<<

PHOTO: ANDREAS TREPTE

USAID/ FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT 119 ANALYSIS

SEPTEMBER 2020

DISCLAIMER

This report is made possible by the support of the American People through the Agency for International Development (USAID). The Cadmus Group LLC and ICF prepared this report under USAID’s Environmental Compliance Support (ECOS) Contract, Contract Number GS00Q14OADU119, Order No. 7200AA18N00001 for USAID/Armenia. ECOS is implemented by ICF and its subcontractors. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States .

USAID/ARMENIA FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT 119 BIODIVERSITY ANALYSIS

SEPTEMBER 2020

Prepared by: The Cadmus Group LLC and ICF

FAA 119 Analysis Team: Elisa Perry, Raymond von Culin, Alla Aleksanyan, Karen Aghababyan, Paola Bernazzani, Jaime Capron, Carmen Saab, Taner Durusu

The Cadmus Group, L.L.C. 100 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Waltham, MA 02451 +1-617-673-7000 Fax +1-617-673-7001 www.cadmusgroup.com

ICF 9300 Lee Highway Fairfax, VA 22031 USA +1-703-934-3000 www.icf.com

ACRONYMS

ADB ADS Automated Directives System AMD Armenia Dram CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered of Wild Fauna and CR Critically Endangered CSO Civil Society Organization DO Development Objective DRG (USAID) Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance EAEU EaP EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EN Endangered ENP European Neighbourhood Policy EU FAA Foreign Assistance Act FAO Food and Organization GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environmental Facility GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic Information System GOAM HDI Human Development Index IAS Invasive Alien Species IBA Important Area ICS Integrated Country Strategy ICT Information and communications technology IPA Important Area IRs Intermediate Results IUCN International Union for the Conservation of IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS i

KBA Key Biodiversity Area kWh kilowatt-hour LC Least Concerned MLET Market Liberalization and Electricity Trade Program MoE Ministry of Environment MW megawatt NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan NGO Non-governmental Organization NT Near Threatened PAD Project Appraisal Document PES Payment for Services PPP Public Private Partnership REC Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus SPNA Specially Protected Nature Areas UN UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Change USAID United States Agency for International Development USG United States Government VU Vulnerable WWF World Wildlife Fund

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS ii

CONTENTS ACRONYMS ...... I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... V INTRODUCTION ...... 1 PURPOSE ...... 1 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE USAID PROGRAM IN ARMENIA ...... 1 METHODOLOGY ...... 2 COUNTRY CONTEXT ...... 2 LOCATION AND COUNTRY CONTEXT ...... 2 BIOPHYSICAL SETTING ...... 3 STATUS OF ARMENIA’S BIODIVERSITY ...... 5 MAJOR ECOSYSTEM TYPES AND STATUS ...... 5 NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY ...... 9 STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF PROTECTED AREAS ...... 10 STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF KEY NATURAL RESOURCES OUTSIDE PROTECTED AREAS .... 15 VALUE AND ECONOMIC POTENTIAL ...... 16 VALUE OF BIODIVERSITY ...... 17 ECOSYSTEM GOODS AND SERVICES ...... 19 LEGAL FRAMEWORK AFFECTING CONSERVATION ...... 25 NATIONAL LAWS, POLICIES, AND STRATEGIES ...... 25 INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS ...... 26 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS ...... 28 CONSERVATION INITIATIVES: GAP ANALYSIS ...... 29 6 THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY ...... 30 6.1 THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY ...... 31 6.2 DRIVERS OF THREATS ...... 38 7 ACTIONS TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY ...... 43 8 “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY ...... 51 9 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 61 9.1 RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY ...... 61 9.2 RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE NEW CDCS ...... 61 ANNEXES ...... 69 ANNEX A. SCOPE OF WORK ...... 70 ANNEX B. KEY ANALYSIS TEAM MEMBER BIOS ...... 76 ANNEX C. LIST OF REFERENCES CONSULTED...... 78 ANNEX D. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION GUIDANCE ...... 87 ANNEX E. TABLE OF NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES RELATED TO BIODIVERSITY ...... 88 ANNEX F. TABLE OF KEY GOVERNMENT-ADMINISTERED SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE AREAS (SPNAS) ...... 92

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS iii

ANNEX G. KEY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES ...... 94 ANNEX H. MAPS ...... 97

LIST OF TABLES TABLE ES 1. RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE CURRENT CDCS ...... 1 TABLE 1. USAID/ARMENIA PROGRAM ...... 2 TABLE 2. NATIONAL PARKS OF ARMENIA ...... 11 TABLE 3. STATE RESERVES OF ARMENIA ...... 12 TABLE 4. RAMSAR WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE IN ARMENIA ...... 15 TABLE 5. EXPENDITURE OF ON ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION ...... 18 TABLE 6. GOAM STATE BUDGET FROM 2010-2019 ...... 19 TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY ...... 31 TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS ...... 38 TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS ...... 43 TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY ...... 52 TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE CURRENT CDCS ...... 62 TABLE 12. NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES PERTAINING TO BIODIVERSITY ...... 88 TABLE 13. KEY GOVERNMENT-ADMINISTERED SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE AREAS (SPNAS) ...... 92 TABLE 14. KEY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES ...... 94

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. MAP OF THE REGIONS OF THE OF ARMENIA ...... 4 FIGURE 2. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ...... 16 FIGURE 3: MAP OF THE COVER OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA ...... 97 FIGURE 4: MAP OF THE OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA ...... 98 FIGURE 5: MAP OF THE MAJOR SURFACE LAKES AND RIVERS OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA...... 99 FIGURE 6: MAP OF THE PROTECTED AREAS OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA ...... 100 FIGURE 7: MAP OF ARMENIAN MINES ...... 101

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Biodiversity Analysis (Analysis) has been prepared for USAID/Armenia (the Mission) as they begin the process of updating their Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS), which will cover the period 2020-2025. This Analysis fulfills Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) Section 119, which requires that all USAID Missions address the following:

Country Analysis Requirements. Each country development strategy, statement, or other country plan prepared by USAID shall include an assessment of:

• The actions necessary in that country to conserve biological diversity, and • The extent to which the actions proposed for support by the Agency meet the needs identified.

USAID best practice guidance further advises that this Analysis provide an overview of the conservation status of biodiversity in Armenia, the stakeholders involved, and a series of recommendations that USAID/Armenia can consider as the new CDCS is developed. It is not expected that the new CDCS will differ substantially from the existing strategy, with a two-pronged focus on democracy and governance and economic growth. Within these technical areas, there are opportunities available to include biodiversity elements.

Background. Armenia is part of the larger Caucasus , recognized as among the richest and most vulnerable in the world in terms of biodiversity. Characterized by mountainous landscape and climatic contradictions, Armenia’s unique terrain has resulted in the formation of diverse ecosystems rich in biodiversity with high species endemism. A high number of species can be found in country due to the great altitudinal variation and the diversity of the vegetative zones.

Methodology. The Analysis Team conducted a desk study and remotely interviewed over 30 stakeholders. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, visits to key conservation areas and to assess the direct threats and drivers were not undertaken. The direct threats are listed according to priority; drivers are presented without prioritization given that many influence multiple threats.

Priority Threats. Major direct threats to Armenian biodiversity include the following:

• Mining, including mining waste • Excessive water extraction and use • Untreated/poorly treated wastewater • Illegal/unregulated logging • Climate change • development, including hydropower • Deterioration of water quality in • Agricultural practices, including grazing • Pests, diseases, and invasive species • Illegal/unregulated/poorly regulated hunting and fishing

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS v

Associated Drivers. Drivers behind these threats are factors at the policy, institutional, and economic levels. In Armenia, these include:

• Poor social and economic conditions • Lack of institutional capacity and prioritization and a legacy of corruption • Poor management of supply and consumption • Lack of public environmental awareness • Lack of environmental data and monitoring • Limited capacity to secure resources for environmental investments • Legislative gaps and lack of transparency • Weak coordination between government and other environmental actors

Actions Necessary to Address Threats and Drivers. The actions necessary to address these direct threats and drivers are provided in Section 7 and include items derived from literature reviews, stakeholder consultations, and the Analysis Team’s expertise. Many of these are specific to biodiversity initiatives and should be undertaken by organizations focusing on conservation.

USAID’s Role. Some actions necessary could be implemented by USAID/Armenia technical offices that focus on democracy and governance and economic growth (Sections 8 and 9). The “extent to which” the Mission addresses the actions necessary for biodiversity conservation include the following:

• Development Objective (DO) 1: Democratic transition advanced; Effective and accountable governance institutionalized (Intermediate Result [IR] 1.1); and Citizen engagement for democratic consolidation increased (IR 1.2). • DO 2: Economic security enhanced; Economic governance strengthened (IR 2.1); Competitiveness of targeted sectors increased (IR 1.2); and Sustainable management of natural resources improved (IR 1.3).

