WILDLIFE...... 5-1 5.1 Conditions of Birds and Wildlife...... 5-1 5.1.1 Fauna in Latvia...... 5-1 5.1.2 Birds...... 5-1 5.1.3 Mammals ...... 5-3 5.1.4 Fish ...... 5-4 5.2 Important Species and Habitats...... 5-6 5.2.1 Endangered and Rare Species ...... 5-6 5.2.2 Distribution of Precious Biotopes...... 5-6 5.2.3 Potential of Fishing and Hunting Development ...... 5-7 5.2.4 Potential for Eco-tourism and Recreation...... 5-8 5.3 Directions for Nature Protection...... 5-8 5.3.1 Impacts on Habitats...... 5-8 5.3.2 Existing Conservation Frame...... 5-10 5.3.3 Directions for Birds and Wildlife Protection...... 5-12 5.3.4 Directions for Fish Conservation...... 5-13
ii CHAPTER 6 WETLAND VEGETATION...... 6-1 6.1 Condition of Wetland Vegetation...... 6-1 6.1.1 Distribution...... 6-1 6.1.2 Characteristics of Vegetation...... 6-2 6.1.3 Relation with Hydrology ...... 6-3 6.1.4 Impact by Human Activities ...... 6-4 6.2 Important Plant Species and Communities...... 6-6 6.2.1 Precious Species and Communities ...... 6-6 6.2.2 Essential Vegetation for Bird and Wildlife ...... 6-7 6.2.3 Species with Economic Value...... 6-8 6.2.4 Important Vegetation for Eco-tourism and Recreation ...... 6-8 6.3 Evaluation of Wetland Vegetation ...... 6-9 6.3.1 Methodology ...... 6-9 6.3.2 Result of Primary Evaluation...... 6-9 6.3.3 Result of Secondary Evaluation...... 6-9 6.4 Protection of Wetland Vegetation...... 6-10 6.4.1 Vegetation to be Protected ...... 6-10 6.4.2 Ecological Planning...... 6-10 6.4.3 Wise Use Possibility of Protected Area...... 6-11 6.4.4 Protection Direction for Wetland Vegetation ...... 6-11
CHAPTER 7 PREPARATION OF BIOTOPE MAP ...... 7-1 7.1 Biotope Map of the Study Area...... 7-1 7.1.1 Selection of Biotope Type ...... 7-1 7.1.2 Distribution of Biotopes...... 7-2 7.2 Detailed Biotope Map of the Model Area ...... 7-3 7.2.1 Purposes ...... 7-3 7.2.2 Model Area Selection...... 7-4 7.2.3 Distribution of Biotopes...... 7-5
PART II REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE CHAPTER 8 GUIDELINE FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT...... 8-1 8.1 Future Socioeconomic Frame...... 8-1 8.1.1 Target Socioeconomic Frame and Rationale...... 8-1 8.1.2 Future Socioeconomic Frame...... 8-3 8.2 Guideline for Regional Development...... 8-6 8.2.1 Approach and Strategy ...... 8-6 8.2.2 Overall Directions...... 8-8 8.2.3 Necessary Actions for Regional Development in LWC...... 8-8 8.2.4 Implication with the Environmental Management Plan...... 8-11 8.3 Fishery Development Plan ...... 8-12 8.3.1 Concept on Fishery Development ...... 8-12 8.3.2 Direction of Fishery Development...... 8-13 8.3.3 Institutional and Regulative Measures...... 8-15 8.3.4 Proposed Projects for Fishery Development ...... 8-17 8.4 Recommendations ...... 8-17
iii CHAPTER 9 DIRECTIONS OF LAND USE PLANNING...... 9-1 9.1 Overall Frame ...... 9-1 9.1.1 Approach and Strategy ...... 9-1 9.1.2 Evaluation of Land Capability...... 9-4 9.1.3 Legal and Institutional Framework...... 9-5 9.2 Directions of Land Use Planning...... 9-7 9.2.1 Proposed Future Land Use of the Study Area ...... 9-7 9.2.2 Implication with EMP...... 9-9 9.2.3 Recommendations...... 9-10
PART III ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN CHAPTER 10 FRAMEWORK OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN...... 10-1 10.1 Rationale ...... 10-1 10.1.1 Background of the Study Area...... 10-1 10.1.2 Justification of Environmental Management Plan (EMP)...... 10-2 10.2 Overall Concept ...... 10-5 10.2.1 Vision and Goals of EMP...... 10-5 10.2.2 Target Area and Year of EMP ...... 10-6 10.2.3 Strategies of EMP ...... 10-6 10.3 Environmental Zoning...... 10-11 10.3.1 Zoning Category...... 10-11 10.3.2 Environmental Zoning in LWC ...... 10-13 10.3.3 Conservation Criteria by Environmental Zone...... 10-14 10.3.4 Regulatory Plan...... 10-15 10.4 Organization and Institution for EMP ...... 10-17 10.4.1 Organization for EMP ...... 10-17 10.4.2 Institutional Frame...... 10-20
CHAPTER 11 WETLAND CONSERVATION PLAN...... 11-1 11.1 Wetland Management Conditions...... 11-1 11.1.1 Natural Parks and Reserves ...... 11-1 11.1.2 Conditions of Environmental Monitoring...... 11-11 11.1.3 Requirements of Ramsar Convention on Wetlands ...... 11-12 11.2 Overall Frame of the Wetland Conservation Plan ...... 11-15 11.2.1 Approach and Strategy ...... 11-15 11.2.2 Biotopes to be Protected...... 11-17 11.2.3 Delineation and Description of Protection Area ...... 11-25 11.2.4 Conservation and Management Criteria...... 11-32 11.3 Wetland Conservation Plan...... 11-36 11.3.1 Projects and Programs for Wetland Conservation...... 11-36 11.3.2 Monitoring Plan ...... 11-46 11.3.3 Environmental Education and Public Awareness Promotion Program ...... 11-48 11.3.4 Cost Estimation for Projects and Programs for WCP ...... 11-49 11.3.5 Organization and Institution...... 11-50 11.4 Application to Ramsar Wetland...... 11-53 11.4.1 Proposed Ramsar Site...... 11-53 11.4.2 Action Plan for Application...... 11-54
iv CHAPTER 12 GUIDELINE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (EIMS)...... 12-1 12.1 Geographic Information System (GIS) on Environmental Management ...... 12-1 12.1.1 Condition of GIS Use on Environmental Management ...... 12-1 12.1.2 Environmental Monitoring by Remote Sensing and GIS Data ...... 12-3 12.1.3 GIS on the Environmental Information Management System (EIMS) ...... 12-5 12.2 Overall Frame of EIMS...... 12-7 12.3 Decision-making with EIMS...... 12-9 12.3.1 Advantages of Decision-making by EIMS ...... 12-9 12.3.2 Decision-making Process of EIMS ...... 12-10 12.3.3 GIS and Remote-sensing Usage for Decision-Making...... 12-11 12.4 Monitoring with EIMS ...... 12-12 12.5 Environmental Education with EIMS...... 12-14 12.6 Public Awareness...... 12-15 12.6.1 Promotion of Public Awareness ...... 12-15 12.6.2 Strategy and Target Groups ...... 12-15 12.6.3 Activities for Public Awareness...... 12-16 12.7 Science Promotion...... 12-17 12.8 EIMS Working Plan...... 12-20 12.8.1 Institutional Setting for EIMS ...... 12-20 12.8.2 Training for EIMS Construction...... 12-20 12.8.3 Systems Structuring for EIMS...... 12-21
CHAPTER 13 ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (EE&T) PLAN ...... 13-1 13.1 Overall Frame of EE&T Plan ...... 13-1 13.1.1 National Education Policy and EU Directive...... 13-1 13.1.2 Framework of EE&T Plan...... 13-3 13.1.3 Principles and Educational Goals of EE&T...... 13-4 13.2 EE&T Working Plan ...... 13-5 13.2.1 LWC Nature School...... 13-5 13.2.2 Educational Resources in LWC and Eco-tourism Development ...... 13-5 13.2.3 Subject Planning for Environmental Education...... 13-6 13.2.4 Proposed Activities...... 13-7 13.2.5 Program Development and Evaluation/Feedback System for EE&T...... 13-7 13.2.6 Training Program for Local People, Teachers and NGOs ...... 13-8
CHAPTER 14 ECO-TOURISM DEVELOPMENT PLAN...... 14-1 14.1 Trend and Potential of Eco-tourism ...... 14-1 14.1.1 Trend in Eco-tourism...... 14-1 14.1.2 Development Potential ...... 14-1 14.1.3 Possible Scale of Eco-tourism Development ...... 14-4 14.2 Concept and Strategy of Eco-tourism Development ...... 14-5 14.2.1 Concept...... 14-5 14.2.2 Strategy...... 14-7 14.3 Eco-tourism Development Plan...... 14-9 14.3.1 Proposed Eco-tourism Resources...... 14-10 14.3.2 Eco-tourism Development Projects...... 14-11 14.3.3 Implementation Schedule...... 14-17 14.4 Management Actions for Eco-tourism Development ...... 14-19 14.4.1 Visitor Management...... 14-19 14.4.2 Inventory Preparation and Monitoring...... 14-20
v 14.4.3 Use of Information Technologies (IT) ...... 14-21 14.4.4 Evaluation System and Green Records ...... 14-21 14.4.5 Management and Marketing...... 14-23 14.4.6 Planning and Implementation...... 14-25 14.4.7 Networking of Eco-tourism Sector...... 14-27 14.4.8 Capacity-building and Training ...... 14-28 14.5 Organization and Institution...... 14-29 14.5.1 Role of Government and Environmental Management Center (EMC)...... 14-29 14.5.2 Proposed Organization for Eco-tourism Development ...... 14-31
CHAPTER 15 WATER LEVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN...... 15-1 15.1 Hydrology and Water Level Control...... 15-1 15.1.1 Hydrological Data and Monitoring Conditions...... 15-1 15.1.2 Hydrological Analysis...... 15-1 15.1.3 Groundwater Level ...... 15-5 15.1.4 Effectiveness Verification of Dyke System against Flooding ...... 15-6 15.1.5 Flood Analysis and Flood Damages...... 15-7 15.1.6 Historical Review of Water Level Control Methods and Facilities...... 15-8 15.1.7 Current Water Level Control and Constraints...... 15-9 15.2 Water Level Simulation Model...... 15-13 15.2.1 Structure of the Model...... 15-13 15.2.2 Methodology and Verification ...... 15-15 15.2.3 Flood Scale and Water Level in Each Block ...... 15-19 15.2.4 Effectiveness of Current Water Level Control Facilities ...... 15-21 15.2.5 Display of Calculation Result ...... 15-21 15.3 Water Level Management Plan ...... 15-22 15.3.1 Approach and Strategy ...... 15-22 15.3.2 Required Water Level ...... 15-23 15.3.3 Competitive Analysis...... 15-25 15.3.4 Countermeasures and Cost Estimation...... 15-26 15.3.5 Current and Proposed Operation Manual ...... 15-31 15.3.6 Organization and Institution...... 15-36
CHAPTER 16 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ...... 16-1 16.1 Proposed Environmental Projects and Programs...... 16-1 16.1.1 Proposed Projects and Programs...... 16-1 16.1.2 Costs for the Environmental Management Plan...... 16-2 16.2 Economic Evaluation...... 16-2 16.2.1 Approach of Cost Benefit Analysis...... 16-2 16.2.2 Monetary Evaluation Methods for Environmental Benefits...... 16-4 16.2.3 Questionnaire Survey...... 16-6 16.2.4 Benefits of Projects and Programs for EMP ...... 16-9 16.2.5 Monetary Valuation Methods for Benefit Calculation...... 16-10 16.2.6 Preliminary Cost-Benefit Analysis...... 16-13 16.3 Financial Analysis...... 16-13 16.3.1 Cost Estimation...... 16-13 16.3.2 Cost Recovery Schedule and Balance Sheet ...... 16-14 16.4 Implementation Schedule ...... 16-15 16.4.1 Phased Plan...... 16-15 16.4.2 Investment Program ...... 16-15 16.4.3 Financial Arrangement for Initial Cost ...... 16-16
vi CHAPTER 17 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 17-1 17.1 Recommendation...... 17-1 17.1.1 Regional Development ...... 17-1 17.1.2 Land Use...... 17-1 17.1.3 Fishery Development ...... 17-2 17.1.4 Wetland Conservation...... 17-3 17.1.5 Environmental Information Management and Education...... 17-4 17.1.6 Eco-tourism Development ...... 17-5 17.1.7 Water Level Management ...... 17-6 17.1.8 Environmental Management Plan ...... 17-7 17.2 Conclusion...... 17-9
Appendices
A-1.1 SCOPE OF WORK ON ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR LUBANA WETLAND COMPLEX IN THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA...... A-1 A-1.2 MINUTES OF MEETING ON THE SCOPE OF WORK ...... A-9 A-2.1 MINUTES OF MEETING ON THE INCEPTION REPORT...... A-14 A-2.2 RECORDS OF DISCUSSION ON THE INCEPTION REPORT...... A-19 A-2.3 MINUTES OF MEETING ON THE PROGRESS REPORT (1) ...... A-22 A-2.4 MINUTES OF MEETING ON THE INTERIM REPORT...... A-26 A-2.5 MINUTES OF MEETING ON THE PROGRESS REPORT (2) ...... A-29 A-2.6 MINUTES OF MEETING ON THE DRAFT FINAL REPORT...... A-32 A-3.1 Discussion Notes of the 1st Informal Meeting with Local Residents on Fishery...... A-35 A-3.2 Discussion Notes of the 2nd Informal Meeting with Local Residents on Agriculture...... A-40 A-3.3 Discussion Notes of the 3rd Informal Meeting on Eco-tourism and Rural Tourism ...... A-45 A-4.1 Discussion Memorandum of 1st Workshop on Progress Report (1)...... A-49 A-4.2 Discussion Memorandum of 2nd Workshop on Progress Report (2) ...... A-52 A-5.1 Seminar Program on Environmental Management Plan for Lubana Wetland Complex...... A-55
vii List of Tables
Table 2.1.1 Four Districts’ Budget and Expenditure Between 1995 and 1997...... 2-29 Table 2.1.2 Local Budget and Expenditure in 1996, Excluding District Budget ...... 2-29 Table 2.3.1 Recent Planned and Realized Projects funded by LEPF...... 2-30
Table 3.2.1 Crop Production and Productivity by Township in 1998...... 3-38 Table 3.2.2 Agricultural Land Use of 12 Townships ...... 3-38 Table 3.4.1 Comparison of Latvia’s Fish Production in Soviet Time (1986-90) and Present ...... 3-39 Table 3.4.2 Share of Lake Lubana’s Fish Production in National Freshwater Fish Production...... 3-39 Table 3.4.3 Abundance of Zooplankton and Zoobenthos in Lake Lubana ...... 3-39 Table 3.4.4 Freshwater Fish Catch by Major Species and Share of Lubana Lake...... 3-40 Table 3.4.5 Number of Licensed Fisherman Length of Net Registered...... 3-40 Table 3.5.1 List of Accommodations in the Vicinity of LWC ...... 3-41
Table 4.1.1 Results of Water Quality Surveys ...... 4-5
Table 5.1.1 Bird Species Recorded in Lubana Wetland Complex ...... 5-17 Table 5.1.2 Mammals Species Recorded in Lubana Wetland Complex ...... 5-21 Table 5.1.3 Fish Species in Lake Lubana ...... 5-22 Table 5.1.4 Spawning Season and Summary of Spawning Ecology of Major Fishes Occurring in Lake Lubana...... 5-22 Table 5.2.1 Most Important Bird Species and Habitats in Lubana Wetland Complex ...... 5-23
