Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe Basin – Lessons Learned
Gulnara Roll, Aija Kosk, Estonian Agricultural University Peeter Unt, Natalia Alexeeva, Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation
Introduction
Lake Peipsi/Chudsko-Pskovskoe, sometimes called Peipus (further Peipsi), is the fourth largest and the biggest transboundary lake in Europe. Its three names originated from three languages historically used in the region – Peipsi came from Estonian, Chudsko-Pskovskoe from Russian and Peipus has German roots. Lake Peipsi belongs to the water basin of the Narva River (or Narova), a 77 km long watercourse, which connects Lake Peipsi with the Gulf of Finland of the Baltic Sea. Estonian and Russia share the Lake Peipsi and three countries, including Estonia, Russia and Latvia, share Narva River basin. Latvia has only 5% of the water basin and pollution from its territory is very small in the overall pollution load in the basin.
What makes the Lake Peipsi specific and different from other great lakes of the world is that it is located on the future European Union border with Russia and is shared by countries in transition. Estonia regained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. Before that Lake Peipsi was an internal big lake in the northwest of the Soviet Union where the same legislation, procedures, environmental standards were applied for the whole lake basin and therefore it is a new transboundary lake. With these radical political changes at the beginning of the 1990s, the socio-economic context of water management also changed drastically as existed earlier economic contacts across the lake were disrupted with the establishment of border customs control on the border between Russia and Estonia. In May 2004 Estonia is expected to join the supranational European Union (EU) and Lake Peipsi will become a transboundary lake shared by Russia and the European Union. Estonian legislation and environmental management system have been adjusted to incorporate requirements of the EU legislative and institutional framework. In the field of water management, requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive as well as of other relevant EU directives are being incorporated into the Estonian framework for water management. The EU legislation, norms and standards are different than the ones of Russia. The main challenge for the future development in the Lake Peipsi Basin is a growing gap in socio – economic development as well as in formal frameworks, including norms and standards; as well as practices, and information between different sides of the border. In this new institutional context of a lake management by one future EU member state and one non-EU member state, there is a need to rethink the coordination mechanism of implementation of pollution abatement strategies in this transboundary lake basin. Background
Lake Peipsi is a part of the Narva River water basin whereas water basin area of Narva River itself is 877 km2 or only 15% of the total area. The mean annual water discharge via the Narva River into the Gulf of Finland of Baltic Sea is 12.6 km3 (approximately 50 % of the average volume of Lake Peipsi). The Narva River basin is located in the central part of southeast coast of the Baltic Sea and has an area around 56,200 km2, which is 3.6 % of the total area of the Baltic Sea Basin.
Three countries share the Narva River/Lake Peipsi Basin: Russia (36,100 km2 or 64.3 %), Estonia (17,000 km2or 30 %) and Latvia (3,100 km2 or 5.5 %). The main part of the Lake
1 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Peipsi water basin is situated on the border of the Republic of Estonia and the Russian Federation between Lake Peipsi Lowland (eastern border of Estonia) and East-European Plain (Russia). Coordinates: latitude 57o 51’ – 59o 01’ (N), longitude: 27o 30’ – 27o 56’ (E).
The lake consists of three unequal parts: the biggest northern Lake Peipsi sensu stricto (s.s.) /Chudskoe, the southern Lake Pihkva/Pskovskoe and the narrow strait-like Lake Lämmijärv/Teploe connecting Lake Peipsi s.s. and Lake Pihkva. Morphometric data on Lake Peipsi at the water level of 30 m above the sea level is described in the table 1.
Table 1. Morphometric data on Lake Peipsi at the water level of 30 m above the sea level (Jaani, 2001)
INSERT TABLE 1 HERE
The submeridionally elongated catchment area of Lake Peipsi ranges approximately 160 km in width and 370 km in length. The catchment area of the lake (including the lake surface) has an area of 47,800 km2, of which 16,323 km2 is in Estonia, 27,917 km2 in Russia, and 3,560 km2 in Latvia. It is part of the basin of the Gulf of Finland and is connected with the latter via the rather short River Narva.
The lake basin holds more than 4,500 lakes. The largest of them is Lake Võrtsjärv (270 km2). Without Lake Peipsi all the lakes form about 2% of the basin and Lake Peipsi adds 5%. There are about 240 inlets (including tributaries) into Lake Peipsi. The largest rivers are the Velikaya (catchment area 25,600 km2), the Emajõgi (9,745 km2), the Võhandu (1,423 km2), and the Zhelcha (1,220 km2). They altogether make up about 80 % of the whole catchment area of Lake Peipsi and account for 80 % of the total inflow into the lake.
Water budget in the lake in general could be described as follows:
Total inflow into the lake: 324 m3/s Total outflow from the lake: 329 m3/s (via the Narva River) Residence time: 2 years
Genetically, the lake basin is a landform, scoured mainly by the Pleistocene glaciers.
Geologically the basin is formed by sedimentary rocks belonging to Cambrian, Silurian and Devon systems. Close to Narva River, Cambrian sediments create so-called clint along Finnish Gulf. Between this clint and the northern shore of the Lake Peipsi the territory is formed by Silurian sediments represented by limestone, marl and dolomite. Upper layers content oil shale, which is intensively used in the mining industry. Silurian limestone has high hardness and form Narva and other waterfalls. From structural-geological and tectonic perspectives, the lake basin is a part of Russian platform, located in transit zone between Baltic shield and Moscow and Baltic syneclises. The stratification depth of the crystalline foundation in the northern part of the basin does not exceed 150 m, in the central part of the basin - within the limits of 250-350 m and in the southern part is lowered up to 1,600 m from a surface level. Regarding its hydrogeological status, the lake catchment is an eastern flank of Baltic artesian basin.
Shores of Lake Peipsi: scarp (cliffed, sandy, morainic, peaty) and flat (till, sandy, peaty, silty). Scarp sandy beach is prevailing in the northern part of the Lake. Flat shores are usually swampy, with reed and bulrush. This kind of shores spread mainly on the western part of the lake.
2 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Narva has two waterfalls – Omutinskie and Narva waterfalls having the maximum high around 7 m and width 125 m. Unfortunately at present Narva waterfalls are dry due to the derivational channel of Narva hydropower station. This station caused an appearance of Narva reservoir formed by the dam of power station in 1955. This reservoir nowadays is also used by two thermal power stations (Baltic and Estonian) working on the oil shale.
There are 29 islands with total area of 24 km2 or 0.7% of the total lake area.
Climate. Lake Peipsi is located in the zone with moderate continental climate, rather wet, softened by a comparative closeness of the Atlantic Ocean. The location on the border of the climate transition zone from marine to continental results in the unstable character of the weather in all seasons. Summer is comparatively warm and wet, and there is a comparatively mild winter. Then more continental character increases to the east, where winter is longer and summer is warmer. In general average temperature has an increasing trend that corresponds to global trends. Freezing season usually comes at the beginning of December and ends in the first decade of March.
Usually stable snow cover appears in the beginning of December although in cold years it could be the beginning of November or even October. In warm years snow covers the land in January or in February. Maximum thickness of snow cover for the lake basin is around 45-50 cm.; in some years it is up to 85 cm., although minimum values do not exceed 5 cm. During 1929-1998 at Tiirikoja the rainiest month has been July and the driest month March (Figure 5). The average annual amount of precipitation at Tiirikoja during this period was 575 mm.
The most frequent wind directions are west (19%) and southwest (18%). This is related to the features of general atmospheric circulation at this latitude that is characterized by the western airflow. Wind direction has seasonal character. Considerable area of the lake causes local changes in general atmospheric circulation that creates definite local circulation in the form of breezes and local winds created by different water and land surface roughness.
The lake basin is located in two native zones – taiga and mixed forests. The sub-zone of southern taiga is located to the north of Pskov latitude and mixed forests are spread to the south. Southern taiga forests are mainly coniferous with oaks, lindens, maples etc. The unique ash forests are located in Slantsy region. Small-leaved trees dominate in sub-taiga forests – birches, aspens, alders etc. Wetlands are covered by the same species. Animals are represented by elks, wild boars, roebucks, lynxes etc. 277 bird species are registered in the river Narva basin, 30 of them are rare and endangered.
