Environmental assessment report of the Interreg 2021-2027 South-East – Programme

President ______Mr. Nikolay Matsukov

St-Petersburg 2021

Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland-Russia programme Environmental report Brukhanov A.U., Matsukov N.N., Vorobyeva E.A., Vasilev E.V., Oblomkova N.S.

SPA ISH

Version 30 June 2021

2

The Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland - Russia Programme is undergoing a strategic environmental assessment (SEA). The SEA procedure includes several phases: determination of the scope of the environmental assessment, preparation of an environmental report, which includes an assessment of risks from the implementation of the program, consultations / public hearings with environmental authorities and other stakeholders on the content of the environmental report, preparation of the SEA report based on the results of consultations / public hearings. One of the main parts of the SEA is the assessment of possible environmental risks and consequences during the implementation of the program. The task of the experts preparing the report is to assess how ecologically important problems for the region are reflected in the preparation of the program and how they will be taken into account in its further implementation. Such an assessment and the final recommendations of the SEA are extremely relevant, as they are taken into account when developing the final version of the program.

3

Content Introduction ...... 5 1.1. The SEA process ...... 6 1.2. Identification of nature protection authorities in the programme area in the Russian Federation ...... 7 1.3 The legislation regarding SEA for CBC 2021-2027 Programme ...... 9 1.4. Uncertainties and unexpected factors ...... 10 2.Brief description of the Programme ...... 11 2.1. Relations to other relevant programmes and strategies ...... 12 3. Existing environmental problems and trends ...... 17 3.1. Social and economic development trends in St Petersburg and the Leningrad region ...... 17 3.2. Environmental trends ...... 17 3.3. Environmental risks in the area covered by the Programme ...... 19 3.3.1. Environmental conditions in the Russian part of the area covered by the Programme .... 19 3.4. Environmental impact from the Programme implementation ...... 30 3.5. Environmental risk assessment matrix ...... 32 3.6. Consequences of the proposed programme ...... 42 4. Comparing the alternatives ...... 46 5. Recommendations ...... 47 6. Monitoring ...... 47 Annex 1 ...... 48

4

Introduction The EU territorial cooperation programme (Interreg) is the instrument of cohesion policy designed to address problems and challenges that transcend national boundaries and require common solutions. The Interreg 2021-2021 South-East Finland-Russia Programme will be funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI), Finland and Russia. The Programme supports sustainable development of the Programme area and builds mutual trust in the regions. It gives opportunities for local communities to provide a higher level of environmental protection and integration of environmental aspects into development plans and programmes to achieve sustainability. A significant environmental effect will be produced in the Programme within the Programme implementation period and afterwards. It is the reason for the Managing Authority and of the Programme and national authorities to apply to carry out a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) for the Programme. The St. Petersburg regional public organization "Association of Agricultural Engineers - SPA ISH" has won the tender for the SEA for the Russian part of the program. Currently, the national legislation of the Russian Federation uses the concept of EIA (environmental impact assessment). The purpose of the EIA is to identify, analyse and include direct, indirect and other effects of environmental impact of the planned economic and other activities in order to make a decision on the possibility or impossibility of its implementation (Article 1 No. 7-ФЗ "On Environmental Protection"). The Regulation of EIA was approved by the Order of the State Committee for Environmental Protection dated May 16, 2000, No. 372, from September 1, 2021, to September 1, 2027, new requirements for the materials of environmental impact assessment will be in force. SEA definitely has a broader scope than EIA. The principles of state policy in the field of the environmental development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030 contain articles on the need for a regulatory framework for the implementation and application of SEA. By Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 176 dated April 19, 2017, the Environmental Safety Strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025 was approved. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of programs for the development of Russian regions is named in it as one of the main mechanisms for the implementation of a state environmental policy. In carrying out this expert assessment, the contractor was guided by the national legislation in terms of EIA, as well as methodological approaches and practical examples of SEA development presented in the Russian Federation.

5

1.1. The SEA process The purpose of defining the scope of the SEA is to focus on the environmental effects that are the most relevant for the programme. Scoping includes the geographical area and time scale for the assessment. The scope shall also propose reasonable alternatives on environmental effects to the proposed programme that will be assessed in the SEA report. The SEA process will include two stages: Scoping of the SEA; Preparation of the Environmental report. Consultations with environmental authorities and the public are expected within both stages of the SEA. The scoping as a first stage of the environmental assessment is necessary to focus on the environmental impact of the programme implementation. The existing documentation and the draft Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland-Russia Programme documents have been reviewed to prepare the scoping of the SEA report. Geographically, the environmental assessment is limited to the programme area of the Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme area, see Fig. 1. The timeframe for the assessment is until 2030 because the main strategical documents for the development of the territory have have been elaborated up to that year. The structure of the SEA will be established in accordance with the overall goals (Policy objectives, Interreg Specific Objectives, and specific objectives) of the Programme and contains following items:

 Waste, hazardous substances  Soil and land use  Water (the sea, fresh water, groundwater)  Air pollution  Climate change  Biodiversity (flora, fauna, forests, ecosystems, protected areas)  Population and health (including gender issues)

6

1.2. Identification of nature protection authorities in the programme area in the Russian Federation

An important phase is to approach the relevant official bodies and stakeholders.

Federal Authorities 1. The North-Western Department of Rosprirodnadzor – provision of state environmental supervision, issuing of licenses on waste processing; issuing of waste disposal limits; determination of norms of emissions into the atmosphere or bodies of water; approval of toxic waste profiles; administration of payments for environmental damage; collection of statistical reports. State environmental supervision (control) over the activities that cause harm to the environment or those that shall be supervised at a federal level. 2. St-Petersburg and the Leningrad region offices of The Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare (Rospotrebnadzor St-Petersburg; Rospotrebnadzor Leningrad region) – supervision and control in the area of responsibility; sanitary and epidemiological audits of land use projects, projects of emissions limit norms, construction and development projects, waste disposal projects. 3. North-West office of the Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Supervision (Rostekhnadzor) - state control and supervision in the field of industrial safety, safety of hydrotechnical objects, supervision of construction, energy safety, issuing licenses for the operation of explosive objects, operation of facilities of harmful chemical industry, storage and use of explosive industrial materials, auditing of industrial safety. 4. State Federal Enterprise Glavgocexpertiza of Russia (North-West branch) - audit of project documentation of facilities, construction projects, renovation, capital repair Regional Authorities St-Petersburg 1. Committee of environmental protection, nature use, and ecological safety of St-Petersburg The Committee implements state policy in the field of nature management, environmental protection and environmental safety. Governmental environmental audit, issuing atmospheric emission permits, approval of terms of reference for waste disposal, signing contracts for water use. State environmental supervision (control) of facilities that have a negative impact on the environment but are not regulated federally. 2. Committee on urban improvement of St-Petersburg. The Committee ensures the implementation of state policy and implements state management in the field of landscaping garden and park, forestry and other landscaping facilities, maintenance of regional roads in St. Petersburg, freight road transport, management of production and consumption waste on the territory of St. Petersburg

7

3. State construction supervision and audit service of St-Petersburg – auditing of project documentation and engineering surveys; issuing permits for construction, reconstruction, renovation of buildings (apart from private residential buildings), state supervision of construction, issuing building exploitation permits. The Leningrad region 1. Committee for natural resources State environmental audit, issuing atmospheric emission permits, approval of terms of reference for waste disposal, signing contracts for water use. State environmental supervision (control) of facilities that have a negative impact of the environment but are not regulated federally. 2. Committee for state environmental supervising State environmental supervision (control) of facilities that have a negative impact on the environment but are not regulated federally. 3. Committee for state construction supervision and audit service of the Leningrad region Auditing of project documentation and engineering surveys; issuing permits for construction, reconstruction, renovation of buildings (apart from private residential buildings), state supervision of construction, issuing building exploitation permits. The list of other stakeholders who should be invited for the consultation is in Annex 1.

8

1.3 The legislation regarding SEA for CBC 2021-2027 Programme

Experts mainly used for the SEA Directive EU: - Directive number 2001/42/EU - the rules and procedures of SEA; - Directive number 2003/4 / EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28.01 2003 on public access to environmental information; - Regulation (EU) № 1367/2006 of the European parliament and of the Council of 06.09.2006 On the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters to community institutions and bodies (the Russian Federation didn’t sign the Aarhus Convention). The Russian Federation in 1991, signed a Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (ESPO Convention), but has not ratified it. In 2003, the Protocol on Strategic Assessment to the ESPO Convention was adopted (SEA Protocol), which came into force in 2010, but Russia has not joined yet. In 2011, the list of orders of the President of the Russian Federation was signed, according to which it was mandated to ratify the ESPO Convention and the SEA Protocol. The Principles of State Policy in the field of the environmental development of the Russian Federation for the period through 2030 contains articles regarding the need for a regulatory framework for the introduction and application of SEA. By order of the President of the Russian Federation by 19.04.2017 № 176 , the Strategy of Environmental Safety of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025 was approved. The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of programs for the development of Russian regions is named in it as one of the main mechanisms for the implementation of the state's environmental policy. However, the ratification of the aforementioned international agreements has not yet taken place. Nevertheless, certain provisions of international documents are consistently included in the national legislation. In particular, on 09.03.21, amendments were made to the Federal Law "On Environmental Protection", significantly expanding public access to environmental information. Currently, the national legislation of the Russian Federation uses the concept of EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment). The objective of the EIA is to identify, analyse, and include direct, indirect and other effects of the environmental impact of the planned economic and other activities, to make a decision on the possibility or impossibility of its implementation (Article 1 №7-FZ "On Environmental Protection"). The Regulation of EIA was approved by the Order of the State Committee for Environmental Protection dated May 16, 2000, No. 372, and from September 1, 2021, to September 1, 2027, new requirements for the materials of environmental impact assessment will be in force.

