DOCSLIB.ORG

Nepcon CB Public Summary Report V1.0 Sveaskog Baltfor FINAL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nepcon CB Public Summary Report V1.0 Sveaskog Baltfor FINAL NEPCon Evaluation of Sveaskog Baltfor SIA Compliance with the SBP Framework: Public Summary Report www.sustainablebiomasspartnership.org Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions Completed in accordance with the CB Public Summary Report Template Version 1.0 For further information on the SBP Framework and to view the full set of documentation see www.sustainablebiomasspartnership.org Document history Version 1.0: published 26 March 2015 © Copyright The Sustainable Biomass Partnership Limited 2015 NEPCon Evaluation of Sveaskog Baltfor: Public Summary Report Page ii Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions Contents 1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Scope of the evaluation and SBP certificate ...................................................................................... 2 3 Specific objective .................................................................................................................................. 5 4 SBP Standards utilised ......................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 SBP Standards utilised ........................................................................................................................... 6 4.2 SBP-endorsed Regional Risk Assessment ............................................................................................. 6 5 Description of Biomass Producer, Supply Base and Forest Management ..................................... 7 5.1 Description of Biomass Producer ............................................................................................................ 7 5.2 Description of Biomass Producer’s Supply Base .................................................................................... 7 5.3 Detailed description of Supply Base ....................................................................................................... 9 5.4 Chain of Custody system ........................................................................................................................ 9 6 Evaluation process ............................................................................................................................. 10 6.1 Timing of evaluation activities ............................................................................................................... 10 6.2 Description of evaluation activities ........................................................................................................ 12 6.3 Process for consultation with stakeholders ........................................................................................... 14 7 Results ................................................................................................................................................. 16 7.1 Main strengths and weaknesses ........................................................................................................... 16 7.2 Rigour of Supply Base Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 16 7.3 Compilation of data on Greenhouse Gas emissions ............................................................................. 16 7.4 Competency of involved personnel ....................................................................................................... 17 7.5 Stakeholder feedback ........................................................................................................................... 17 7.6 Preconditions ........................................................................................................................................ 17 8 Review of Biomass Producer’s Risk Assessments ......................................................................... 18 8.1 Risk Assessment for Latvia ................................................................................................................... 18 9 Review of Biomass Producer’s mitigation measures ...................................................................... 20 9.1 Mitigation measures of risks for feedstock originating from Latvia ........................................................ 20 10 Non-conformities and observations .................................................................................................. 22 10.1 Closed Non-Conformity Reports (NCRs) .............................................................................................. 28 11 Certification decision .......................................................................................................................... 35 12 Surveillance updates .......................................................................................................................... 36 12.1 Evaluation details .................................................................................................................................. 