The Lake Peipsi basin is rich in wetland areas: Emajõe Suursoo (Estonia) and Remdovsky (Russia) being Ramsar sites. Bogs and marshes occupy about 15% of the lake basin; wet areas in general are spread on the 35% of the territory. Emajõe-Suursoo wetland being Ramsar site is located at the mouth of the River Emajõgi on the western shore of the lake. Its surface area is 255 km2, of which the protected area covers ca 180 km2. The total surface area of the Ramsar site is 320 km2 and includes also the Piirissaar Island. The site is a habitat for several globally endangered birds, i.e. corncrake (Crex crex), lesser spotted eagle (Aquila pomarina), white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla). Rembdovsky reserve being Ramsar site located on the eastern shore of the lakes Peipsi and Teploe was founded in 1985 and has a territory about 65,000 ha. In 1996 it was included into “Lake Peipsi lowlands” which is a Ramsar site. Its aim is to preserve biodiversity of the region having international importance due to the presence of endangered species (vegetation - 58 species from the Red Book of the Russian Federation and 7 from Estonian Red Book, birds – 11 and 15 respectively).
3 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Socio-economic and political context
The total population of the basin is approximately 1 million inhabitants, but the population density differs in various parts of the basin: 24 inhabitants/km2 in Estonia and Pskov region, 11 inhabitants/km2 in sparsely populated eastern seashore areas of the lake. There are only two bigger towns in the basin: Pskov in Russia, with 204,000 inhabitants and Tartu in Estonia, with 98,000 inhabitants, which means that the majority of the basin population lives in small settlements. The number of people living by the lake is comparatively small being only 27,000 in the local municipalities bordering the lake on the Estonian side. On the Russian side in two counties of Leningrad region belonging to the River Narva basin 60,600 people were living in 2001, 87% (52,600) of them are urban population and 13% (8,000) are rural. The main part of the population is located in two biggest towns – Slantsy (40,600) and Ivangorod (12,000) with the higher density in the region – 1,115 people/km2 and 1,500 people/km2 respectively. Besides these two towns, there are 96 smaller settlements, 79 of them have population less than 50 people.
The Lake has been a natural border between people who inhabited territories around Lake Peipsi and resulted in the different cultural composition of the Eastern (Russian) and Western (Estonian) peripheries of the Lake Peipsi basin. Majority of the population on the Russian side of the border is Russian and on the Estonian side of the border two cultural minority group reside – among the majority of the Estonian population in the central part of the basin in shoreline rural communities Russian Old-Believers live, a distinct cultural minority group; and in the southern part of the basin, Setu people live who speak a language that is very close to Estonian but unlike Estonians in their religion are Christian Orthodox, like Russians.
The severest demographic problem is ageing of the population, and younger generation leaving for bigger towns. Additional problem on the Russian side is very low incomes in the Pskov and Leningrad regions. More than a half of population (52% in Leningrad region and 51% in Pskov region) has incomes under the cost of living. This situation is getting even worse (comparing 1997, 1998 and 1999 years). That is partially caused by the high rate of unemployment in these regions.
In terms of economic development in the region, commercial fishery and agriculture are most important sources of income for the local population in the region. The Lake Peipsi area is mostly rural agricultural periphery of the two countries. The main commercial fishes of L. Peipsi are lake smelt, perch, ruff, roach, bream, pike, vendace, and pikeperch. The stock of vendace has sharply decreased in the last years, while the amount of pikeperch has increased. Considering annual fish catches (9,000- 12,000 tons or 25-40 kg/ha), L. Peipsi exceeds all large lakes in North Europe (Nõges,T. et.al., 1996.)
Agricultural lands occupy more than 40 % of the total territory of the Lake Peipsi basin. A substantial fraction of the agricultural land is today unused land or fallow land. For example, 40% of the agricultural land in the Velikaya River basin is of non-arable character. Besides agricultural land is the land use in the drainage basin of Lake Peipsi dominated by 40% of forested areas and approximately 8-9% of wetland/bogs. Forestry and processing of timber is a rapidly developing branch in Estonian industry at the moment. On the Estonian side, logging and the timber processing are becoming a noteworthy alternative for those who lost their jobs in agriculture in the regions far from cities. On the Russian side, the main impediments to the development of forestry are the absence of roads in remote forested areas and the general economic recession in the region.
Large areas of peat deposits are located in the Lake Peipsi basin. They are not used intensively because the bigger bogs and marsh areas are under nature protection. Moreover, wetland areas of Lake Peipsi have been recognized as wetlands of international importance. Thus, the Lake Peipsi
4 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe and the water basin have a great potential for eco-recreation and eco-tourism.
The main branches of industry in this region are energy production, building and civil engineering, chemical industry, textile manufacture, foodstuff production and timber processing. The environmental impact of the energy production, which has in North-East of Estonia and in Leningrad Oblast the tight connection with mining of oil shale, is without doubt the greatest of the industrial impacts in this region. The residual water from the ash removal systems of oil-shale-fired power plants (Narva Power Plants, former known as Estonian and Baltic Power Plants) has very high alkalinity (pH 12 and over), with a large concentration of heavy metals. Despite of the closed water circulation in the ash removal systems there have been leakage from the sedimentation basins in the heavy rain periods and in the snow melting periods.
The energy industry’s second largest impact on environment quality and on biological diversity is caused by sulfur and ash emission, originated from power plants. Estonia makes a significant contribution to acid rains in the Baltic Sea Region. The alkaline ash has strongly damaged the natural succession of the bog communities in this region.
Chemical industry produces many liquid hazardous substances, which in outlets can cause harmful damages in water bodies and its ecosystems. There are not enough investigations, but the first results of them indicate the higher concentrations of PCB’s, phenols and phenol compounds, hydrocarbons and heavy metals.
Recent improvements in municipal sewage treatment have not been sufficient to reverse the situation and eutrophication is still recognized as a major threat for the water quality of the lake.
Oil shale mining has considerable impact on the landscape and to the groundwater flow. In the Eesti Deposit, oil shale lays in the depth up to 100 meters. The open cast mining method is used if the depth of the oil-shale bed is up to 40 meters and the underground mining is used for deeper oil-shale beds. Any kind of mining significantly changes the relief of the land surface and groundwater regimes, the water chemistry and hence the whole living environment. These complicated environment protection problem need the careful analyze and complicated technologies. Very big amounts of water (about 190-210 million cubic meters) are annually pumped out of the mines and quarries caused problems for both ground and surface waters.
Water use
In the Lake Peipsi watershed there is enough of clean ground- and surface water for basic needs of the population. The only bigger settlement using the lake water for drinking is Narva (73,000 inhabitants), which takes its water from the River Narva (the only river flowing out of the lake).
The part of Lake Peipsi belonging to Estonia constitutes 89 % of surface freshwater and yields 95 % of the freshwater fish catch of the country. Lake Peipsi has been considered a potential source of water supply for North-East Estonia and Estonian capital Tallinn. Besides the fact that the water resources of Lake Peipsi can be regarded as practically inexhaustible for Estonia, the lake has also great importance from the point of view of fishery and recreation.
For the Russian Federation the lake is not so important as a source of fresh water and fish catch due to the absence of big cities around Peipsi and close location of bigger lakes such as Ladoga and Onega. Lake Peipsi region is more important from the political point of view as a border region with Baltic States and, in the nearest future, with the EU and NATO. Nevertheless on the regional level the lake is essential resource for the fishery purposes and, as it is expected in the future, for recreation although at present tourism is still developing.
5 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
The lake itself is not used for irrigation purposes thus its main use from the food production perspective is fishery. According to the present data, one lamprey and 33 fish species inhabit permanently Lake Peipsi or the lower reaches of its tributaries. As to the catches, the main commercial fish are lake smelt, perch, pikeperch, ruffe, roach, bream, pike and, until the 1990s, also vendace. The second rate commercial fish are burbot, whitefish and white bream. The total catch is usually 9,000-11,000 (25-31 kg/ha) t of fish a year. In general, the lake provides more or less favorable spawning and feeding conditions for fish. According to the classification used in fisheries, the lake was earlier referred to the smelt-bream type of water bodies; since the second half of the 1980s it has acquired some qualities of a pikeperch lake.
INSERT FIGURE 3 HERE
Figure 3. Total fish catch in 1995-2000 in the Russian part of the Lake Peipsi in tones (SP CIEA RAS 2001).