9

SEA definitely has a wider range of coverage than the EIA. Environmental Impact Assessment is carried out mainly for the objects of environmental expertise specified in the Federal Law on Environmental Expertise (23.11.1995 No. 174-FZ). For other capital construction projects, a state examination of the project documentation is carried out, including an assessment of the adequacy of the environmental measures developed within the project. Russian environmental legislation is constantly changing and improving.

1.4. Uncertainties and unexpected factors

In case of events of force majeure, such as Acts of God or the adoption of prohibitive legislation, the cross-border cooperation can be hampered or terminated. It is important to foresee the ongoing process of change of the Russian environmental legislation. Consequently, it is important to allow corrections in the Programme documents as it progresses, as well as in decision making regarding the projects.

10

2.Brief description of the Programme The Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme includes the following geographical area (see figure 1): St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region on the Russian part and the South Karelia, South- Savo and Kymenlaakso Regions on the Finland part.

Figure 1. Map of the Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme area The Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme includes the following geographical area (see figure 1): St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region on the Russian part and South Karelia, South-Savo and Kymenlaakso on the Finland part. Several policy objectives (PO), Interreg Specific Objectives (ISO) and specific objectives (SO) were determined within the Programme:

PO1 PO2 PO3 ISO1 A smarter Europe A greener low- A more connected Europe A better cooperation carbon Europe governance for Europe

SO (i) Enhancing SO (iv) Promoting SO (iii) Developing and SO (i) Institutional research and climate change enhancing a sustainable, capacity of public innovation capacities adaptation, risk climate resilient, intelligent authorities, in and the uptake of prevention and and intermodal national, particular those advanced disaster resilience, regional and local mobility, mandated to manage a technologies, including improved access to specific territory, TEN-T and cross-border and of stakeholders, mobility SO (iii) Enhancing SO (vi) Promoting the sustainable growth transition to a and competitiveness circular economy of SMEs and job creation in SMEs, including by productive investments 11

SO (vii) Enhancing SO (iii) People-to- nature protection people action for and biodiversity, increased trust green infrastructure in particular in the urban environment, and reducing pollution Indicative financial allocation between the objectives 25% 35% 25% 15% The beneficiaries of the Programme on the Russian and Finnish sides are: - Authorities (Federal and Regional) - Municipalities - Business sector (huge and SME) - Scientific educational and developing organizations - NGO, social services providers

2.1. Relations to other relevant programmes and strategies

The Programme has a significant synergy with the global, national federal and regional programmes. 2.1.1 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015. The document has established 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are an urgent call for action by all countries in a global partnership. The SDGs thematic issues include water, energy, climate, oceans, urbanization, transport, science and technology. In order to make the 2030 Agenda a reality, broad ownership of the SDGs must translate into a strong commitment by all stakeholders to implement the global goals. The programme policy and specific objectives present a good example of the localization of the Strategic Development Goals (SDG) for the Programme area. 2.1.2 Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region: EUSBSR Roadmap 2020–2030 Focus for the next 10 years on -Circular economy, -Low-carbon energy systems and green transport, as well as functioning public services, should be prioritized - Baltic Sea Region has a potential to become the world leader in green transition 2.1.3. HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan

12

Healthy Baltic Sea throw the mitigation of the negative impact from the catchment area (discharges from point and diffuse sources), hazardous substances, adaptation to the climate change, protect biodiversity in the Baltic Sea region. 2.1.4 Environmental Doctrine of the Russian Federation The strategical goals of the state environmental policy are: - protection of nature ecosystems (their functions for sustainable development of a society, - increasing of wellbeing, - enhancing of a public health and demography situation, - environmental safety of the country. 2.1.5. Fundamentals of state policy in the field of environmental development in Russia for the period up to 2030 The document determines the priorities for the national programmes. - sustainable development of the economy, - environmental wellbeing conservation, - biodiversity and nature resources conservation for future generations, - implementation of the human right to a healthy environment, strengthening the rule of law in the field of environmental protection, - ensuring environmental safety. 2.1.6. Decree on the national development goals of Russia until 2030 The document is a basis for the development of the national projects and establishing the national environmental goals: - enhance waste management; - decrease the negative pollution on the environment and health; - dissolution of the most hazardous sites and ecological improvement of water bodies 2.1.7. National project “Ecology” (duration till 2024) This national project gathered all activities and projects that are implemented to enhance the environmental quality and financed by the federal budget. Main goals of the national project related to the Programme area: - complex system of waste management; - enhancing drinking water quality; - conservation of unique water bodies - forest protection.

13

2.1.8. Spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025 Objectives of the Strategy: -Elimination of infrastructural restrictions, increasing the availability and quality of trunk transport, energy, information and telecommunications infrastructure. -Strengthening interregional cooperation and the coordination of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation within the framework of macroregions. -Increasing the sustainability of the national settlement system through the socio-economic development of cities and rural areas. - Ensuring the improvement of the environment, preservation and restoration of the biological diversity of the Russian Federation, cultural landscapes and reduction of negative consequences from climate change. - Ensuring the national security of the Russian Federation through the socio-economic development of geostrategic territories. 2.1.9 Strategy of social and economic development of St. Petersburg for the period up to 2035 Main goal of the Strategy until 2035 - ensuring improvement in the quality of life of citizens on the basis of ensuring sustainable economic growth by using the results of innovative and technological activities and increasing the global competitiveness of St. Petersburg. The priority of the Strategy: 1. Priority " City of innovation". 2. Priority "Comfortable City". 3. Priority "Open City". 2.1.10. State program of St. Petersburg "Improvement of public services and environmental protection in St. Petersburg"(duration till 2024) The main priorities in the environmental field are: - prevention of pollution of all components of the environment; - elimination of accumulated harm to the environment; - ensuring the environmental safety of hydraulic structures and protecting territories from hazardous natural phenomena; - ensuring the efficient operation of environmental emergency services on land and offshore; - conservation of natural complexes, objects of flora and fauna through the development of a network of specially protected natural areas; - development of a regional environmental monitoring system; - ensuring the functioning of the state information system in the field of environmental protection "Ecological passport of St. Petersburg";

14

- ensuring access of all target groups to information on the state of the environment, environmental education and the formation of an ecological culture of the population in St. Petersburg. 2.1.11 St-Petersburg environmental policy until 2030 - the Environmental Policy defines a strategic goal in the field of environmental protection, sustainable use of natural resources and ensuring environmental safety. - achievement of the strategic goal of the Environmental Policy is ensured by solving the following main objectives: - development of a management system in the field of environmental protection, nature management and environmental safety; - prevention and reduction of the negative impact on the environment; - restoration of disturbed natural ecological systems, compensation for environmental damage and elimination of environmental damage; - preservation of the environment, natural ecological systems, objects of flora and fauna, including green spaces; specially regional protected areas in St. Petersburg; - ensuring environmental safety; - development of economic incentives for environmental protection and environmental safety; - formation of the ecological culture of the population of St. Petersburg; - ensuring the effective participation of citizens, commercial and non-commercial organizations in solving issues related to environmental protection, rational use of natural resources and ensuring environmental safety; - development of international cooperation in the field of environmental protection and environmental safety. 2.1.12. Strategy of socio-economic development of the Leningrad region until 2030 - the strategic goal of the Leningrad region is to improve the level and quality of life of the population based on the implementation of the following priorities: - increase in fertility. - reduction in mortality from cancer and cardiovascular diseases. - increase in the duration of a healthy life. - increasing the volume of non-resource non-energy exports. - ensuring sustainable growth rates of agricultural production. - growth in the quality of transport services for the population. - improving the quality of the urban environment. - increasing the tourist flow by improving the quality of services in the field of tourism.

2.1.13 State Program of the Leningrad region "Environmental Protection of the Leningrad region" The main objectives of the state programme:

15

- Conservation and widening of the protected area of the Leningrad region; - Development of the monitoring system for the environment; - Reduction in discharges of pollution into the air; - Effective waste management.

16

3. Existing environmental problems and trends 3.1. Social and economic development trends in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region

Territorial development trends can be traced over 2014–2019, as no final statistics for 2020 have been published yet and, besides, COVID-19-related restrictions significantly distort long-term trends. St Petersburg and the Leningrad region are among the most densely populated regions in Russia, with the population constantly on the rise due to migrant inflows. There is a clear trend towards an increasing population density as territorial development is associated with the growth of urban agglomerations such as St Petersburg, , Sosnovy Bor etc. The region has a unique staff, research and education potential, which is in active progress. As far as research activities are concerned, there is a shift of focus from fundamental research to applied innovative projects. A number of federal government institutions and large companies affiliated with the federal government have moved to St Petersburg due to the highly qualified staff located there. St Petersburg is the largest hub of international cooperation in the North- West region in both business and humanitarian projects. This field is the key point of growth for St Petersburg. Given the region’s location near the border, foreign trade plays an essential role in its economy; over the last years, however, the scale of foreign trade operations has somehow diminished. Industrial output is on the increase in the regions covered by the Programme, while the level of agricultural production stays the same. Construction industry is rapidly growing.