Table 8.1.1 Socioeconomic Indicators to Identify Special Support (in 1997 and 1998)...... 8-19 Table 8.1.2 Estimated or Projected Future Population in LWC...... 8-20 Table 8.3.1 Number of Licensed Fisherman and Length of Net Registered...... 8-20 Table 8.3.2 List of Facility and Equipment for Fishery Development ...... 8-20
Table 10.3.1 Summary of Latvian Nature Protection Territory...... 10-22 Table 10.3.2 Regulatory Plan by Environmental Zone...... 10-23
Table 11.1.1(1) Number of Game Animals in 1999 Reported by Hunter Groups...... 11-56 Table 11.1.1(2) Permitted Hunting Numbers during the Season of 2000/2001...... 11-56 Table 11.2.1 Status of Mammal Species in LWC ...... 11-57 Table 11.2.2 Major Bird and Mammal Species at Fishponds and their Relevance with Aquaculture ...... 11-58 Table 11.2.3 Chronological Change of Biotopes in LWC ...... 11-59 Table 11.2.4 Conservation Criteria and Approach Methods in LWC ...... 11-60 Table 11.4.1 Status of LWC with Relevance to Criteria for Ramsar Registration...... 11-61 Table 11.4.2 Relevance of Wetland Conservation in LWC with the Main Text of the Ramsar Convention ...... 11-62 Table 11.4.3 Relevance of the Wetland Conservation Plan with the 'Ramsar Strategic Plan 1997-2002'...... 11-63
Table 12.3.1 Decision Items and Necessary Data Matrix...... 12-22 Table 12.4.1 Monitoring in LWC ...... 12-23 Table 12.8.1 Hardware and Software for EIMS...... 12-24
Table 13.1.1 Educational Goals...... 13-10 Table 13.2.1 Educational Resources in LWC ...... 13-11 Table 13.2.2 Subject Plan Matrix ...... 13-12 Table 13.2.3 List of Proposed Activities...... 13-13
Table 14.3.1 Detail Description of Eco-tourism Sites ...... 14-33~36 Table 14.3.2 Eco-tourism Project for Nagli and Gaigalava...... 14-37 Table 14.3.3 Eco-tourism Project for Lubana and Indrani...... 14-37 Table 14.4.1 Evaluation of Eco-tourism and Green Record...... 14-38
viii Table 14.4.2 Eco-tourism Training / Education Programs ...... 14-39
Table 15.1.1 Main Features of Hydraulic System...... 15-39 Table 15.3.1 Inflow and Outflow Calculation for Lake Lubana...... 15-41
Table 16.2.1 Questionnaire Form...... 16-18~20 Table 16.2.2 Average Number of Households' Member ...... 16-21 Table 16.2.3 Occupational Structure of Sample Households ...... 16-21 Table 16.2.4 Income Structure of Sample Households ...... 16-21 Table 16.2.5 Average Income of Sample Households by Occupation...... 16-22 Table 16.2.6 Number of Visit to Lake Lubana in a Year ...... 16-22 Table 16.2.7 Purpose of Visit to Lake Lubana ...... 16-22 Table 16.2.8 Mode of Visit to Lake Lubana ...... 16-23 Table 16.2.9 Popular Recreational Activities in LWC ...... 16-23 Table 16.2.10 Activities in Holiday...... 16-23 Table 16.2.11 Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC ...... 16-24 Table 16.2.12 Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC by Occupation...... 16-24 Table 16.2.13 Positive Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC...... 16-24 Table 16.2.14 Negative Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC ...... 16-25 Table 16.2.15 International and/or Domestic Tourism Development in LWC ...... 16-25 Table 16.2.16 Participation of Tourism Development in LWC...... 16-25 Table 16.2.17 Preservation and Conservation of LWC ...... 16-26 Table 16.2.18 Favorite Points of Landscape...... 16-26 Table 16.2.19 Ecosystem Functions...... 16-27 Table 16.2.20 Pricing of Unit Area by Type of Biotope...... 16-28 Table 16.2.21 Economic Benefit by Maintaining Present Biotope...... 16-29 Table 16.2.22 Potential Countries for Eco-tourist of LWC and Their Travel Costs...... 16-29 Table 16.2.23 Economic Cash Flow and EIRR ...... 16-30 Table 16.4.1 Implementation Schedule of the EMP Projects...... 16-30 Table 16.4.2 Required Annual Revenue of the EMP Projects...... 16-31
ix List of Figures
Figure 1.2.1 Location of the Study Area...... 1-4 Figure 1.3.1 Work Flow of the Study...... 1-5
Figure 2.1.1 Organizational Structure of the Rezekne District Council Administrative Office...... 2-31 Figure 2.1.2 Organizational Structure of Barkava Township Council ...... 2-31 Figure 2.3.1 Money Flow on PIP ...... 2-32 Figure 2.3.2 Money Flow on LEPF and LEIF...... 2-32 Figure 2.5.1 Land Use in LWC as of 1998...... 2-33 Figure 2.5.2 Land Use in LWC as of 1995...... 2-34
Figure 3.4.1 Location of State-Own and Privatized Freshwater Aquaculture Farms ...... 3-42 Figure 3.4.2 Elevation and Designated Wintering Places for Fishes ...... 3-43 Figure 3.4.3 Fishery and Aquaculture Production of Latvia (1970-1998) ...... 3-44 Figure 3.4.4 Water System around Lake Lubana and Fishponds...... 3-43 Figure 3.4.5 Estimated Water Temperature Change in Mid-layer of Lake Lubana ...... 3-44 Figure 3.4.6 Species Composition in Fish Catch of Lake Lubana (1952-1998)...... 3-45 Figure 3.4.7 Proportion of Fish Catch of Lake Lubana in Two Districts...... 3-45 Figure 3.5.1 Number of Foreign Tourist Coming to Latvia in 1998...... 3-46 Figure 3.5.2 Points of Entrance of Foreign Tourists to Latvia and its Number in 1998...... 3-46 Figure 3.5.3 Distribution of Archaeological Sites in Latvia...... 3-47 Figure 3.5.4 Distribution of Archaeological Sites in LWC ...... 3-47 Figure 3.5.5(1) Landscapes of LWC ...... 3-48 Figure 3.5.5(2) Landscapes of LWC ...... 3-49
Figure 4.1.1 Survey Points of Water Quality...... 4-6 Figure 4.2.1 Water Quality Conservation Plan ...... 4-7
Figure 5.2.1 Feeding and Breeding Places for Important Bird Species in LWC...... 5-24 Figure 5.3.1 Current Nature Protection Areas in LWC ...... 5-25
Figure 6.1.1 Vegetation Map...... 6-13 Figure 6.1.2 Typical Cross Section in LWC ...... 6-14 Figure 6.1.3 Forest Belt along Drainage...... 6-15 Figure 6.1.4 Forests Disturbed...... 6-16 Figure 6.3.1 Preliminary Evaluation Map ...... 6-17 Figure 6.3.2 Habitat for Wildlife ...... 6-18 Figure 6.3.3 Secondary Evaluation Map...... 6-19 Figure 6.4.1 Delineation of LWC for Vegetation Biotope...... 6-20
Figure 7.1.1 Biotope Map in LWC ...... 7-7 Figure 7.2.1 Detailed Biotope Map in LWC ...... 7-8
Figure 9.1.1 Schematic Chart of Land Use Frame for LWC ...... 9-12 Figure 9.1.2 Idle Arable Land...... 9-13 Figure 9.2.1 Proposed Land Use Map...... 9-14
Figure 10.2.1 Concept of Vision and Goals of the Environmental Management Plan ...... 10-24 Figure 10.3.1 Implication of Environmental Zoning with Environmental Management Plan...... 10-25 Figure 10.3.2 Implication of EMP Component with Environmental Zoning...... 10-25 Figure 10.3.3 Environmental Zoning in LWC...... 10-26 Figure 10.3.4 Environmental Zoning Map...... 10-27 Figure 10.3.5 Land Tenure Map ...... 10-28
x Figure 11.2.1 Proposed Biotopes for Conservation...... 11-64 Figure 11.2.2 Map of LWC in 1916 ...... 11-65 Figure 11.2.3 Map of LWC in 1931 ...... 11-66 Figure 11.2.4 Map of LWC in 1966 ...... 11-67 Figure 11.2.5 Map of LWC in 1981 ...... 11-68 Figure 11.3.1 Points and Area to Close Drainage ...... 11-69 Figure 11.3.2 Facilities of Nature Observation and Monitoring...... 11-70 Figure 11.4.1 Proposed Ramsar Site...... 11-71
Figure 12.2.1 EIMS Framework...... 12-25 Figure 12.3.1 Decision-making Process with EIMS ...... 12-26 Figure 12.4.1 EIMS Collaboration Framework for Monitoring Data...... 12-27 Figure 12.5.1 Site Map of EMC Home Page & Feedback System ...... 12-28 Figure 12.8.1 Institutional Setting for EIMS...... 12-29
Figure 13.1.1 Framework of Environmental Education & Training (EE&T) Plan...... 13-14 Figure 13.2.1 Process of Program Development and Evaluation & Information System...... 13-15
Figure 14.3.1 Framework of Eco-tourism Development Plan...... 14-40 Figure 14.3.2(1) Eco-tourism Resources and Activities ...... 14-41 Figure 14.3.2(2) Eco-tourism Resources and Activities ...... 14-42 Figure 14.3.2(3) Eco-tourism Resources and Activities ...... 14-43 Figure 14.3.2(4) Eco-tourism Resources and Activities ...... 14-44 Figure 14.3.3 Proposed Eco-Tourism Activities...... 14-45 Figure 14.3.4 Proposed Eco-Tourism Development Project ...... 14-46 Figure 14.3.5 Location of Information Board & Sign post ...... 14-47 Figure 14.4.1 Eco-tourism Planning and Implementation Scheme ...... 14-48 Figure 14.5.1 Organizational Structure and Financial Procedure for Eco-tourism Development in LWC ...... 14-49
Figure 15.1.1 Meteorological and Hydrological Stations...... 15-40 Figure 15.1.2 Thiessen Polygon...... 15-41 Figure 15.1.3 Location Map of Groundwater Observation Well ...... 15-42 Figure 15.1.4 Flood Situation with Northern Dyke System (Flood scale of once per 100-year)...... 15-43 Figure 15.1.5 Flood Situation without Northern Dyke System (Flood scale of once per 100-year) ...... 15-44 Figure 15.1.6 Maximum Flood Area before Constructing Dike System ...... 15-45 Figure 15.1.7 Existing Flood Mitigation Facilities...... 15-46 Figure 15.1.8 Existing Organization for Water Level Control...... 15-47 Figure 15.1.9 Water Level of Lake Lubana and Blocks...... 15-48 Figure 15.1.10 Storage Volume and Water Surface Area of Lake Lubana ...... 15-48 Figure 15.1.11 Surface Area of Lake Lubana ...... 15-48 Figure 15.2.1 Location Map of Subsystems ...... 15-49 Figure 15.2.2 Flood Situation in each Biotope Category (Flood scale of once per 2-year) ...... 15-50 Figure 15.2.3 Flood Situation in each Biotope Category (Flood scale of once per 5-year) ...... 15-51 Figure 15.2.4 Flood Situation in each Biotope Category (Flood scale of once per 10-year)...... 15-52 Figure 15.2.5 Proposed Display System ...... 15-53 Figure 15.3.1 Location Map of Competitive Problem in LWC...... 15-54 Figure 15.3.2 Location Map and Survey Point in Lake Lubana...... 15-55 Figure 15.3.3 Cross Section of Fish Wintering Place...... 15-56 Figure 15.3.4 Cross Section and the Proposed Fish Channel in Lake Lubana...... 15-57 Figure 15.3.5 Proposed Organization for Water Level Management...... 15-58 Figure 15.3.6 Proposed Hydrological Monitoring Network ...... 15-59
Figure 16.2.1 Occupational Structure of Sample Households ...... 16-32 Figure 16.2.2 Income Structure of Sample Households ...... 16-32 Figure 16.2.3 Average Income of Sample Households by Occupation...... 16-32 Figure 16.2.4 Number of Visit to Lake Lubana in a Year ...... 16-32
xi Figure 16.2.5 Purpose of Visit to Lake Lubana in a Year ...... 16-32 Figure 16.2.6 Mode of Visit to Lake Lubana ...... 16-32 Figure 16.2.7 Popular Recreational Activities in LWC ...... 16-33 Figure 16.2.8 Major Activities in Holiday...... 16-33 Figure 16.2.9 Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC ...... 16-33 Figure 16.2.10 Positive Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC...... 16-33 Figure 16.2.11 Negative Expectation of Future Tourism Development in LWC ...... 16-33 Figure 16.2.12 Preference of International/Domestic Tourism Development in LWC ...... 16-33 Figure 16.2.13 Participation of Tourism Development in LWC...... 16-34 Figure 16.2.14 Preservation and Conservation of LWC ...... 16-34 Figure 16.2.15 Favorite Points of Landscape...... 16-34 Figure 16.4.1 Financial Arrangement Structure for EMP Projects...... 16-35
xii ABBREVIATIONS
LWC Lubana Wetland Complex
ALRSA Aiviekste Land Reclamation System Administration CESAMS Center for Environmental Science and Management of the University of Riga CNREE Center for Nature Research & Environmental Education CSB Central Statistical Bureau DC District Council DPU Daugavpils Pedagogical University EEC European Economic Committee EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency LEDC Latvian Environmental Data Center LFN Latvian Fund for Nature LFRI Latvia Fishery Research Institute LOS Latvian Ornithological Society LRDA Latgale Regional Development Agency MEPRD Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development MOA Ministry of Agriculture MOE Ministry of Economy MREB Madona Regional Environmental Board NBF National Board of Fishery NGO Non-governmental organizations NPO Non- profit Organizations RDC Rezekne District Council REB Regional Environmental Board RREB Rezekne Regional Environmental Board SHMA State Hydro-meteorological Agency TNR Teici Nature Reserve ULEC University of Latvia Ecological Center WWF World Wildlife Fund for Nature
xiii
xiv
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand COD Chemical Oxygen Demand DO Dissolved Oxygen PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl SS Suspended Solid T-N Total Nitrogen T-P Total Phosphorus
xv CHAPTER 1 PART I CURRENT SITUATIONS OF THE STUDY AREA
CHAPTER 1 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
1.1 Objectives
The objectives of the Study on the Environmental Management Plan for Lubana Wetland Complex in the Republic of Latvia (the Study) are: a) To formulate an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for conservation of environmental assets and sustainable use of natural resources in the study area with the target year of 2010, and b) To transfer technology on the formulation of the EMP to the Latvian counterparts.