Lake Peipsi is one of the most productive among all lakes in the North-West Russia – up to 42kg/ha, nowadays – 22-27 kg/ha. However the total catch in the lake is very unstable during last years. It is connected not only with smelt quantity that varies year form year but also with unbalanced catch regarding fish species. Comparing fish catch in 1995 and 2000 several species disappeared from commercial fishery: in 1995 year 14 species were caught on the commercial basic whereas in 2000 only 9 species were found to be sufficient for commercial use. Vendace, asp, ide, white bream and bleak become less commercially important due to noticeable decrease in their catch. As a result of intensive use of trawls and fine-meshed Danish seines, the stock of pikeperch was strongly suppressed for a long time (1957-82). After trawls were prohibited and the number of Danish seines considerably restricted (from 133 to 40), the stock and catches of pikeperch began to grow rapidly. Pikeperch has become one of the most important commercial fish in the lake. In recent years, the abundance and catches of vendace have decreased sharply, which is probably caused by the high mortality of its eggs on the spawning grounds during successive mild winters at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s. Owing to the normal winters of the years 1994-98, the stock of vendace is gradually restoring. Registered catch in 1999 (t) Figure 4. Registered catch in 1999 from Lake Peipsi (Vetemaa et al., Whitefish 50 2001). Bream 482 Pikeperch 977 At the beginning of the nineties the possibility to export fish to the European market appeared. Opening of this new and highly profitable Pike 208 market outlet resulted in rapidly increasing pressure to the fish resources, Burbot 60 both in terms of the number of fishermen and in their effort. Some of the most important coastal fishery resources have been over-fished because Perch 1140 of high export market demand coupled with insufficient resource management, and not effective enough control and enforcement capacity. Roach 466 The costs connected to fishery have grown much more than the first buyer prices. Additionally, dynamic development of the Estonian economy has yielded in substantial increase of wages in other sectors of economy and therefore the well-being of fishermen has steadily worsened, which has resulted in increasing social problems.
6 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
The number of professional fishermen has varied over the last 10 years. An increase during the first half of the 1990s was followed by a later decline. The total number of professional fishermen on Lake Peipsi is estimated at approximately 450 in Estonia and 700 in Russia. In Estonia there are only five fishing enterprises and a few private entrepreneurs, whereas in Russia there are about 60 enterprises. In both states all fishing enterprises are private, mostly in the form of joint-holding companies. The character of the recreational fishery is rather untypical on Lake Peipsi, being rather an additional source of income for many coastal inhabitants than an activity carried out for pleasure. As recreational fishery is mostly done in winter during the period when the lake is covered with ice (at least 10 weeks a year).
The Lake Peipsi basin can be divided in three parts from the point of view of economic and social development, cultural composition of the population and character of anthropogenic influence on the Lake and its watershed. These are the southern, central/south-eastern and northern regions.
The southern part of the basin is a rural, sparsely populated area with forestry and agriculture as main sources of income for people. Since agriculture is not profitable today, many farmers live by cutting forest from their own lands and selling it. The main environmental issues in this area are forest cutting and non-point agricultural pollution. Tartu and Pskov, the two largest towns in the basin, are located in the central and southeastern part of the Lake Peipsi basin. The economic development processes in this area are defined by the existence of these two population centers. These towns are also important sources of lake pollution: the construction of the biological department of the sewage treatment plant in Tartu and the last part of the sewage treatment plant of Pskov are to be completed in the coming few years. Main industrial enterprisers located in Pskov are mostly dealing with construction materials and service facilities. Pig and poultry farms are dominant in the agricultural sector.
In the central part of the Lake Peipsi area, rural settlements prevail. Vast areas of wetlands, especially on the Russian side, have impeded the development of agriculture and industry on a larger scale. On the Estonian side, the lake’s culturally mixed rural communities are located along the lake coast. Russian Old Believers who live in the lakeside communities in this area are well known for growing cucumbers and onions. On the Russian side this part is quite sparsely populated. One of the larger centers for this part of the area is the town of Gdov with the population about five thousand people.
Commercial and small-scale fishing is currently an important source of income especially because the small enterprises and the access to Russian (St Petersburg) market for local cucumbers and onions that existed during the Soviet time has been closed. So in agricultural sector prevail small scale crop production and horticulture.
The northern part of the basin is the most industrial and tightly linked to the use of the main natural resource that exists in this area – oil-shale. Two of the world’s largest thermal power plants that work on oil shale – Baltic and Estonian – are on the Estonian side and are main energy production enterprises. The power plants as well as chemical enterprises are main sources of air pollution.
Land use in the Lake Peipsi basin is described in the figure 12.
INSERT FIGURE 5 HERE
7 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Figure 5. Land use in the Lake Peipsi basin (Stalnacke et al., 2001).
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 brought massive changes to the region’s industry and especially agriculture. In communist times, the landscape in this northwestern part of the Soviet Union had always been used more intensively than other regions. The collective and state farms were mainly specialized in meat and dairy production and additional growing of fodder crops. Because of inefficient use of fertilizer and the lack of proper manure handling, agriculture caused high emissions of nutrients Ntot and Ptot into rivers and lakes and subsequent eutrophication problems (Loigu & Leisk 1996). After the 1991 political changes, the abrupt drop took place in the economic development in the lake region, especially in the agriculture, the main source of pollution in the lake basin, as the existed earlier economic activities and contacts across the lake on economic production and trade were disrupted after the establishment of the border, the started transition in the legal and institutional framework for economic development of Estonia and introduction by Russia of import tariffs in 1994 for Estonian goods.
According to Stalnacke at al. (2003), at present, the area has already been in a period of transition for more than a decade, and the future is still highly uncertain. Although economy will grow definitely, especially on the western side of this new EU border, it is not yet clear whether the environment will gain or loose from that. The decline of agriculture during the nineties actually caused diffuse pollution to decrease and the quality of rivers to rise. So, in the future, it is possible that water quality will decrease again, if agriculture recovers. On the other hand, water quality may benefit from EU regulation and good transboundary cooperation to agree on farm mineral balances and better public wastewater treatment. Thus, nutrient emissions and water quality are linked to future economic development in various, sometimes indirect ways. Institutional Framework
Political setup and border issues
Lake Peipsi belongs to the Republic of Estonia and the Russian Federation, who are responsible for the management and monitoring of the lake. The total length of the Estonian - Russian border is 333,8 km of which approximately two-thirds runs along Lake Peipsi and the Narva River. The border treaty between two countries has not been signed yet, so officially there is no border but control line. There are 5 international border crossing points between the Republic of Estonia and the Russian Federation, but none of them on the lake, which means that the distance between southern and northern border crossing points is ca 200 km.
Five Estonian administrative regions – the Eastern Estonian counties of Ida-Virumaa, Jõgevamaa, Tartumaa, Põlvamaa and Võrumaa – have a common border with the Russian Federation. On the Russian side, the Leningrad and Pskov regions are bordering the Republic of Estonia.
Governance
In the Russian Federation water management in implemented into three different levels – federal, regional and territorial levels. The main state agency responsible for these activities is the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) of Russian Federation although some other ministries and committees have supportive tasks. The Ministry on the different levels is represented by the following bodies: the Ministry itself is working on the federal level, Water Basin Administrations are dealing with water management on the regional (basin) level and the Committees of Natural Resources on the territorial (oblast) level. Local authorities are involved in the regulations implementation process. In Estonia water management is co-ordinated by Ministry of the Environment and its 15 country
8 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Environmental Departments. Territory of Estonia is divided into 9 sub-basins for which water management plans are being prepared. Correspondingly 9 county Environmental Departments were appointed by the ministry to coordinate preparation and implementation of water management plans. Lake Peipsi belongs to Peipsi sub-basin where Tartu Environmental Department is responsible for implementation of water policy at regional/sub-basin level and advising local authorities and stakeholders in issues of implementation of the water management legislation.
Transboundary water management arrangements
Each country has its own legislation dealing with water management, but in order to provide sustainable use of the whole lake water basin taking into account basin approach, several bilateral agreement were signed between governments of Estonia and Russian Federation. There are three bilateral agreements concerning water use and water protection in the region: Treaty between the Government of the Republic of Estonia and the Government of the Russian Federation on the conservation and use of fishing stocks in Lake Peipsi, Lake Lämmijärv and Lake Pskovskoe. 4 May 1994, Moscow; Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Estonia and the Government of the Russian Federation on Co-operation in the field of Environment. 11 January 1996, Pskov; Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Estonia and the Government of the Russian Federation on Co-operation in the field of Protection and Sustainable Use of Transboundary Watercourses. 20 August 1997, Moscow.