3.2. Environmental trends Environmental conditions in the region remain rather favourable on the whole. Emissions from industrial enterprises are declining, although transport emissions are somehow increasing with the growth of the motor vehicle fleet and busy urban traffic. Elevated risk zones primarily include littoral areas, which are exposed to the most considerable technogenic impact from industrial infrastructure facilities and high recreational load. A critical problem is sanitary and biological contamination of small streams, which stems from a considerable wear of the water disposal systems. Despite a large scope of activities aimed at their recovery in the Leningrad region, no improvement has been observed so far. The problem of recreational overload in the woodlands located in the suburbs of urban agglomerations is getting worse. Starting from 2019, the household waste treatment system has undergone radical changes. Since the transformation process is not over yet, waste recovery and disposal are still a sensitive point. The most important trends of environmental legislation in Russia at present are

17

- cutting down the list of objects which are subject to state ecological review; - a radical change in environmental standards concerning the design and construction of facilities, methods for calculating harm to environmental components; - an obligation to eliminate the accumulated harm to the environment is fixed in normative documents; - in order to implement the right of citizens to a favourable environment, a procedure for creating forest park green belts has been determined; - requirements to the creation of systems for continuous automatic control of emissions and discharges of pollutants; - additional requirements were introduced in the field of environmental protection during the production, exploration, transportation and storage of hydrocarbon raw materials; - establishing the priority of national legislation (the Constitution of the Russian Federation); - expanding the list of environmental information published in the form of open data (including information on stationary sources of pollution, the mass of emissions and discharges of pollutants, measures to reduce the impact on the environment)

18

3.3. Environmental risks in the area covered by the Programme Current environmental risks in the Programme area are related to elevated man-made pressure on the environment. High population density in the region (St-Petersburg and the Leningrad region) leads to a rather considerable impact produced by economic activities on all environmental components. Major environmental pollution risks are associated with large utility enterprises. Critical factors increasing environmental pressure in the area in question include: - motor vehicle pollution (primarily in historical areas of St Petersburg); - intensive impact on the marine environment due to a clustering of industrial potential in littoral areas (port and oil port terminals in Vyborg, , Primorsk, Luga Bay, oil product pipeline routes and industrial enterprises) - rapid development of residential and commercial real estate in littoral areas, high construction rate in tandem with a significant wear on utility infrastructure facilities; - high risk of seawater pollution due to a high level of sea freight turnover (above all, the threat of accidental oil and oil product spills and discharge of bilge water)

3.3.1. Environmental conditions in the Russian part of the area covered by the Programme

This chapter was done on the base of information presented in the state report on the environmental situation in the Leningrad region in 2019, a state report on the environmental situation in St-Petersburg in 2019, Information on the state and prospects of using the mineral resource base of the Leningrad Region (from June 15, 2020), Statement on the state of the environment in the Leningrad Region for 2020. Atmospheric air St Petersburg In 2019, the level of air pollution in St Petersburg was qualified as being low according to the Integrated Pollution Index (IPI). Major contributors to air pollution in the city comprised nitrogen dioxide, ammonia, suspended matter, nitrogen oxide and ozone. The IPI value was the same in 2019, as in 2018. The nature and degree of air pollution are largely determined by the volume of pollutant emissions from fixed and moving sources. The annual amount of solid matter emissions dropped from 1.1 to 0.9 thousand tons, while the annual volume of sulphur oxide emissions remained the same. This trend confirms that the engines have become more environmentally friendly and the technical and overall condition of motor vehicles has improved.

19

Starting from 2008, pollutant emissions from fixed sources soared from 46.5 to 80.4 thousand tons, a trend that is in line with the industrial output growth over the same period. From 2017 to 2019 the total annual volume of emissions from fixed sources declined by 6.9 thousand tons. The total annual cumulative volume of emissions from fixed and moving (motor vehicles and railway transport) sources rose by 37 %, from 398.6 to 547.5 thousand tons, during the period from 2008 to 2018. Emissions increased for all pollutants but SO2.

Leningrad region In 2019, the average level of atmospheric pollution did not exceed the maximum allowable concentration (MAC) for any pollutant in any of the stations. According to the IPI values, the level of air pollution is recognised as low in all the inhabited localities where monitoring was done. As the comparative analysis of atmospheric air monitoring data for 2016–2020 in Vyborg, , Kirishy and Luga showed, the level of pollution in these towns was qualified as low according to IPI. No cases of high or extremely high air pollution were registered from January to November 2020. These data confirm that the level of air pollution in the Leningrad region is within the acceptable limits. In 2019, as part of the ‘Evaluation of Transboundary Atmospheric Transmission of Pollutants to the Territory of the Leningrad region’, archival data regarding the transmission of heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants up to the present time were collected and analysed within the framework of the EMEP programme (co-operative programme for monitoring and evaluation of the long-range transmission of air pollutants in Europe – Protocol to the Convention on Long- Range Transboundary Air Pollution concerning the Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds or their Transboundary Fluxes, 1991) in the territory of the Leningrad region. As the results of the EMEP data processing showed, the approximate accumulative inflow of pollutants from the Republic of Finland to the Leningrad region amounted to 425 tons of sulphur compounds and 634 tons of nitrogen compounds, while the largest contributions from the Republic of included 2,852 tons of sulphur compounds and 535 tons of nitrogen compounds. GHG emission inventory in the Leningrad region revealed that carbon dioxide accounts for the largest share of such emissions (84%). Emissions of methane and nitrous oxide account for 11% and 5% of the total amount, respectively. The largest contributors to GHG emissions are energy companies (71.6%), with 7.4% coming from the industrial sector, 5.5% from agricultural sources, 11.6% from the land use sector and 3.8% from the waste sector.

Surface waters St Petersburg

20

Compared to 2018, the year 2019 saw the degree of water pollution in a number of waterbodies improve from polluted to slightly polluted (Bolshaya and Malaya Nevka, and Malaya Rivers) and from highly polluted to polluted ( River). Major environmental challenges in Neva Bay comprise eutrophication and contamination with hazardous substances. The dynamics of the rated average annual values indicate a reduction in the discharge of bulk phosphorus, total phosphorus and total nitrogen to Neva Bay with the flow of the Bolshaya Neva River and its arms. Toxicological studies carried out in 2019 in the revealed that copper, zinc and manganese concentrations in the water samples exceeded the MAC in the water of a waterbody used for fish farming. The overwhelming majority of samples revealed elevated MACs related to biochemical oxygen consumption over five days and concentrations of total phosphorus and nitrites. Slightly increased MACs were also sporadically detected for oil products, synthetic surfactants and ammoniacal nitrogen. Leningrad region In 2019, six episodes of high pollution were registered at three fixed stations: the Luga River – urban-type settlement Tolmachyovo (cadmium), the River – Naziya settlement (dissolved oxygen); the River – St Petersburg (four manganese-related episodes on the border between the city and the Leningrad region). The highest pollution levels, compared to other waterbodies, are observed in the Rivers , , , Chyornaya, Sharya, (near and ), Okhta, Luga and Lake Syabero. The quality of surface waters generally remains the same as in previous years (polluted). The waters in the Rivers Volchya, Tigoda and Chyornaya are the most contaminated. Watercourses located near the city border (Rivers , Slavyanka and Okhta) and next to the Krasny Bor dump site are also among the most polluted. Samples taken during the field work reveal the highest level of pollution in such rivers as , Lebyazhya, Lubya, Suyda and Kapralyev stream. In 2019, field hydrological, hydrochemical and hydrobiological surveys were made across a dedicated network of fifteen stations in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, located in the shallow area (west and north of the Kotlin Island), deep water area, and Luga Bays. Water quality was evaluated based on the following hydrochemical parameters: salinity, dissolved oxygen, % oxygen saturation, рН index, alkalinity, inorganic phosphorus, total phosphorus, ammonium ions, nitrates, nitrites and total nitrogen. Manganese is the major seawater pollutant among all the considered contaminants (heavy metals and organic pollution components). Elevated manganese content was registered in all the areas of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland: it was too high in 75% samples in Luga Bay, in 60% samples from the deep water area, in 50% samples from Koporye Bay and 33% samples from

21

the shallow area. MAC was exceeded 1.0 – 9.4 times. The highest manganese concentrations both in August – September 2019 and in previous years were observed in the seabed layers of the deep water stations, largely in the summer. This suggests natural reasons behind such elevations, which could be caused by the processes related to the natural degradation of aquatic animals and plant organisms since manganese is found in natural waters and the organs of aquatic organisms. Copper was discovered in the seawater of all the areas of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, but its content was within the rated limits. Pollutants such as zinc and cadmium were present in the Gulf waters in small concentrations. In all the samples their content was within the MAC limits. Concentration of total iron, mercury, total chromium and lead in the waters of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland was below the detection threshold in all the samples. The Gulf waters are slightly polluted with oil products, whose content stayed within the MAC limits and varied within a narrow range from 0.005 to 0.015 mg/l. In 2019, the highest concentrations of most pollutants (copper, cadmium, chromium, mercury and oil products) were observed in the shallow area. For several years (from 2015 to 2019), there was a clear trend towards increasing concentrations of pollutants (nickel, lead and cadmium) from station 26 in the southern part of the area to station 20 in the north. The concentration of oil products grew in 2019 compared to 2015–2017: in several stations, their concentration in the seafloor sediments reached the maximum value over the period in question. Four out of the eight samples taken from four areas in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland revealed elevated contamination of seafloor sediments with copper (35 mg/kg dry weight) in 2019. Elevated concentrations of cadmium (0.8 mg/kg dry weight) were found in 63% of all seafloor sediment samples in 2019. Most of the stations revealed a downward trend in cadmium concentration, compared to 2018. Seafloor sediments in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland were contaminated with zinc. In 2019, the zinc concentration was above the acceptable threshold (140 mg/kg dry weight) in one sample with seafloor sediments taken from Koporye Bay. In 2019, all of the stations but one reported a reduction in zinc concentration compared to 2018. Seafloor sediments from the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland contain such pollutants as nickel, lead, chromium and mercury, though within the MAC limits. The content of iron and manganese is also substantial, but no recommended allowable concentrations are available for these substances. The Gulf ecosystems can be characterised as being environmentally favourable according to their hydrobiological indicators.