Recommendations. Based on the findings in this Analysis, recommendations are made for the Mission to address the actions necessary to conserve biodiversity in Armenia. These recommendations are made based on the work of other donors and organizations, an assessment of the comparative advantages of the Mission, and feedback received from USAID staff during the Analysis Team’s stakeholder consultations. These include short-term, long-term, and future considerations; attainable, short-term recommendations based on the draft results framework for the 2020-2025 CDCS are provided below.

TABLE ES 1. RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE (SHORT-TERM) DO 1: DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION ADVANCED Capacity-building Invest in biodiversity capacity-building activities for government IR 1.1: Effective and accountable officials at every level to develop new and innovative ideas to governance institutionalized address social and economic challenges, especially in rural areas IR 1.2 Citizen engagement for democratic or for vulnerable populations (e.g., job training, community consolidation increased engagement activities support). Integrate environmental impacts knowledge into capacity-building activities for all implementers.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 1

TABLE ES 1. RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE (SHORT-TERM) Provide technical assistance to local governments to better address environmental concerns, including on environmental compliance, avoiding invasive species, and on local policy development or community communications strategies. Incorporate questions about the environment and natural resource management into citizen opinion surveys, focus groups, and other data collection tools and support government management and public dissemination of that information, including an emphasis on the link between natural resources and ecosystem services. Support training of local civil society organizations to field surveys and monitoring activities related to biodiversity. Rule of Law Strengthen judicial practices related to environmental crime, IR 1.1 Effective and accountable governance including by the incremental implementation of new policies and institutionalized laws to monitor how actions impact citizen behavior (e.g., pilot programs to manage resources and address corruption). Education Integrate conservation education into youth, women, and IR 1.2 Citizen engagement for democratic vulnerable populations programming to improve knowledge and consolidation increased engagement. DO 2: ECONOMIC SECURITY ENHANCED Economic development projects Support appropriate review of all development projects and IR 2.1 Economic governance strengthened; ensure that biodiversity is adequately considered during project IR 2.2 Competitiveness of targeted sectors development. increased Support the development of management action plans for all types of small and medium enterprise projects, especially those with natural resource implications. Management action plans may influence the design, process, and sale of goods and services in a way that supports biodiversity preservation. Support community-based natural resource management programming designed to boost private-sector engagement and promote sustainable utilization of natural resources. Job creation Ensure that environmental considerations are not secondary to IR 2.2 Competitiveness of targeted sectors economic growth objectives in any USAID/Armenia projects (e.g., increased prioritize job creation in sectors such as eco-, and/or support sustainable management positions in agriculture, water resources, etc.) Propagate job opportunities – including 21st century jobs, for example in information and communications technology (ICT) – in both rural and urban areas to reduce reliance on illegal or extractive activities. Energy Encourage efforts that diversify, promote, and improve renewable IR 2.2 Competitiveness of targeted sectors energy production, costs, and use nationwide and in rural areas increased; IR 2.3 Sustainable management (e.g., in solar or ). Support the development and/or of natural resources improved application of energy-efficiency best practices.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 2

TABLE ES 1. RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE (SHORT-TERM) Eco- and Wildlife Tourism Support environmental eco- and wildlife tourism and sustainably IR 2.2 Competitiveness of targeted sectors grow Armenia’s tourism industry (e.g., through strategic planning increased; IR 2.3 Sustainable management for tourism development, especially activities that will promote of natural resources improved and encourage observation and monitoring). Agriculture Provide support to rural communities to put greater value on IR 2.2 Competitiveness of targeted sectors best practices, ecological concerns, and sustainable value chains increased; IR 2.3 Sustainable management with growth potential, including through an emphasis on organic of natural resources improved certification and relevant sectors in the tourism industry; education campaigns; and funding mechanisms. Water Continue or expand monitoring activities under the ASPIRED IR 2.2 Competitiveness of targeted sectors program, including increasing the number of technological tools increased; IR 2.3 Sustainable management utilized, the number of monitoring/ observation wells, and of natural resources improved integrating data management systems. Support optimization of additional wells and develop well closure standards. Expand research, investment, and technical assistance into water- use infrastructure, such as water treatment, wastewater treatment, and/or (waste)water reuse/recycle systems to support both improved water quality and water use efficiency. CROSS-CUTTING Specially Protected Nature Areas Support efforts to collect, share, and manage biodiversity data Support throughout the specially protected nature areas (SPNA) system Cross-cutting and with the public, including carrying capacity studies. Explore supporting programming that increases funding to managing SPNAs, including through entrance and use fee structures, taxes, and eco-vacations where tourists work to clean or otherwise improve the SPNAs. Cooperation Support international donor and government biodiversity Cross-cutting initiatives, especially those that strengthen the developing legal framework and governance structures (particularly in water use monitoring).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 3

INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE The purpose of this Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) Section 119 Biodiversity Analysis (hereafter, the Analysis) is to inform the development and implementation of the new USAID/Armenia Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) for 2020-2025. Preparation of this Analysis will comply with Section 119, Endangered Species, of the FAA of 1961, as amended; Agency guidance on country strategy development, under Automated Directives System (ADS) 201 and ADS 204; the USAID Biodiversity Policy; and the USAID FAA 118/119 Tropical Forest and Biodiversity Analysis Best Practice Guidance (2017). This Analysis will fulfill FAA Section 119, which requires the following:

Each country development strategy statement or other country plan prepared by the Agency for International Development shall include an analysis of:

(1) The actions necessary in that country to conserve biological diversity; and

(2) The extent to which the actions proposed for support by the Agency meet the needs thus identified.

The Analysis for USAID/Armenia must adequately respond to the two questions for country strategies, also known as “actions necessary” and “extent to which.” The Analysis also provides recommendations that will inform the development of the Mission’s 2020-2025 CDCS.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE USAID PROGRAM IN ARMENIA According to Armenia’s Integrated Country Strategy (ICS) (2018), the Post’s chief priority is to help Armenia succeed as a secure, prosperous, and democratic country, at peace with its neighbors, and more closely integrated with the Euro-Atlantic community. Sub-components of the ICS include improving the business climate by countering corruption, supporting sovereignty and resilience in order to extricate from Russian influence, and achieving peace through improving ties with its neighboring countries.

The 2020-2025 CDCS outlines the goal of building Armenia’s capacity to become more inclusive, democratic, and economically resilient in the wake of a historic democratic development in Armenia. The 2018 Velvet Revolution was a peaceful protest against the government, which set the for fair and free elections (Lanskoy 2019). The Government of Armenia (GOAM) and the United States Government (USG) have two key priorities in support of the Armenian people: to advance and cement Armenia’s democratic transition and to secure inclusive, broad-based economic growth for the Armenian people as newly empowered actors in Armenia’s development.

Technical programming under the 2020-2025 CDCS consists of two Development Objectives (DOs), with supporting Intermediate Results (IRs) (See Table 1).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 1

TABLE 1. USAID/ARMENIA PROGRAM GOAL: A MORE INCLUSIVE, DEMOCRACTIC AND RESILIENT ARMENIA DOs DESCRIPTION (IRs) DO 1: Democratic transition advanced IR 1.1: Effective and accountable governance institutionalized IR 1.2: Citizen engagement for democratic consolidation increased DO 2: Economic security enhanced IR 2.1: Economic governance strengthened IR 2.2: Competitiveness of targeted sectors increased IR 2.3: Sustainable management of natural resources improved

METHODOLOGY The Analysis will consist of seven tasks:

• Task 1: Work Plan Development and Logistics Planning • Task 2: Pre-fieldwork Research, Analysis, Consultations, and Writing • Task 3: In-Country Stakeholder Consultations and Site Visits • Task 4: Post-fieldwork Consultations and/or Follow-up Research • Task 5: Preparation of Post-fieldwork Review Draft Report • Task 6: Report Revision and Finalization • Task 7: Activity Management

The Analysis Team consists of Elisa Perry (team leader); Raymond Von Culin (in-region environmental specialist); Paola Bernazzani (home office manager and biodiversity specialist); Alla Aleksanyan (local biodiversity expert); and Karen Aghababyan (local biodiversity expert).

Work began in April 2020 with a literature review and desk study. Consultations and fieldwork were originally planned to occur in May 2020. However, given considerations related to security and public health as a result of the outbreak of the novel coronavirus COVID-19, the field-based component of the Analysis has been re-envisioned. The Analysis Team instead has relied heavily on desk-based research; remote stakeholder consultations via web, video, and phone; GIS; and synthesis.

This report has been prepared following the 2017 USAID Foreign Assistance Act Sections 118/119 Tropical Forest and Biodiversity Analysis: Best Practices Guide.

COUNTRY CONTEXT

LOCATION AND COUNTRY CONTEXT Modern Armenia comprises only a fraction of ancient Armenia, one of the oldest centers of civilization in the world. At its height, the Kingdom of Armenia extended from the south-central Black coast to the and from the Mediterranean Sea into present-day , more than ten the size of Armenia today (Suny and Mints 2019). Armenia, now a parliamentary democracy, gained independence in September 1991 with the dissolution of the . Following the success of the 2018 Velvet Revolution -- a series of peaceful protests against a semi-authoritarian regime -- the new, pro-

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 2

democratic government in Armenia has committed to sweeping domestic reform complete with fair, free, and transparent elections (Neljas 2018).