Estonian-Russian Transboundary Water Commission was established in 1997 after signing of the intergovernmental agreement on the protection and sustainable use of transboundary water bodies between the Republic of Estonia and the Russian Federation. The responsible authorities for implementation of the agreement – the Estonian Ministry of the Environment and Russian Ministry of Natural Resources – develop joint policies for management of the transboundary waters through the Joint Commission.
The management of fish resources of the whole lake is regulated by the bilateral intergovernmental Estonian-Russian agreement about cooperation in the field of use and protection of fish resources in Lake Peipsi s.s./Chudskoe, Lake Pihkva/Pskovskoe and Lake Lämmijärv/Teploe concluded on 4 May 1994. According to this agreement, Intergovernmental Estonian-Russian Commission on the Fishery was formed in 1995. The functions of the Commission are to develop recommendations for coordinated actions in fish resource management, coordinated research in fish resource assessment, possibilities and procedures for one party to fish in the waters of the other party, exchange of fishing quotas based on mutual interests and legislation of both parties, establishment of the maximum common catch for various fish species and its distribution between the two parties, regulation of allowable fishing gear and methods, minimum permissible size of commercial fish, allowable share of fry catch, seasonal and territorial limitations, improvement and efficient reproduction of fish resources, including fish-breeding, procedures to resolve fishing disputes and incidents, access to fishing of the third parties' persons and organisations, control over the fulfillment of the approved measures and other activities in protection and sustainable use of fish resources of Lakes Peipsi, Pihkva and Lämmijärv. Human impacts on water resources
One of the main problems with water protection is the eutrophication of surface waters caused by the increased load of nutrients of anthropogenic origin. The nutrient content in the rivers of the Lake Peipsi basin was high at the end of the 1980s causing eutrophication of water bodies. At the beginning of the 1990s, with the dissolution of all collective agricultural farms on the Estonian
9 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
side and an economic depression on the Russian side of the lake, where the collective farms did not receive any more subsidies to use fertilisers on the fields and to keep large cattle stocks, the nutrient load to the lake has decreased considerably. Research results indicate that the nitrogen and phosphorus loads decreased by 53% and 44%, respectively, between the late 1980s and the mid 1990s. This has also noticeably improved the water quality of Lake Peipsi.
In the figures 6 and 7 there are described total-P and total-N division between countries and sources.
INSERT FIGURE 6 HERE
Figure 6. Total-P division between countries and sources (Stalnacke et al 2001).
INSERT FIGURE 7 HERE
Figure 7. Total-N division between countries and sources (Stalnacke et al 2001).
The majority of phosphorous and nitrogen compounds are carried into the lake by two rivers. The Estonian river Emajõgi and the Russian river Velikaya account for approximately 80% of the total nitrogen load and almost 85% of the total phosphorus load into Lake Peipsi. It is interesting to compare the studies done in the middle of 1980s and 1990s showing great decrease in pollution loads, especially concerning agriculture.
Annual inputs of total-N and total-P during 1985-89 and 1995-98 are described in the figures 19 and 20.
10 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Total-N (t/year)
50 000
45 000
40 000
35 000
30 000
25 000
20 000
15 000
10 000
5 000
0 precipitation other diffuse wastewater on lake agriculture sources surface (background)
1985-89 2 010 4 360 45 190 3 500 1995-98 1 325 2 737 12 269 9 632
Figure 19. Annual inputs of total-N 1985-89 and 1995-98 according to Loigu and Leisk (1996) and Andersen et al. (2001).
INSERT FIGURE 8 HERE
Figure 8. Annual inputs of total-P during 1985-89 and 1995-98 according to Loigu and Leisk (1996) and Andersen et al. (2001).
Some trends in the population dynamics of fish (e.g. sharp decline of the stock of vendace) are probably irreversible owing to the eutrophication of the lake. Some sharp falls in fish stocks can be reversible (e.g. collapse of the smelt stock, caused by night time water anoxia in the summer of several years). Quick recovery of stocks is possible in the case of fishes with a short life cycle and fast reproduction. Periodical changes in the population of pike are related mostly with water level fluctuations. Since the fish stocks are heavily exploited, the fisheries largely control the population dynamics of many fishes, especially in the case of big predators. The population dynamics of pikeperch and perch is heavy influenced by fishing pressure, although climatic factors are also of importance. Food networks interactions are also significant. Predation by pikeperch appears partly responsible for the decline of several stocks of prey fish.
Total amount of wastewaters discharged into water bodies in 1999 only on the Russian part of
11 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
the basin was 92.4 million m3, including 23.3 million m3 of totally polluted (without any treatment) and 69.1 million m3 of inappropriately treated. Thus only 65% of all wastewaters are somehow treated whereas the rest is going directly into water bodies without any cleaning measures.
Maximum volume of waters was discharged by communal wastewater treatment facilities.
INSERT FIGURE 9 HERE
Figure 9. Distribution of wastewaters discharged by different industries on the Russian side of Narva river basin including Lake Peipsi in 2001 (SP CIEA RAS, 2001).
Diffuse pollution is increasing in last years that partially caused by drastic changes in economy – industry is not so polluting any more as it was due to sharply decreased production. Another factor influencing non-point pollution is forest cutting that contribute to additional dissolved and fixed nutrients pollution. At present drainage system built in Soviet time is almost not working so already meliorated territories become swamps again.
One of additional problems – thermal pollution caused by two large thermal power stations (Baltic and Estonian), which use Narva reservoir for cooling of steam machines. Waters from ash dumps having high alkalinity also going in to the reservoir.
Northeastern Estonia is one of the most developed industrial regions of the country, where oil-shale industry occupies the first position. The wastewaters and gaseous emission of toxic sulfur and nitrogen oxides, hydrogen chlorine and carcinogenic compounds from power stations operating on pulverized oil shale have a considerable effect on the chemical composition of water in Lake Peipsi.
2- + The content of total nitrogen, nitrite (NO ), ammonia (NH4 ), total phosphorus, silicon (Si), ortophosphate, chlorophyll a, dichromate oxidizability (CODCr) and permanganate oxidizability (COD ) decrease from south to north, while water transparency, alkalinity (HCO -), sulphate 2-Mn - 2+ 2+ 3 (SO4 ), chloride (Cl ), calcium (Ca ) and magnesium (Mg ) ions have the opposite trend. The first trend is caused by the impact of the pollution loads from big cities, Pskov (mainly to Lake Pihkva/Pskovskoe) and Tartu (to southern part of Lake Peipsi s.s. and to Lake Lämmijärv/Teploe). The second trend is caused by the impact of the oil-shale mines and their sediment basins for water pumped out from the mines, which finally reaches the lake. Also a large-scale expansion of reeds has taken place. State of the Lake and Basin Environments
Eutrophication is the major environmental issue in the lake basin due to the nutrient load to the shallow lake. The main source of nutrient water pollution of Lake Peipsi is agriculture and municipal wastewaters. With the expected in future economic growth in the region, there is a danger of an increase of the nutrient load into the lake from agriculture and other sources in correlation with the economic recovery of the region. Potential increase of the agricultural production in future without improvement in agricultural practices can considerably affect potential of the lake for supporting important Baltic Sea area habitats for wildlife, especially
12 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe birds. During the last half of this century, ecological conditions of L. Peipsi have been constantly worsening. In the 1960’s the lake was classified as mesotrophic. The eutrophication in 1970-80’s has caused the higher vegetation (mainly reeds) to spread and grow thicker.
Potential danger of overfishing is the second major environmental challenge to be address in the lake basin. Peipsi is one of the best lakes in Europe for commercial fishing. A risk of overfishing in the region remains as long as the high pressure to the lake fish resources remains. To reduce the stress to the fish resources, it is necessary to improve economic development conditions in the region: to address the problem of high unemployment and monofunctional development of lakeside municipalities. There is a need in diversifying economic activities in the region. Transboundary Water Policies, Stakeholder Involvement
In the beginning of 1990s there was no intergovernmental agreement signed between Estonia and Russia that would regulate the use of natural resources in the border area. The political climate of region was quite complicated. Even though the water quality monitoring of the lake has long traditions, the parties did not have experience in cooperating on water monitoring while Estonia was responsible for monitoring activities during the Soviet time on the whole lake area. In the beginning of 1990s there were no efforts to organize joint monitoring programme nor exchange and analyses of the available data. Also the economic crisis made monitoring problematic: the laboratory equipment in Russia is in most cases old, and chemicals and consumable supplies are too expensive or difficult to obtain. Besides, heritage of Soviet administrative and legal system did not support public participation and transparent management of resources; therefore the initiatives of collaboration on international level relied heavily on personal contacts and wider, unorganised public did not have possibility to promote water management.