Groundwaters St Petersburg

22

The territory of St Petersburg stands out as one of the highest loads on the geological environment in the Russian Federation. According to the Federal State Statistics Service, the population density within the city confines is more than 3,760 people per sq. km. The urban underground space is filled with underground structures of different purposes and depths (including metro tunnels, sewerage and conduits). St Petersburg has complex hydrogeological and geotechnical conditions owing to extended unstable waterlogged soils, highly susceptible to various technogenic factors. Major problems related to groundwaters include the possibility of urban flooding, land movement, reduced bearing capacity of soils and contamination of aquifers used as sources of potable water not only from the surface, but also from water supply communications and flowing through ‘hydrogeological windows’ (both natural and technogenic ones). Many architectural monuments of the eighteenth – nineteenth centuries in the historical centre of St Petersburg, including the St Isaac’s and Kazan Cathedrals, Church of the Saviour on Spilled Blood and others, were built on pile foundations (wooden oak or pine piles). Forced drawdowns of groundwaters during construction and repair works (such as the laying of communications, pumping from pits and trenches) can lead to desiccation of wooden piles, the development of bad decay processes, deterioration of bearing capacities and deformation of unique historical buildings and monuments. Interstratal groundwaters in St Petersburg are used for the water supply and their share in the urban water supply structure will continue to grow. Therefore, the protection of aquifers and systems used or potentially used in the water supply is a relevant environmental task. As far as development of the Ordovician carbonate rocks in Krasnoselsky and Pushkinsky District of St Petersburg is concerned, karst processes happen, leading to a creation of areas of loose soil, saucer-shaped depressions and, eventually, collapses associated with sinkholes and cavities (the city has sinkholes that are from 0.5 to 2 m deep and up to 15 m in diameter). Given the above, the city is in need of geological monitoring (of groundwaters and exogenic geological processes). Leningrad region Centralised household and potable water supply is sourced to the residents of the Leningrad region from ground and surface waters. In 2019, groundwaters accounted for 23% of the total household and potable water supply. In the mid-1960s, two regional cones of depression occurred within the confines of the Leningrad region. The first one encompasses the north-western part of the Leningrad region and is connected to the Vendian aquifer system. In 2019, maximum reduction was reported in settlements Vartemyagi, Chyornaya Rechka and Nizhnie Oselki (62.9–67.5 m), which accounted for 51% of the acceptable reduction (132.0 m). The second depression spans the western part of the Leningrad region (Kingiseppsky and Slantsevsky Districts) and is connected to the Lower Cambrian (Lomonosovsky) aquifer. The level

23

of groundwaters was restored over recent years. The deepest reduction, detected at water intake facilities in the towns of Slantsy, Kingisepp and , reached 22.6–32.5 m, accounting for 22–39% of the acceptable reduction (81–184 m). A large depression was formed in Podporozhye, where the Kotlin aquifer is in active use (5 water intake facilities). The reduction from the natural level made 19.6 m on the flank, or 16% of the acceptable reduction (124.9 m). In the rest of the territory, local cones of depression within the confines of water intake facilities are no more than 10–15 m in size. Groundwaters are generally in compliance with current regulatory requirements, except for iron, colour, manganese, total stiffness, chlorides, fluorides, specific total alpha radioactivity and radon. This is associated with natural particularities of the content of groundwaters. All large water intake facilities run water treatment plants to eliminate excesses of different components. No technogenic pollution was found at water intake facilities in the Leningrad region in 2019. The territory of the Leningrad region comprises areas of technogenic pollution, located in close proximity to sources of technogenic impact. Local in nature and variable over time, this pollution generally does not affect the quality of water used for domestic and drinking purposes. Industrial waste dump site Krasny Bor in of the Leningrad region (the settlement of Krasny Bor) is the largest toxic waste landfill in the north-west of Russia. It stopped accepting new waste in 2014. Preparation for conservation of this hazardous site is currently underway. In 2019, pollutants such as aluminium, iron, manganese, oil products, nickel, arsenic, fluorides, chlorides and others were detected in the groundwaters of the observation wells located in the territory of the dump site and linked to the Quaternary aquifer system, in 2019. In the wells, at a distance of 350 m from the dump site down the groundwater flow, the pollutant concentration either declines drastically down to 2-3 MAC or does not exceed the MAC, except for manganese, aluminium and iron, for which the pollution intensiveness is 15, 44 and 200 MAC respectively. No impact on the quality of groundwaters used for household and drinking purposes was established. In 2019, the territory of the Novy Svet-Eko solid domestic waste landfill revealed exceeded values for lithium (1.3 MAC), oil products (24 MAC), biochemical oxygen demand (1.75 MAC), permanganate index (1.78 MAC), chromium (3.8 MAC), dry residue (2.26 MAC) and chemical oxygen demand (2.86 MAC) in the groundwaters. The spots most exposed to contamination are groundwaters and surface waters of the first pressure horizons from the surface, which form an area of active water exchange.

Soil and land resources St Petersburg St Petersburg shows signs of the growth of lands for residential, social and business construction, which is associated with the reduction of lands used for agricultural and recreation purposes, as well as the use of lands not involved in urban planning or other activities. 24

The monitoring of soil and land contamination with heavy metals in St Petersburg from 1991 to 2008 revealed that the least polluted are soils in the areas located far away from the city centre, as well as soils on the northern and southern outskirts of the city. The average level of soil contamination in this territory can be described as ‘moderately hazardous’. As part of the monitoring of eight core sites in eight urban districts carried out by TekhnoTerra LLC, elevated MACs of cadmium, copper, lead, zinc and benzo(a)pyrene were reported in 2019. All of these indicators are primarily associated with transport (automobiles and railways). In Vyborgsky, Krasnoselsky, Nevsky, Primorsky and Frunzensky Districts, elevated nickel values were reported, with an increased concentration of oil products in Nevsky and Tsentralny Districts. Seven out of eight districts revealed increased amounts of polychlorinated biphenyls. The highest excessive MACs in all the examined samples were reported for benzo(a)pyrene. Over the last twenty years, there was a reduction in soil pollution with heavy metals and metalloids. However, some of the sites revealed an increased content of cadmium, nickel, chromium, manganese, copper and cobalt in the soil. Most of these pollutants come from automobile and railway transport emissions. As a result of an increased amount of motor transport in the city (and its emissions), soils contain elevated concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene. The polychlorinated biphenyl concentration in all the studied areas is higher than the average values over the previous periods starting from 1993. Leningrad region A total of fifty core sites were examined in 2020, with thirty-two located in the impact monitoring areas assigned in 2015–2018; ten additional core sites in new impact monitoring areas used for the evaluation of the cross-border transfer of pollutants from metallurgical enterprises in the Scandinavian Peninsula along the Russian borders; eight additional core sites in impact monitoring areas used for the evaluation of pollutant transmission around the production sites of Boksitogorsky Glinozem (‘ Alumina’) OJSC. Based on the data retrieved from the background sites in 2015 and 2018, the average background values were counted, which were further used to calculate the value of the overall soil pollution Zc in the samples of 2020. Based on the analytics obtained, the concentration of pollutants in impact monitoring areas was compared against the above-mentioned background levels. The comparison covered heavy metals (Hg, Pb, As, Cd, Zn, Ni, Co, Cr, Cu, Mn), oil products, benzo(a)pyrene, phenol and benzene. The overall heavy metal pollution index (Zс) shows that soils in most of the sites fall within the category of acceptable pollution, with some soils classified as moderately hazardous and hazardous. The soils around the Boksitogorsk Alumina Factory are contaminated with heavy metals to a minor degree: with 3.6 as the average Zc value and 14.2 as the maximum (acceptable). A rather substantial excess of heavy metals, compared to background levels, is reported along the borders with Finland, with two out of ten samples classified as hazardous, five as moderately hazardous and only three as acceptable.