36 NEPCon Evaluation of Sveaskog Baltfor: Public Summary Report Page iii Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions 12.2 Significant changes ............................................................................................................................... 36 12.3 Follow-up on outstanding non-conformities .......................................................................................... 36 12.4 New non-conformities ........................................................................................................................... 36 12.5 Stakeholder feedback ........................................................................................................................... 36 12.6 Conditions for continuing certification ................................................................................................... 36 12.7 Certification recommendation ............................................................................................................... 36 13 Evaluation details ................................................................................................................................ 37 NEPCon Evaluation of Sveaskog Baltfor: Public Summary Report Page iv Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions 1 Overview CB Name and contact: NEPCon OÜ, Filosoofi 31, 50108 Tartu, Estonia Primary contact for SBP: Ondrej Tarabus, [email protected], +420 606 730 382 Report completion date: 19/Jul/2017 Report authors: Oļesja Puišo, Ģirts Karss, Certificate Holder: SIA Sveaskog Baltfor, Brīvības iela 40-23, Rīga, LV-1050, Latvia Producer contact for SBP: Marta Ciekure (Quality and environmental manager), phone;+371- 26111329, email: [email protected] Certified Supply Base: Latvia, Lithuania SBP Certificate Code: SBP-01-84 Date of certificate issue: 31/Aug/2017 Date of certificate expiry: 30/Aug/2022 Indicate where the current audit fits within the certification cycle First Second Third Fourth Main (Initial) Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance Audit Audit Audit Audit Audit ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ NEPCon Evaluation of Sveaskog Baltfor: Public Summary Report Page 1 Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions 2 Scope of the evaluation and SBP certificate The certificate scope covers office in Riga, harbour storage places in terminals; Jaunmilgrāvis, Rīga and Terrabalt, Liepāja Scope of this evaluation is based on SBP standards 1; 2; 4; and 5. Organization holds valid FSC COC and FSC CW certificate NC-COC-013350 and NC-CW-013350 certificates covering procurement and sales of pulpwood, production and procurement of wood chips (both primary and secondary feedstock) The BP is wood chip producer and trader. The BP buys biomass - chips from suppliers and also produce biomass itself – by producing chips from roundwood and chipping biomass from non-forest land and harvesting residues. The BP buys harvesting residues and bush/brush from owners of forest land, harvesting companies and owners of non-forest land for chipping. The share of biomass sourced from non-forest lands used for production of chips exceeds 50%. The other (least) half of primary feedstock is sourced as a roundwood and chipped from low quality wood (pulpwood and firewood) in harbour terminals. The share of feedstock to be sourced within the SBE constitute 15-20% from the total volume of biomass. The BP is also buying wood chips (primary and secondary feedstock) from FSC certified /FSC Controlled wood certified and also non-certified suppliers. Supplies from non-certified suppliers is verified according to the BP’s own Controlled Wood verification system. All feedstock is originating from Latvia and some minor part could potencially come from Lithuania as an indirect/secondary flow. BP is sourcing production residuals supplied by Latvian primary suppliers, It is possible that the volume could potencially contain feedstock originating from both Latvia and Lithuania in the future. FSC Controlled Wood system of the Organisation does cover procurement of the feedstock origingating from Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Wood from Estonia is stored in Skulte terminal (not included into the SBP scope. At the moment feedstock of the Estonian origin is out of the certification scope, thus even if FSC system does allow mixing feedstock with other feedstock, material of Estonian origin will be segregated from feedstock originating from approved Supply Base. BP is implementing both FSC transfer and FSC credit system. FSC credit system
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Latvijas Veģetācija 29