International basin level policies
The Estonian and Russian governments are signatories to the UN ECE Transboundary Water Convention (1992). The two governments have signed a bilateral intergovernmental agreement on the use and protection of their transboundary waters in 1997. According to the agreement, the Estonian-Russian Transboundary Water Commission (further the Joint Commission) was established. The Commission has proven to be important for communicating differences in positions and coordinate actions of the two governments as well as coordinating international initiatives. The Commission adopts its working plans and decisions at its annual meeting. Four expert working groups created under the Commission (working groups on monitoring and research; water management; water quality; and cooperation with local authorities, NGOs and international organizations) that include Estonian and Russian experts, conduct studies and prepare background information for the decisions to be made by the Commission. Experience of work of the Commission shows that successful start of cooperative management of transboundary waters after years of economic crisis and political difficulties is possible, if there is a political will of the parties and if the parties create formal (legal and agreed procedures) mechanisms and means for cooperation. The joint water commission is an important institution that can effectively coordinate implementation of integrated water management approaches organized by the riparian parties – Estonia and Russia.
Members of the joint commission represent different organizations involved in transboundary water management so that different perspectives are represented: the Joint Commission includes representatives of ministries of the environment and foreign affairs, border guards, regional and local authorities. Having representatives it creates conditions for adopting the most viable working solutions to addressing water management challenges in the lake basin.
13 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
Speaking about effectiveness of the existing institutional arrangements for transboundary water management in the Lake Peipsi Basin, it is worth to mention that the Commission lacks capacity for implementation of integrated water management approaches in the transboundary water basin. The working groups due to the lack of financial and human resources do not meet more often than once a year; information on the working groups’ meetings is not disseminated widely (the minutes are available on the request but no active dissemination of the Commission materials is taking place), implementation of working plans are sometimes delayed and the Commission website was not updated for about year. The Russian side of the Commission that has a long term experience of work in the transboundary water commission with Finland as well as with China and other countries on the eastern borders of Russia and it seems this experience is well used to develop a better cooperation also in the Estonian – Russian transboundary water area.
The Commission established a formal mechanism for development of co-operation with local authorities, NGOs and stakeholders, which allows NGOs and local stakeholders in the region to communicate their issues and interests directly to the intergovernmental commission. However, only few regional NGOs are involved in the work of the Commission; capacity of most of local NGOs and stakeholder groups is low although growing and external financial support is necessary to promote development of capacity of local NGOs and stakeholders to enable them to get involved in management of transboundary waters shared by countries in transition. Regional NGOs, such as Peipsi Center for Transboundary Co-operation (Peipsi CTC) and Council for Co-operation of Border Regions, co-operate with the local authorities and stakeholders on regional development projects as well as on educational, research and social projects in the region. Peipsi CTC is also actively involved in the work of the Estonian – Russian Transboundary Water Commission. Involving small NGOs, local and regional authorities and businessmen in the Lake Peipsi region into the work of the Transboundary Water Commission remains one of the challenges to be addressed in the future by the Commission. The Estonian-Russian intergovernmental transboundary water commission coordinates national implementation of measures for protection and sustainable use of water resources on the two sides of the Lake Peipsi Basin.
Central: state and federal level
On the state (Russia – federal) level, governments implement national legislation and plans that promote sustainable use of natural resources in the Lake Peipsi Basin. Russian Water Code was adopted in 1995 that provides legal basis for water protection measures in the Lake Peipsi Basin and in Russia as a whole. Estonian Water Act was adopted in 2000.
Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive in Estonia. Estonia's wish to quickly accede to the EU has brought about the need to adapt the Estonian legislative and administrative systems to EU requirements. Within this process, the Estonian Water Act also has been harmonized with the EU Water Framework Directive. In accordance with the EU Water Framework Directive, since 1 April 2001 Estonia has 8 sub-catchment areas and one nitrate-sensitive area and in each one of these a responsible catchment administration will also be set up.
European Water Policy and Russia. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) of the European Union does not have mandatory character for Russia as far as EU WFD is compulsory only for the members of the EU and recommended for accession-countries. Nevertheless, it could be used for transboundary basins located on the territory of Russian Federation because it is dealing with the questions of joint water management in the case of EU and third-countries transboundary waters. In fact Russian water authorities started to implement joint approaches based on the principles of the EU WFD on the transboundary Finnish – Russian waters. There is willingness on the Russian side to harmonize approaches with the Estonian water authorities and implement jointly principles of the European water legislation also on the Estonian – Russian transboundary
14 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
waters. The Russian Water Code – the main piece of the Russian federal water legislation – is in overall based on the same ecosystem and basin management principles used in the EU WFD although still arrangements for reporting, etc. are still different in the Russian Water Code and the EU WFD. At the World Summit for Sustainable Development (Johannesburg, September 2002), the EU launched a Strategic Partnership on Water with States of Eastern Europe (including Russia), Caucasus and Central Asia where also Russia will implement some of the requirements of the EU Water Policy. Within EU TACIS projects and on transboundary waters of Russia with Finland and Estonia, Russian government agencies are already involved in pilot activities of implementation of the WFD in Russian water basins that are usually transboundary waters shared by Russia with EU Member and Accession states. The new Russian Water Code that is being drafted in the spirit of the EU Water Framework Directive. This gives a good opportunity to better coordinate work on national strategies between Estonia as an the EU Accession State and Russia on their shared waters.
Major actors in policy implementation on the subregional level
Local authorities and stakeholders. Most of local authorities in the region are small and are located in rural areas. To enforce water protection measures in the Lake Peipsi basin, involvement of local authorities in implementation of such measures as construction of wastewater treatment plants, coastal zone management, is critical. However, local authorities lack capacity and financial means to implement environmental protection measures independently. They also lack the capacity to draft sound project proposals and sufficient knowledge on the possible alternative strategies to generate additional financial resources. As an answer to these local impediments, we recommend that international and national environmental financing plans are designed and adopted in consultation with local authorities and stakeholders, this would ensure that local sustainable development priorities are met and financial means are effectively used to decrease the pollution load. More efforts should be put to develop capacity of local authorities to implementation of international and national legal acts aimed at environmental protection in the Lake Peipsi Basin.
The main problem in the Lake Peipsi region is that both the local authorities and the local population lack the economic means to generate these leverage funds. Offered EU funds to infrastructure projects are often too large and small municipalities are not able to get use of them. They also lack the capacity to draft sound project proposals and sufficient knowledge on the possible alternative strategies to generate additional financial resources.
NGOs. Regional NGO Support centers established in 1990s in Tartu and Pskov, try to promote more profound NGO involvement in environmental decision-making on local and regional levels in the lake basin. There are a growing number of grassroot non-profit organizations in both Estonia and Russia that deal with environmental protection and sustainable development issues in the Lake Peipsi Basin. However, still most of small organizations in the region are weak and do not have sufficient capacity for large-scale activities. The major NGO that deals with transboundary cooperation in the Lake Peipsi Basin is an international non-profit Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation (Peipsi CTC) (www.ctc.ee). The Peipsi CTC was formed on the basis of Lake Peipsi Project. Established in 1993, the Lake Peipsi Project was an informal network of researchers who were interested in studies of environmental issues in the Lake Peipsi Basin. Today Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation is an international, non-governmental organization that works to promote sustainable development and transboundary cooperation in the border areas of the Baltic States and the New Independent States. Peipsi CTC main programs are Lake Peipsi Water Management, NGOs and Civil Society, and Lake Peipsi Ecotourism Program. Peipsi CTC organized every year “Lake Peipsi Forum” – an international conference that brings together representatives of the governments of Estonia and Russia, international organizations working in the region, municipalities, businesses,
15 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe and NGOs around the lake basin. There are more and more smaller NGOs get involved in the transboundary water projects but there is a need in additional capacity building measures and financial support to promote their involvement in water management on the transboundary water basin.