1.2 Study Area
The study area covers the whole Lubana Wetland Complex (LWC) with about 81,000 ha as shown in Figure 1.2.1. The up- and downstream areas of the study area are also taken into account for an integrated hydrological analysis.
1.3 Framework of the Study
In accordance with the agreement between the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development (MEPRD) and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) on March 18, 1999, the Scope of Work (S/W) for the Study is set as follows and the study framework is shown in Figure 1.3.1.
Phase I: Basic Study a) Collection and analysis of data and information concerned with environmental and socio-economic aspects of the Study area in order to grasp actual situations and issues, b) Consideration of the future economic development, land use and water management in the study area, and c) Field surveys to obtain additional data and information for supporting the above work.
Phase II: Plan Conceptualization a) Analysis on the rich and diverse ecosystem in the study area, b) Assessment of the past impacts of human activities on the ecosystem, and c) Conceptualization of the conservation strategies and development framework.
1-1 Phase III: Formulation of the EMP a) Review and finalization of the study results of Phases I and II, b) Formulation of the EMP, and c) Evaluation of the plans/programs and development of the implementation schedule.
The study schedule is tabulated below:
Phase Works Study Period Phase I The First Works in Latvia August 1999 ~ November 1999 The first half of the First Works in Japan December 1999 ~ January 2000 Phase II The second half of the First Works in Japan January 2000 ~ February 2000 The first half of the Second Works in Latvia May 2000 ~ June 2000 Phase III The second half of the Second Works in Latvia June 2000 ~ July 2000 The Second Works in Japan August 2000 ~ October 2000 The Third Works in Latvia October 2000 The Third Works in Japan November 2000 ~ December 2000
1.4 Organization for the Study
MEPRD is the national level counterpart to back up the implementation of the Study. MEPRD coordinates the Steering Committee (S/C) and supports the implementation of the Study. The S/C members are shown below:
Position in S/C Name Organization 1 Chairman Ms. Ilona Jepsen Director, MEPRD 2 Member Ms. Rasma Ivanovska Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 3 Member Mr. Normunds Riekstins Director, National Board of Fisheries, MOA 4 Member Ms. Alda Nikodemusa Senior Officer, Spatial Planning Division, MEPRD 5 Member Mr. Imants Tiesnieks Head, Capital Market Policy Division, MOF 6 Member Mr. Andis Zeikars Department of Agricultural Strategy and Co-operation, MOA 7 Member Ms. Lasmo Abrolina National Board of Forestry, MOA 8 Member Mr. Juris Kalnins Director, State Company of Projecting and Information, MOA 9 Member Dr. Arturs Skute Head, Laboratory of Ecology, DPU Note: MEPRD: Ministry of Environmental Protection and regional Development MOA: Ministry of Agriculture MOF: Ministry of Finance
A regional level counterpart team (CP/T) was set up for the Study and consists of the following nine members:
Position in CP/T Name Organization 1 Chief CP Ms. Erika Ruskule Deputy Director, RREB 2 Member Ms. Sandra Ezmale Senior Specialist, Territorial Planning Department, RDC 3 Member Mr. Arkadijs Sluckis Head, Draining Department, ALRSA 4 Member Ms. Vija Kreile Teici Nature Reserve 5 Member Mr. Juris Zvidrins Territorial Development, RDC 6 Member Mr. Normeends Vejois Deputy Director, MREB 7 Member Ms. Guntor Ozolina Deputy Director, National Fishery Board, MOA 8 Member Ms. Brigita Dreimane Territorial Development, RDC 9 Member Mr. Ivars Ruzans Fishery Inspector, RREB Note: RREB: Rezekne Regional Environmental Board RDC: Rezekne District Council ALRSA: Aiviekste Land Reclamation System Administration MREB: Madona Regional Environmental Board MOA: Ministry of Agriculture
1-2 The JICA study team is comprised of 12 members as listed below:
Designation / Work Assignment Name 1 Team Leader / Regional Conservation Yoichi IWAI 2 Land Use / Regional Development Hiroshi HASEGAWA 3 Water Management / Hydrology Manabu MASAKI 4 Wildlife / Ornithology Ugis BERGMANIS 5 Wetland Vegetation Isao SAKAI 6 Protected Area Management Motokazu ANDO 7 GIS Kenichi SHIBATA 8 Tourism / Eco-tourism Toshiro HAMADA 9 Agriculture / Fishery Shouji MASUMURA 10 Fishery Masanori DOI 11 Socio-economy / Financial Analysis Tomoo AOKI 12 Coordinator Yukiyasu SUMI / Kengo NAGANUMA
1-3 N
Rugaji LEGEND Gulbene Main road River Daukstu 0 1 2 3 4 5 km Lake District boundary Township boundary
Indrani
Lazdukalns
Madona Balvi
Lubana
Study Area Boundary
Berzpils
Osupe
Gaigalava
Barkava Lake Lubana
Rezekne
Nagli
Murmastiene
Deksares
Varaklani
The Study on Environmental Management Plan Figure 1.2.1 Location of the Study Area for Lubana Wetland Complex in the Republic of Latvia JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY 1 - 4 Year 1999 2000 Month 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Pre- Phase para- Phase I (Basic Study) Phase II (Plan Conceptualization) Phase III (Formulation of Integrated Management Plan) tory Work Third Third Works in Term in First Works in Latvia First Works in Japan Second Works in Latvia Second Works in Japan Works in Japan Latvia Japan
Supplementary Field Study Preparation of (birds) (by contract) Technology Transfer Water Quality Survey (by contract) Seminar Formation of Implementation Preliminary Formulation of Wetland Program • Priority Water Environment Survey Conservation Plan • Appropriate zoning • Implementation a. Hydrology, b. Water quality • Priority area for protection Guideline for schedule • Vision for wetland protection Environmental • Strategies for wetland protection Information Management Supplementary Information Collection and Cost Estimation Preparation of Biotope Map System and Formulation Analysis • Mapping from biodiversity data Preparation of Detailed Biotope Map for a • System design of Financial • Meteorology, hydrology • Hardware, • Compilation as GIS data Typical Wetland Area Plan •. Ecosystem, environ. resources • Typical wetland ecosystem area equipment • Cost estimation •. Laws, regulation, organization • Designation of model area • Cost recovery • Donors, NGO, NPO
Evaluation of Preliminary Formulation of Environmental Wetland Proposed Wetland Protection Information Management System Conservation Plan Measures • Monitoring data • Measures for a.Technical
Collection & Analysis of Available Information Environmental Monitoring • Framework for information management system ecosystem Evaluation b.Economic System Survey • Technical level protection Evaluation • Organization and budget • Environmental education • Protected area Preparation of Environmental & management Formulation of Landscape Resource Lists Preliminary Formulation of Environmental • International Environmental Education Plan framework for Management • Environmental awareness nature conservation Plan • Nature Regional Ecosystem Survey (by contract) • Capacity building • Software & hardware projects protection • Environmental education • Sustainable Preparation of Final Report
Preparation of Interim Report development Discussions on Inception Report
• Ramsar Preparation of Draft Final Report Analysis of Potentials of Eco-tourism convention Tasks Preparation of Present Preliminary Formulation of Water Level Development Landuse Maps (by contract) Management Plan a.Resources for eco-tourism Eco-tourism Development Presentation and Discussion of Interim Report b.Potential for development Plan • Impact on local industries • Sustainable use of natural Presentation and Discussion of Draft Final Report Examination of Present Status of • Requirements for land use & water level c. Cost estimate d.Promotion strategy resources Regional Industries control • Sustainable develop. of community • Vision of Regional Development • Simulation model (5) 1) b
Preparation, Presentation and Discussion of Progress Report (1) • Concrete and feasible plan Confirmation of
Analysis of Regional Development Plan Vision of Regional Preparation, Presentation and Discussion of Progress Report (2) Development and Supplementary Information Collection and Analysis • Potential development to 2010 Water Level Management Plan • Conflict resolution • Socio-economy, land use Technical • Land use zoning • Inundation damage alleviation • Facilities, infrastructure Examination of • Future local industries Inland Fishery • Operation rule
Preparation of Inception Report Questionnaire Survey (by contract) Development • Non-structural measures • Development Regional Development perspective to 2010 Condition Assessment for Water Guideline for Regional Development Analysis of Socio-economic Frame • Land use Level Management Plan and Land Use Plan • Analysis of socio-economic indicators • Discussions with • Direction of economic development • Socio-economic framework related • Guideline for regional development Inundation Area Map organizations • Directions of land use planing
Submission Submission Submission Submission Submission Submission of Inception of Progress of Interim of Progress of Draft of Final Report Report (1) Report Report (2) Final Report Report (Draft) Report Submission
1st 2nd 1st 3rd 2nd Seminar for Informal Informal Work- Informal Work- Technology Meeting Meeting shop Meeting shop Transfer Workshop, Seminar, etc.
Figure 1.3.1 Work Flow of the Study
1-5 CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 2 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS
2.1 Administrative Conditions
2.1.1 Regional Administration The Lubana Wetland Complex (LWC) consists of 4 districts with 1 town and 12 townships as follows. Administrative Units of LWC
District Township District Township/Town Rezekne 1. Deksare Madona 8. Lubana Town 2. Gaigalava 9. Barkava 3. Nagli 10. Indrani Balvi 4. Berzpils 11. Murmastiene 5. Lazdukalns 12. Osupe 6. Rugaji 13. Varaklani Gulbene 7. Dauksti
The District Council (DC) established in each district executes duties under the regulation as shown in the next table. The council consists of the townships and towns chairpersons. The DC Administrative Office has departments to implement tasks decided in the council. Organizational structure of the Rezekne DC Administrative Office is shown in Figure 2.1.1. The town and township councils are organized in each town and township to implement their local issues. Organizational structure of Barkava township in Madona district is shown in Figure 2.1.2 for example. Duties of District Council
1. Civil defense activities 2. Public transportation 3. Representation for the council of Sickness Insurance Fund 4. Provision of the in-service training for the teachers 5. Preparation of the council's budget and the district total budget, its reviews, and provision of the newest information about the budget issues for the bookkeepers and chairmen 6. Estimation of the property and financial resources of the people who had been sent to Siberia 7. Reception and controls of the documents from the townships about the land certificates, the former land owners and their heirs 8. Educational activities according to the Latvian laws 9. Organization of sports festivals 10. Coordination of the cultural activities in the district 11. Coordination of the work of children music and art schools 12. Purchase and classification of the books which are bought by the government budget 13. Coordination of the maintenance and repairing of the roads 14. Coordination of the health department and its staff's in-service training 15. Maintenance of the social care institutions, and preparation of the documents about the old people's and orphans’ care institutions 16. Preparation of the bookkeeping accounts about the social help 17. Formulation of the social economic development programs and territorial plans 18. Identification of the deported person's status, and renewal of the property rights for the people who had been deported to Siberia Source: Regulation of Rezekne District Council, 1999
2-1 2.1.2 Relations between Central and Regional Government
(1) Development cooperation between central and local government Development policies and programs in Latvia are drafted and implemented on the basis of coordination and cooperation among the national, regional, and local governmental bodies. Since a precondition for the successful development of any region is the involvement of each local authority in fostering the self-development of its own area, the Concept of Regional Development Policy of Latvia (the Concept) issued by MEPRD in 1996 has ordered that the activity of local governments should be based on the support, understanding, and active involvement of the local community in decision-making processes. The state legislative and executive institutions, on the basis of local and regional development plans, programs and proposals are: 1) draft state investment programs, 2) develop legislation, providing for the democracy of local authorities, fostering the development of economic life in local governing areas, and 3) define problems in regions as well as ways to solve the problems. Moreover, on a voluntary basis, local authorities join forces in regional cooperation structures to resolve common problems and plan the development. In regions, the formation of Regional Development Boards (RDBs) is to be encouraged to unite delegated representatives from regions, districts and towns, as well as senior representatives from regional bodies under ministries. Recent examples are the Council of Latgale Development formed in 1998 and its work body called the Latgale Regional Development Agency (LRDA) established in September of 1999.