    LATVIJAS VALSTS MEŽZINĀTNES INSTITŪTS «SILAVA» LATVIJAS VEĢETĀCIJA 29 SALASPILS 2019 Latvijas Veģetācija 29, 2019 Redaktori Māris Laiviņš, Latvijas Valsts mežzinātnes institūts “Silava” Agnese Priede, Dabas aizsardzības pārvalde Redkolēģija Baiba Bambe, Latvijas Valsts mežzinātnes institūts “Silava” Gunta Čekstere, Latvijas Universitātes Bioloģijas institūts Pēteris Evarts-Bunders, Daugavpils Universitātes Dzīvības zinātņu un Tehnoloģiju institūts Āris Jansons, Latvijas Valsts mežzinātnes institūts “Silava” Anna Mežaka, Rēzeknes Tehnoloģiju akadēmijas Reģionalistikas zinātniskais institūts Solvita Rūsiņa, Latvijas Universitātes Ģeogrāfijas un Zemes zinātņu fakultāte Inga Straupe, Latvijas Lauksaimniecības universitātes Meža fakultāte Līga Strazdiņa, Latvijas Universitātes Botāniskais dārzs Tehniskā redaktore, datorsalikums Ilva Konstantinova, Latvijas Valsts mežzinātnes institūts “Silava” Žurnāla raksti ir recenzēti. Iesniegtos rakstus pirms publicēšanas izvērtē redaktors un anonīmi recenzenti. Before accepting and publishing papers in this journal the articles are reviewed by the editor and anonymous reviewers. ISSN 1407-3641 © Latvijas Valsts mežzinātnes institūts “Silava” Žurnāls elektroniskā formā lasāms interneta vietnē www.silava.lv SATURS Table of content Lpp. / Page Māris Laiviņš, Zane Kalvīte, Ivars Kļaviņš, Dārta Kaupe, Ilze Matisone, 5 Ilze Kārkliņa, Agnis Šmits Sausas mezotrofas priedes mežaudzes izmaiņas skrejuguns ietekmē: trešais gads pēc meždegas Post-fire dynamics in a mesotrophic pine forest: the third year after fire
    [Show full text]
  • World Bank Document
    E-306 VOL. 1 LIEPAJA CITY COUNCIL :52 -Akrmene Vqrgde Du k SO'M Ploce s Public Disclosure Authorized Medz R6va 162 ~10 J__ Kapsgde, . DURBE 9Q5W ~~~~~~~~~~~Lie,i GOpcasRfdz Joun ;.384 LIEPAJA:--hde V6r[i- Cniden e -k GrGoavieze Taii 100 M611 Dube6 -' DSusta Cenkone 3 Pa> t Public Disclosure Authorized Pqrkone oii gem6 -- bun 100 BenihRudei z Wite - Nica BMit C-M 56'2tKyPla Beitdbdems 4480 qw SIOMsti FEASIBILITYSTUDY, PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL Public Disclosure Authorized ASSESSMENT OF SUSTAINABLESOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FORLIEPAJA CITY AND LIEPAJAREGION FINALENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT AMENDEDDECEMBER 7, 1999 Public Disclosure Authorized SWECO onsonsultants SWECOINTERNATIONAL in association with GEO CONSULTANTS Stockholm, December 7, 1999 ProjectNo. 1150335 LIST OF CONTElNTS I);dL 0 SUMMARY I) l I INTRODUCTION 1:1 1.1 Background 1:1 1.2 Structure of the report 1:2 1.3 Objectives and tasks of the EIA 1:2 1.4 Concepts of the Feasibility Study 1:3 2 GENERAL DATA ABOUT THE REGION 2:1 2.1 Territorv, inhabitants and administrative division 2:1 2.2 Inhabitants served by the current waste management system 2:2 2.3 Existing road network 2:5 2.4 Hydrometeorological conditions 2:5 3 OVERVIEW ON THE EXISTING WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 3:1 3.1 Institutional aspects and existing infrastructure 3:1 3.2 Waste amount and composition 3:3 3.3 Waste collection and transportation 3:6 3.4 Waste reuse and recycling 3:8 3.5 Waste disposal and existing landfills 3:11 3.6 Environmental and health impacts 3:15 3.7 Economic aspects 3:21 4 ACQUIS
    [Show full text]
  • The Family of Indriķis Blankenburgs (1887–1944) and Architectural Projects in the Turn of the Century
    HISTORY OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES AND INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION No. 2, Sept. 2018, p. 76.–91. 2018/2 doi: 10.7250/HESIHE.2018.006 THE FAMILY OF INDRIĶIS TURNBLANKENBURGS OF THE CENTURY (1887–1944) AND ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS IN THE MĀRIS ZVAIGZNE* ALĪDA ZIGMUNDE, ILZE GUDRO Riga State German Grammar School Riga Technical University Summary. Indriķis Blankenburgs The graduate of the Department of Architecture (1913) of the Riga Polytechnic Institute (RPI), architect (1887–1944) is one of the best-known architects of school buildings in Latvia during the interwar years. Most of his more than 30 projected schools and other buildings are Blankenburgsstill used for the original purpose of the architect. Using I. Blankenburgs the documents of the Latvian State Historical Archives and library collections, the article follows the family and outlines the contribution of to school architectureKeywords: Indriķisand provides Blankenburgs the list of schoolsBlankenburgs designed by the architect. , the family, school building projects. Introduction Indriķis Blankenburg On 7 April 2017, a scholarly-practical conference «School Architect – 130» was held at the Riga State German Grammar School. It was marking the anniversary of the graduate of Riga Polytech- nic Institute andIndriķis reviewing Blankenburgs his performance and life activity. By studying less well-known pages of his life, the authors of the paper referred about the architect at the conference. The research was carried out by analysing the documents of the Latvian State Historical Archive, the Riga State German Grammar School Museum and the Natio- nal Library of Latvia, including articles in the periodicals. [email protected] * Corresponding author. E-mail: Māris Zvaigzne Alīda Zigmunde Ilze Gudro 76 © 2018 , , .