Scientists and educators. Estonian and Russian universities started their cooperation – joint seminars, research, and educational projects and students’ exchanges in the 1990s. Currently Tartu University in Estonia cooperates with Pskov Pedagogical University, Pskov private Volny Institute, and St. Petersburg State University in Russia. There are also joint projects and summer camps on the lake organized jointly by NGOs, regional and local authorities and high schools from Tartu and Pskov regions that bring together school children from both sides of the Lake. Since 1996, every year more than 5000 schoolchildren from the region participate in an international children's creative works contest “World of Water Through the Eyes of Children.”
There are a number of multilateral large-scale research projects where universities and other organization from the Lake Peipsi Area participate. Thirteen research institutions from six countries in Europe, including organizations from Estonia and Russia, are involved in a three-year research project “Integrated Strategies for the Management of Transboundary Waters on the European fringe – the pilot study of Lake Peipsi and its drainage basin” (MANTRA-East) supported by the EU. This project produces multiple research reports and publications that are actively used in preparation of management plans of the Lake Peipsi Basin. The MANTRA East project also produced a transboundary GIS system and as a central instrument for the information dissemination on the lake basin environmental issues a regional Lake Peipsi web portal that shall exist principally for the collection, processing and dissemination of information pertaining to the Lake Peipsi region. The portal that is available in Estonian, Russian and English languages at www.peipsi.org, with the aid of innovative web technologies has the potential to tailor otherwise highly specialized environmental information pertaining to the Lake Peipsi Region to the individual needs of any stakeholder, including municipal government officials, businessmen, schools, NGOs and the local public. The portal uses tools such as GIS software, which allows interactive use of maps and provides important information on the Lake Peipsi fauna, flora and various environmental challenges to the area. In addition, to sort through excessive information that may exist on the web, the portal also includes semantic web tools that limit information search results to relevant environmental information on the region in question. Semantic Web (“next generation web”) is an extension of the current web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation. Information on the portal is structured using the DPSIR framework (driving forces-pressures-stress-impact-responses) was used (see more on the DPSIR framework at the European Environmental Agency at www.eea.int). In order not to overwhelm the average user with information a pre-constructed hierarchical navigation system was implemented. There are four different ways to browse the contents of the portal: via a common hierarchical structure organised into main- and subcategories of which the main categories are accessible from every page; via a references system that is attached to every bit of information; via a direct keyword search; and via the GIS map. Visitors can run queries based on the GIS map of the Peipsi region. Altogether, the benefits of this portal are two fold. On the one hand, it facilitates the research process by allowing users to find only the most relevant information without having to waste time sifting through unnecessary sources. On the other, it helps users to understand the extent of connections between different concepts and keywords encountered on daily basis. Water managers and consultants actively use research projects results, such as results of studies within the MANTRA East project.
International organizations
16 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
The transboundary cooperation on Lake Peipsi became possible thanks to the assistance of international donor organizations and governments of the Nordic countries, Denmark, the European Union and the US government. In terms of funding of transboundary cooperation, due to a lack of financial resources to support the transboundary cooperation, the governments pay costs of the Transboundary Water Commission’s secretarial staff, while scientists, interested parties, local authorities and non-governmental organizations (NGO) fund themselves and also receive support to implement the transboundary water agreement from international foundations and organizations. The international funding possibilities are discussed at annual meetings of the Commission and are used to implement priority activities under its working plan. For example, support for the Commission's work is coming from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the non-profit organization Peipsi Centre for Transboundary Cooperation (Peipsi CTC), with implementation units on both sides of the lake, to develop coordinated environmental monitoring programs and to promote information dissemination in the Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe region. As a result of the Swedish EPA funded projects, nutrient load calculations for the lake basin were accomplished, an electronic communication network was developed that joined all Commission members and experts; the Commission website is to be ready in summer 2001. With the support of the Danish EPA, a strategy for pollution load reduction (phosphorus and organic pollution) was prepared and cooperation with local authorities and businesses was strengthened.
As Lake Peipsi is a relatively new transboundary water basin (Estonia separated from Soviet Union in 1991 and border (control line) formed between Estonia and Russia), the procedures of international co-ordination of water management have to be elaborated. This is especially a challenge in the situation when Estonia will enter the European Union and is adopting EU standards and norms that are different form norms of standards in Russia. This task in the context of an international lake shared by transition countries is not easy to achieve – development of co-operative integrated water management is a long process, and along with water management issues, economic and social development problems should be resolved. The European Union and the Global Environmental Facility provided financial support to the Estonian and Russian governments to develop and start implementation of water management plans in the Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe Basin. In 2002, EU LIFE – Environment Programme approved funding to the Estonian government to prepare Lake Peipsi Catchment Management Plan for the Estonian side of transboundary water basin that is to implement requirements of the Estonian national legislation and the EU WFD. In 2003, EU TACIS Programme supported preparation of the Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe Basin Management Plan on the Russian side of the lake basin in accord to the Russian Water Code as well as the EU water legislation. While the mentioned two programs are implemented only on one side of the lake basin, the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) through United Nations Development Programme provided support for cooperative work in both countries worth US$1M to launch the three-year transboundary Lake Peipsi Basin Management Programme (2003 – 2005). The UNDP/GEF project supports water management measures that are of importance for the whole basin. It is important that the GEF supports involvement of local authorities, stakeholders and NGOs in transboundary environmental cooperation. The mentioned EU LIFE, TACIS and UNDP/GEF projects also include implementation of a wide range of technical activities such as monitoring and sampling, environmental assessment of pollution and pilot projects aimed at reducing nutrients in the lake. Cooperation and coordination of activities between these three major initiatives is organized through having the same representatives of the Estonian and Russian governments on the three projects’ steering committees; joint working plans on specific project components, joint events and activities, regular meetings of projects’ teams between each other and finally by the way of information exchange through linked between each other websites and email lists.
Information and Communication Strategy and Tools for Management of Transboundary Waters
17 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
The UNPD/GEF Lake Peipsi basin management program is a joint program of measures in the transboundary Estonian – Russian basin aimed to reduce and prevent pollution in the water basin and to promote the sustainable development. To facilitate effective implementation of the Lake Peipsi Basin Management Program, an Information and Communication Strategy for dissemination of scientific and technical information on preparation and implementation of the Management Program to local stakeholders in the lake region (further: Communication Strategy) was prepared and tested. The Communication Strategy may serve as an example of some directions for generation of usable knowledge on an international river basin level. The regional non-governmental organization, Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation organized work on preparation of the Communication Strategy. Universities both on Estonian and Russian sides of the border as well as companies dealing with information management and technologies also participate in the development of the Communication Strategy for the Lake Peipsi basin. The local team actively utilized the knowledge existing in other regions in Europe and America on preparation of this type of communication plans; also results of earlier international projects conducted by international organizations and researchers in the Lake Peipsi Basin were extensively used in the process.
Preparation of the Communication Strategy started with identification of the main water management issues and major stakeholder groups in the lake basin through organizing expert interviews with specialists and officials involved in implementation of national water policies in the respective countries – Estonia and Russia. On the basis of the expert interviews and additional research conducted, a joint database with contact information for people and organizations involved in water management issues was developed and set up in Internet in three languages – English, Estonian and Russian.
Once the stakeholders have been identified, the next step was to figure out their concerns and pressing issues. To identify interests of the stakeholder groups, the following approaches were used: questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, and public forums. Based on the mapping of the stakeholders’ needs, reports were prepared that contained specific recommendations for information dissemination strategy including formats of the information presentation and channels of communication and dissemination.
Next step in the development of the communication included development of mechanisms to compile and “translate” a tremendous amount of environmental information and turn this into “usable knowledge” by the stakeholders. The data should have been customized to meet the needs of every stakeholder. However, efficiency should have also been taken into account, and therefore a mechanism that meets the widest range of stakeholder needs was the ideal method for disseminating information. The conducted studies allowed to conclude that the mechanism of “translation” of the raw data into “usable knowledge” should ensure that the information users receive is: • Easy to use/understand: users are seeking knowledge, and therefore information must be accessible through the user-friendliest method possible; • Accurate and relevant, tailor made to the needs of stakeholders; The mechanism should provide a possibility to sift through this body of data and present only relevant, and therefore usable information; • If the problem is geographic in nature, maps that explain and identify the area in question would be more useful than textual description; • Constructed to meet the needs of the most number of people. Highly specialized mechanisms that reach only few groups of stakeholders do little service to meeting the needs of the general public.