(2) Responsibilities of the central government for development According to the Concept, the regional development program must be implemented as part of the general state development strategy, comprising all its area. The strategy must provide the state development priorities, directions, objectives, as well as means of attaining these objectives for a medium term (3~5 years) and a long term (10~20 years) period. The general state development strategy and regional development policy are therefore the issue within the competence of the Parliament and the central government. Supporting the central government, RDB is responsible for implementation of the regional development policies. RDB is formed as a coordination institution for drafting and implementation of the state regional development policy, comprising senior representatives from ministries, the Union of Local & Regional Governments (ULRG), RDBs, and the Latvian Development Agency (LDA). RDB works out and submits to the central government proposals concerning the drafting and implementation of regional policy, informs regularly the central government of progresses about implementation of regional development policy, and monitors the work of the Regional Development Fund.
2-2 Ministries are responsible for implementation of national policies, by drafting bills and programs for their sector development. The functions and responsibilities of ministries in the sphere of regional development are now considered to be defined more precisely. For instance, the activities of REBs are to be extended in order to support the planning process, and the functions of LDA are to be extended in order to encourage the implementation of regional development policy.
(3) Responsibilities of the local governments for development The concept of local government reform was prepared and accepted by the Cabinet of Ministers of Latvia in September 1993. The principles of creation and development of local governments in Latvia are based on its constitution and the European Charter on Local Self-government in 1985. Article 3 of the Charter says that “Local self-governments denotes the right and the ability of local authorities, within the limits of the law, to regulate and manage a substantial share of public affaires under their own responsibility and in the interests of the local population”. The Law on Self-government passed in May of 1994 accordingly sets the general provision and economical basis of local governments’ activities in Latvia. The local governments bear direct responsibilities for the fields of regional socioeconomic development of the respective area as well as coordination for implementation. The permanent functions of the following three types of local governments are described in the law, although additional functions have been imposed on local governments by a number of other laws and regulations issued by the Cabinet of Ministers: 1) Republican cities such as Riga, Daugavpils, and Rezekne, 2) District self-governments (rajons), and 3) Local self-governments in towns (pilseta) and townships (pagasts) Republican city councils perform the functions combining ones of both local (towns and townships) and district councils. These cities have responsibility for most infrastructure functions within them, although the electricity, gas and railway systems are state undertakings. DCs coordinate the activities of towns and townships in solving common issues as well as consult them about the performance of the self-government functions. Their competence is the district-level local administration, and socioeconomic and culture promotion functions common to the whole district. The competence of local self-governments in towns and townships is also the local administration, and socioeconomic and culture promotion functions. The town and township councils, reflecting wishes of the community and interests of local people, define objectives of local development and ways of their implementation, perform the coordination function with other local authorities, and mobilize the resources of the community to attain their goals. The above table shows specific competence which is to be held by districts, towns and townships, which are most concerned with their future development.
2-3 Council Competence of Local Governments
District Council Town Council or Township Council 1) provides for elaboration of the district spatial development plan, 1) provides for producing the spatial 2) adopts the district spatial development plan, development plan of its administrative 3) evaluates the parts of the state national programs, sector development territory, plans, the National Land Use Plan, development plans of regional level 2) adopts the spatial development plan, and spatial development plans of special territories referring to the 3) evaluates the existing use of real estates and territory of the district, determines the necessary restrictions, 4) initiates changes (amendments) in spatial development plans of its 4) provides for the administrative control over planning region or spatial development plans of national level, observation of the spatial development 5) evaluates compliance of the spatial development plans of the towns plan, and townships to the district spatial development plan, 5) initiates changes (amendments) in spatial 6) takes decisions about cooperation with the town and township development plans of other municipalities municipalities of the district and other municipalities in producing a (towns, cities and districts), planning common spatial development plan, regions and spatial development plans of 7) evaluates sector development plans as well as regional spatial national level, development plans and land use plans referring to the territory of the 6) takes decisions about cooperation with district, other municipalities in preparing a common 8) evaluates the use of the district territory and plans its future use, and spatial development plan 9) provides for public participation in the process of spatial development 7) provides for public participation in the planning. spatial development planning process. Source : Law on Spatial Development Planning, MEPRD, October 1998
2.1.3 Budget and Expenditure During the period from 1992 till 1997 in Latvia, the role of local governments was step by step decreasing as the financial functions for pedagogical personal, primary and secondary health care system, and professional education were centralized. On the other hand, some were decentralized as financial and administrative provision for secondary schools, state enterprises and property were directly taken by local governments. This was related to the reform of national financing systems from 1994 till 1998. The new system of local government financing and equalization system had been established according to the Law on Equalization of Self-government Finances. The Municipal Financial Control Division of the Budget Department in the Ministry of Finance (MOF), is responsible for the supervision of local government finances. The total amount of local government’s budget is defined during the negotiations between ULRG and MOF. The financial resources of local governments are formed mainly by tax and non-tax revenues, state subsidies, and target subsidies. These incomes are divided into money obtained within the local area and money from the payments of outside. The first one is mostly tax which is paid for realized services and goods, while the outside incomes are subsidies and mutual accounts. On the district financial level including both the district and local budgets, as for the four districts partially covering the study area, about a half of their local governmental budgets comes from the state subsidies (Table 2.1.1). In particular, subsidies accounted for 67 % of Rezekne district’s budget in 1997, although the national ratio of subsidies to local governments was only 33 % in the same year. It means that these districts’ budgets
2-4 strongly rely on the central government. According to expenditure figures between 1996 and 1997, the district money was mostly expended to education and this trend has been strengthened (42~57 % in 1997). On the contrary, expenditure for health care has been decreased. The budget deficit was covered by the rest of the previous years. It can be identified that the district budget revenue and expenditure per capita were generally higher in Madona and Gulbene districts, but lower in Rezekne and Balvi districts than the national averages. This implies necessity of further financial supports to Rezekne and Balvi districts. Table 2.1.2 shows the local budget and expenditure of the 4 districts and 13 town/townships in 1996. On average, 50 % of the local budgets was subsidies except for Lubana town where tax revenue accounted for 85 % of its total budget. Most townships obtained half of their financial resources from other district taxpayers. As for their expenditure, money was most expended for education (40 %) followed by administration (22 %) and social security (19 %) on average. A larger part was devoted to the township council expenditures while health protection expenses were insignificant. Local budget and expenditure per local residents in the 13 town/townships were mostly below their districts’ averages. Exceptions are only Lubana town and Indrani township in Madona district. The other 11 townships should be financially supported, at least to attain the district average level and to reduce the expenditure ratio for local administration.
2.2 Population and Social Conditions
2.2.1 Population
(1) National and regional conditions As one of the main indicators of socioeconomic development of the region or the state is the number of population and its dynamics characterizing the development potential. The total population of Latvia was 2.46 million as of 1998, as shown in the next table. Since 1990, there has been rapid decrease of the number of population in Latvia. Between 1991 and 1998, the population fell by around 210,000 (8 % of 1991’s population) in the whole area of Latvia. Nevertheless, the dynamics and intensity of the decrease of the number of population is not the same in different regions of Latvia. The main changes have been taking place in Riga and Kurzeme regions. In Latgale region the population within the same period had decreased by 7 %, indicating that the decrease of population in Latgale is less than the Latvian average. Thirty-one percent of citizens of Latvia live in rural areas. According to the data of the State Statistic Committee (SSC), 48 % of rural citizens are concentrated in villages and 70 % of the total rural citizens are of economically active age in comparison with 72 % in the urban areas. A demographic characteristic of Latgale region, which is unfavorable for development, is more than 28 % of elderly people rate. It is higher than in other regions such as 23 % in Vidzeme, 22 % in Kurzeme, and 21 % in Zemgale. Due to the decreasing
2-5 birth-rate, the rate of children and juveniles (0-14 years old) in Latgale region is only 19 %, the lowest in Latvia. Demographic burden is one of the indicators characterizing age structure of population. It describes the number of the people under working age and over working age per 1,000 working age inhabitants. Demographic burden in Latgale (764) a little exceeds the corresponding rate in the whole of Latvia (726) and the other regions, except Vidzeme with the highest rate (804). Nevertheless, in rural districts of Latgale, the demographic burden of 934 is the biggest in Latvia. Resident Population in Latvia Year Resident Population (thousand) Urban Ratio (%) Rural Ratio (%) 1935 1,906 37 63 1959 2,080 52 48 1970 2,352 61 39 1979 2,503 67 34 1981 2,515 67 33 1986 2,588 69 31 1991 2,668 - - 1992 2,657 - - 1993 2,606 - - 1994 2,566 - - 1995 2,530 - - 1996 2,502 - - 1997 2,480 - - 1998 2,458 - - Note: “-“ means not available. Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
(2) Conditions in LWC The next table presents population change from 1991 to 1998 in Balvi, Gulbene, Madona and Rezekne districts, which partially cover LWC. Population in all four districts has decreased following the national demographic tendency. The total population of the districts amounted to 150,000 residents in 1998, which means about a 4 % decease compared with the 1991’s figure. Resident Population of Districts Related to LWC
District/Town 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1.Balvi 33,634 33,576 33,284 32,999 32,715 32,383 31,998 31,529 1-1.Towns 11,600 11,704 11,699 11,639 11,569 11,542 11,417 11,282 1-2.Townships 21,974 21,872 21,585 21,360 21,146 20,841 20,581 20,247 2.Gulbene 30,129 30,243 29,990 29,861 29,797 29,601 29,326 29,197 2-1.Towns 10,385 10,359 10,123 10,124 10,015 9,907 9,800 9,740 2-2.Townships 19,744 19,884 19,867 19,737 19,782 19,694 19,526 19,457 3.Madona D. 49,899 49,953 49,838 49,361 48,725 48,332 48,006 47,600 3-1.Towns 17,121 17,110 17,073 16,952 16,813 16,633 16,432 16,249 3-2.Townships 32,778 32,843 32,765 32,409 31,912 31,699 31,574 31,351 4.Rezekne 43,134 42,899 42,754 42,685 42,485 42,263 42,132 41,962 4-1.Towns 4,699 4,702 4,605 4,589 4,576 4,548 4,495 4,446 4-2.Townships 38,435 38,197 38,149 38,096 37,909 37,715 37,637 37,516 Total 156,796 156,671 155,866 155,581 153,722 152,579 151,462 150,288 Source : Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998) Population in each of the 12 townships and Lubana town has been also decreased as shown in the next table. Their total population has decreased by 4 % or more than 700
2-6 people between 1996 and 1999. As for LWC, demographical statistical data separated from any administrative units are not available. But the present number of local residents is roughly estimated from multiplication of each township’s or town’s 1999 population density with LWC figured out from the Satellite SPOT data. The calculation result implies that population in LWC is approximately 6,500, which can be regarded as a maximum level considering a high occupation rate of water bodies in the area. Historically, LWC belonged to the most populated lands of Latvia in the beginning of the 20th century. During the last decades, the number of residents has decreased so that LWC has become less densely populated. This decreasing tendency can be explained not only by the residents’ low birthrate but also by residents’ leaving to other economically favorable places for living. Estimated Population in LWC
Town/ Whole Population Density Study Population Township area 1996 1999 in 1999 area in LWC unit km2 persons persons persons/km2 km2 persons Rezekne Gaigalava 193 1,247 1,213 6.3 94 592 Nagli 138 700 687 5.0 133 665 Deksare 103 998 976 9.5 21 200 Balvi Ragaju 318 1,968 1,872 5.9 50 295 Lazdukalns 195 1,328 1,225 6.3 80 504 Berzpils 128 1,246 1,107 8.6 59 507 Madona Lubana Town 3 2,197 2,131 710.3 2 1,421 Varaklani 99 1,080 1,046 10.6 12 127 Indrani 343 1,240 1,222 3.6 125 450 Osupe 224 1,657 1,604 7.2 134 965 Barkava 188 1,901 1,798 9.6 54 518 Murmastiene 175 1,052 1,027 5.9 38 224 Gulbene Dauksti 165 1,430 1,412 8.6 12 103 Total 2,272 18,044 17,320 - 814 6,571 Note : Population in LWC = (Density in 1999) x (Study area) Sources : Towns and Civil Parishes in the Administrative Districts of Latvia: A Collection of Statistical Data, Parts 1 & 2 (CSB, 1998); and Number of Inhabitants in Regions, Towns and Townships of Latvia: Statistical Bulletin (CSB, 1999)
2.2.2 Labor Force The next table summarizes population ratios of working ages (15~59 year old for male and 15~55 year old for female). Fifty-eight percent of all the Latvian population in 1997 are categorized as labor force. In the urban area such as Riga and Rezekne cities, this ratio is higher. Even for the four districts concerned, this ratio is lower than that for the whole Latvia, because these districts cover a wide rural area. The working age ratios in the 13 town/townships of LWC range from 46 % of Varaklani township to 57 % of Barkava township, both in Madona district. Based on the 1997 ratio figures and the 1999 population estimated for LWC, labor force of the area in 1999 is summed up into approximately 3,400 persons. The largest population of working age is at Lubana town (about 750 persons), and secondly 520 persons in Osupe township.