25

In 32 core impact sites, samples from 24 are rated as ‘acceptable’, four as ‘moderately hazardous’ and the remaining four as ‘hazardous’. The most common elevated concentrations in the examined sites relate to cadmium and lead. They were elevated in all the samples taken along the border with Finland. The worst contamination of soil with heavy metals is observed in the sites located near the following enterprises (in the descending order): • crushing-grading mills in the urban-type settlement of , Priozersky District; • industrial enterprises in Kirishi (Kirishi Oil Refinery, Kirishi Biochemical Plant etc) in Kirishsky District; • Syassky PPM in Volkhovsky District; • industrial enterprises in Tolmachyovo (Tolmachyovo Factory for Reinforced Concrete and Metal Structures OJSC • Luga Feed Mill Plant in Luzhsky District; • Krasny Bor dump site in Tosnensky District; • iron and steel works of the Scandinavian Peninsula (sites in Vyborgsky District along the borders between Russia and Finland); • Dubrovskaya CHP plant in Kirovsky District; • industrial enterprises in Volkhov (Volkhov Aluminium Factory, Volkhov Feed Mill Plant etc.) in Volkhovsky District; • industrial enterprises in Slantsy (former Polymer Factory, woodworking factory etc.) in Slantsevsky District; • industrial zone in Pikalyovo (Pikalyovo Cement CJSC, BaselCementPikalyovo CJSC, Pikalyovo Alumina Plant) in Boksitogorsky District; • Slantsy Plant OJSC, Slantsy Cement Plant, TSESLA OJSC, mining facilities, the settlement of Shakhta No. 3, Peterburgcement Cement Factory LLC in Slantsevsky District. As far as organic pollutants are concerned, elevated concentrations of oil products were observed in impact sites. Some of these have increased benzene concentrations. A minor excess of phenol is only detected in one site in (1.7 times). The concentration of benzo(a)pyrene in all the sites examined in 2020 was below the detection threshold. Based on the chemical analysis of samples from core sites in 2020 (total of 50 samples), elevated concentrations were sporadically observed in three sites in Vsevolozhsky (1.5 times for cadmium), Tosnensky (1.3 times for manganese) and Tikhvinsky (3 times for zinc) Districts. In the sites studied in 2020, soil contamination levels are thus within the limits safe to human health (except for the three exceptions mentioned above).

26

In general, the vast majority of samples in 2016–2020 are rated as ‘clean’ or ‘acceptable’.

Protected areas St Petersburg The current network of protected areas in St Petersburg includes fifteen regional protected areas, which fit into two categories, public natural reserves and natural sites. The network of protected areas comprises all major standard, rare and valuable natural systems of the Neva Lowlands, where St Petersburg lies, among them: large swamps; taiga, mixed and broad-leaf forests; seacoasts, Neva Bay shallow waters – bird stopover sites along the White Sea– Baltic migration route; systems of islands, rivers and lakes; geological outcrops, highlands; old landscape parks. Protected areas are located in seven districts of the city, with the total area reaching 6,142.7 ha, or 4% of the area of St Petersburg. Activities run in protected areas include the following: special protection regime; provision of proper sanitary conditions; preservation and recovery of biological and landscape diversity; research; environmental education. To further develop the network of protected areas, comprehensive environmental studies of specific areas of St Petersburg are carried out to evaluate their value from the point of view of nature protection and the need to provide them with the legal status of a protected area. In accordance with current legislation, protected areas have a special protection regime which bans or limits the activities that are in conflict with the goals and objectives behind the creation of a specific protected area and can be harmful to its natural systems and sites. Starting from 2016, bioindicator studies have been performed regularly, which have described zooplankton and macrozoobenthos as being stable. New mammal species were reported in some of protected areas. For example, in 2019, the first traces of roe deer were identified in the Yuntolovsky protected area, the traces of weasels were found in the Western Kotlin protected area and the first arrivals of moose in the Petrovsky Prud area were registered. Flying squirrels, detected in 2017, were confirmed to inhabit the Komarovsky Bereg area. As of 2019, 15 protected areas in St Petersburg reported 50 mammal species from six orders, including insectivores (6), chiropterans (9), lagomorphs (2), rodents (18), carnivores (12) and artiodactyls (3), with seventeen listed in the Red Book of St Petersburg. Two other mammals, Baltic grey seal and Baltic ringed seal, listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation and in the Red Book of St Petersburg, are sometimes observed in the Gulf of Finland, close to the Western Kotlin reserve. Salmonid fry have been released in the reserve for more than ten years. In 2019 15,000 fry of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) were released into the River Gladyshevka in the Gladyshevsky protected area. According to the data of the control catch, the released fish successfully migrates to the sea to make its way back to the river for spawning several years later.

27

Protected areas are involved in the fight against invasions, namely elimination of Sosnowsky’s hogweed (Popovka River Valley, Gladyshevsky and Southern Coast of Neva Bay areas). In 2019, this work spanned 45 ha of the total protected areas. Protected areas also serve as platforms for raising public environmental awareness and providing environmental education to children. Leningrad region There are 54 protected areas in the Leningrad region with a total area of almost 605 thousand hectares, or 7.2% of the region's territory. Three of them are protected areas of federal significance - the state nature reserve "Nizhne-Svirsky", the state nature reserve "East of the Gulf of Finland", and the state nature reserve "Mshinskoye swamp"; 47 of them are regional: 2 natural parks National park "Vepsky forest" and " Toksovsky ", 27 state reserves and, 18 natural monuments ; and 4 local - 3 protected landscapes and 1 state reserve. The Leningrad region also has six wetlands of international importance, nominated under the Convention on Wetlands. They are important primarily as a habitat for waterfowl (Ramsar Convention). Four regional locations (Birch Islands, Vyborgsky, Kurgalsky, Lebyazhy) have been nominated for inclusion in the List of Protected Areas of the Baltic Sea under the Convention on the Protection of the Baltic Sea Marine Environment (HELCOM). In total, 12 state reserves are part of the international network of protected areas. The regional reserve "Lindulovskaya Roscha" is included in the UNESCO World Heritage Site - "The Historical Center of St. Petersburg and Related Monuments." Protected areas play an important role in the conservation of rare and endangered species of plants, animals and other organisms (the total number in the Leningrad region is 1086, including 558 animal species (120 vertebrates and 438 invertebrates) and 536 plant species. The Lindulovskaya Woods regional reserve is included in the UNESCO World Heritage list. Another UNESCO World Heritage site is ‘historical centre of St Petersburg and related monuments’. Priority tasks related to the network of protected areas in the Leningrad region include: 1) preservation of natural systems that are instrumental in preserving biological and landscape diversity: • natural sites of the water system Lake Onega – River Svir – – River Neva – Neva Bay of the Gulf of Finland – Gulf of Finland; • reference landscape sites; • local ecosystems with complex micro and mesorelief; • sources of large rivers; • natural floodplain and river mouth areas; • smaller rivers, primarily those with preserved basins;

28

• transitional and raised bogs defining the water regime of surrounding areas; • reference natural old forests; • animal habitats (especially resting and feeding locations of migratory birds, mass bird nesting locations, seal whelping and haulout grounds, Salmonid spawning grounds, mass bat hibernation sites); • habitats of rare and endangered flora and fauna species, areas of rare and endangered soils; • rare and unique natural sites; 2) preservation of ‘corridors’ between large protected areas; 3) ensuring environmental links between protected areas of the Leningrad region and neighbouring Russian regions, including preservation of natural ecosystems on the border between the Leningrad region and St Petersburg.

Production- and consumption-related waste St Petersburg In 2019, the total volume of waste production in the city amounted to 10.672 mln tons, with 0.237 million tons buried and 9.52 mln tons recycled. A total of 9,750.07 thousand m3 of solid domestic waste was carried away from the city territory (8,615.2 thousand m3 in 2017). The government programme of St Petersburg foresees actions aimed at enhancing the efficiency of production- and consumption-related waste management, including increasing the share of treated, recovered and neutralised solid domestic waste in the total volume of generated waste. For this purpose, the upgrading programme of the St Petersburg unitary enterprise Factory for Mechanised Treatment of Household Waste provides a plan for the upgrading of the factory’s technological equipment so as to increase its capacity up to two million tons of waste per year by 2023, including by means of building sorting units and revamping the systems for aerobic composting of solid domestic waste. This upgrading project will help to fully separate organic fractions from solid household waste sent there for treatment. It will also allow to retrieve the maximum number of useful fractions from solid domestic waste for further recovery and recycling. There is already a clear trend for reduction in the amount of solid household waste sent for burial (a 7% decrease in 2019 compared to 2018). The share of treated, recovered and neutralised solid household waste in the total amount of waste was 26.6%, which is 6.6% higher than the target value set in the government programme. Leningrad region In 2019, the Leningrad region produced around 4.4 million tons of waste, which is 25% less than in the previous year. Around 42% of waste came from construction enterprises, the other source industries being crop and animal farming, hunting and related services (21.7 %), production of paper and paper products (12.2%), waste collection, treatment, recovery and recycling of secondary raw materials (7.8%), as well as the production of vehicles and equipment (3.4 %). 29

3.4. Environmental impact from the Programme implementation Methodology Strategic environmental assessment of the Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme aims to identify environmental consequences of the implementation of all of the Programme focus areas in the Russian part of the border region. The study was carried out in coordination with the Finnish side and involved meetings and consultations among experts. The methodology of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) includes such stages as preliminary assessment and scoping (including preliminary identification of considerable environmental consequences), in-depth analysis of environmental consequences of the project implementation given the existing alternatives, preparation of environmental impact assessment, development of proposals regarding the clarification of environmental priorities and a set of activities to reduce negative environmental impact, and development of environmental monitoring programme during the Programme implementation stage. SEA is focused on considerable environmental effects in the region as a whole. The possibility of negative consequences at the local level is indicated in some cases, although the Programme’s priorities are posited in a way that many projects will require additional assessment when a decision on implementation is taken based on national legislation. Data sources behind strategic environmental assessment included proposals regarding the planned cross-border cooperation programme, materials and reports of the current Programme, government statistics across the Programme regions, territorial planning materials, programmes for social and economic development of the Programme regions, national projects in the sectors related to the Programme’s focus area, current requirements of national environmental standards and their update trends. All the documents were studied as far as a considerable impact on the environment was expected. SEA is largely based on the assessment of the risk of a negative environmental impact in all focus areas of the Programme, with expected positive changes noted separately. The key aspects of environmental impact are identified, with the risk evaluated for each of the aspects. Only those aspects that can produce a significant impact on the environment are examined, and the association of each one of them with national social and economic, as well as environmental development goals, is established. An assessment was carried out with the help of a matrix, where each cell lists the impact of every specific objective (SO) on a particular environmental target, as follows: green – no considerable negative impact yellow – a risk of a negative impact orange – an expected negative impact. Those cells where a substantial positive effect is expected are marked with the ‘+’ symbol. 30

Expected effects are described in the section ‘Consequences of the proposed programme’.