To develop such a mechanism was a serious challenge especially in this lake basin area that can be considered as a combination of 'data-rich' and 'information-poor' area, with respect to
18 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
environmental information, as the access and availability of data is scattered in the region. Each country – Estonia and Russia - collects and analyses environmental information on the lake basin on its own manner. These data are occasionally exchanged between experts of the Estonian-Russian Joint Commission and its working groups. Estonia and Russia already have got different monitoring methods and equipment as well as norms and standards. These differences cause different approaches towards environmental assessment that makes joint assessment of the lake status something very complicated. Information is presented in different languages and different formats on Estonian and Russian side. For example, in Estonia, Internet based solutions are already widely spread also in the rural area, as there is a support from the government provided to promote a higher computer and Internet use by a maximum amount of the population in Estonia. On the Russian side of the basin due to technological limitations, such as poor telephone lines or absence of appropriate computer technology, use of the Internet is limited. Based on the analysis of the stakeholder information needs, Peipsi CTC developed the Communication Strategy that was based on a combination of diverse interactive approaches such as focus groups and group interviews, email lists in the local languages, interactive websites but also an active use of mass media including newspapers, magazines, television, radio, etc.; meetings, campaigns, and conferences; cultural events including contests, tours as well as local community venues, including bulletin boards in schools, stores, community centres; and publications, such as brochures, pamphlets, and flyers.
Peipsi CTC has created as a central instrument for the information dissemination on the lake basin environmental issues a regional Lake Peipsi web portal that shall exist principally for the collection, processing and dissemination of information pertaining to the Lake Peipsi region. The portal that is available in Estonian, Russian and English languages at www.peipsi.org, with the aid of innovative web technologies has the potential to tailor otherwise highly specialized environmental information pertaining to the Lake Peipsi Region to the individual needs of any stakeholder, including municipal government officials, businessmen, schools, NGOs and the local public. The portal uses tools such as GIS software, which allows interactive use of maps and provides important information on the Lake Peipsi fauna, flora and various environmental challenges to the area. In addition, to sort through excessive information that may exist on the web, the portal also includes semantic web tools that limit information search results to relevant environmental information on the region in question. Semantic Web (“next generation web”) is an extension of the current web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation. Information on the portal is structured using the DPSIR framework (driving forces-pressures-stress-impact-responses) was used (see more on the DPSIR framework at the European Environmental Agency at www.eea.int). In order not to overwhelm the average user with information a pre-constructed hierarchical navigation system was implemented. There are four different ways to browse the contents of the portal: via a common hierarchical structure organised into main- and subcategories of which the main categories are accessible from every page; via a references system that is attached to every bit of information; via a direct keyword search; and via the GIS map. Visitors can run queries based on the GIS map of the Peipsi region. Altogether, the benefits of this portal are two fold. On the one hand, it facilitates the research process by allowing users to find only the most relevant information without having to waste time sifting through unnecessary sources. On the other, it helps users to understand the extent of connections between different concepts and keywords encountered on daily basis.
While the Internet has a great potential for disseminating information, it is not yet completely accessible to all for various logistical reasons. Furthermore, it does not serve as a substitute for more traditional means of information communication and dissemination. While the Internet promises to be the major media of the future, for those who are currently without access to the World Wide Web, Peipsi CTC has developed various other methods to disseminate important information that were mentioned above. Other used approaches include a three-way interaction between the experts and scientists, politicians, and local stakeholders. This organised three-way
19 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe interaction should contribute to the social learning and development of the region-wide knowledge base for implementation of the Lake Peipsi Basin Management Programme.
Peipsi CTC has developed the Communication Strategy and the Lake Peipsi portal as a demonstration prototype of an effective tool for the information dissemination. However, the actual work on using the knowledge for effective implementation of water policies is still ahead. The next steps in implementation of the Communication Strategy for the Lake Peipsi Basin are to implement mechanisms for dissemination of relevant and understandable information in a manner that would guarantee their future use and actual generation of the usable knowledge. For example, in order for the information portal project to be successful, a marketing strategy has been elaborated that is to ensure that the portal would evolve into the main source of information about the Lake Peipsi region; its political, geographical, biological and social development. This marketing strategy is to be implemented to ensure that information resources of the lake regional portal are utilised.
Finally, on the Communication Strategy implementation stage, the feedback stage will be of paramount importance for it is then that the target audience can determine the true value of data compiled and disseminated through developed mechanisms. The feedback sessions should occur at staggered intervals over the course of a year after implementation, and then sparsely after this period. Feedback determines whether the dissemination strategy was successful, or whether the process must be started again. Lessons learned and recommended initiatives
Water management in a transboundary context is much more complex and multifaceted than water management within one nation - state. In the situation where there is no one government to manage the transboundary waters and there are different states with their distinct political and economic interests, different histories, cultures; all water management aspects become very political. They require much more information exchange and communication, deliberations on each issue that would result in common understanding of these issues between different actors and, first of all, between riparian governments involved in the management of transboundary waters. Good communication and developing trust is also important between the state and local levels. Trust building between actors involved in management of transboundary waters is the first and the most important step especially in the new border regions shared by countries in transition; and it takes special efforts and long period of time to achieve the trust between the partners. Therefore, transboundary water projects on the stage of development of transboundary water regimes should focus much more on communication, information exchange, developing confidence and trust between all the partners involved rather than in national water projects where usually water management are to be implemented in a homogeneous socio-economic, cultural, institutional and political context.
A major challenge to effective transboundary water management is differences in legislations and institutions in the riparian countries, disparities in procedures, monitoring strategies, environmental data and information gathering, and institutional organization. There is a need in developing in an interactive way joint strategies for integrated water management for whole transboundary water basins accepted by the riparian countries and all the stakeholders.
This again requires clear and regular communication between experts and stakeholders on different sides of the border. In the Lake Peipsi Basin, a communication and information strategy has been developed as a part of the transboundary lake basin management program and special tools for information exchange and communication were elaborated with the aim to facilitate effective management of transboundary waters. One important tool is a regional Lake Peipsi Internet portal at address www.peipsi.org that uses knowledge
20 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe management technological solutions to provide all interested in the comprehensive information on environmental issues and management of the lake basin. The portal exists in Estonian, Russian and English languages. The UNDP/GEF project also implements a pilot project on coordinated water monitoring in the lake basin and obtaining harmonized water monitoring data will support decision-making and planning.
In the Lake Peipsi Basin shared by Estonia and Russia, the transboundary water management regime does not have yet a long history – the lake became transboundary after the borderline between Estonia and Russia was reestablished at the beginning of the 1990s. Transboundary water management agreement was signed and a joint transboundary water commission was established in 1997. This rather short history of the transboundary water cooperation showed that the political will from the governments of the riparian countries is a prerequisite for the start of successful transboundary cooperation.
Also establishment of joint bodies for coordination of implementation of transboundary water agreements is another necessary step during the period of initiation of the cooperation. Joint bodies established by transboundary water agreements may vary as to format, structure or functions according the specific circumstances in question. The value of joint bodies comes from providing a forum for working together and for addressing and resolving common problems. Often joint bodies deal with difficult issues, some of which have large-scale environmental and economic impacts and some joint plans take a long time to resolve, but the process of working on those plans is important and as a rule as a result of these cooperative processes difficult plans and issues are resolved. Therefore, joint bodies present an instrument for resolving differences in opinions and potential conflicts and through that for promoting trust and good neighboring relationship between riparian countries.
When cooperation just starts, it is easy to get frustrated while observing multiple difficulties in the cooperation that arise from the lack of financing, experience as well as awareness of importance of the transboundary cooperation and lack of qualified specialists in transboundary water monitoring and management. In order to overcome this frustration, it is very important to look at water management as at a continuing process and see the process long-term goals, and major benefits of the cooperation. When possible, efforts should be put into developing shared visions and scenarios of the future of transboundary water basins; bringing multiple stakeholders into these discussions about the future is of an utmost importance.