Armenia has a population of 3 million people, 98% of whom are ethnically Armenian (Central Intelligence Agency 2018). Most of the population resides in the northern half of the country and , the capital, is the most populated . Pre COVID-19, Armenia had seen robust gross domestic product (GDP) growth in the past three years: 7.5% in 2017, 5.2% in 2018, and 7.6% in 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic threatens 2020 GDP growth predictions. The most recent estimates from the International Monetary Fund predict a 1.5% decline in 2020, as opposed to the projected growth by 2.8% (Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Armenia 2020). The service and industry sectors have been the drivers of economic growth in Armenia through the expansion of tourism, trade, and a rebound in mining production. Despite marked GDP growth, unemployment remains high at 18%, and 50.4% of the population remain in ( 2020). There are also deep and persistent economic disparities that characterize the regions of Armenia, with Yerevan’s GDP accounting for 57.7% of Armenia’s total GDP, followed by the Ararat region with only 7.0% (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019).

Armenian politics in recent decades have been marked by a protracted conflict with neighboring country over Nagorno-. Nagorno-Karabakh was a primarily ethnic Armenian region recognized by the Soviet Union as an oblast in Soviet Azerbaijan. When both Armenia and Azerbaijan gained independence in 1991, violent conflict over the disputed region ensued until a 1994 ceasefire took effect to control the border. The final status of Nagorno-Karabakh remains subject to international mediation by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in (Central Intelligence Agency 2018).

Armenia has strong ties with the diaspora in the Russian Federation, the United States, the Middle East, and the European Union (EU). There are also close ties with and Iran, and the prospects for regional integration between Armenia’s economy and its neighbors (including the Russian Federation) are supported by various transnational institutions, such as the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union. Ties between the Russian Federation and Iran are strengthening, and the physical links between those two large and powerful nations go through the Caucasus (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019).

BIOPHYSICAL SETTING Armenia lies between latitudes 38°N and 42°N and longitudes 43°E and 47°E with a total area of 29,742 km2. Armenia is bordered to the north and east by Georgia and Azerbaijan and to the southeast and west by Iran and , respectively. Armenia is a mountainous, in the geopolitical region, characterized by the Southern Caucasus mountains. There are no lowlands in Armenia, and the average altitude is 1,800 m above sea level (Suny and Mints 2019). Armenia’s terrain is geologically unstable, and, as a result, Armenia is prone to earthquakes.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 3

Figure 1. Map of the Regions of the Republic of Armenia

Characterized by mountainous landscape and climatic contradictions, Armenia’s unique terrain has resulted in the formation of diverse ecosystems rich in biodiversity with high species endemism (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). The country is located at the intersection of three biogeographical provinces with diverse climatic conditions and geological processes. The vertical zonation and topographic diversity of the country conditions the geographical distribution of the main biotypes of flora and fauna (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). The abundant species composition in Armenia is also a factor of its location in the , which serves as a critical location for formation of flora and fauna, as well as a crossroad for bird migration.

Armenia’s climate is influenced by the Caucasus mountains and ranges from dry sub-tropical to cold alpine. There are five altitudinal vegetation zones: semi-desert, steppe, forest, alpine , and high- altitude tundra (Suny and Mints 2019). Average annual monthly temperatures range from 7.3°C to 12.2 °C. The highlands of the Lesser Caucasus mountains are marked by distinct temperature contrasts between summer and winter months. Average annual precipitation is 524 mm, 40% of which occurs between April and June. Precipitation increases from east to west and primarily occurs in higher- elevation locations (USAID 2017).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 4

STATUS OF ARMENIA’S BIODIVERSITY

MAJOR ECOSYSTEM TYPES AND STATUS Armenia’s landscape can be divided into six distinct ecosystem zones: forests; deserts and semi-deserts; steppes and meadow-steppes; sub-alpine and alpine ; and wetlands, rivers, and lakes. The high number of species can be largely attributed to the great altitudinal variation and the diversity of the vegetative. The steep and mountainous terrain affects Armenia’s species richness, biodiversity, and endemism – which is high – with about 4.0% of fauna and 3.8% of flora considered endemics (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

3.1.1 FORESTS Research indicates that, two hundred years ago, Armenia’s landcover was approximately 35% forests, while today forest cover is approximately 8-14% (Threats to Armenia’s Biodiversity 2013), (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations 2015).1 According to the 2015 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Global Forest Resources Assessment, 332,000 ha or 11.8% of Armenia’s land area is forested. Despite the historic decrease in forest area, the rate of decrease between 2005 – 2010 reversed, accounting for afforestation efforts. According to the same study, approximately 17,000 ha (5.1% of Armenia’s forested area) are primary forests, 293,000 ha (88.3% of forest area) are naturally regenerated forests, and 22,000 ha (6.6% of forest area) are reforested area (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations 2015).

Armenia has experienced significant tree cover loss over the last 30 years, beginning at its independence from the Soviet Union. At the , Armenia was still suffering from the consequences of the devastating 1988 earthquake, after which the plant was closed. Armenia was also engaged in an intensifying conflict with Azerbaijan in the early 1990’s, which in part lead to a reduction of gas supply flowing through that border. This development almost brought the country's industrial sector to a standstill and created extreme hardships for the population. A “cold and dark years” period followed, which forced much of the population to burn biomass for heating and cooking, resulting in massive across the country.

According to the most recent national forest inventory (1993), estimated forest cover in Armenia is 11.2% (334,100 ha) of its territory, although there is no consensus on current forest cover.2 More recent estimates suggest that 70% of Armenia’s existing forests are degraded (RA Governmental Decision N1232Ն, National Forest Program of the Republic of Armenia 2005). Various natural and anthropogenic impacts on the natural seed regeneration have led to reductions of valuable forest species such as oak and beech. Today, Armenia’s limited forest resources make them particularly vulnerable to over-harvesting. Despite this, Armenian forests provide important services for the national economy and local populations. Forests on steep terrain protect from floods, decrease erosion, enhance soil

1 This figure represents a range of forest cover projections in Armenia, from several official sources, including the UN FAO and German Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU). 2 Other sources, including a 2007 study by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), report that forest cover is below 10%.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 5

fertility, and increase resilience to the threats from climate change. Armenia’s forests also play a vital role in providing habitats for rare and endangered species (Galstyan 2016).

The distribution of forests in Armenia is uneven and fragmented. The primary forested areas are in the north, northeast and south, while the central part of the country is almost treeless. Virtually all forest resources are located in and Lori regions (northeast) and region (south), with just 2% located in central Armenia (Mkrtchyan and Grigoryan 2014). Due to Armenia's topographical features and historical forest harvesting, one-third of forests are located on steep terrain (approximately 80% of the country’s terrain is considered mountainous) (Ter-Gazarian 1997). Forest habitats are typically found on mountain slopes between 500 and 2400 m altitude, although beech and oak forests are typically concentrated at moderate altitudes (1,300-1,600 m).

Armenia’s forests can be divided into the following four major types: Georgian oak (Quercus iberica) and oriental oak (Quercus macranthera) forests represent about a third of forest cover (approx. 90,000 ha) and are widely distributed across the country. Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis) forests are widespread in northern Armenia, particularly on north-facing slopes at altitudes of 1,000-2,100 m. Caucasian hornbeam (Carpinus caucasica) forests are less common and occur at altitudes of 800-1,800 m. Dry scrub forests are found in both north and south of the country and occur at altitudes of 900-1,000 m in the north and 1,800-2,000 m in the south (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 1999).

Over 320 species of trees and bushes occur in forested areas including species such as pine, birch, elm, maple, ash, pear, apple, yew, hazel-nut, plane, and walnut. These species occupy 8.4% of the forest covered territory and present in a mixture with populous species (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014), (A. Gevorgyan 2014). Armenian forests are also home to 56 species of , 17 species of , and 2,212 species of , the highest diversity of in Armenia (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

The country’s arid open woodlands, which are characterized by coniferous and deciduous species (e.g., Juniperus sp. Pyrus sp. Amygdalus fenzliana, Punica granatum, Pistacia mutica, and Cerasus mahaleb). Arid scrubs (communities of Paliurus spina-christi and Rhamnus pallasii) and woodlands are expanding in areas where native deciduous forests are degrading, either due to natural processes or anthropogenic factors. In many places, steppe-meadow vegetation is replacing primary forests (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

3.1.2 DESERTS AND SEMI-DESERTS Desert and semi-desert landscapes account for approximately 10% of Armenia’s territory. These include the mountain-valley semi-deserts, such as the Ararat Valley and Valley, and semi-desert mountain slopes up to an altitude of 1,200-1,300 m (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Accumulations of sand in the Armavir region near the Araks River have resulted in a desert landscape and saline lowlands. The climate of these landscapes is dry and continental, characterized by hot summers and moderately cold winters.