31

3.5. Environmental risk assessment matrix Environmental SEA aspect National and regional Main priorities and focus areas of the programme component objectives A smarter Europe (Priority 1 A greener A more A better Innovative, advanced and low-carbon connected cooperation competitive economy) Europe (Priority 2 Sustainable Europe governance and resilient (Priority 3 for Europe living Safe, (Priority 4 environment) intelligent Active and and well-functioning accessible society) region) Enhancing Enhancing Promoting Promoting Enhancing Developing Institutional People-to research and sustainable climate the nature and capacity of people innovation growth and change transition protection enhancing a public action capacities competitiveness adaptation, to a and sustainable, authorities, for and the of SMEs and job risk circular biodiversity, climate in increased uptake of creation in prevention economy green resilient, particular trust advanced SMEs, including and disaster infrastructure intelligent those technologies by productive resilience in particular and mandated investments in intermodal to manage a the urban national, specific environment, regional and territory, and and reducing local of pollution mobility, stakeholders including improved access to TEN-T and cross-border mobility Atmospheric air Increased Decrease the total + + and climate emissions, amount of emissions, including GHGs, reduce air pollution, deteriorated mitigate negative atmospheric air consequences of climate change for environmental components Water Increased Ensure safety of + resources number of waterworks and adverse events,

disturbance of protect the territory waterbodies from natural hazards Deteriorated Improve the quality + + + quality of water of potable water, in the preserve unique waterbodies, waterbodies and increased prevent the pollution discharge of of environmental pollutants components Lithosphere Elevated damage Protect the territory + (geological from hazards from natural hazards environment) Soils Soil pollution Improve the + production potential of ameliorated lands and effective use of natural resources. Create conditions for preserving the epizootic wellbeing of the region Soil degradation Improve the + + and land take production potential of ameliorated lands and effective use of natural resources Waste Land take and Reduce negative + + + environmental environmental contamination impact of waste with production- through waste and sorting, increase the consumption- share of treated related waste waste, revamp waste recycling plants, disband facilities 33

posing cumulative damage Natural Increased Preserve natural + + resource use consumption of resources for future natural generations resources, including nonrecoverable ones Forests Felling and/or 100% ratio of + + + degradation of afforested area to forests under felled area high human- induced load Flora and fauna Reduction in the Preserve flora and + + number of rare fauna, as well as species. Habitat natural habitats destruction Protected areas Increased Preserve natural and high-value recreation load in habitats, flora and landscapes regional fauna by promoting a protected areas network of protected areas Reduction and Expand protected + degradation of areas protected areas Public health Increased Increase longevity, + + + incidence of improved diseases caused environmental living by bad conditions environmental conditions, increased population living in the territories 34

with substandard quality of the environment

Low risk (no risk) Moderate risk Considerable risk

+ Positive environmental effect is expected

35

PO1 A smarter Europe (i) Enhancing research and innovation capacities and the uptake of advanced technologies (iii) Enhancing sustainable growth and competitiveness of SMEs and job creation in SMEs, including by productive investments Specific PO1 objectives address an innovative and competitive economy. The programme has two areas of focus: enhancing and strengthening research and innovation capacities and the uptake of advanced technologies; and enhancing growth and competitiveness of SMEs, as well as creating jobs at SMEs, including by means of production investment. Here, the following features are viewed as meaningful for the territory covered by the Programme: • The Russian economy is dominated by big businesses, with small and medium-sized enterprises accounting for 37.5% of the economy of St Petersburg and the Leningrad region, which is the highest level across the country, exceeding the target value of the national project ‘Small and Medium-Sized Entrepreneurship’, which is supposed to reach as low as the average of 32.5% across Russia in 2024. Apparently, given the successful implementation of the national project, the share of small and medium-sized businesses in the economy of the Programme territory (St Petersburg and the Leningrad region) will rise. • The economy of the Russian part of the Programme territory involves a host of highly-qualified staff with higher and secondary vocational education. High-skilled staff is in the highest demand on the labour market. • Large number of processing facilities and transportation and logistics companies in the economy. • High research potential. • The experience of international cooperation, conditions and experience in holding public events to exchange experience, training etc, human resources capable of integrating innovative methods in the manufacturing practice.

The assessment of the direct and indirect environmental impact is carried out based on the proposed tentative activities as part of the Programme as listed below: • Building joint or complementary R&D ecosystems, designing and implementing R&D strategies (joint innovative ecosystems, mechanisms of private-public use of knowhow and results, fostering conditions for digital, intellectual and environmentally friendly and sustainable services and products for private businesses, experimental culture for innovative subjects, cooperation as part and between professional education, green technologies and creative industries, as well as intellectual specialisation, use of various sources of funding and open information sources). • Enhancing cross-border consultancy on innovation and cross-border business consultancy services (joint laboratories for cross-border technology and business research, cooperation as part of public-private and research-business networks, methods for developing services for cross-border cooperation, pilot projects and implementation of joint projects). • Improving the quality of lifelong learning and professional education (development and approval of progressive approaches and applications in education, creation of a constantly upgraded think tank encompassing the Programme period, study of the labour market and

boosting demand for human resources, coordination of higher professional and secondary education). • Contributing to the revamping of existing enterprises and the creation of new ones (driving entrepreneurial mentality, fostering experimental culture, hackathons and spinoffs, support of joint cross-border innovation and new markets, raising the level of research and business cooperation and its implementation, promotion of labour markets and businesses in rural areas, reinforcing interaction between rural and urban areas for the purpose of synergetic and balanced social and economic growth of the regions). • Raising awareness and replication of results among residents, professional communities and groups (digital skill training courses, study materials and programmes for stakeholders and competent authorities).

37

PO2 – A greener low- carbon Europe (iv) Promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and disaster resilience, (vi) Promoting the transition to a circular economy, (vii) Enhancing biodiversity, green infrastructure in the urban environment, and reducing pollution. Specific PO2 objectives are concerned with environmental protection. The programme deals with three areas: promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and disaster resilience; promoting the transition to a circular economy; and finally, enhancing biodiversity, green infrastructure in the urban environment, and reducing pollution. Here, substantial features of the Programme territory can be listed as follows: • Increase in the transit of goods and port operations, including environmentally hazardous cargo. • Discharge of untreated wastewaters contaminated with various pollutants including nitrogen and phosphorus, which leads to the eutrophication of waterbodies. This factor is more relevant to inhabited localities in the Leningrad region. • Potential contamination of groundwaters due to fertilisers, uptake of pollutants by soil (including along the motorways and in residential areas), land take, extraction of mineral resources, leakages from water supply communications and damage to major pipelines. • The need to strike a balance between the promotion of tourism and preservation of protected areas. • Lack of recycling of solid waste coming from industries, services and households, which hinders the transition to a circular economy. • The need to consider the life cycle of raw materials, other materials, products and waste when designing products and services. • Raising the level of environmental responsibility among the population, improving its consumer behaviour and raising awareness. • Intensive navigation in the Baltic Sea leads to a high risk of accidental oil and oil product spills in the sea and on the coast. • Biodiversity loss in the Programme region. • The need for a more sustainable development of urbanised territories including holistic planning of the urban environment with the involvement of representatives of different communities and stakeholders (cross-sectoral cooperation).

Evaluation of direct and indirect environmental impact is based on the proposed Programme activities: • Development of joint or complementary strategies (harmonisation of objectives and strategies to mitigate climate change consequences, adaptation and commitment to the transition to a circular economy, adaptation to climate change, preservation and sustainable

38

use of natural resources including flora and fauna, local reinforcement of environmental protection). • Development of systems for cross-border monitoring and emergency warning (exchange of experience and training as a result of joint integration, development and integration of methods and technologies, forecasting of future needs, provision of vital resources during accidents or hazardous events). • Improving sustainable production, integration and development of new and extended business models (sustainable development, low-carbon and circular production, enhancement of the transition to a green economy, creation of new enterprises and business models to match the demands and criteria of sustainable development). • Raising awareness and sustainable transfer of results (training, development of study materials, holding campaigns, sectoral networking). • Development of a cross-border consultancy service with a focus on circular economy (laboratories with a competence in circular economy, exchange of experience and training as a result of joint integration, planning and implementation of pilot projects and events, development and implementation of training and education programmes). • Creation and development of cross-border consultancy services concerning nature use and environmental protection (expert review of projects involving the use of natural resources, exchange of experience and training as part of joint projects, development and integration of pilot projects and events, development and implementation of training and education programmes). • Better access to best practices and technologies.