2-7 2.2.3 Settlements and Living Standards Latgale has always been recognized as a region rich in various cultures and languages. Historically, Latgale region has not been formed as a homogenous area in comparison with other regions. According to the 1998 statistical data, the rate of Latvians of the total number of population was 41 % in Latgale, which is lower than those of Vidzeme (82 %), Kurzeme (70 %) and Zemgale (68 %) regions. On the contrary, the rates of Russians (43 %), Poles, and Belorussians is the highest among the regions. But, Latvian nationality residents dominate Madona district, where a minority are Russians (less than 1/8 of the number of Latvians). This is because there was rather small migration during the Soviet times due to lack of large industrial companies as major stimulus of migration. Estimated Working Age Population in LWC in 1999
District/Town/ Population Ratio in 1997 (%) 1999 Estimation Township Under Working Of Working Age Over Working Age Population in Working Age Age LWC Population Rezekne dis. 21 51 28 - - Gaigalava 23 51 26 592 302 Nagli 21 53 26 665 352 Deksare 22 50 28 200 100 Balvi district 21 53 26 - - Rugaji 22 51 27 295 150 Lazdukalns 22 51 27 504 257 Berzpils 21 48 31 507 243 Madona dis. 23 53 24 - - Lubana town 23 53 24 1,421 753 Varaklani 22 46 32 127 58 Indrani 22 47 31 450 212 Osupe 25 54 21 965 521 Barkava 22 57 21 518 295 Murmastiene 23 47 30 224 105 Gulbene dis. 23 56 21 - - Dauksti 26 52 22 103 54 Total in the study area 6,571 3,402 Whole Latvia 20 58 22 Riga City 17 60 23 Rezekne City 19 61 20 Notes : Working ages are 15~59 year old for male, and 15~55 year old for female. Working Age Population = (% of Working Age)/100 x (Population in LWC) Source : Towns and Civil Parishes in the Administrative Districts of Latvia, Part 1 & 2, CSB, 1998 The next table shows regional ratios of the poor among the total population, using two criteria such as crisis minimum (54.5 LVL per month) introduced by the Ministry of Welfare and the half of the average consumption expenditures (32 LVL per month). The crisis minimum satisfies the people’s basic needs. In 1997, 68.1 % of householders were under the level of the crisis minimum in Latvia. The rate of the rural inhabitants under the crisis minimum is higher than the rate of the urban inhabitants. The 1997’s ratios of Latgalian residents consuming lower than both criteria are the highest among the regions. These rates have even increased in comparison with the year 1996. Only 22 % and 78 % of Latgale householders in 1997 could clear the monthly expenditure criteria of 54.5 LVL and 32 LVL, respectively. These data imply that socioeconomic conditions in LWC, located in rural area, are also very severe at present.
2-8 Ratio (%) of the Poor by Region
Ratio of persons with consuming expenditures lower than Householders Crisis Minimum Level Half of Expenditures 1996 1997 1996 1997 All householders in Latvia 67.9 68.1 14.9 16.1 Urban areas householders 65.4 65.3 13.9 14.0 Rural areas householders 73.8 74.8 17.3 21.2 Householders in Kurzeme 73.7 72.6 16.9 18.4 Householders in Zemgale 74.8 73.4 18.3 17.7 Householders in Latgale 75.1 77.8 17.9 21.7 Householders in Vidzeme 70.1 71.3 15.6 17.1 Householders in Riga 61.1 61.0 12.2 12.7 Source : Pilot Regional Development Plan for the Latgale Region: Regional Report (EU Phare, September 1999)
2.3 Economic and Financial Conditions
2.3.1 National and Regional Economy The independence of Latvia and the transition to market economy are linked with radical structural changes in national economy. A considerable part of production infrastructure has gone to waste, unemployment rate has grown in towns and the countryside. Many people find it difficult to adjust to the new conditions, especially in the countryside where there is a limited variety of economic activity, high communication and transportation costs, as well as an unfavorable demographic situation. Due to small farms, unsuitable household buildings and facilities, lack of information about marketing possibilities as well as high production costs, low-income households and subsistence agriculture pervade in the rural areas. Lack of possibilities for employment has motivated educated and young people to leave the rural area. As LWC mainly consists of primary industries, its economic conditions are the same or more severe than the above mentioned situations. The following tables present representative economic indicators such as GDP, foreign exchange rate, consumer price index, and capital investment level. The capital investments had increased in the four districts between 1995 and 1997. Gross Domestic Product of Latvia
Year Total (million LVL) Per Capita (LVL) At current prices At 1995 price At current prices At 1995 price 1980 37 3,154 14.9 1,255.8 1985 42 3,746 16.4 1,452.5 1990 62 4,737 23.4 1,773.5 1991 143 4,243 53.8 1,593.8 1992 1,005 2,764 381.7 1,050.4 1993 1,467 2,353 567.3 910.1 1994 2,043 2,368 801.7 929.6 1995 2,249 2,349 933.9 933.9 1996 2,829 2,428 1,135.8 974.8 1997 3,211 2,587 1,300.5 1,047.6 Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
2-9 Foreign Exchange Rates Set by the Bank of Latvia
Currency 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 LVL/USD 0.835 0.595 0.548 0.537 0.556 0.590 LVL/100 JPY 0.675 0.533 0.549 0.524 0.486 0.453 Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
Consumer Price Indices in Latvia (Unit: % of previous year) Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 General 272 1,051 209 136 125 118 108 1. Goods 280 796 189 134 121 115 107 1-1. Food 276 861 190 132 118 113 103 1-2. Non-food 284 752 188 137 131 122 111 2. Services 221 2,824 340 141 137 124 116 Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
Capital Investments by District Related to LWC (Unit: million LVL at 1997 price) District / City 1995 1997 Balvi District 0.8 1.7 Gulbene District 1.7 3.4 Madona District 2.0 5.0 Rezekne District 1.6 1.7 Riga City 175.4 301.1 Daugavpils City 8.8 16.7 Rezekne City 2.1 4.0 Whole Latvia 326.6 612.6 Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
However, the national economy has been successful, implying possibilities for further economic growth since 1997 when a stable and significant increase of gross domestic income (6 %) was achieved. In comparison with the previous year, inflation decreased to 8.4 %, and real increase of important macro economic indicators was noted. This allowed decreasing of registered unemployment rate in the country. In 1997 it was 7.2 % (7.0 % in 1996).
2.3.2 Employment and Income According to an investigation on labor force carried out by SSC in May of 1997, 80 % were employees, 3 % were employers, and 10 % were self-employed. The registered unemployment rate in Latvia in 1998 was 7.0 % as shown in the next table, fluctuating between 3.1 % in Riga city to 29 % in Rezekne district. But there are a number of jobless people who are seeking for a job but are not registered as unemployed persons. The actual unemployment rate in Latvia is thus higher than officially registered. For instance, in 1997, the number of the officially registered unemployed was only 53 % of all the unemployed persons, according to the Employment State Department (ESD).
2-10 Registered Unemployment Rate in Latvia
Year 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Rate (%) 0.9 4.6 6.4 6.4 7.0 7.2 7.0 Note: They are shares of the registered unemployed people to economically active population. Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
As shown in the next table, average gross monthly wages of 1995 and 1997 in Latvia were 90 LVL and 120 LVL, respectively. But difference of income growth between urban and rural citizens has increased. People’s incomes are based mainly on two types of sources such as payment from hired work and social remittances. The later type of income exceeds half of income of farmers’ households whose income from agricultural production is 41 %. Average Monthly Wages by Activity Kind in Latvia (Unit: LVL) Activity 1995 1997 Gross Net Gross Net Total Average 90 73 120 88 - Agriculture, hunting and forestry 64 55 83 63 - Fishing 119 94 150 117 - Industry 95 77 132 97 - Construction (mining, manufacturing, etc.) 87 71 113 83 Note: “Net” refer to wages excluding social and personal income taxes paid by employed persons. Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
In Latvia the proportion of those engaged in agriculture, hunting, fishery and forestry in 1997 was about 19 % as shown in the table below. At present, agricultural production and related services provide jobs and income to only one-fifth of rural inhabitants, as the proportion of agriculture in the Latvian economy decreases. In order to eliminate social tension in rural areas, it is necessary to develop viable farms and to increase income of rural inhabitants. Lessening of the number of jobs in agriculture causes labor migration from the countryside to towns. Employed Persons in Latvia by Kind of Activity (Unit: 1,000 persons) Kind of Activity 1990 1995 1996 1997 Total 1,409 1,046 1,018 1,037 - Agriculture, hunting and related service activities 218 174 167 172 - Forestry, logging and related service activities 15 14 14 15 - Fishing 12 5 5 6 - Industry (mining, manufacturing,, gas supply, etc.) 391 214 202 209 - Construction 136 56 58 60 - Others (trade, transport, education, services, etc.) 637 583 572 575 Source: Statistical Yearbook of Latvia (CSB, 1998)
For the moment, there is no statistics of the income and employment for LWC. But based on the following statistics for the four districts and 13 town/townships concerned as well as the field reconnaissance, it is supposed that situation of LWC is worse than the district averages and even than the town/township averages because a considerable number of
2-11 residents are involved in agricultural, forestry and fishery sectors. For instance, the registered unemployment levels of Rugaji, Lazdukalns and Berzpils townships in Balvi district were more than 40 %, and the average rate among the 13 town/townships was 26 % in 1997. Such a phenomenon signifies low education level and the undeveloped production sector in the area. The origin of the unemployment is the state-owned industrial companies which have discontinued their activity or limited their production, and jobless people who do not possess their own farm after the re-organization of the collective farms. Registered Unemployment Rates and Wages in the 4 Districts
District Year Rezekne Balvi Madona Gulbene Unemployment rate 1997 29.0 21.6 13.1 9.9 (%) 1998 28.2 22.1 12.5 10.2 Average gross wage 1997 74 82 83 84 (LVL/month) 1998 80 92 92 92 Source: Administrative Districts and Major Cities of Latvia : Statistical Yearbook (CSB, 1998 and 1999)
Registered Unemployment Rates of the 13 Town/Townships in 1997
Town/Township Unemployment Rate Town/Township Unemployment Rate (%) (%) 1. Gaigalava 24.0 8. Varaklani 4.9 2. Nagli 16.7 9. Indrani 17.3 3. Deksare 28.2 10. Osupe 25.7 4. Rugaji 40.2 11. Barkava 14.7 5. Lazdukalns 44.3 12. Murmastiene 29.7 6. Berzpils 77.3 13. Gulbene 7.0 7. Lubana town 7.4 Average 26.0 Source: Ministry of Economy, 1999
2.3.3 Industry
(1) Agriculture In 1990, agricultural production made up one-fifth of the general domestic product of Latvia. Its proportional decrease was caused mainly by changes of prices in different sectors. In total during the period 1990-1997, prices in national economy have increased 90 times, prices of agricultural production are 50 times. The production in livestock breeding most rapidly decreased by 60 %. The amount of product in crop production decreased by 30 %. The decrease of agricultural production in the 1990s was determined by different factors: those influencing national economy on the whole, and those which were especially unfavorable for agriculture considering its specific character. The main reasons are rapid narrowing of outer and inner market and changes in prices unfavorable for agriculture. At the beginning of 1997 there were about 300,000 farms of different size in Latvia. The absolute majority of them are small farms that do not produce any agricultural products, or they sell products in small amounts. Only about 5 % of all farms may be called those producing goods. According to the data of CSB, on the average there is 13.7 ha of agricultural land in one farm. The total area of sown area decreases from year to year. At present, small scale production is dominating in agriculture : 30 % of total sowing area is in
2-12 small farms with sowing areas under 5 ha, 69 % in farms with sowing areas up to 20 ha. Such farms are short of current assets. Quite often cereals are not cultivated in accordance with agro-technical demands and harvests are rather small. 48 % of milk cows are in farms where there are 1 or 2 cows. It does not promote production of cheap milk. Agricultural sphere is of great importance in LWC. The effectiveness of farming is influenced by peculiarities of local relief and soils. In this sense, more convenient situation is in the Lubana lowlands, although hydrological route is rather risky for agriculture with poor fertile and moisture areas. The peasant farms predominate among agricultural land users. Main activities are production of wheat, rye, barley, potato and flax as well as cattle breeding for meat and milk. But, there is a lack of meat processing enterprises around LWC. Agricultural land division in LWC reflects economical situation in the country. The present agriculture is mostly subsistence farming, which is not engaged into agricultural processing route. This kind of management is unprofitable and endangers the liquidation of many farms. However, it has an important role in local economy securing the existence of unemployed countrymen. A considerable amount of subsidies have been used for supporting farmers in LWC, in order to overcome the agricultural crisis where the agricultural products are not able to compete. The peasants can receive financial support from a special credit line in “Zemes and Hypothere Bank”, although long term credits are not available for farmers.
(2) Forestry The total area of forests is 2,882 million ha or 45 % of the national area. Annual growth in all forests is 16.5 million m3. The estimated allowable cut by the law for the period 1995~ 2000 is 8.35 million m3 a year. In 1996, 6.76 million m3 of wood were felled, including 66.3 % in state forests and 33.7 % in other forests. In the total amount of timber products 37.3 % was firewood, 29 % were sawn logs, and 21.3 % was round timber. Special assortment such as packing blocks and veneer blocks for matches accounted for only 11.1 %. There is 1.16 ha of forest area per one inhabitant or on average 197 m3 of wood stock volume in Latvia. After the finalization of land reform, about 56 % of forests will be in the property of state, 42 % in private property, and 2 % in municipal property. These forests consist of different tree species, age, thickness, and quality. At present about 900 enterprises are operating in forestry and lumbering. About 1,500 wood processing enterprises are functioning in the countryside. Forestry and further wood processing give jobs and income to local residents, and it thus performs economic social functions in rural areas. For those private forest proprietors who do not carry out agricultural activities, forests serve as a capital. Forests cover about 30 % and idle land comprises about 15 % of Latgale region. The dominating tree species are pine (40 % of the inventory), spruce (20 %) and birch (25 %). The timber is mainly used for the paper and construction industries. Modern manufacturing facilities, such as paper-mills and sawmills, are only in the course of
2-13 establishment. Wood products represent the biggest group of exports, reaching about a third of total exports in 1997. Forests are a great part of natural resources in LWC, protecting biological habitat and giving working places. There is enough area of woods which is a good stimulus for the new wood processing enterprises. Wood processing around LWC is very disunited and seldom effective, and production of wood goods depends on requirements. The rest part of production is sown materials for export needs. Places for wood sawing are placed in each township. Small part of the remainder of wood sawing is used for heating. 4-5 m3 of this can be substituted for 1 ton of coal. Craft industry with wood exists around LWC, being mainly oriented on domestic market.