The are generally of the semi-desert grey type and have been managed for cultivation over millennia. Today 80-90% of the semi-desert zone is cultivated requiring intensive irrigation to support fruit, vegetable, flower, and wine production. Erebuni and Khosrov Forest State Reserves, Arevik

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 6

National Park, and Vordan Karmir and Goravan Sands State Sanctuaries protect a total of 62,214 ha of semi-desert . Erosion and are expanding the semi-desert regions of Armenia; between 2009 and 2013 semi-deserts expanded by approximately 50 m (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

One hundred and one species of vertebrate animals, including 44 species, 60 species of birds, and 30 species of , and 1,687 species of invertebrates are considered part of the semi-desert ecosystem (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Numerous endemic invertebrate species occur in semi-deserts, including those of Mediterranean, Iranian, Caucasian, and Crimean origin. Vegetation cover is generally 25-30% in these habitats and is mostly composed of desert and turf- forming . The vegetation of semi-deserts consists mostly of ephemeral plants. The fauna of these habitats is characterized by the occurrence of several species of reptiles, such as the steppe-runner (Eremias arguta, Least Concerned [LC]), several endemic subspecies of the Lacerta and Agama, as well as the Armenian viper ( raddei, Near Threatened [NT]). Mammals include the weasel (Mustela nivalis, LC), and red fox (Vulpes, LC). Typical birds are the Finsch’s Wheatear (Oenanthe finschii, LC), Woodchat ( senator, LC), Upcher's Warbler (Hippolais languida, LC), and Chukar (Alectoris chukar, LC), and others.

3.1.3 STEPPES AND MEADOW-STEPPES Dry mountainous steppes are primarily found at higher altitudes than semi-deserts (above 1,500 m) in the Ararat Valley. They are also found at lower altitudes (above 800 m) in the lowlands to the north- east of the country, which were originally forested (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 1999). The steppe ecosystem is the largest ecosystem type in Armenia and includes the following sub-categories: low and middle mountain steppe (800-2,300 m), which accounts for 28.7% of total landmass; low mountain dry steppe (1,000-1,600 m), which accounts for 7.6% of total landmass; and mountain meadows steppe (2,200-2,600 m), which accounts for 16.6% of total landmass (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2011).

Armenian steppe ecosystems are distinguished by the presence of xerophilous3 grasses, which form thick, sod-like ground cover. In Armenia, 96 species of vertebrates, including 41 mammals, 49 species of birds, and 32 species of , and 992 species of invertebrates have been described as typical for the steppes (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Horticulture is among the typical uses of the steppe ecosystems in Armenia, including grain and vegetable growing and to a lesser extent, the development of orchards, nomadic grazing, hay-making, and apiculture.

Little of the steppe zone remains unused by humans, with the exception of preserved specially protected nature areas (SPNAs) and rockier and more mountainous areas. SPNAs include Khosrov Forest State Reserve, Sevan, , Arpi Lake and Arevik National Parks, and a number of wildlife sanctuaries, totaling 61,391.7 ha. As of 2013, the steppe and meadow-steppes have lost territory due to the expansion of semi-desert habitat but have begun to increase in areas where forest cover has inadequately recovered (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

3 Plants or animals adapted to a dry climate or habitat, or to conditions where moisture is scarce.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 7

3.1.4 SUB-ALPINE AND ALPINE MEADOWS High mountain sub-alpine (2,400-2,800 m) and high mountain alpine (2,800-3,400 m) meadow ecosystems account from 14.9% and 6.7% of Armenia’s total landmass, respectively (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2011). These landscapes represent the primary areas for hay- making and summer pastures in Armenia. In addition to being a source of fodder, the sub-alpine and alpine meadows are a valuable part of the genetic diversity of Armenian flora (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Despite the importance of natural grasslands for the country’s agriculture sector, approximately 57% of pasture lands in Armenia are degraded (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2011).

Meadows in Armenia support a wide floral diversity including a wide assemblage of grasses. Alpine meadows that are rich in Poaceae (such as Poa alpina) have slowly been replaced by grasses more typically found in sub-alpine meadows. Across sub-alpine and alpine meadows, an expansion of plant species not suitable as fodder has been observed, especially of the species Tripleurospermum transcaucasicum (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2011). The 5th National Report on Biological diversity noted 61 species of vertebrates (3 , 10 reptiles, 15 birds, and 33 mammals) and 508 species of invertebrates are species associated with this ecosystem. “Sub-alpine and alpine meadows are well represented in the protected area system of Armenia, making up 87,500 ha, or 22.6% of SPNAs. Arpi Lake and Arevik National Parks, and , , Aragats Alpine, Sev Lich and Hydrological State Sanctuaries all include these habitats” (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

3.1.5 WETLANDS, RIVERS, AND LAKES The rivers in Armenia are largely tributaries of the Araks and the – two of the dominant rivers in the southern Caucasus. About 76% of Armenia’s land area is part of the Araks basin and 24% of the Kura basin (Aubrey 2014). About 9,500 rivers and streams, with a total length of 23,000 km, flow in Armenia (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2016). The , Debet, , , Aghstev, Arpa, and Metsamor-Kasakh rivers are each longer than 100 km (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2016). There is also significant seasonal and annual variability in river runoff, including frequent droughts and risk of flooding in the spring. Approximately 55-70% of total annual runoff occurs during the peak -melting period (Yu, Cestti and Lee, Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia 2015).

Armenia has more than 100 small lakes, some of which regularly dry out in the dry season. The Sevan and Arpi lakes are the most important in terms of size and economic value. Lake Sevan, which is in the center of the country and lies at 1,900 m above sea level, is the largest freshwater lake of the Caucasus, Asia Minor, and Middle Asia regions. Lake Sevan’s location makes it a strategic source of energy (hydropower) and irrigation water that serves the densely populated Hrazdan river basin and the agricultural heartland of the Ararat Valley (Yu, Cestti and Lee, Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia 2015). In addition to a source of irrigation and energy, Lake Sevan is an important habitat for freshwater of , breeding and migratory birds, and a nursery zone for aquatic and species (World Lakes 2004). The Salmo ischchan, Barbus goktshaikus, and Varikorhinus capoeta fish species are endemic to Lake Sevan (World Lakes 2004). Since the 1930s, overuse of the lake

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 8

for irrigation has reduced the depth of the lake approximately 18 m. The water level in the Lake is now There are 55 fish species presently in being gradually raised; however, seasonal overuse continues Armenia’s rivers and lakes, of which one to disturb the spawning grounds of many species of fish and is endemic (Sevan Trout, Salmo ischchan), the nesting habitats for many birds (Armenian Environmental 42 are native, 11 are introduced, and one Network n.d.). The otter, once found in Lake Sevan’s is hybrid (Froese and Pauly 2019). wetland habitats, has also since been extirpated in the Lake Wetland flora diversity includes 622 Sevan region (World Lakes 2004). species of vascular plants, 135 species of mosses, around 200 species of fungi, 245 The second-most significant lake is , which is species of algae, and thousands of located to the north. At an altitude of 2,020 m above sea species. In Armenia’s wetland ecosystems, level, it is primarily used for irrigation and as an energy as of 2014, 255 species of vertebrate source. With of a dam to solve irrigation animals (7 amphibians, 5 reptiles, 213 problems, the lake became a reservoir in 1951. Both Lake birds, and 30 mammals) and 786 species Sevan and Lake Arpi are designated in the Ramsar List of of invertebrates have been recorded Wetlands of International Importance and described in more (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation detail below. In the mountains of Geghama, Zangezur, and Union 2014). Aragats, a large number of small lakes (<1 ha) exist, mainly fed by snowmelt. The larger lakes are fed by well-developed tributary river systems. Lake Ayghr is fed exclusively by groundwater.

Other wetland types are present in Armenia in the form of sloping fens, wet and bog meadows, river pools overgrown with vegetation, seasonal saline marshes, and mires and peatlands. According to a consultation with a former Ministry of Nature Protection official, wetlands can be grouped into “three altitudinal groups with different vegetation and peat deposits: 1) saline and freshwater marshes at low altitudes up to 1,400 m without peat deposits; 2) freshwater mires, ponds and river pools situated at altitudes between 1,400- 2,400 m with well-developed peat layers; and 3) high-mountain ephemeral and suspended marshes (>2,200 m) with abundance of mosses and thin peat layers” (RAMSAR 2004).

NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY From 2004 to 2015, more than 50 new Armenia is situated at the intersection of three species were identified and described in biogeographical provinces, with active geological processes Armenia (Biodiversity and Landscape and a variety of that have created assorted Conservation Union 2014). As of 2015, ecosystems and abundant biodiversity. According to the 5,091 species of plants and 17,703 World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Caucasus region is among species of animals have been recorded the planet’s 25 most diverse and endangered hotspots, rich in (Republic of Armenia 2015). Of the over species endemism (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund 17,700 species of animals, there are 2003). 17,154 invertebrates, 39 fish, 7 amphibians, 53 reptiles, 347 birds, and 93 The March 2020 update of the International Union for the mammals, two of which are endemic Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List identified 43 (Republic of Armenia 2015), species of globally threatened animals and 76 plants (International Union for the (International Union for the Conservation of Nature 2020). Conservation of Nature 2020). To date, 35 plant species of economic importance are known

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 9

to have been extirpated in Armenia (Gokhelashvili n.d.). Armenia, with the help of the IUCN, has published their own Red Book of Plants and Animals, most recently in 2011, providing a national compendium of threatened species in Armenia (International Union for the Conservation of Nature 2011); it assesses 452 species of plants (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2010).