    [Show full text]
  • Saeima Ir Pieņēmusi Un Valsts
    The Saeima1 has adopted and the President has proclaimed the following Law: Law On Administrative Territories and Populated Areas Chapter I General Provisions Section 1. Administrative Territory An administrative territory is a territorial divisional unit of Latvia, in which the local government performs administration within the competence thereof. Section 2. Populated Area A populated area is a territory inhabited by people, the material pre-conditions have been established for residence therein and to which the relevant status of populated area has been granted according to the procedures specified by regulatory enactments. Section 3. Scope of Application of this Law (1) The Law prescribes the conditions for the creation, registration, modification of boundaries and establishing of the administrative centre of administrative territories and the territorial divisional units of a municipality, and the definition of the status of a populated area, the procedures for registration thereof and the competence of institutions in these matters. (2) The activities of State administrative institutions in administrative territories shall be regulated by other regulatory enactments. Chapter II Administrative Territories Section 4. Administrative Territories The Republic of Latvia shall be divided into the following administrative territories: 1) regions; 2) cities; and, 3) municipalities. Section 5. Region (1) The territorially amalgamated administrative territories of local governments shall be included in a region. (2) The municipalities and cities to be included in a region, as well as the administrative centre of the region shall be determined by the Saeima. 1 The Parliament of the Republic of Latvia Translation © 2010 Valsts valodas centrs (State Language Centre) (3) When creating or eliminating a region, establishing the administrative centre of a region, and modifying the boundaries of a region, the interests of the inhabitants of the State and local government, the Cabinet opinion and the decisions of interested local governments shall be evaluated.
    [Show full text]
  • Work Conditions and Risks in Latvia 2012-2013
    WORKWORK CONDITIONSCONDITIONS ANDAND RISKSRISKS ININ LATVIALATVIA 2012-2013 INVESTMENT IN YOUR FUTURE INVESTMENT IN YOUR FUTURE! WORK CONDITIONS AND RISKS IN LATVIA, 2012–2013 The Study “Working conditions and risks in Latvia 2012-2013” was carried out within the project “Practical application of the legislation regarding labour relations and occupational safety in sectors and companies” (No. 1DP/1.3.1.3.2./08/IPIA/NVA/002) with financial support of the European Social Fund of the European Union and the state of Latvia. Responsibility for the content of the research shall be borne by the Employers’ Confederation of Latvia, “TNS Latvia Ltd.” and Institute for Occupational Safety and Environmental Health of Rīga Stradiņš University (RSU DDVVI). Riga, 2013 SIA «TNS Latvia» & RSU DDVVI kroW snoitidnoc dna sksir ni ,aivtaL 3102–2102 RESEARCH GROUP The Study “Work conditions and risks in Latvia” within the project “Practical application of the legislation regarding labour relations and Occupational safety in sectors and companies” (No. 1DP/1.3.1.3.2./08/IPIA/NVA/002) with financial support of the European Social Fund of the European Union and the state of Latvia was carried out by a research group composed of the experts from “TNS Latvia Ltd.” and Institute for Occupational Safety and Environmental Health of Rīga Stradiņš University. Following specialists contributed to the Study: Ivars Vanadziņš, Žanna Martinsone, Svetlana Lakiša, Jeļena Reste, Mairita Grāvele, Mārīte Ārija Baķe, Dagmāra Sprūdža, Inese Mārtiņsone and Maija Eglīte. Quantitative surveys of employers, employees and general public, as well as analysis of focus groups were carried out by “TNS Latvia Ltd.” under the leadership of project director Signe Kaņējeva.