(3) Fishery Latvia is rich in waters and there are 2,256 lakes at its area with the water-surface area of about 100,000 ha. Main fish resources are concentrated in approximately 800 water bodies and in the large rivers. The most part of these waters is characterized by high fish productivity. About 40 species of fish are met in the internal waters of Latvia, 26 of them have been recognized in industrial fishing. In the end of the 1930s, fish breeding existed mainly as an auxiliary sector of almost 1,000 of farms. The state granted its support for the development of breeding and fish fry in ponds. In the post-war period, breeding and releasing of fish fry developed. After the restoration of independence, social economic and legal situation of fish farming has changed. Land reform in rural areas and turn to market economy has brought deep depression in breeding of market fish – trout and carp. In the latest years market carp production in Latvia was about 500 tons, including trout 5 ~ 10 tons a year. Fishery in Latgale region is limited to fish caught in inland waters. The most important kinds are carps, breams, pikes, sanders, perches, eel and other fish. Taking into account the large number of water bodies in Latgale, the inland water resources may be regarded as untapped potential of fish. The Licensing Commission of the National Board of Fishery (NBF) gives the fishing licenses for 1~5 years. There are three types of activities such as catching, aquaculture and tourism opportunity. As Latgale region has 40 % of all lakes in Latvia, the possibility to develop fishery is quite realistic. Fishery in LWC is largely connected with Lake Lubana. However, catching of fish is now an additional activity mostly for home consumption and also for sales on the local market. The aquaculture is limited to the Nagli fishponds. In 1980s, about 700 to 1,000 tons of carps were produced. Due to privatization and lack of capital and market development, the production decreased to about 150 tons in 1998. The demand for carps is quite good but the decreasing purchasing power resulted in lower prices and poor profitability. In the mid and long term, perspectives are rather good and restocking is necessary. In this way the managers of Nagli look for foreign direct investment. Another positive point to improve the technical and economic opportunity of aquaculture is the training of specialists in the “Razna Vocational School”. Also, these are ideas to start some processing of fish around LWC. In addition, good infrastructure and facilities for angling around the lake are important for further development including eco-tourism and rural tourism.
2-14 (4) Tourism Direct income from tourism in Latvia in 1996 was only 3 % of GDP. Tourism is a sector having very high competition between the countries. For Latvia it is not easy to present a product competitive to other countries. The state funding for tourism in Latvia is the lowest in Baltic States. It is approximately a half of what is provided by Lithuanian government and only one-fourth of Estonia’s. The institution responsible for implementation of the national tourism policy is the Latvian Tourism Agency. The rural tourism has started to develop, as the statistics data show that the number of tourists is growing constantly. At the end of 1999 the number of the dwelling houses for rural tourism was 116, and in April 2000 there were 125 houses in Latvia as shown in the next table. The average duration of visitors’ stay was 3.4 days. The highest number of tourists has been recorded during May to September as well as in December. In 1999, 11 % of the visitors were foreigners who had arrived from 25 countries, including Scandinavian countries (19 %), USA and Canada (16 %), Germany (14 %), India (13 %), UK and Ireland (7 %), Holland (7 %) and France (6 %). The local tourists spent 1.6 days on average, while foreign tourists stayed for 1.3 days (Finland), 4.8 (Germany) and 6 (Russia). Past Increasing Trend of Farms and Visitors for Rural Tourism Year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 April 2000 No. of Farms 20 38 46 70 98 116 125 No. of Beds n.a. 167 200 416 494 732 n.a. No. of Visitors 228 880 2,486 3,630 6,200 7,642 n.a. Note : n.a. = data is not available Source : Association of Rural Tourism, May 2000
Tourism in LWC and even in the entire Latgale region is of the primary stage. Geographical situation, nature peculiarities, culture objects and unpolluted environment of the study area will promote eco-tourism and rural tourism industry. In particular, there are possibilities to develop water active tourism around Lake Lubana. But there is a lack of trained staff in tourism industry, and limited knowledge of languages is an obstacle. There are information centers in the four districts concerned, which were established by each district council. They are concerned with the information generalization and the research of tourism objects. The main problem of the centers is lack of any united information system of tourism in the entire area.
2.3.4 Financial Sources for Environmental Management
(1) Fund sources for environmental investment projects in Latvia Fund sources for the environmental investment projects in Latvia are Public Investment Program, Natural Resources Tax, grant, loan, and municipalities’ budget.
2-15 1) Public Investment Program (PIP) PIP was established and started in 1995 to fund for high priority projects and programs set by the government. The main objective of PIP is to coordinate finances in the country with investment needs for infrastructure as shown in Figure 2.3.1. The priority sectors are designated as energy, transport, and environment. As for the environmental sector, PIP focuses on the improvement of water supply and waste water treatment, establishment of municipal and hazardous waste management, and modernization of hydrometeorology network. MEPRD coordinates and supervises the funding allocated from PIP to environmental sector as state subsidies to municipalities and ministry investment projects. Environmental budget from PIP is shown as follows. Environmental Budget from PIP (Unit: million LVL) Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 Total Budget of PIP 13.8 14.9 34.3 42.2 Environmental investments from PIP 2.4 3.3 3.6 6.2 (% of PIP) (17.4 %) (23.5 %) (10.6 %) (14.8 %) - State subsidies to municipalities 1.9 2.0 1.7 4.2 - Ministry investments 0.5 1.3 1.9 2.0 Source : Environmental and Sustainable Development Projects in Latvia, MEPRD, 1998
2) Natural Resources Tax Based on the Law on Natural Resources Tax (1995, revised in 1996), the tax is imposed on use of natural resources polluting the environment, pollutants, and products harmful to the environment including imported products and packaging. REBs verify the calculations and sign the completed form based on the resource use declared by user. The tax is collected by the Income Department of MOF, and it is used for environmental protection purposes. The Natural Resources Tax was mostly used for following purposes: - Purchase, repair, and reconstruction of water purification equipment, - Repair of water supply and sewerage system, purchase of water pump, - Maintenance of dumping sites, solid waste collection, and - Analysis of drinking water. Collected tax is allocated to municipalities' government as Special Municipalities Environmental Budget (SMEB) and channeled to the Special State Environmental Budget accruing to the Latvian Environmental Protection Fund (LEPF) as shown in Figure 2.3.2.
3) Grant and loan Funds for environmental projects are provided from donor countries and EU Phare as grant or loan scheme. MEPRD coordinates and allocates the grant and loan to the priority environmental investment projects in whole country. Main donor countries are Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, USA, and Switzerland. Main international financing institutions include Nordic Environmental Finance
2-16 Cooperation (NEFCO), World Bank, Nordic Investment Bank, and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Usually the donor countries provide grants in the case of investment schemes when their financing is not more than 30 % of total investments. Banks like World Bank, normally take the role as lead financier in the project funding. Additional funding is supplied as bilateral grants or equity. Regarding the loan scheme, local funding of about 20 % of the project costs is also always required. NEFCO provides project funding as loans, but it should be less than 30 % of the required funding. The projects funded by NEFCO should have environmental benefits for the Nordic countries as well as involving at least one Nordic country. As a part of the Municipal Services Development Project, financed through a loan from the World Bank, US$3.5 million is made available under the Municipal Development Fund (MDF). The MDF channels loan funds to a number of small-scale investments in municipal services. The MDF pilots a mechanism for channeling loan funds to municipalities for infrastructure investment in order to reduce the dependence of municipalities on state grants for such investment.
(2) Financing mechanism for environmental investment project There are three main financing mechanisms for environmental investment projects: Latvian Environmental Protection Fund (LEPF), Latvian Environmental Investment Fund (LEIF), and Fish Fund.
1) LEPF LEPF is a state-administered establishment subordinated to MEPRD. LEPF revenue is accrued from the use of natural resources tax as Special State Environmental Budget. The main objectives of the fund are: - to provide additional financial resources in grant-base for funding environmental protection activities and projects, - to ensure proper use of these funds and supervision of projects, and - to provide financial resources in order to soften loans for the environmental protection projects. Public and private organizations that want to apply for LEPF have to submit an application form. A private company who wants to apply to the LEPF needs a recommendation letter by REBs to get approval. However, in the case where the proposed project is not suitable from an environmental viewpoint, REBs refuse it and the company can not get approval of LEPF. Recent planned and realized projects funded by LEPF around LWC are shown in Table 2.3.1. Total annual investment provided by LEPF to Rezekne REB are shown as follows.
2-17 Investment by LEPF to Rezekne REB (Unit: LVL) Year 1997 1998 1999 LEPF 27,529 5,699 6,939 Source: Rezekne Regional Environmentally Board, Nov. 1999
2) LEIF With assistance from the EU Phare National Program 1995, a feasibility study about the necessity of the investment fund, target groups and methods of management has been made. On the basis of the feasibility study, LEIF was established by the decision of Cabinet of Ministers in April 1997 as a non-profit limited liability company. Projects supported from LEIF are in line with the national environmental policy and the annual priorities of MEPRD. Other criteria look at foreseeable improvements in the environmental sector for both public and private projects, financial viability after implementation of projects and ability of project to take soft loans from LEIF. NEFCO and LEIF have signed an Intention Protocol in 1998 about cooperation in order to distribute NEFCO loans with assistance of LEIF. A representative of NEFCO is a member of the Board of Supervisors of LEIF. Financing sources of the LEIF are shown as follows. Interest rate for financing by LEIF ranges from 5 to 8 %. Financing Sources of LEIF (Unit: million Euro (million LVL)) Name of Source Investment* 1) Latvian Environmental Protection Fund (LEPF) 5.0 (8.3) 2) EU Phare 2.0 (3.3) 3) Nordic Environmental Finance Corporation (NEFCO) 3.5 (5.8) 4) Danish Environmental Protection Agency 0.2 (0.3) 5) Technical Assistance from EU 1.0 (1.7) Total 11.7 (19.4) Note: * total investment as of Nov.1999 Source: Investment Department of MEPRD, 1999
3) Fish Fund (FF) The FF established in 1996 funds for fishery-related projects and activities. Fish breeding and plant cultivation, fish transport and import are subject to a fee and a license. The Law on Fishing (1995) requires those fees to be paid into the fund. FF can be applied for some kinds of environmental project, which contribute the fish resources protection such as river water quality improvement project. Annual total amount of FF provided to Rezekne REB is shown as follows. Investment by Fish Fund to Rezekne REB (Unit: LVL) Year 1997 1998 1999 Fish Fund 7,055 15,675 5,500 Source: Rezekne Regional Environmentally Board, Nov. 1999
4) Special Accession Program for Agriculture and Rural Development (SAPARD) This new financial program sponsored by EU is planned to support small enterprises or farmers to improve the quality of the services in the rural area for such development fields as agriculture, forestry, fish-breeding and rural tourism. The financial subsidies from the
2-18 program will be EUR 2,000 (1,150 LVL)~EUR 100,000 (57,500 LVL)/project. The expected total financing of EU to Latvia will be about 22 million EUR (or 13 million LVL)/year. The subsidy amount for profitable and non-profitable projects is 50% and 80 % of the total project cost, respectively. But the remaining expenses must be covered by the proposing individuals or enterprises themselves. 5) Environmental budget in local government of the study area General budgets of town and townships in LWC are limited. Those local governments have to apply for the financial sources explained in the previous section to implement environmental protection activities with assistance by REB.
2.4 Infrastructure
2.4.1 Water Supply and Sanitation While 49% of the total water resources in Latvia derives from surface water, 41% is from groundwater. In Rezekne district, 89% of water resources is extracted from surface water. Rezekne district has two main rivers, the Rezekne and the Malta rivers, both of which pour into LWC. At the end of the two rivers, several fishponds located in the Nagli township extract surface water from the Malta river. Groundwater is used for drinking or household usage in LWC, due to its comparative cleanness to surface water. Households of local municipalities are the biggest producer of wastewater in Latvia, while industry wastewater has remained the second. In order to solve water supply and wastewater treatment problems in small Latvian towns, the Project of Water Supply and Waste Water Treatment in Small and Medium Sized Towns of Latvia was planned from 1995 to 1996. The strategy elaborated within the framework of this project was accepted by the Cabinet of Ministries in 1997. In order to implement this strategy, the State program of Water Supply and Waste Water Treatment in Small and Medium Sized Towns of Latvia (800+) was established as a part of the National Baltic Sea Protection Program. In Rezekne city located upstream of LWC, about 9,000 m3 of wastewater is treated in a day. The effluent concentrations of organic substances and nutrients often exceed the water quality standards. The coverage of the sewage system is lower than 70% in Rezekne city, and it is even lower in other towns and townships of LWC. Households unconnected to the sewer systems and agricultural lands remain the main non-point sources of water pollution. In line with the 800+, the project of Improvements to Water Supply and Wastewater Management in Five Municipalities in Eastern Latvia financed by Denmark is now in progress. Rezekne city, Vilani town, and Malta township are included in the 5 municipalities and located in Rezekne district. MEPRD initiated the solid waste management program called "500-" to reduce the total number of landfill sites to less than 500 and to integrate waste management in Latvia. Each municipality is responsible for organizing waste management within its territory. There were 2.6 million m3 of municipal waste in 1996, which showed 50% decrease from 1992
2-19 (5.1 million m3) in all Latvia. Hazardous waste has also shown a decreasing trend since 1991 in Latvia. 240,000 tons of hazardous waste were produced in 1991, while 50,000 tons were generated in 1996. Rezekne district generated 9,000 m3 of municipal waste and 1.9 tons of hazardous waste in 1998, and Balvi district 16,000 m3 and 16.9 tons, respectively. Due to less industrial activities in Rezekne, Madona, and Balvi districts, municipal waste generation is comparatively small. Rezekne city has one landfill site for municipal waste in its suburb where hazardous waste had been accumulated during the Soviet era. The landfill puts threats on ground water close to it. Improvement of the existing landfill and separation of hazardous waste from municipal waste are prioritized by Rezekne REB.
2.4.2 Transportation The road network with international importance runs southward of LWC. The A-12 freeway is crossing Jekabpils, Vilani, and Rezekne city, heading for Moscow. To the east of the study area, the A-13 freeway from St. Petersburg and Ostrov in Russia is crossing Rezekne city, heading for Daugavpils city. These roads are well developed and maintained. The local roads in and around LWC are not so well developed except the roads connecting main cities and towns like Rezekne city, Madona town, Gulbene town, and Balvi town. Roads connecting township centers in LWC are mostly unpaved, and their maintenance is not well conducted due to financial shortage. The total length of all the railway lines in Latvia is 2,413 km, of which 534 km is in the Latgale region. The railway connecting Ventspil, Riga and Rezekne runs southward of LWC, heading for Moscow. Rezekne city is one of the 6 largest railway terminals in Latvia. The existing railway infrastructure is sufficient to cover the present demand for transportation of cargoes and passengers.