Endangered species of note include the Armenian (Ovis orientalis, Endangered [EN]), an endemic species of wild sheep, the endemic Armenian birch mouse (Sicista armenica, EN), the Eurasian otter (Lutra, Near Threatened [NT]), the marbled polecat (Vormela peregusna, Vulnerable [VU]), and the Caucasian leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor, EN) (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2010). The Caucasian leopard’s range was once widespread throughout the Caucasus but is now restricted. Surveys conducted in 2013 and 2014 recorded 24 sightings of the leopards, 14 of these records were in the in Southern Armenia, which provide an important transboundary breeding range for the leopard in the Lesser Caucasus mountains (Farhadin, et al. 2015). Among birds, endangered species include the Saker falcon (Falco cherrug, EN), recently discovered at a local breeding ground (Korepov and Aghababyan 2020), Egyptian vulture (Neophron percnopterus, EN), and white-headed duck (Oxyura leucocephala, EN). Many of Armenia’s reptilian species found in the highlands and mountains are also endangered, including the northern banded newt (Ommatotriton ophryticus, NT), steppe-runner (Eremias arguta, NT), and Darevsky’s viper (Vipera darevskii, Critically Endangered [CR]) (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2010).

The Caucasus mountains harbor a wealth of medicinal plants, as well as unique relic and endemic plant species (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund 2003). Medicinal plants make up about 10% of plant species in Armenia, with approximately 15 species in high demand for the production of medicinal teas (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Of the 122 species of macrofungi found in Armenia with pharmacological , 12 are endangered (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Armenia also exhibits strong agrobiodiversity, with the wild relatives of numerous cultivated plants and of a number of domestic animals (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Species such as wild wheat (Triticum), rye (Secale), barley (Hordeum) and aegilops (Aegilops) have been conserved in Armenia and disseminated globally (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).”

STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF PROTECTED AREAS According to the Law of the Republic of Armenia on SPNAs, protected areas are defined as those “natural objects of ground and surface waters, the entrails, land flora and fauna and appropriate air , set apart under the statutory order under the law, which represent an environmental, scientific, health care, cultural, tourism, aesthetic values, which are fully or partially, temporarily or permanently exempted from economic exploitation and civil circulation and for which a special conservation regime is set forth” (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2016). SPNAs are divided into four groups: national parks, state reserves, state wildlife sanctuaries, and natural monuments.

Armenian biodiversity conservation is mainly implemented through the designation of these SPNAs, where 60-70% of the species composition of the flora and fauna, including the majority of rare, endangered, and endemic species, is concentrated. As of 2014, the total territory covered by SPNAs in Armenia was 387,054 ha, or approximately 13.1% Armenia (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 10

Union 2014). Armenia also features 18 Important Bird Areas (IBAs), 23 proposed Emerald Networks of Areas of Special Conservation Interest (“Emerald Network Sites”), 12 Prime Butterfly Areas, and 3 Ramsar Sites. These categories are described below.

3.3.1 NATIONAL PARKS Armenia’s four national parks include Arevik, Dilijan, Lake Arpi, and Sevan. Together the parks cover an area of 236,802 ha, which is 7.9% of Armenia’s territory (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). National parks are areas of ecological, historical-cultural, and aesthetic significance. Armenia’s national parks consist of natural and cultural landscapes and thus involve human activities along with nature protection issues. To enable a variety of uses, the national parks employ a zoning system with areas specially designated for strict conservation, recreation, and economic activities (Khanjyan 2004). By the IUCN classification, national parks of Armenia are category II protected areas. (International Union for the Conservation of Nature n.d.)

TABLE 2. NATIONAL PARKS OF ARMENIA NAME FACTS AND FIGURES DESCRIPTION AREVIK Location: is located along , NATIONAL PARK Size: 34,402 ha and river catchment areas and is a more recent protected area of Armenia. Arevik is Altitude: 450 m – 3,500 m important for the protection of endangered and rare Year of establishment: 2009 species such as the Caucasian leopard, the Armenian Landscape: Broad leaf forests, mouflon, and the Mediterranean turtle. The special juniper open woodlands, of Arevik National Park reflects its location in subalpine and alpine meadows, the border region in the very south of the country, semi-deserts, mountain where Iranian, Anatolian, Caucasian, and Central Asian steppes, rivers, high-mountains fauna come together. DILIJAN Location: The national park stretches over the slopes of the NATIONAL PARK Size: 33,765 ha , , Miapor, (Kaeni) and Halab mountain ranges at the altitude of 1,070-2,300 m above Altitude: 1,070 m - 2,900 m sea level. The Aghstev river and its main tributaries – Year of establishment: 2002 the Hovajur, Shtoghanajur, Bidan, Haghartsin, and Getik Landscape: Woodlands, lakes rivers – run through the national park. Within the and rivers, curative mineral national park are several lakes, including Parzlich and springs, mountain meadows, Tzrkalich. The flora comprises 1,200 species of vascular middle and high-mountain plants, of which 977 species grow in the park zone (51 landscapes trees, 47 bushes, 696 perennial grasses, 176 annual and biennial plants, 7 parasites). Fifty-four species of the national park are medicinal and 41 edible plants (Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Armenia 2008). The park is not only important for the conservation of Armenia’s forest landscapes, but also provides local economic benefits. LAKE ARPI Location: features mountain steppes, NATIONAL PARK Size: 21,179 ha subalpine grasslands, and high alpine rocky outcrops intertwined with a wealth of lakes, wetlands, and rivers. Altitude: 2,025 m – 3,196 m The lakes and marshes of Lake Arpi National Park are Year of establishment: 2009 globally important for breeding birds (from May to July) and migratory birds resting during spring and autumn,

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 11

TABLE 2. NATIONAL PARKS OF ARMENIA NAME FACTS AND FIGURES DESCRIPTION Landscape: Mountain steppes, including the Dalmatian pelican (Pelecanus crispus) subalpine meadows, lakes, identified as vulnerable by the IUCN. wetlands, rivers SEVAN Location: Gegharqunik encompasses Lake Sevan and a NATIONAL PARK Province buffer zone, incorporating the slopes of nearby Size: 147,343 ha mountain ranges (Areguni, Sevan, Gegham, and Pambak) up to their watersheds. The national park Altitude: 2,000 m also incorporates Marz (4900 km2) with Year of establishment: 1978 its numerous settlements and population of 270,000. It Landscape: Fresh water features 267 bird species, of which 39 species are ecosystems, pebble beaches, included in the Red Book of Armenia. woods, steep rocks, mountain steppes, alpine meadows, islands Source: (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2013), (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 1999)

3.3.2 STATE RESERVES State reserves are established to protect the natural course of dynamic processes and rare species of flora and fauna. Human activity, including logging of trees, hay-making, hunting and introduction of animals, and plant gathering, is restricted. State reserves are set aside as scientific research entities with strict conservation regimes (Khanjyan 2004). Per the 1994 IUCN international classification, state reserves of Armenia fall under the 1a designation.4 Armenia has three state reserves -- Khosrov, and Erebuni -- covering approximately 35,500 ha or 1.2% of the country (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014).

TABLE 3. STATE RESERVES OF ARMENIA NAME FACTS AND FIGURES DESCRIPTION KHOSROV Location: The Khosrov Forest State Reserve is crossed by a FOREST STATE Size: 23,213 ha mountain range consisting of a dense network of main RESERVE and branch ridges, high plateaus, and deep canyons Altitude: 700 m - 2,800 m towered over by volcanic shield massifs and peaks. The Year of establishment: 1958 reserve harbors rare species such as the Landscape: Mountain ranges, Caucasian leopard, the bezoar goat, and the brown rocks and cliffs, semi-deserts, bear. mountain/high mountain steppes, open juniperous woodlands and oak forests SHIKAHOGH Location: Syunik Province The is characterized by lush STATE RESERVE Size: 12,137 ha vegetation flourishing in a humid and warm climate, rugged terrain, streams, cliffs, and deep gorges. Some

4 Defined as an area that is protected from all but light human use in order to preserve the geological and geomorphic features of the region and its biodiversity (Dudley 2008).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 12

TABLE 3. STATE RESERVES OF ARMENIA NAME FACTS AND FIGURES DESCRIPTION Altitude: 700 m – 2,400 m parts of the Meghri ridge within the reserve are marked Year of establishment: 1958 by steep rocky massifs protruding from the forest. A high diversity of relict and endemic flora and fauna Landscape: Mountain ranges, species are present. The steep terrain provides a great small streams, springs, gorges, diversity of climatic conditions. The reserve is also cliffs, virgin broadleaf forests responsible for the management of the Plane Grove (oak, hornbeam), rocky massifs, and Zangezur State Sanctuaries, established in 1958 and subalpine meadows, 2009, respectively. EREBUNI STATE Location: Marz Erebuni Reserve is the smallest among Armenia’s three RESERVE Size: 89 ha reserves. It protects a unique gene stock of wild cereals (family Poaceae), including more than 100 varieties of Altitude: 1300-1400 m above wild wheat and their habitat. Despite the reserve’s sea level relatively small size, its flora includes 292 higher Year of establishment: 1958 flowering species of 196 different genera belonging to Landscape: Semi-desert and 46 botanical families. 93.2% (272 species) of the reserve mountain-steppe flora are grasses, 146 species of which (53.7%) are annuals and biennial plants. Source: (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2013), (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 1999)

3.3.3 STATE WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES AND NATURAL MONUMENTS Armenia has 27 designated sanctuaries, occupying approximately 114,800 ha or 3.9% of the country’s territory, and 232 designated natural monuments (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Sanctuaries are designated to conserve specific species and their habitats and correspond to the 4th IUCN management category (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2014).