Research and educational transboundary cooperation projects play an important role in elaborating visions, scenarios for transboundary water basins as well as helping to develop expertise and capacity of water experts in the region. Cooperation between research and educational organizations in the water basin is also important to produce shared and reliable information that can be further used to make management decisions. Coordination of information on research projects by transboundary water organization – the Joint Water Commission – allows to more efficiently using results of the research projects in preparation and implementation of water basin management plans. More independent research has to be encouraged to produce new ideas and approaches for more effective work of handing transboundary water management challenges. Many of the scientists working with water research, work as experts for joint water bodies. It is important to have a broad base of expertise among experts involved in transboundary water management. Role of experts is important in developing common ground for the environmental protection strategies to overcome existing differences in environmental standards, norms, legal and institutional frameworks.
The political as well as social and economic context and environmental challenges in transboundary water basins change with the time in every lake basin; and institutional arrangements should be established to be flexible and to accommodate the socio-economic and political changes that take place in the region.
21 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
To ensure that the institutional arrangements are updated to reflect changes in the cooperation context and environmental issues, a mechanism for regular evaluation of effectiveness of institutional arrangements should be set up. Having the evaluation mechanism would ensure the institutional arrangements fit to address priority environmental issues in a transboundary water region.
In scientific literature it is recognized importance of the formal mechanisms of evaluation but usually due to the financial difficulties or imperfections in institutional designs, these formal mechanisms do not exist. It seems that the most effective way to establish this kind of a mechanism is through setting up regular communication channels between relevant authorities and diverse groups of stakeholders in transboundary water basins and organizing regular discussions with local authorities and stakeholders of work of joint bodies and lake basin management plans.
Implementation of water protection measures requires considerable financial resources, usually much higher than are available in the transboundary water region. Implementation of water protection measures requires utilization of matching finances from the respective governments but as well as from regional and local authorities and the private sector. It is important to take into account that transboundary areas shared by countries in transition consist of peripheral and usually less economically developed regions of neighboring countries and budgets of local authorities are poor and not many private entrepreneurs in those border areas who also would be willing to put their resources into water protection – market for businessmen is much wider in capital areas where most of the wealth of countries is concentrated. In this context, it is an imperative especially in transboundary water basins shared by countries in transition bringing together within the water management basin plans environmental objectives with economic development priorities of the border regions that reflects priority interests of people living in transboundary water regions. This is the only way to ensure availability in the long term of financial resources for implementation of water protection measures.
To ensure an integrated approach to managing transboundary waters, it is important that members of joint bodies represent different organizations involved in water management on different levels so that different perspectives are represented: for example, it proved effective for example, for the Estonian – Russian joint commission to have in the commission not only representatives of ministries of the environment and foreign affairs, but also border guards, regional and local authorities. This composition of members of the joint bodies creates conditions for adopting the most viable working solutions to problems.
Involving local authorities and stakeholders into the work of joint bodies and preparation and implementation of transboundary water management plans is critically important to ensure that the inter-municipal cooperation is included into the transboundary water cooperation process. Involving municipalities and local stakeholders allows including the interests of the local population into implementation of transboundary water regimes. When implementing the proposals of joint bodies and riparian governments, ownership of the local population and the decision-making ministries is essential. Involving local stakeholders in the transboundary water management is not a luxury but a necessary condition for the long-term sustainable development. Developing social capital and promoting social learning, developing capacity through networking in the region and with experts and organizations in other transboundary water regions.
In future projects that support personal communication between local authorities and stakeholders, schools, their joint activities, are necessary. Support to the cross-border networks is important information exchange and communication across the border and promoting social learning. It is something what is very difficult to accomplish within the EU programs – the
22 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
practice shows that funding of PHARE program in Estonia and TACIS in Russia is almost impossible to coordinate. Possibilities for the better coordination of funding mechanisms should be found.
Incorporating unique history and cultural context of transboundary water regions into the water management. Considered the most historic body of waters in the Northern Europe, transboundary water organizations capitalize on people’s interest in the cultural heritage of the region to find a common ground and breakdown barriers to cooperation that had come about in more recent history. All of the transboundary lakes and rivers have unique histories and cultural heritage related to the water itself and in many cases this is reflected in the music, art, poetry, legends, architecture and other forms of cultural expression. Different cultural contexts need to be factored in to the design of lake basin management plans.
Effectiveness of the transboundary water cooperation depends on the range of differences in the levels of social and economic development on different sides of the borders. Studies showed that when these differences are not great, the differences could promote cooperation; if a gap in socio-economic development and political organization is as great as it prohibits partners on different sides of the border to understanding each other problems and issue; this could create mistrust and serious impediments to effective cooperation. If no arrangements are adopted to manage the disparities and also to overcome them, the growing gap in socio – economic development and living standards on different sides of the border, including norms and standards; as well as practices, and information between different sides of the border, is likely to become the main bottleneck to implementation of integrated water management strategies. The Estonian – Russian border area is one of the examples where a growing disparity in socio-economic development is a worrying feature that may become an impediment to the transboundary cooperation. It is obvious that the disparity will be the case as Estonia will become a member of the European Union and Russia will be on the external border of the EU. However, this gap should be manageable and would still allow understanding, trust and cooperation with Estonia; Estonian businesses should be still willing to invest on the Russian side of the border and Western tourists would be willing to visit the Russian side of the border region. To ensure this balance, it is important to provide more international, mostly EU, as well as Estonian government funding to the Russian side of the border for the infrastructure, building administrative and institutional capacity of stakeholders.
Finally, coordination of international water initiatives on the water basin level is of utmost importance and there is a positive experience of the coordination of international projects’ implementation in the Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe Basin. Coordination of preparation of the Estonian and Russian national plans of water protection measures and the Lake Peipsi transboundary water management program is organized through the development of detailed joint plans of work between the relevant authorities and these projects’ implementation units, regular consultations between the project managers and establishment of shared projects’ steering committees that include the same representatives from the Estonian and Russian relevant authorities who oversee implementation of all the major projects in the water basin. Acknowledgement
For description of the Lake Peipsi Basin in this report, the materials of the following projects were used: the EU FP5 research project ’Integrated strategies for the management of transboundary waters on the Eastern European fringe – the pilot study of Lake Peipsi and its drainage basin’ (website: www.mantraeast.org); the Peipsi case study report prepared for the UN World Water Development Report (2003) and Peipsi case report for the Global Water Partnership Toolbox (www.gwpforum.org).
23 Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe
References
Literature
Geoffrey D. Gooch, Pär Höglund, Gulnara Roll, Natalia Alekseeva. 2002. Review of Existing Structures, Models and Practices for Transboundary Water Management. MANTRA East Report D1b, 227 p. Nõges, T., Ed. 2001. Lake Peipsi. Hydrology, Meteorology, Hydrochemistry. Tallinn, Sulemees Publishers. Pihu, E. and Habermann, J. 2001. Lake Peipsi. Flora and Fauna. Tallinn, Sulemees Publishers. Russian Scientific Research Institute of Water Management. 2000. Assessment of Transboundary Water Pollution from Emissions of the Estonian and Baltic Thermal Power Stations. St. Petersburg, Russia (in Rus.) Stålnacke, P.,Sülts, U., Vasiliev, A., Skakalsky, B., Botina, A., Roll, G., Pachel, K.,and Maltsman, T. 2002. An assessment of riverine loads of nutrients to Lake Peipsi, 1995-1998. Large Rivers Vol. 13:3-4. Archiv Fur Hydrobiol. Suppl. 141/3-4: 437-457. Timmerman, J.G., Kipper, K., Meiner, A., Mol, S., Nieuwenhuis, D., Roll, G., Säre, M., Sults, Ü. and Unt, P. 2002. The use and valuing of environmental information in the decision making process: an experimental study. Workshop report. RIZA report no. 2002.069X. RIZA, Lelystad, The Netherlands. UN/WWAP (United Nations/World Water Assessment Programme). 2003. UN World Water Development Report: Water for People, Water for Life. Paris, New York and Oxford, UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and Berghahn Books. Websites
Lake Peipsi regional portal – www.peipsi.org UNDP/GEF Lake Peipsi/Chudskoe Basin Management Programme – www.peipsi.org/gef MANTRA East project – www.mantraeast.org Estonian – Russian Transboundary Water Commission – www.envir.ee/jc Estonian Ministry of the Environment – www.envir.ee Russian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources – www.mnr.gov.ru Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation – www.ctc.ee EU LIFE project “Catchment Area Water Management Plans for Viru and Peipsi” - http://www.envir.ee/viru.peipsi/ EU FP5 project “Empowerment and Awareness Building in River Basin Management Through Focus Groups and Citizens Juries - River Dialogue” – www.riverdialogue.org
24