    [Show full text]
  • Protection and Management of Coastal Habitats in Latvia
    LIFE02 NAT/LV/008498 FINAL REPORT Covering the period from 01.04.2002 to 30.06.2006 Date of the report: 11.10.2006 PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL HABITATS IN LATVIA Project Project location Latvia, entire seacoast – appr. 500 km long and 300 m wide strip including 4 Natura 2000 sites Project start date: 01.04.2002 Project end date: 30.06.2006 Total Project duration 51 months (in months) Total budget 1 666 151.60 € EC contribution: 1249613.70 € (%) of total costs 75 % (%) of eligible costs 75 % Beneficiary Beneficiary Faculty of Biology, University of Latvia Contact person Mrs Vija Znotiņa Address Kronvalda bulv.4, Rīga, LV 1010, LATVIA Telephone +371-7034875 Fax: +371-7034874 E-mail [email protected] Project Website http://piekraste.daba.lv Report compiled by: Vija Znotiņa, Brigita Laime, Didzis Tjarve, Rita Birziņa, Kārlis Kalviškis, Ineta Plikša, Marita Nikmane LIFE02 NAT/LV/008498 FINAL REPORT CONTENTS 1. KEYWORDS ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................4 3. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................................6 4. LIFE PROJECT FRAMEWORK .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Deliverable 2.1: Technical and Socio-Economic Conditions
    Ref. Ares(2018)5593330 - 31/10/2018 Deliverable 2.1: Technical and socio-economic conditions A literature review of social acceptance of wind energy development, and an overview of the technical, socio- economic and regulatory starting conditions in the wind energy scarce target regions Date: 29.10.18 Version V2 Summary WP 2 Name of the WP: Social acceptance analyses in target regions/communities Dissemination Public Due delivery date: 28 February 2018 level: Nature: Report Actual delivery date: 08 June 2018 Lead beneficiary: CICERO Contributing beneficiaries: All partners Lead authors: Kristin Linnerud, Stine Aakre and Merethe Dotterud Leiren Contributing authors: Freie Universität Berlin (FFU), Authors: seecon Ingenieure, ENEA, Ecoazioni, Institute of Physical Energetics (IPE), Latvian Environmental Investment Fund (LEIF), Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE). Polish National Energy Conservation Agency (KAPE), ECORYS ES, ACER Document history Reviewed/Approved Version Date Submitted by Partner Date by/Partner V0 13.05.18 Stine Aakre CICERO Reviewed by FFU 24.05.18 Reviewed by IPE and V0 13.05.18 Stine Aakre CICERO 17.05.18 and 07.06.18 KAPE VI 08.06.18 Stine Aakre CICERO Reviewed by FFU 08.06.18 Reviewed & approved V2 29.10.18 Merethe D. Leiren CICERO 31.10.18 by FFU, R. Di Nucci WinWind has received funding from European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme under Grant Agreement Nº 764717. The sole responsibility for any errors or omissions made lies with the consortium. The content does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Commission. The European Commission is also not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
    [Show full text]
  • Tourist Officers in Latvia
    Tourist Officers in Latvia Kurzeme / Western Latvia Aizpute Tourist Information Centre Skolas iela 1, Aizpute, Liepāja district, Latvia, LV-3456 Phone: +371 29623284, +371 63448880 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.aizpute.lv Dundaga Tourist Information Centre Dundaga castle, Pils iela, Dundaga, Talsi district, Latvia, LV-3270 Phone: +371 63237858, +371 29444395 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.ziemelkurzeme.lv, www.dundaga.lv Durbe Tourist Information Centre Skolas iela 14, Durbe, Liepāja district, Latvia, LV-3440 Phone: +371 63498808 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.durbe.lv Embūte Ecotourism Information and Education centre