Natural monuments in Armenia are natural objects having special scientific or historical-cultural significance; they correspond to category III of the IUCN classification (Khanjyan 2004).

3.3.4 IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS (IBAS) Based on the Birdlife International database, there are a total of 18 IBAs in Armenia, comprising a wide range of critical habitats, including lakes, forests, and mountains. According to the 5th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Armenia’s IBAs designate areas for protection for all species of endangered Armenian bird species (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). They cover an area of 415,132 ha (BirdLife International 2015). The IBAs require an updated review, as they do not reflect recent changes in IUCN Red List nor do they currently reflect national priorities for the protection of certain species (K. Aghababyan, G. Khanamirian and H. Ter-Voskanyan, et al. 2020).

3.3.5 IMPORTANT PLANT AREAS (IPAS) Based on the PlantLife International 2019 Important Plant Areas (IPAs) international database, a total of 32 Important Plant Areas (IPAs) have been identified in Armenia using criteria that measure species

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 13

vulnerability, irreplaceability, and species richness, in addition to the threatened habitats. Armenia’s IPAs are scattered and relatively evenly distributed around the country (PlantLife 2019).

3.3.6 PRIME BUTTERFLY AREAS (PBAS) According to the Butterfly Conservation Europe’s methodology, there are 32 Prime Butterfly Areas (PBAs), preliminary recognized for protection of species of global, European, and national conservation concern. An assessment of the PBAs is still in progress; at present 12 PBAs have been evaluated, covering a total area of 100,415 ha (Aghababyan and Khanamirian, Butterfly Conservation Armenia 2020).

3.3.7 KEY BIODIVERSITY AREAS (KBAS) The IUCN has 31 globally agreed-upon criteria for the identification of Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs). KBAs have proven to be a key tool for guiding decisions on conservation and sustainable management; contributing significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity, in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. Evaluating the distribution of KBAs against nationally protected areas can be a useful way of identifying gaps in a nation’s protected areas network (Grimmett, et al. 2017). To date, 28 KBAs (18 of which are also classified as IBAs) have been declared in Armenia, covering approximately 941,610 km2, including Dsegh, Haghartsin, and Pambak. Many of Armenia’s KBAs are largely grouped around Lake Sevan and north of the lake, south of Yerevan, along the southwestern border with Turkey and along Armenia’s southernmost border with the Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan (BirdLife International 2020).

3.3.8 EMERALD NETWORK OF AREAS OF SPECIAL CONSERVATION INTEREST The Emerald Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest (the Network) was developed as an output of the 1979 Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats. The goal of the Network is to ensure all high biodiversity areas of European importance have been identified, ecological inventories completed, and their importance legally recognized ( and the European Union Joint Programme 2012). The Network currently includes 16 European countries. Armenia and six other Eastern European countries are tasked with setting up the Network for (Rayvush, et al. 2016). The implementation of the Network in Eastern Europe has been supported by a co-financed Council of Europe and EU two-part joint program (Council of Europe and the European Union Joint Programme 2012).

The conservation objectives of the Network sites are threefold: legislating adequate protection of precious biodiversity and fragile ecosystems; maintaining human social and economic activities; and encouraging sustainable human-nature interaction (Council of Europe and the European Union Joint Programme 2012). As of 2016, Armenia has proposed 23 total Network sites, totaling 1,033,719.5 ha, or 34.7% of Armenia’s territory. Several of the proposed Emerald Sites are already designated SPNAs, including the four national parks described above (Rayvush, et al. 2016). The assessments of these proposed sites were completed in 2013-2014; however, they have yet to be officially designated, and according to expert opinion, require further optimization to secure realistic management (Directorate for Democratic Participation 2019).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 14

3.3.9 RAMSAR WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE Ramsar wetlands are defined by the Ramsar Convention for Wetland Conservation and Sustainable Use in recognition of the economic, cultural, scientific, and recreational value of wetland sites (described in additional detail in Section 5). Armenia currently has three designated Ramsar wetlands of international importance as listed in the table below, although this official list is missing some key areas.

TABLE 4. RAMSAR WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE IN ARMENIA NAME AREA IMPORTANT CONSERVATION INFORMATION LAKE ARPI 3,230 ha Designated as a National Park and IBA, Lake Arpi is a freshwater lake high in the Ashotzk mountains. The wetland is made up of four sub-sites: Lake Arpi, the human-made wetlands of Alvar Sanctuary, and the ephemeral wetlands of Sanctuary, which consists of Ardenis pond and the wet meadows of . These wetlands support several species of rare botanicals, such as the Yellow water-lily (Nuphar luteum) found only in the oxbow lakes of Alvar Sanctuary. Numerous species of waterbirds occur here, such as the Dalmatian Pelican (Pelecanus crispus, NT) and the Armenian Gull (Larus armenicus, NT). LAKE SEVAN 490,231 ha As the largest lake in Armenia and the Trans-Caucasus region, Lake Sevan’s importance to the country culturally, economically, and for biodiversity, cannot be overemphasized. It is the main source of irrigation (and drinking) water and provides electricity, fish, recreation, and tourism. It is an important cultural and aesthetic site. Lake Sevan was designated a Ramsar site in 2003 and the wetlands of the basin are significant breeding, resting, foraging, and wintering areas for migratory waterfowl. It is also a habitat for both endemic and introduced species of freshwater fish. 50 ha Also designated as a State Wildlife Sanctuary, Khor Virap Marsh is a MARSH freshwater marsh of semi artificial origin (i.e., fed by an irrigation canal and surrounding drainage channels). The marsh is important as a nesting site for 30 of the approximately 100 migratory waterbird species that utilize this wetland. Species of note include the Marbled Teal (Marmaronetta angustirostris, VU) and White-headed Duck (Oxyura leucocephala, EN), as well as nationally threatened species such as the Pygmy Cormorant (Phalacrocorax pygmaeus) and Gadwall (Anas strepera). In addition, the marsh supports several notable mammal species, including the Jungle (Felis chaus), European otter (Lutra, NT), and the only non-native wild mammal Coypu (Myocastor coypus). The Marsh supports populations of the nationally endangered Vagrant Emperor dragonfly (Hemianax ephippiger). Located in central Armenia close to Yerevan, the marsh plays a significant role in downstream flood mitigation and sediment trapping. Source: (RAMSAR 2011)

STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF KEY NATURAL RESOURCES OUTSIDE PROTECTED AREAS Recreational fishing is allowed in all the rivers and lakes of Armenia except protected areas. Catch from natural water bodies, canals, and water reservoirs are uncontrolled and without benefit of licensing or inspection systems. Recreational hunting is allowed through licenses, and commercial hunting is limited.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 15

Hunting and fishing activities are managed by the Ministry of Environment (MoE) and pursuant to Article 5, Part 1, Clause 8 of the Law of the Republic of Armenia on the Management of Hunting and Hunting Economics. Permissible quantities of hunting and amateur fishing for social purposes are defined in the findings and recommendations put forth by the Scientific Center of and Hydroecology of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia. The permissible hunting and fishing allowances in Armenia are outlined annually by the MoE. The 2019-2020 Law on Hunting Animals also specifies that hunting of crows and is possible during the hunting season with a permit (Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Armenia 2020). Despite these regulations, enforcement and overhunting and overfishing are problems in Armenia, as discussed further in Section 6.

VALUE AND ECONOMIC POTENTIAL This section provides a brief overview of the value and economic potential of biodiversity and ecosystem goods and services in Armenia, including a discussion on the various categories of ecosystem services, information on the economic values that have been ascribed to them, and the status on implementation of ecosystem service evaluation in Armenia.