2.4.3 Energy Latvia is scarce in energy resources. Approximately 40% of electricity is imported from Latvia’s neighboring countries. Three hydropower plants are located along the Daugava river with the total capacity of 1,510 MW. The two largest combined thermal power plants are located in Riga with the capacity of 500 MW. Latvenergo, which is the largest power generation enterprise and is now in a process of privatization, provides electricity in Latvia. Oil and natural gas are imported mainly from Russia and their prices are set high, which causes less use of oil and agricultural equipment.
2.4.4 Environmental Education There is no formal curriculum on environmental education in primary and secondary schools of Latvia. Through only school camps and special projects such as National Olympiad of Environmental Projects, students learn various aspects of environmental issues. About 200 classes in different regions of Latvia participated in an environmental education project "Air Pollution in Europe" from 1995 to 1997. Students made
2-20 observations of precipitation, identified the air quality, and studied the lower ozone layer. The project has received high evaluation at several international environmental protection and education competitions in Europe and USA. In Latvia the project has been continued as a national project "Air Observation Network". Rather than the introduction of environmental education curriculum to schools, there are basic problems to be solved such as underpaid teachers, insufficient teachers' training, and lack of textbooks. Environmental Education Association releases an information document "Celabiedrs" for schools and other environmental education institutions six times a year. An organization “Children Environmental School” has published such teaching materials as "Find trees and bushes in winter", "Find trees and bushes in summer", and "Let's live alive life!" Environmental education at university level is concentrated at the Center for Environmental Science and Management of the University of Riga. Master degree program on environmental science and management in the University of Latvia was started in 1993. This is the first MSc program providing interdisciplinary approach to solve environmental problems and to acquire new environmental protection methods. According to hearing from Rezekne and Madona REBs, they have no formal program of environmental education. However, REBs conduct seminars and lectures in the schools and vocational centers when they are requested.
2.4.5 Activities of Donors, NGOs, and NPOs
(1) Donors The National Program of Baltic Sea Environmental Protection has been worked out. The first three phases of the program were completed in September 1996 within the framework of EU Phare project. The program is performed by using several financial resources such as State Investment Program, Environmental Protection Fund, municipal budgets and budgets of enterprises, means of EU Phare Program, foreign bilateral assistance (state grants of Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Germany) and loans with lightened terms of repayment (NEFCO and Danish government). The EU Phare National Program 1997 under the heading regional development contains the “Pilot Regional Development Plan for Latgale Region”, which was completed in September 1999. For Balvi district, the following two energy pilot projects have been implemented through the “Activities Implemented Jointly” network : Balvi District Heating, and Balvi Boiler Conservation. In addition, Rezekne district has established twinning city relationship with Aust-Agdere and Arendale in Norway to cooperate in health and environmental protection, social sphere, education and culture. In 1989, EU Structural and Cohesion Funds were created, the aim of which is to finance and equalize development of different regions of Europe. Creation of these funds allows to pay more attention to rural development and financing. Since 1992 when the reform of Common Agricultural Policy including objectives of environmental protection was
2-21 initiated, rural development became an important part of it. As Latvia is in the status of Candidate State of EU at present, it is important to promote cohesion between regions, cities and rural areas. Even more important is to create ways through which resources of EU Structural and Cohesion Funds could flow into Latvia in the future. These funds are now not available for candidate states but in the period of accession support for rural areas from Phare programmes will gradually shift to Structural Funds. The World Bank Latvian Rural Development Project (approved in September 1998) and the EU-Phare SAPARD Program managed by MOA (under preparation at present) offer financial support for agricultural producers and processors and for small enterprises in rural areas. These financial resources are earmarked for the development of efficient agricultural production as well as for promoting non-traditional agricultural sectors and competitive alter-native businesses.
(2) Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Non-profit Organizations (NPOs) The Concept of the Regional Development Policy of Latvia (1996) defines objectives and tasks for the regional development policy, as well as basic objectives of the regional policy of Latvia and the framework for its creation and implementation. As one of the basic standpoints of regional policy of Latvia is the principle of partnership, such that “the state regional policy is part of the general development policy of the state. The state implements the regional development policy in co-operation with local authorities, entrepreneurs, the society and NGOs.” There are 60 environmental NGOs regularly active in Latvia. The Environmental Protection Club has a membership of 3000, while the oldest environmental NGO, the Latvian Society of Nature and Monument Protection, is supported by 2000 members. Most environmental NGOs in Latvia engage in environmental education and training (39%), collection and dissemination of environmental information (37%), environmental fieldwork and monitoring (35%), alternative environmental expertise (27%), and so forth. The Ecological Center and the Center for Environmental Science and Management Studies of the University of Latvia working for information dissemination, training, and publication in the field of environmental education are the examples of active NPOs. In LWC, the Latgalian Ecological Society, the Center for Nature Research & Environmental Education of Daugavpils Pedagogical University did the ecological researches in 1999. NGOs and NPOs are highly informative and have a possibility of active participation in the environmental management of LWC.
2-22 2.5 Land Use
2.5.1 Land Use Status and Change
(1) Present land use conditions The most fertile soils can be found in the plains south of Riga, where most of the domestic sugar beets in addition to fruit, crops and vegetables are produced concentively. The total arable land in Latvia is about 41,000 km2, but only 60 % of which is now under actual agricultural activities. In the 4 districts surrounding LWC, this figure is lower except for Rezekne district (i.e. Rezekne district: 64 %, Balvi district: 57 %, Madona district: 51 %, and Gulbene district: 57 %). This means that potential arable land in and around LWC is further abandoned than the national average, because of low intensity of the land usage, multi-shaped terrain, and improper hydrological conditions as well as a lack of agricultural markets. Present land use data focusing on LWC are tabulated in the next table. The figures were calculated and processed based on the Satellite “SPOT” data in 1998 (refer to Figure 2.5.1) and the existing topographical maps in 1:50,000 scale. The total width of LWC is about 814 km2, which is consisting of parts of 12 townships and Lubana town in Rezekne, Balvi, Madona and Gulbene districts. Madona district occupies nearly a half (45 %) of LWC followed by Rezekne and Balvi districts, while Dauksti township of Gulbene district belongs to the area only with 12 km2. Therefore, LWC only covers 8 % of the 4 districts’ area (10,264 km2) or 36 % of the summed territory of these 13 local municipalities (2,272 km2). Gaigalava and Nagli townships in Rezekne district as well as Indrani and Osupe townships in Madona district are 4 major municipalities totally occupying 60 % of LWC. The greatest treasure in LWC is natural resources. Forests cover 47 % of the area, which is higher than the national forest ratio of 44.6 % figured out by MEPRD in 1998. Wetlands and water bodies (Lake Lubana and fishponds) account for 13 % and 12 % respectively. The water surface of Lake Lubana belongs more to Rezekne district than to Madona district. Besides, the rest (28 %) of the area is mainly agricultural land that is regarded as a kind of semi-natural resources. This land use structure dominated by such natural resources provides local people with environmental goods and services, while LWC carries the agrarian characteristics and landscapes because of the agricultural areas. There prevail turf bog and marsh soils in the lowlands. According to Figure 2.5.1 showing the present land use of the whole LWC, the water bodies are located in the southern half of the area, centered by Lake Lubana with the fish ponds eastward. The major part of forests is in the north half of the area, while some patched woodland is scattered around the lake. The wetlands mainly spread on the northeastern part and the south side of Lake Lubana. The agricultural area surrounds these three major natural resources (water bodies, forests and wetlands) covering all over LWC.
2-23 Land Use Situation of LWC in 1998 (Unit: km2) Land Use in LWC Township Whole Forests Wetlands Water Bodies Agriculture Lands Total / Town Area Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Rezekne Gaigalava 193 44 46 18 19 12 12 20 23 94 100 Nagli 138 38 29 30 22 52 39 13 10 133 100 Deksare 103 14 66 2 12 0 0 5 22 21 100 Balvi Rugaji 318 39 78 2 5 0 0 9 17 50 100 Lazdukalns 195 33 41 20 25 0 0 27 34 80 100 Berzpils 128 20 33 11 18 0 0 28 49 59 100 Madona Lubana Town 3 0 10 0 0 0 0 2 90 2 100 Varaklani 99 5 37 0 0 0 0 7 63 12 100 Indrani 343 101 81 7 6 0 0 17 13 125 100 Osupe 224 44 32 12 9 30 22 48 37 134 100 Barkava 188 16 29 6 11 0 1 32 59 54 100 Murmastiene 175 17 44 0 0 0 0 21 56 38 100 Gulbene Dauksti 165 8 67 0 0 0 0 4 33 12 100 Total 2,272 379 47 108 13 94 12 233 28 814 100 Notes: 1)Forests include broad-leaved forest, coniferous forest, mixed forest, natural grassland, transitional woodland & scrub, and sparsely vegetated area; 2)Wetlands include inland marshes, and peat bogs; 3)Water bodies include lakes, and fish ponds; 4)Agricultural lands include non-irrigated arable land, pastures, complex cultivation patterns, and land principally occupied by agriculture with natural vegetation, in addition to urban area of 2 km2. Sources: Satellite “SPOT” data in 1998, and 1 : 50,000 Topographical Maps
(2) Land use change In 1935, nearly 60 % and 30 % of Latvian lands were occupied by agricultural area and forests, respectively. Afterward, some agricultural area had been gradually converted into forestry use. But, during the 1980s this land-use conversion tendency from agriculture to forestry had stopped, and up to now ratios of both the agricultural and forestry lands have continued to keep more or less 40 % of the national territory. It means that total lands for agriculture and forestry have been around 80 % of Latvia. At present, a third of the agricultural lands are pastures. As for LWC, land use patterns have altered mostly in the similar process to the whole country, keeping a certain ratio of agricultural lands and forests with some conversion between them. The next table summarizes land use patterns of LWC in 1995 and 1998. Area figures by major land use were calculated through computer processing based on the land use maps in Figures 2.5.1 and 2.5.2. According to these land use data, the total amount of forests, water bodies and agricultural lands has been decreased while wetlands have been added in the last several years. Although these look quite minor land use changes (less than 2 % of the total LWC area), increase of the wetlands implies natural succession from the idle fish ponds and inundated agricultural/forestry lands.
2-24 Land Use Pattern in LWC in 1995 and 1998 (Unit: km2) Land use Forests Wetlands Water Bodies Agricultural Total lands Year Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % 1995 381 47 94 12 101 12 238 29 814 100 1998 379 47 108 13 94 12 233 28 814 100 Change -2 - +14 - -7 - -5 - 0 -
(3) Relation with socioeconomy in LWC The near industrial centers such as Valmiera, Jekabpils, Daugvpils and Riga are still a long distance from LWC so that forest and agricultural lands prevail with small population density and without severe industrial impacts. Agricultural pollution on water and soil has decreased during the last years because of the increase of uncultivated area. A part of the existing forests is forbidden to use for economical activities because they are located within the restricted areas with objects of scientific resources. Such socioeconomic and geographical situation has facilitated the preservation of clean and healthy environment, with little urbanization. Therefore, there are no urgent problems connected with environmental degradation. Only 50~60 % of the arable land is now under actual agricultural activities in the four districts surrounding LWC. This high proportion of idle land results partially from the fact that there are large areas of low-quality boggy and marshy soils with peat. The poor soils had been forced into production before independence and parts have never come back into agricultural production. The share of acid soils requiring liming has increased, and some soils also contain insufficient natural phosphorus. The improvement of soil requires big investments. In addition, improvement of drainage situation is necessary for some arable lands. For instance of Balvi district with the drained land occupying 66% of the total district area, ratios of the drained lands in a good technical condition, on average, and unsatisfactory are 68 %, 15% and 17%, respectively. Such situation of agricultural land use is also because of privatization and the existing economic conditions such as high production costs, low purchase prices, and market shrinkage reflecting the economic depression at the national level after its independence. This results in spread of weeds or overgrowing with shrub. It causes the decline of half- artificial meadow, which is an important biotope for many rare wild species. There is another possibility of land use change of LWC. The state energy program is supposed to increasingly utilize local resources suitable for heating. It will cause the increase of peat mining, which probably results in the decrease of the swamp area in LWC. Thus, land use pattern in and around LWC has been and will be significantly affected by the national and local socioeconomic conditions. Pollution problem on the local environment has become much less at present compared with the Russian times when in- land fishery and agricultural activities were at full scale inputting a lot of harmful chemical and organic matters. This implies that the local environment will be re-degraded as the primary industry activities in the former polluting manner are repeated, when the Latvian
2-25 economy gets prosperous in the future. In this sense, today’s economic recession period is a good opportunity to formulate and commence an environment-cum-development program which can conserve important ecosystem of LWC even during the economic prosperity times.
2.5.2 Constraints on Land Use
(1) Contradictions in land use planning between national and local levels Preparation of land use plans in local municipalities has begun and is rapidly expanding in Latvia. Land use or spatial planning at the national level is also carried out at the moment. But there arises contradictions in the local-level and national-level land use planning, and they can not be solved only at local municipal levels. In the future these contradictions may cause unforeseen consequences and hinder a harmonious and sustainable development of LWC as well.
(2) Lack of land use coordination among different sectors At present the national directions in land use are not clearly formulated. Territories of state interests are marked with the aid of sector development plans and programs or separate legislation acts. Such examples are specially protected nature areas, cultural monuments of national significance, minerals of national significance, and free economic zones. The existing legislation acts contain no united approach to land use conflicts, so that land use is directly or indirectly regulated by a number of different legislation acts which are not connected with each other. Individual sector development plans or programs do not pay enough attention to mutual connection from the spatial point of view, contradicting potentials and goals of local municipalities including LWC.
(3) Balance of interests of local stakeholders In contrast with the public lands belonging to the state or local municipalities, change of private land owned by individuals or private sectors will bring sensitive problems to local private land owners. It will happen especially when the private lands include areas of national significance or of mutual interests such as objectives of infrastructure, objects of environmental protection, and protected nature area. LWC includes tenureship of private land which is proposed to be utilized in environmentally friendly manners, because of ecological importance there. Therefore, it is essential to take appropriate means to balance all local stakeholders’ interests for obtaining active agreement and participation of the owners in following an established land use plan, such as substitute land, financial compensation, and special technical support for conservation technology.