Embūte, Liepāja district, Latvia, LV-3466 Phone: +371 26585221 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.embute.com Jūrkalne Tourist Information Centre “Krasti”, Jūrkalne parish, Ventspils district, Latvia, LV-3626 Phone: +371 63697131 Fax: +371 63697131 E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected] Home page: www.jurkalne.lv Kandava Tourist Information Centre Kūrortu iela 1b, Kandava, Tukums district, Latvia, LV-3120 Phone: +371 63181150, +371 28356520 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.kandava.lv Kolkasraga Information and Visitor Centre Kolkasrags, Kolka parish, Talsi district, Latvia, LV-3275 Phone: +371 26486622 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.kolka.info, www.kolka.lv Kuldīga Tourist Information Centre Baznīcas iela 5, Kuldīga, Latvia, LV-3300 Phone: +371 63322259, +371 29334403 Fax: +371 63322259 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: www.kuldiga.lv Liepāja District
    [Show full text]
  • A Abc - 06.01.19 - 17.01.20 SL1 КАПИНО ВИТЕБ
    The Provisional Postmarks of Latvia 1919 - 1920 ref No. P.O. (District) Opening date / closing date type index Earliest seen Latest seen ref vH HB Jakimovs A 0004 Abrene (Abrene) 20.03.1920 LR p.k., p.t.k. Tolkova parish Bokova manor-house 20.03.20 / p.t.k. - 07.04.21 - 01.11.21 (renamed Jaunlatgale) LR1 Pitalowo manuscript cancellation in Latvian pr15 29 -4-20 8-6-20 4.2 001.2 LR2 PITALOWO * * wooden mark pr14 20.05.20 LR3 PITALOWO negative seal pr14 9 - 6 (20) 4.1 001.1 0010 Aglona (Daugavpils) 06.01.1919 SL Kapina p.t.n. Somerseta Abc - 06.01.19 - 17.01.20 SL1 КАПИНО ВИТЕБ. pr1 a 566.1 119.1 SL2 КАПИНО ВИТЕБ. pr1 б 17 2 19 11 12 19 566.2 119.2 LR p.k., p.t.k. Kapina Somerseta p.k. - 14.02.20 / p.t.k. -24.07.20 - 01.06.27 (renamed Aglona) LR1 КАПИНО ВИТЕБ. used at Rušūna p.k. pr1 a 23 5 20 7 7 20 566.3 119.1 LR2 КАПИНО ВИТЕБ. pr1 б 22 4 20 -4 9 20 566.4 119.2 0014 Ainaži (Valmiera) 14.01.1919 SL p.t.k., 0,5 km from Ainaži station, route Valmiera - Ainaži Abc - 14.01.19 (postal operations didn't take place 14-22.02.19), Abc - 04.04.19 - 25.05.19 SL1 ГАЙНАШЪ ЛИФЛ. pr1 a 12 2 19 003.1 SL2 ГАЙНaШ + date single line mark pr14 19 , 3 19 15.1 003.2 SL3 Гайнaш pr15 15 / V (19) 15.2 003.3 EE 05.07.19 - 17.07.20 EE1 Heinaste pr15 9 / 8 19 003.4 EE2 Heinaste single line mark pr14 003.5 EE3 ГАЙНАШЪ ЛИФЛ.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Quality Report on Electronic Communications Services
    APPROVED at the Public Utilities Commission’s Board meeting of 23 April 2020 (minutes No. 19, p. 9) 2019 Quality Report on Electronic Communications Services 45 Unijas Street Riga, LV-1039 Latvia T: +371 67097200 E: [email protected] www.sprk.gov.lv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ 3 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS ................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5 I INTERNET SERVICE ....................................................................................................... 7 1.1. How Internet service measurements are performed .................................................... 7 1.2. Measurement results ................................................................................................. 8 1.2.1. Connection speed ............................................................................................. 8 1.2.2. Latency .......................................................................................................... 14 1.2.3. Jitter .............................................................................................................. 15 1.2.4. Packet loss ratio ............................................................................................. 16 1.3. Summary ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Region Sustainable Development Strategy 2030 Dundaga Municipality Ventspils Municipality Kurzeme