Figure 2. Ecosystem Services

Ecosystem services are those values provided to society by the function and processes that take place within nature. Ecosystem services can be classified into three categories: i) the provisioning of directly utilized resources (environmental goods); ii) non-material cultural services; and iii) regulating services, which provide critical benefits through reliable ecosystem processes. Supporting services underlie the three former categories through long-term horizons and broad scale processes, such as soil creation

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 16

and nutrient . Biodiversity provides the foundation for ecosystem services, as it plays a critical role in both the provision of ecosystem services as well as their maintenance over time (Harrison and et al 2014).

VALUE OF BIODIVERSITY Biodiversity and ecosystem services are important to Armenia due in part to the large role they play in the livelihoods of local populations. For example, forest ecosystems, pastures, and Lake Sevan all have unique biodiversity and provide essential ecosystem services. These natural resources contribute to socio-economic development and safeguard human well-being in the country. When changes to ecosystem components and losses of biodiversity occur (e.g., reduced quality and availability of timber and non-timber forest resources; loss of fodder plants for live-stock in pastures; and reduced water quality and quantity in Lake Sevan), they can directly and indirectly affect Armenian standards of living, incomes, and economic migration. Ecosystem degradation also has the potential to be a source of political and social conflict as seen from activities in the mining sector. of waterways in Armenia has the potential to affect the biodiversity of countries downstream.

Armenia’s dependence on ecosystem services is not always obvious and has generally not been properly valued. The ecosystem services concept is still in its infancy in Armenia, and the use of the term “ecosystem” occurs only a few times in national legislation. The term is present in Article 3 of the Forest Code (Republic of Armenia 2005) and Article 1 of the Law on Specially Protected Areas (Republic of Armenia 2006). The term “ecosystem” also occurs several times in the Laws on Flora and Fauna (CIS-Legislation 2020). However, in both instances, no adequate definition for the term is provided. Existing legislation also does not define any valuation methodology for natural resources used or their protection (Shahnazaryan and Harutyunyan 2017).

Currently, natural resources are valued per unit of the resource used or as a calculation of environmental harm caused by an activity. The two broad types of ecological compensation mechanisms for valuing resources are provided in the law. The law requires payment to the state or community budget for implementation of nature protection measures, use, and/or sale of natural resources. However, payments do not typically reflect the true value of the resource. In general, rates are also low and do not provide incentives for responsible behavior (United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Environment Programme 2014).

According to the National Statistical Service, in 2018, the fees for use of biological resources made up 4.4% (65,923,400 AMD) of total nature use fees, the fees for use of water – 30.3% (453,797,500 AMD), and the fees for extraction of underground resources – 65.3% (976,216,900 AMD) (National Statistical Service 2020). The types of biological resources for which natural resource user fees are paid include fuelwood, construction wood, animals, fish, crawfish, and pastures.

Available data on government expenditures by function for 2018 and 2019 shows that the expenditure on environmental protection in Armenia as a share of GDP has somewhat increased from 2017 through 2019, and is largely comparable to many other countries in the region.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 17

TABLE 5. EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENTS ON ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION 2017 2018 Country % of GDP Country % of GDP , The 1.39 Netherlands, The 1.37 Greece 1.33 1.30 Belgium 1.30 Greece 1.30 0.94 Malta 1.25 Malta 0.93 France 1.02 Luxembourg 0.87 Luxembourg 0.89 0.85 0.84 Spain 0.84 Italy 0.84 Slovak Rep. 0.79 Romania 0.84 Estonia, Rep. of 0.74 Slovak Rep. 0.80 Bulgaria 0.68 Estonia, Rep. of 0.74 , Rep. of 0.67 Bulgaria 0.71 Portugal 0.61 Croatia, Rep. of 0.70 Germany 0.59 Portugal 0.64 Latvia 0.54 Germany 0.60 Romania 0.52 Latvia 0.57 Slovenia, Rep. of 0.45 Slovenia, Rep. of 0.53 Hungary 0.45 Poland, Rep. of 0.49 Lithuania 0.41 Hungary 0.45 Poland, Rep. of 0.39 Armenia, Rep. of 0.38 Georgia 0.38 Turkey 0.38 Turkey 0.38 Ireland 0.37 Ireland 0.38 Austria 0.37 Austria 0.35 Georgia 0.37 Armenia, Rep. of 0.33 Lithuania 0.32 Cyprus 0.28 Kazakhstan, Rep. of 0.30 0.25 Cyprus 0.27 Kazakhstan, Rep. of 0.25 Ukraine 0.24 Finland 0.20 Finland 0.20 Albania 0.18 Kyrgyz Rep. 0.17 Kyrgyz Rep. 0.17 Russian Federation 0.15 Russian Federation 0.14 Belarus, Rep. of 0.11 Belarus, Rep. of 0.10 Albania 0.09 Moldova, Rep. of 0.08 Moldova, Rep. of 0.06 Azerbaijan, Rep. of 0.02 Azerbaijan, Rep. of 0.02 Source: Elaboration based on data from the Statistical Committee of the Republic of Armenia (2018).

To assess how environmental protection funding is allocated in Armenia, data from the RA State Budget was examined from 2010 to 2019. From the table below, the data indicates that allocations for environmental protection from the state budget have been relatively consistent from 2013 to 2019, with a slight decrease as a percentage of GDP in recent years. While data on local expenditures for the environment are not available, it can be inferred that approximately three fourths of the allocations for environmental protection in 2018 and 2019 (see table above) came from the GOAM.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 18

TABLE 6. GOAM STATE BUDGET FROM 2010-2019 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Allocations from the GOAM state budget for environmental 4.930 6.630 7.030 4.600 4.670 5.650 4.460 5.410 5.690 5.600 protection (billion AMD) % of GDP 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.09 Source: Elaboration based on data from the Statistical Committee of the Republic of Armenia.

Among the international environmental agreements Armenia has ratified is the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (discussed further in Section 5). While the terms “ecosystem services” and “ecosystem services valuation” are not included within the text of the CBD, there is strong emphasis on the ecosystem approach within the framework of CBD implementation. One of the 12 implementing principles of the CBD, for example, states: “Conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning, in order to maintain ecosystem services, should be a priority target of the ecosystem approach” (Convention on Biological Diversity 2020).

Some of the significant actions taken by GOAM on ecosystem services includes the following: (Shahnazaryan and Harutyunyan 2017):

• In 2013, the GOAM introduced protocol decree N 16 dated April 25, 2013, “Approving an innovative financial mechanism,” which presented the concept of ecosystem services. Tasks under this law were subsequently implemented by the Ministry of Nature Protection (MoNP). • The development of the GOAM draft Law "On Ecosystem Services" (2015) included the revision of legislation and current key issues relating to ecosystem services. This was elaborated by the MoNP to ensure the introduction of the ecosystem approach, conservation and effective management of ecosystems. • Since 2011, the GOAM has approved a number of strategic programs, which envisage activities related to the introduction of ideology of ecosystem services and payments for ecosystem services, including the Strategy of Armenia on SPNAs, the Strategy and the National Action Plan to Combat Desertification; the Strategy in the Field of Conservation, Protection, Reproduction and Use of Biological Diversity (Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Armenia 2020). USAID has supported these efforts, most recently with the Advanced Science and Partnerships for Integrated Resource Development (ASPIRED) project to support sustainable water resource management and sustainable practices of water users in the Ararat Valley.

There have also been a limited number of ecosystem service-focused evaluations and projects implemented over the years. Descriptions of each are included in Annex G.

ECOSYSTEM GOODS AND SERVICES This section describes some of the key ecosystem goods and services that provide value to Armenia, broken down by the categories of provisioning services, regulating services, and cultural services.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 19

4.2.1 PROVISIONING SERVICES Provisioning services arise from the direct use of goods, such as food, fuel, water, timber, non-timber forest products, medicine, and raw materials. Many different ecosystems produce provisioning services, but the focus in this report is on the dominant sources: agriculture, forest products, freshwater resources, and fishing.

AGRICULTURE

Armenia has 2.974 million ha of land, of which 2.043 million ha is considered agricultural land (69%). The total area of arable land is 446.0 thousand ha (21.8% of agricultural lands), out of which 68.1 thousand ha is concentrated in Ararat valley (15.2%). More than 57% of agricultural land in Armenia is pastures and meadows. Around 29.1% of cultivable land is not utilized for various reasons. According to census results from 2014, 33% of arable land holdings without legal status and 38% of holdings with the legal status are abandoned (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2020).5

Though its share has declined by 8% since 2011, employment in agriculture still makes up more than 30% of total employment in Armenia. The agricultural sector remains essential for the economy of the country and is the main source of economic activity in rural areas and a significant contributor to GDP (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019).

While urban agriculture is not a priority of Armenia’s policy agendas, there is still some urban agriculture practiced in Armenia’s urban areas.6 Yerevan contributed only 1.2% of Armenia’s gross agricultural output in 2017; otherwise, no data exist to assess urban agriculture prevalence or output (National Statistical Service 2020). In the peri-urban areas where dachas (a Soviet legacy) still exist, small plots of land are used by the citizens to grow vegetables, fruits, and herbs (Knuth 2006).