39

PO3 – A more connected Europe (iii) developing sustainable, climate resilient, intelligent and intermodal1 national, regional and local mobility, including improved access to TEN-T and cross-border mobility. A specific goal is to foster the availability and progress of mobility at the regional and local levels. The Programme aims to enhance safety and equal opportunities for the residents of the Programme territory and foster cross-border efficiency and mobility management, sustainable logistics and management. Here essential features of the territory in question are as follows: • Increasing load on motorways and railways, ports and border checkpoints due to increased traffic. • Potential for more intensive use of waterways and tourist routes. • Illegal border crossing • The need to combat such hazards as floods, forest fires and others.

Assessment of direct and indirect environmental impact is carried out based on the following tentative Programme activities: • Creation of joint or complementary strategies (support of equal and easy mobility in cross- border regions, forecasting). • Development of infrastructure (sustainable green and intellectual infrastructure and equipment, new opportunities on the private service markets). • Expansion of the respective field and promotion of digital services and products (digital tools for government services, as well as for public and private use of waterways, railroads and roads in the regions and in the border area). • Raising awareness and sustainable transfer of results (study materials, programmes and events, sectoral networks and study, building responsibility).

1 Implying the use of different means of transport as part of one trip 40

ISO 1 – A better cooperation governance for Europe (i) Institutional potential of public authorities, in particular those that are authorised to govern a specific territory, and stakeholders. (iii) Joint actions intended to increase trust between people. The specific goal is focused on government services and solutions, as well as on promoting trust between people. The Programme aims to reinforce the institutional potential of government authorities, in particular those that are authorised to govern a specific territory, and stakeholders. Here the following meaningful features of the Programme territory can be mentioned: • Obstacles created by differences in national legislation, incompatible administrative processes and lack of common territorial planning. • Lack of international cooperation in the development and implementation of smart specialisation strategies. • Competent authority: Committee for Digital Development of Leningrad region • Underdeveloped physical digital infrastructure: access to digital resources does not cover the needs for them everywhere • Digital solutions and services of the public sector meet the needs of society quite well and often anticipate public willingness to use them.

Assessment of direct and indirect environmental impact is held based on the following tentative activities as part of the Programme: • Development of joint or complementary strategies (improving the understanding and commitment to common goals and sustainable development of the Programme region, support of efficient, sustainable and result-oriented implementation of cross-border cooperation programmes and other respective initiatives, transfer of skills and best practices to local stakeholders and novices). • Fostering residents’ involvement in sustainable development programmes (promotion of involvement and commitment to society, including grassroots activities, raising awareness and interest in self-employment, support of social entrepreneurship). • Expansion of the existing cooperation events and development of new ones (including those that are promising in terms of development, based on cross-sectoral approaches, replicable methods, contribute to positive changes in society, notably improve mental and physical health). • Raising awareness and the sustainable transfer of results (study materials, programmes and events, sectoral networks and studies).

41

3.6. Consequences of the proposed programme According to the expert risk evaluation of the Interreg 2021–2027 South-East Finland – Russia, the following effects can be obtained if the stated priorities and specific objectives are addressed: A smarter Europe (Priority 1 Innovative, advanced and competitive economy) SO (i) Developing and enhancing research and innovation capacities and the uptake of advanced technologies In general, a positive environmental effect is expected from the fulfilment of this component of the Programme. This has to do with the fact that a joint research and technology potential will help to develop new environmentally-focused technologies across various sectors in a faster and more efficient manner. The promotion of education projects will help raise the quality of training among engineers and managers, which will contribute to a more environmentally safe operation of enterprises. Educational projects for schoolchildren and other groups of population will raise environmental awareness among the public. The development of remote study and work methods will contribute to the rehabilitation of the atmosphere and help to hinder climate changes due to decreased impact from transportation. Waste treatment shows two opposite trends: on the one hand, recycling and safe waste recovery technologies are expected to develop rapidly; on the other, broader computerisation will contribute to some growth in the generation of specific waste, part of which is difficult to recover. According to experts, the first trend will have a much larger scale in the Programme region. The risk of negative effects on soil is expected to come from a broader use of computer technologies. Continuous operation of computer networks requires the use of additional equipment, notably no-break power supply sources, powerful cooling systems etc. If capacities for recovering specific waste are not enough, soils can become contaminated with heavy metals and other pollutants. At the same time, implementation of the Programme can trigger the development of new technologies geared towards recovery of soil fertility. The potential risk for flora and fauna is also associated with waste from the electronic industry, as well as an increase in electromagnetic impact, which can have a critical effect on some groups of living organisms. In order to prevent the identified risks, specific projects, which will be run with the Programme support, have to be evaluated based on national environmental safety criteria. SO (iii) Enhancing sustainable growth and competitiveness of SMEs and job creation in SMEs, including by productive investments The fostering of small-sized entrepreneurship in the Programme territory can produce both a positive and a negative impact on the region’s environment. The diversity of environmental effects stems from the variety of economic sectors where small businesses will be active. It is, therefore, highly important to carry out an environmental assessment of separate projects, as

42

well as strictly controlling the compliance with environmental requirements, when obtaining permits for activities. The existing structure of the region’s economy proves that most of the small businesses are involved in retail sales, construction, utilities, agriculture and services, including tourism. All of these sectors are characterised by a notable impact on the environment, whose mitigation requires a set of compensatory measures. Therefore, most of environmental components face a moderate risk of worsened quality indicators. The greatest impact is expected to hit the quality of the aquatic environment. This is associated with an expected increase in water consumption together with the insufficient safety of some treatment facilities (this largely concerns Leningrad region). A negative impact can also come from the littering of littoral areas and water areas as trade and tourism unfold against the backdrop of an ineffective system of waste collection and recovery. The development of farms, notably animal ones, in the region can also pose a risk of contamination with biogenic elements to surface and ground waters, thus exacerbating sanitary and epidemiological danger. Littering, organic waste and construction also inflict potential risks on soils. At the same time, promotion of sustainable farms can produce a significant positive effect on the preservation of soil fertility and soil protection from erosion and degradation. There are two opposite trends related to waste treatment: on the one hand, at present the number of small enterprises dealing with waste collection and recovery, which are putting cutting-edge environmentally-oriented technologies to practice, is already on the increase. On the other hand, the development of small enterprises is associated with a significant increase in the amount of waste produced both within the production cycle and during consumption due to increasing wealth and further consumption growth. During the period in question, the second trend is more considerable, and, therefore, the risk is qualified as moderate. Negative effects on flora and fauna are linked to more intensive territorial development, increased construction scales, as well as habitat deterioration. Of special mention should be transformation of the settlement system during construction and recreational overload on most of the natural territories located next to urban localities. Tourism development in the region’s protected areas also entails a substantial risk. Implementation of the Programme will produce a significant positive effect on the social and economic sphere as well as on public health. This has to do, above all, with an increase in income among the population and broader access to better-quality healthcare, foodstuffs and social services. PO2 – A greener low-carbon Europe SO (iv) Promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and disaster resilience This focus area is directly geared towards improving the quality of the environment by means of reducing negative environmental impact and damage from negative natural processes and

43

phenomena, which is why a low environmental risk and a multitude of positive effects are expected from the respective activities. The most expected environmental effects include improving the quality of atmospheric air, slashing pollutant emissions and discharges, slowing down climate change rates, expanding forest and green space areas and, subsequently, preserving biodiversity in the region. Reclamation of the natural environment will produce a positive, though probably delayed effect on public health. A moderate risk can be only seen in the case of an impact on water resources as far as unfavourable natural processes are concerned. This happens because the results of systemic change can be delayed, while engineering solutions to protect the territory always entail the risk of accidents. SO (vi) Promoting the transition to a circular economy Development of a circular economy has an explicit positive environmental effect. Minor risks of environmental deterioration are only possible locally, primarily during construction of structures required for the integration of new technologies. Therefore, the risk is classified as low for all environmental components. It is evident that an apparent positive effect will be observed in the use of natural resources, both mineral and biological ones (forest, for instance) and waste management, with an expected drop in pollutant discharges into waterbodies. The risk of unfavourable processes will also decrease due to a reduced extraction of mineral resources and a lower likelihood of soil fertility loss and soil degradation linked to a reduced uptake of pollutants. SO (vii) Enhancing nature protection and biodiversity, green infrastructure, in particular, in the urban environment, and reducing pollution This area is directly aimed at improving environmental conditions and, therefore, environmental risks are extremely low for it. The most meaningful environmental effect is expected from the preservation of biodiversity, forest restoration and creation of new protected areas, since all of these activities fall within the focus of the Programme. It is rather difficult to evaluate the scale of the positive impact on the diversity of flora and fauna species since respective effects can be delayed. A positive effect from forest restoration and enhancement of protected areas will not be immediate, although this positive impact will continue to build up after the end of the Programme. Major risks associated with the implementation of this Programme are linked to the promotion of green infrastructure and the increase of the recreational load on them. Due to high population density in the region covered by the Programme and an intensive development of overbuilt areas of residential housing, the issue of recreational overload on natural areas is already burning for St Petersburg and most of the towns in the Leningrad region. The current trend of providing the visitors of natural areas with a high degree of comfort leads to a soaring increase in recreational loads and can contribute to degradation of the environment-saving function of protected areas. Growing visitor inflows to urban green infrastructure sites and popular summer leisure tourism