2.5.3 Land Tenure and Privatization Land tenure is an important socio-economic factor which greatly affects the local residents’ decision regarding land use, land conservation, and rural development.
2-26 Individuals make their own decisions about how land is to be used. Security of ownership or the right to use the land and hand it on to children is a strong incentive to husband the soil, plant trees and so on. Clarification, adjudication and registration of land tenure is a crucial basis for planned land use. In Latvia, the second turn of land reform is going on, i.e. privatization of land. According to the State Land Service data, the local Land Commissions had renewed land ownership to 116,300 former owners by December 1997, and public land had been newly sold to 106,000 citizens. A total of 158,000 land properties were registered in the Land Cadastre Center. The land use changes in rural areas of Latvia are connected with land reform and formation of new peasantry. The total number of land claims reflects the situation before World War II. There are more claims in localities where the number of farms was bigger. Out of the total number of farms, 64.8 % are small farms (2 ~ 10 ha) and only 0.2 % of farms are those larger than 100 ha. Small farms are mostly located in the central part of Latvia such as Riga and Jelgava districts, and in remote regions of Kurzeme and Latgale. In LWC, agricultural products have been decreased rapidly in association with land privatization after the independence, and ownership of the fishery area has been often claimed. It has destroyed large scale farms, making the local unemployment rate higher. There is no statistical data on land ownership only for LWC. Ownership components for the whole LWC are measured as below, using GIS with the land registered maps manually prepared by the Offices of Land Registered Service of Madona, Balvi, Gulbene and Rezekne districts. More than 60 % of the whole LWC is owned by the state (57 %) and the townships (7 %), while 36 % belongs to private persons. Many land use conflicts cannot be simply resolved because there are basic differences in goals and vested interests. This is why implementation of a land use plan requires the authority of government, which can use incentives such as subsidies, tax incentives, prestigious awards and the like, and disincentives including regulations, taxes and penalties, to bring about changes in land use. Moreover, in case some private land within LWC is proposed to be conserved, the following measures for smooth land use change should be duly considered: - Dissemination on importance of the conserved area in LWC to obtain understanding and cooperation of the private land owners, - Conclusion on conservation agreement for the conserved area with the private land owners, and - Public purchase of the conserved area from, or compensation for the lost income from the conserved area to the private land owners.
2-27 Land Tenure Component within LWC (Unit: km2) District Township/Town Total Area in LWC State Land Township Land Private Land Rezekne Gaigalava 94 70 7 17 Nagli 133 106 7 20 Deksare 21 14 1 6 Balvi Rugaji 50 21 0 29 Lazdukalns 80 32 22 26 Berzpils 59 20 14 25 Madona Lubana town 2 0 0 2 Varaklani 12 3 1 8 Indrani 125 86 0 39 Osupe 134 67 1 66 Barkava 54 23 2 29 Murmastiene 38 14 0 24 Gulbene Dauksti 12 12 0 0 Total 814 468 55 291 % in Total 100 57 7 36 Source: Offices of Land Registered Service of Madona, Balvi, Gulbene and Rezekne Districts, 1999/2000
2.5.4 Present Land Use Plan The Law on Spatial Development Planning of Latvia was adopted in October 1998. According to this new law, land use planning in Latvia is to be carried out, as such: 1) Local governments of districts, state cities, towns, and townships should prepare land use plans of their administrative areas; 2) Land use plans of higher level should be observed when producing the plans of lower levels; and 3) Land use plans of regional and local municipal levels should be prepared in accordance with the relevant development plans. Land use plans for LWC, therefore, has to observe and coordinate with the directions and strategies mentioned in the existing national-level, regional-level district-level and township-level plans. There is no land use plan exclusively for LWC, while land use concept of Latgale region and land use plans of Osupe and Murmastiene townships have been drafted. In LWC, individual regulations on protection and management have been recently prepared for 3 out of 11 nature protection areas designated by the state. These regulations implicate land use directions with a zoning map attached for the protection areas from the environmental point of view.
2-28 Table 2.1.1 Four Districts' Budget and Expenditure between 1995 and 1997
(Unit : LVL 1,000) Government Budget (Revenue) Government Expenditure District/ Tax Non-tax Sub- Target Mutual Total Per Financing Social Health Edu- Culture Admini- Others Total Per Balance year Revenue Revenue sidies Subsidies Accounts Capita of Security Care cation stration Capita (LVL) Economy (LVL) Rezekne 1995 ------87 ------84 - 1996 1,112 53 2,633 (total of 3 items) 3,798 90 149 433 785 1,372 211 667 131 3,748 89 50 (%) 29 1 69 (total of 3 items) 100 - 4 12 21 37 6 18 3 100 - - 1997 1,178 329 1,589 1,708 120 4,924 117 341 456 129 2,865 209 794 205 4,999 119 -75 (%) 24 7 32 35 2 100 - 7 9 3 57 4 16 4 100 - - Balvi 1995 ------96 ------95 - 1996 1,139 86 1,813 (total of 3 items) 3,038 94 338 383 595 919 206 508 93 3,042 94 -4 (%) 37 3 60 (total of 3 items) 100 - 11 13 20 30 7 17 3 100 - - 1997 1,143 474 1,255 1,235 103 4,210 134 392 494 102 2,208 235 555 136 4,122 131 88 (%) 27 11 30 29 2 100 - 10 12 2 54 6 13 3 100 - - Madona 1995 ------92 ------88 - 1996 2,140 56 2,157 (total of 3 items) 4,353 90 344 492 1,085 1,446 334 644 167 4,512 93 -159 (%) 49 1 50 (total of 3 items) 100 - 8 11 24 32 7 14 4 100 - - 1997 2,127 1,261 1,372 1,810 159 6,729 141 718 508 869 3,196 421 738 275 6,725 141 4 (%) 32 19 20 27 2 100 - 11 8 13 48 6 11 4 100 - - Gulbene 1995 ------107 ------108 - 1996 1,499 84 1,551 (total of 3 items) 3,134 106 515 415 596 879 250 485 132 3,272 111 -138 (%) 48 3 49 (total of 3 items) 100 - 16 13 18 27 8 15 4 100 - - 1997 1,420 661 727 940 76 3,824 131 1,253 164 157 1,939 318 554 209 4,594 157 -770 (%) 37 17 19 25 2 100 - 27 4 3 42 7 12 5 100 - - National 1996 ------104 ------106 - Total 1997 180,230 39,357 32,828 74,590 4,227 331,232 135 66,526 26,536 8,642 145,539 16,329 32,790 39,978 336,340 137 -5,108 (%) 54 12 10 23 1 100 - 20 8 3 43 5 10 12 100 - - Sources : Towns and Civil Parishes in the Administrative Districts of Latvia, Part 1 & 2, CSB, 1998 Administrative Districts and Major Cities of Latvia, CSB, 1998
Table 2.1.2 Local Budget and Expenditure in 1996, Excluding District Budget
(Unit : LVL 1,000) District/ Government Budget (Revenue) Government Expenditure Town/ Tax Non-tax Subsidies Total Per Financing Social Health Edu- Cul- Admini- Others Total Per Balance Township Revenue Revenue Capita of Security Care cation ture stration Capita (LVL) Economy (LVL) Rezekne 984 42 1,213 2,239 53 142 309 4 1,003 182 473 123 2,236 53 3 Gaigalava 25 3 36 64 51 3 8 0 32 6 14 0 63 51 1 Nagli 18 0 19 37 53 0 1 0 18 4 11 1 35 50 2 Deksare 16 0 36 52 52 1 14 0 17 3 15 0 50 50 2 Balvi 1,000 80 777 1,857 57 336 228 18 636 136 418 89 1,861 57 -4 Rugaji 38 1 69 108 55 3 24 6 44 6 26 0 109 55 -1 Lazdukalns 17 1 48 66 50 2 12 4 28 4 16 2 68 51 -2 Berzpils 16 0 44 60 48 0 11 2 25 3 15 3 59 47 1 Madona 1,880 49 855 2,784 58 325 332 27 1,312 243 493 138 2,870 59 -86 Lubana Town 121 4 17 142 65 22 7 0 59 14 26 22 150 68 -8 Varaklani 26 0 29 55 51 0 20 1 18 3 9 2 53 49 2 Indrani 51 0 30 81 65 2 28 0 26 6 17 3 82 66 -1 Osupe 36 2 41 79 48 4 24 1 28 6 16 2 81 49 -2 Barkava 45 4 45 94 50 2 10 0 59 9 13 2 95 50 -1 Murmastiene 18 8 33 59 56 0 19 0 16 4 20 1 60 57 -1 Gulbene 1,314 76 556 1,946 66 501 154 65 727 133 376 129 2,085 70 -139 Dauksti 35 1 41 77 54 2 6 4 26 20 16 0 74 52 3 Total of 13 462 24 488 974 - 41 184 18 396 88 214 38 979 - -5 Townships (%) 47 2 50 100 - 4 19 2 40 9 22 4 100 - - Source : Towns and Civil Parishes in the Administrative Districts of Latvia, Part 1 & 2, CSB, 1998
2-29 Table 2.3.1 Recent Planned and Realized Projects funded by LEPF
Name of Project Fund (LVL) Schedule Rezekne REB in charge 1) Reconstruction of sewage water facilities of Stolerova na 1999 - township 2) Stage of clearing facilities reconstruction in Ludza 42,255 completed in 1998 3) Garbare river source improvement 1,570 completed in 1998 4) Fasterning polder dam of Liela Ludza lake 742 completed in 1998 5) Reconstruction project of rain sewerage net, sewage 4,000 not yet started ditches, and through flow in Ludza 6) Organization of modern waste management system in 5 % of total cost not yet started Aluksne, Balvi, and Gulbene districts 7) Water supply development in Balvi(800+) 30 % of total 1998 - cost Madona REB in charge 8) Reconstruction of treatment facility in Ranka township 35,000 completed in 1998 9) Treatment of oil pollution in Aizkraukle concrete na na factory 10) Treatment facilities of sewage waters in Aizkraukle na na district 11) Protection plan of big dormouse na na 12) Plan of Skriveri dendrology park na na 13) Children camp 'taka' na na 14) Reconstruction of the heating complex in Madona na na 15) Ecological education center in Madona na na na: data is not available. Source: Environmental Review of 1998, Rezekne REB, 1999 and Environmental Review of 1998, Madona REB, 1999
2-30 Rezekne District Council
Chairman
Executive - Financial Committee Director - Sports Committee - Development Plan Committee Bookkeeping Dept. - Health and Social Issues Committee
Personnel Dept. - Latvian Language Examination Committee - Former Property Issue Committee Planning Dept. - Deported People Applications Committee - Latvian Army Soldiers Committee Maintenance Dept. - Administrative Committee - Road Maintenance Committee - Public Transportation Subsidy Committee Cultural Dept. - Public Transportation Management Committee - Election Committee Infrastructure Dept. - Special Issue Commissions
Social Issues Dept. Orphan’s House
Health Care Dept. Old People’s House
Education Dept. Malta Hospital
Vilani Hospital Sports Dept. Sickness Insurance Fund
Civil Defense Dept. Adults in Service Training
Boarding School Lawyer Special Boarding School
Secretary
Registry Office
Source: Rezekne District Council, 1999 Figure 2.1.1 Organizational Structure of the Rezekne District Council Administrative Office
Barkava Township Council
Financial Culture and Administration Land Inspection and Social Education Committee Commission Commission Committee Committee
Council Chairman
Leader of Leader of Leader of Director of Education Culture Old People’s Utility Institution Institution House Services
Board Secretary Bookkeeper Register Dept. Land Service Source: Barkava Township in Madona District, 1999 Figure 2.1.2 Organizational Structure of Barkava Township Council
2-31 Extrabudgetary Funds State Budget Grant Loan such as LEPF
Public Investment Programme (PIP)
Energy Project Transport Project Environmental Project
Ministry Investment State Subsidies Projects/Programs: to Municipalities - Hazardous waste for management program Environmental - Solid waste Projects management - Hydrometeorological sector projects - Environmental data centre project
Source: Arranged from “Environmental and Sustainable Development Projects in Latvia, MEPRD, 1998”
Figure 2.3.1 Money Flow on PIP
Natural Resources Tax
Extraction charge of Pollution charge Penalty charge Product charge natural resources (below the limits) (exceed the limits) (Products harmful for the environment)
60 % 40 % 100 %
Special Municipalities Special State Environmental Environmental Budget Budget (SSEB) (SMEB)
Latvian Municipalities Grants for Environmental Environmental Protection Fund Protection (LEPF)
28 %
Latvian EU PHARE Soft Loans for Environmental Environmental Investment Fund NEFCO Protection (LEIF)
Source: Rearranged from “Environmental and Sustainable Development Projects in Latvia (MEPRD, 1998)” and “Environmental
Figure 2.3.2 Money Flow on LEPF and LEIF
2-32 N
LEGEND Rugaji Main road Gulbene River Daukstu 0 1 2 3 4 5 km Lake Study area
Urban and industrial areas Bogs / marshes Forests Natural grasslands Uncultivated agricultural lands Indrani Agricultural lands
Lazdukalns
Balvi
Madona Lubana
Berzpils
Osupe
Fish pond
Gaigalava
Barkava Lake Lubana
Rezekne
Nagli
Fish Fish pond pond
Murmastiene
Deksares
Varaklani
Figure 2.5.1 Land Use in LWC as of 1998 The Study on Environmental Management Plan for Lubana Wetland Complex in the Republic of Latvia JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY 2-33 LEGEND
N
LEGEND Rugaji
Main road Gulbene River Daukstu 0 1 2 3 4 5 km Lake Study area
Urban area and industrial Bogs / marshes Forests Natural Grasslands Uncultivated agricultural lands Indrani Agricultural lands
Lazdukalns
Madona Balvi
Lubana
Berzpils
Osupe
Fish pond Gaigalava
Barkava Lake Lubana
Rezekne
Nagli
Fish pond
Fish pond
Murmastiene
Deksares
Varaklani
Figure 2.5.2 Land Use in LWC as of 1995 The Study on Environmental Management Plan for Lubana Wetland Complex in the Republic of Latvia JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY 2-34