    KURZEME PLANNING REGION SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 2030 DUNDAGA MUNICIPALITY VENTSPILS MUNICIPALITY KURZEME ROJA MUNICIPALITY ALSUNGA MUNICIPALITY PĀVILOSTA MUNICIPALITY VENTSPILS CITY TALSI MUNICIPALITY MĒRSRAGS MUNICIPALITY GROBIŅA MUNICIPALITY LIEPĀJA CITY BROCĒNI MUNICIPALITY KULDĪGA MUNICIPALITY DURBE MUNICIPALITY PRIEKULE MUNICIPALITY NĪCA MUNICIPALITY The booklet is nanced by the Norwegian Financial Mechanism AIZPUTE MUNICIPALITY programme 2009–2014 No. LV 07 SKRUNDA MUNICIPALITY “Capacity-building and Institutional Cooperation between Latvian and Norwegian Public Institutions, Local and Regional Authorities” project No. 4.3–24/NFI/INP–002 “Increasing territorial development planning capacities of planning regions and local governments VAIŅODE MUNICIPALITY of Latvia and elaboration of development planning documents” SALDUS MUNICIPALITY RUCAVA MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPALITY RUCAVA Local Governments of Latvia Kurzeme Planning Region Kurzeme is a unique region in the west of Latvia. It can be proud of the long and diverse coast of the Baltic Sea and important cultural and natural heritage. The widest waterfall in Ventspils Dundaga Municipality Municipality Europe – Ventas Rumba – is situated in the heart of Kurzeme. The landscape of the region keeps traces left not only by the Roja Suiti and Livs, but also by the Vikings. Chairwoman of Kurzeme Ventspils Municipality Planning Region City Historically, Kurzeme Region is known by its strong traditional Development Council Mērsrags economic sector (forestry, agriculture and shery) and manufacturing Municipality industry. The development of technologies and creative industries Inga Bērziņa also plays an increasing role. Ports are an important aspect in the Talsi Municipality development of the cities of national signicance – Liepāja and Ventspils. Kurzeme has three regional development centres – Kuldīga, Saldus and Talsi, and each of them has its own special signicance.
    [Show full text]
  • How Politics Influence the Amount of Government Transfers Received by Latvian Municipalities
    SSE Riga Student Research Papers 2020 : 5 (227) FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR PARTY SUPPORTERS? HOW POLITICS INFLUENCE THE AMOUNT OF GOVERNMENT TRANSFERS RECEIVED BY LATVIAN MUNICIPALITIES Authors: Daria Orz Oļegs Skripņiks ISSN 1691-4643 ISBN 978-9984-822-49-5 September 2020 Riga Financial Support for Party Supporters? How Politics Influence the Amount of Government Transfers Received by Latvian Municipalities Daria Orz and Oļegs Skrip ņiks Supervisor: Oļegs Tka čevs September 2020 Riga Table of contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 6 2. Literature review........................................................................................................... 8 2.1. The normative approach to transfer allocation .................................................................. 8 2.2. Public choice literature .................................................................................................... 10 2.3. Positive approach to transfer allocation ........................................................................... 11 2.3.1. Link between transfers and elections ........................................................................ 11 2.3.2. Partisan alignment as a predictor of increased transfers ........................................... 12 2.3.3. Transfers misallocation............................................................................................. 14 2.4. Choice of research design ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]