44

sites increases waste volumes, the degradation of soils that become polluted and trampled, and damage to ecosystems. The risk of such negative consequences depends on approaches to the implementation of specific projects as part of the Programme. Generally classified as moderate, this risk, however, requires thorough attention to be paid to the observance of environmental protection measures as part of the projects. PO3 – A more connected Europe SO (iii) Developing and enhancing a sustainable, climate resilient, intelligent and intermodal national, regional and local mobility, including improved access to TEN-T and cross-border mobility A more connected Europe priority is the Programme element associated with the most considerable environmental risks. This has to do with the fact that this aspect directly correlates with the promotion of the region’s transport infrastructure. It foresees the development of both land and waterborne transport, which makes its impact potentially critical for all environmental components. The impact on atmospheric air and the climate stems from the growth of the bulk amount of transport emissions since a substantial growth of traffic is expected. Meanwhile, the development of the road network and sea transport can dramatically improve transportation logistics, in particular, reducing the average carrying distance, determining the preference for lower-carbon means of freight transport and lessening the burden on the areas with the busiest traffic, where large atmospheric emissions are due to low movement speeds. It is due to these opposite trends that the respective risk can be rated as moderate. The impact on the water environment is associated with an increase in cargo and passenger traffic of the waterborne transport, as well as with the construction of transport infrastructure in littoral areas, meaning both the seacoast and riparian buffers of rivers and lakes. Meanwhile, there is a possibility of both a deterioration of the hydrological condition of waterbodies (flooding, changed flow course) and contamination of the aquatic environment with undertreated discharges from ships, port structures and land transport routes. Impact on the lithosphere is linked to the construction of transport infrastructure. There is also a growing use of mineral resources and a high likelihood of unfavourable geological processes, primarily local in nature. Negative impact on soils can be directly linked to both land take during construction of new facilities and the development of extremely polluted soils along the motorways. An increase in transportation volumes will inevitably bring up the volumes of generated waste. Impact on forests is related to felling during construction, while the evaluation of the impact on flora and fauna should take into account the effect of landscape fragmentation, which badly affects the sustainability of ecosystems. For all of these environmental components, the risk that negative effects may arise during the implementation of the Programme is reckoned to be high, which is why it is extremely important

45

to evaluate each funded infrastructure project against national legislation to avoid environmental degradation. Impact on social environment and public health has two opposite trends. On the one hand, the development of transport links provides the population with better access to various services, including such vital ones as healthcare and education. On the other hand, negative changes in the quality of environmental components are capable of deteriorating the quality of life of people living within the areas of negative impact. Therefore, the risk is rated as moderate. Institutional capacity of public authorities, in particular those mandated to manage a specific territory, and of stakeholders The focus area related to the development of the institutional capacity of local public authorities and stakeholders is of utter importance for the Russian part of the territory covered by the Programme. The decision-making system here is highly centralised, meaning that local particularities are not always given enough consideration. That being the reason, expanding the competencies of local authorities and advancing their role in the activities will produce a positive effect from all points of view. The most considerable positive effect will be observed in the area of waste management and a reduction of the impact on water resources, notably by means of improving environmental indicators of the utility sector. People-to people action for increased trust People-to-people action for increased trust may also improve environmental indicators of a whole array of various projects. Better access to environmental information and consolidation of efforts among local communities in relation to the key issues of habitat protection will definitely yield positive effects. Raising environmental awareness can also play a vital role. Existing risks are associated with an ever-increasing number of contacts, aggravation of the transport and recreational load as well as the insufficient level of awareness among the population in the course of volunteer and other projects. However, these challenges can be easily avoided with the help of additional actions and events, which is why this risk is rated as moderate.

4. Comparing the alternatives As part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Interreg 2021–2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme, a zero alternative and an environmental alternative are presented to compare the Programme proposals. This is done to convince decision-makers that no significantly better alternative was left out. Zero alternative This alternative means that no programme will be adopted for 2021–2027 and none of the measures will be put into practice. Russia will continue funding the existing regional and federal actions as part of the ‘Ecology’ state programme and associated government programmes as well as regional development programmes of St Petersburg and the Leningrad region.

46

In the event of such an alternative, current trends and challenges (described in chapter 3 of the report) will remain, while climate actions will not be so extensive. Environmental alternative According to the environmental alternative, Interreg 2021-2027 South-East Finland – Russia Programme will be implemented with a focus on those priorities that have a positive environmental effect as an outcome. It is clear from the environmental risk matrix which particular Interreg objectives have the best possible environmental consequences from the point of view of augmenting positive effects. In order to minimise negative effects, construction- related projects are recommended to include an environmental impact assessment (if provided by national legislation). In all the other cases, a risk assessment should be a prerequisite for submission and risk reduction measures to be taken during the implementation stage should be developed.

5. Recommendations The Programme effectiveness will be determined by the cumulative effect from the individual projects run as its part. Negative effects will also be due to specific projects. When implementing projects related to construction, infrastructure or transportation, it is recommended to perform a risk analysis during the submission stage and foresee measures to reduce the negative environmental impact, making it a prerequisite for project implementation. Moreover, such projects are recommended to include regular environmental monitoring of the neighbouring area in order to control its state.

6. Monitoring Environmental conditions in the Russian part of the area covered by the Programme can be traced based on regular environmental reports published by both Russian regions (St Petersburg and the Leningrad region) and the federal report ‘On the State of the Environment’. The dynamics of environmental change in the area in question should be included in the list of measures to evaluate Programme efficiency. So as to trace the cumulative effect, it is recommended to extend the environmental criteria related to negative impact reduction used in individual projects to the regions that are part of the area covered by the Programme. It is also advisable to establish criteria regarding the achievement of sustainable development goals as part of the current projects and extend them to the regions that are part of the area covered by the Programme so as to trace the cumulative effect.

47

Annex 1

Stakeholder Responsibility Сommunication Environmental authorities Responsible for socio-economic strategyQuestionnaires* (mentioned in the report) development (including tourism and fishing), the ecological situation, public Interview safety (flood protection), environmental On-line consultations activities (including the management of protected areas) and cross-border Feedback collection cooperation; manage the water and analysis resources Federal border service Supervising of the border territories On-line consultations (regional department) Questionnaires Governments of St-Petersburg Responsible for socio-economic Questionnaires and the Leningrad region development (including tourism and (including environmental fishing), the ecological situation, public Interview Committees) safety (flood protection), environmental On-line consultations activities (including the management of protected areas) and cross-border Feedback collection and cooperation; manage the water resources analysis of the region Administration of Responsible for municipal territorial Questionnaires municipalities within the planning, water protection and Programme area management (wastewater treatment, Interview wastewater discharge limits, flood On-line consultations protection), participation in cross- border cooperation Feedback collection and analysis Administration of a protected Responsible for the management of Questionnaires area St-Petersburg and the their territories and water bodies and for Leningrad region their protection from various influences, Interview as well as for the development of On-line consultations measures that promote the ecological and socio-economic development of Feedback collection Development companies and Scientificthese territories support for the decision Questionnairesand analysis education and research making on the regional and federal level, institutions consultation for the industrial sector, for Interview public On-line consultations Feedback collection and analysis

48

Industrial sector (transport, Shares responsibility for pollution, the Questionnaires ports, commercial need for BAT Shares responsibility for organizations) experts pollution, the need for BAT Interview On-line consultations RT discussions Feedback collection Agricultural sector (including Shares responsibility for pollution, the andQuestionnaires analysis agricultural enterprises) need for BAT and good nutrient experts management Interview On-line consultations RT discussions Feedback collection and analysis Fisheries (commercial and Responsible for direct and indirect Questionnaires recreational) impacts (e.g. by-catch of seabirds), but can be part of the solution (biogenic Interview fisheries - removing excess biomass); On-line consultations RT discussions Feedback collection and analysis Tourism sector / hotels and Interested in good status of the Questionnaires restaurants, experts environment as a recreational function of the ecosystem, which increases the Interview attractiveness of the region and its water On-line consultations bodies; potential beneficiaries in resolving consumer conflicts RT discussions Feedback collection and analysis Public organization Has the right to a healthy environment Questionnaires (environmental and social and, therefore, should have access to organizations, services relevant information about the state of Interview providers) the environment, as well as projects and On-line consultations processes that may affect this state; indigenous peoples have the right to RT discussions maintain their traditional way of life, customs and traditions Feedback collection and analysis SME Has the right to a healthy environment Questionnaires and, therefore, should have access to relevant information about the state of Interview the environment, as well as projects and On-line consultations processes that may affect this state; indigenous peoples have the right to RT discussions maintain their traditional way of life, customs and traditions Feedback collection and analysis

49

Regional mass media Interested in improving the Will be invited to take environmental situation in the region part in the zoom- meeting Will be informed by press-releases

50