FORESTS AND FOREST PRODUCTS

Armenia's forest cover provides a wealth of benefits, many of which are vital to the fundamental wellbeing of the nation. Forests provide timber and fuelwood for rural communities and for industrial purposes. Due to the accessibility of wood, high price of energy, and needs of a socially insecure population, wood continues to be the main source of fuel for the population of forest-adjacent communities. On average, each household uses approximately 10 m3 of fuelwood annually (A. Gevorgyan 2014). The governmental decision 1535-N approved in 2011 “on granting privileges for nature use fees to extract waste wood for non-production (non-industrial) use by families residing in the forest adjacent settlements of the Republic of Armenia” has had some positive impact on prevention of illegal loggings. By allowing families residing in forest adjacent communities to extract (at their own expense) up to 8 m3 of firewood free of charge, the incentives to pay for wood from illegal wood suppliers is reduced (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). However, issues

5 Figures on agricultural resources vary by source. The FAO report was used because it provides the most complete picture and was closely aligned to the official figures held by the GOAM Statistical Committee. 6 A 2010 study called Public Green Space in Armenian : A Legal Analysis by Arsen Karapetyan and Anush Khachatryan examined the state of urban green in Armenia between 2004 and 2009 based on national statistical data. Those statistical indicators are no longer collected by the Statistical Committee of Armenia.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 20

remain with government measures around limited transportation options for families interested in transporting their allocations of wood, a lack of details on the distance of allocated cutting areas, and other related technical issues (A. Gevorgyan 2017).

Communities rely on forests not only for fuelwood but also for non-timber forest products such as food (e.g., forest fruits and berries, edible plants, mushrooms, and animals) and medicines. While a part of the collected non-timber forest products is sold in local markets or on the side of roads, the majority of Armenia’s population uses them for personal needs.

FRESHWATER RESOURCES

Armenia water resources are generally considered adequate. An analysis conducted by FAO concluded that “the internal renewable surface water resources are estimated at 3.948 km3 per year and the internal renewable groundwater resources at 4,311 km3/year. The overlap between surface water and groundwater is estimated at 1,400 km3/year. This amounts to a total of 6.859 km3 of annual internal renewable water resources (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2016).

These water resources are not divided evenly throughout the country, however. Despite the availability of water, resources are stressed, particularly in the densely populated Hrazdan River basin in the central part of the country and in Yerevan and the broader Ararat Valley basin (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2010), (Cyrs 2016). Significant seasonal and annual variability in river runoff also exists, including frequent droughts and risk of flooding in the spring, when about 55%–70% of total annual runoff occurs during the peak snow melting period. As a way to address temporal variations in river runoff, the country has built 87 dams with a total capacity of 1.4 billion m3 (Yu, Cestti and Lee, Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia 2015).

There has been significant restructuring of the water sector in Armenia during the last two decades. Beginning in the early 2000s, a number of public private partnership (PPP) schemes were implemented in the sector, including several management and lease contracts with private water operators. In 2017, the government of Armenia contracted Veolia Water (“Veolia Jur”) to operate Armenia’s centralized water systems. Today, there are approximately 560 to 600 villages outside the service area of Veolia Jur (off- grid communities), served by their own water resources and operated under various public organization models managed by the municipality or community administration (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019). Mineral waters in Ararat, , , Buzhakan, Dilijan, Jermuk, , provide important sources of drinking water as well as bottled water sold domestically and abroad. In 2018, 1,136,100 m3 of mineral water was extracted in accordance with licenses (Statistical Committee of Armenia 2018).

Armenia’s small hydropower sector is important for the generation of renewable energy. In general, renewable energy resources have a share of 31% of the total balance of generated electricity in Armenia. Generation of electricity from small hydropower plants (SHPPs) is approximately 11.5% of the total balance of generated electricity. As of July 1st, 2019, electricity was generated by 187 small hydropower plants, with a total of 370 megawatt (MW) installed capacity. (In 2018, the generation of the electricity from small HPPs was around 1 billion kilowatt-hour (kWh), for perspective.) As of 2019 and according to provided licenses, 28 additional small hydropower plants are currently under construction, with a total projected capacity of 59 MW and 203 million kWh electricity annual supply (Ministry of Energy

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 21

Infrastructures and Natural Resources of the Republic of Armenia 2020). The use of small hydropower has several associated challenges, including competing claims, environmental impacts and compliance with Armenia’s environmental impact assessment (EIA) law, stream flow limitations, and conflicts over water use, among others. For example, according to the EIA law, HPPs with a capacity of less than 10 MW are not required to undergo an EIA. However, a significant portion of Armenia's HPPs are located in small rivers and do not reach the 10 MW threshold, which leads to excessive levels of water abstraction, fragmentation of the small rivers and streams, significant loss of biodiversity, including water invertebrates, , and water birds, and changes in the local micro-climate, which influences on the plants and .

Wetland flora provide edible plants that are collected for food including flowering rush (Butomus umbellatus), watercress (Nasturtium sp.), dock (Rumex sp.), sickleweed (Falcaria sp.), and asparagus (Asparagus officinalis). Tinctures made from of Althaea officinalis, Bidens tripartida, Glycyrrhiza glabra, Menyanthes trifoliate, Mentha longifolia, Ononis arvensis, Polygonum hydropiper, Plantago major, Tussilago farfara, Valeriana sp. are of traditional medical use. Young willow branches have been used to construct fish-traps and baskets while reeds are utilized for crafts and in rural areas as bedding material and livestock litter (RAMSAR 2004).

FISHING

Capture fishing in Armenia has historically centered around Lake Sevan, the most important water body in the country, where planned commercial fishing began in the 1950s. Due to years of unrestrained fishing over many years, however, and other factors, the fish stock has decreased drastically. The introduction of a fish into any water body is harmful and can have numerous negative consequences. These species can prey on and out-compete other native fish species; can introduce disease; and can negatively impact water quality, changing the functions of the ecosystem. Through a series of bans and government control efforts starting in 2002, legal fishing has been stopped in Lake Sevan. Enforcement remains weak and alternatives for communities around Lake Sevan are not available resulting in illegal fishing activities and the presence of fish for sale in markets and on the side of the road. To increase fish stocks in 2018, fry of Gegarkuni and summer trout, 18,500 and 41,500 respectively, were released in the lower reaches of the and Masrik rivers (Statistical Committee of Armenia 2018).

Fisheries of other natural and artificial public water bodies are an important element in the food supply of rural people and approximately 20% of villagers fish regularly (Hovhannisyan, et al. 2011). Catch from natural water bodies, canals, and water reservoirs are uncontrolled and without benefit of licensing or inspection systems. Although fishing is a popular activity among the rural population of Armenia, a recreational fishery industry does not exist (Hovhannisyan, et al. 2011).

During the last decade, development of private fish farms in Armenia has significantly intensified. The number of fish farms has increased from just a few in the 1980s to 250, out of which 83% are located in the Armavir and Ararat marzes. The main fish species produced in Armenia for commercial purposes are carp, silver carp, white and black amur, Sevan summer trout, Gegarkuni, golden trout, red-finned-fish (karmrakhayt) and acipenseridae (Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Armenia 2020).

Total water surface of fish farms in the country is 3,542 ha, of which 2,479 ha or almost 70%, is located in Ararat marz, and 956 ha or about 27% is in Armavir marz (Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 22

Armenia 2020). The availability of low-cost, high-quality artesian groundwater in the Ararat valley has made it especially attractive for fish farming. As a result, artesian water resources have been overused by growing sectors of trout and sturgeon farming. In turn, the high level of ground water combined with improper irrigation, has caused salinization and soil degradation of significant territories in the plain.

An aquaculture sector review by the World Bank in 2014 estimated the production of fish products reached about 14,000 tons, and from 2010 to 2014, and that the value of this production increased by 2.5 times - from $27.4 million to $69 million (G. Gabrielyan 2015). The report also established that from 2010-2013, the volume of fish product exported increased over five times - from 1,265 to 6,578 tons, with a concomitant increase in export value of over four times from $7.7 million to $32.5 million. The main export destinations for fish are and EU member states.

4.2.2 REGULATING SERVICES Regulating services include the functions and processes that ecosystems undergo for sustenance and maintenance that provide value to human beings. The valuation of regulating services is underpinned by bio-physical data, which is generally lacking in Armenia (United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Environment Programme 2014). As a result, it was not possible to estimate the value of any of the regulating services in this section, and only a high-level valuation is provided below.

Forests and other areas dense with vegetation provide important climate regulation services by mitigating the emission of greenhouse gasses. Armenia’s roughly 332,000 ha of forest (approximately 11.8% of total land cover) provide significant value in the form of climate regulation benefits.7 According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Armenia Country Study on Climate Change project report (2003), the sequestration of carbon dioxide in forest ecosystems of Armenia reached 697 Gg (thousand tons) in 1990, but has since shrunk to 523 Gg in 2000 (a 25% reduction) (Vermishev 2003).

The stability of forest ecosystems supports the productivity of agricultural crops as well as the diversity of plant composition in hay-making areas and pastures. Armenia’s forests have a direct influence on water balance, as well as the quantitative and qualitative features of drinking water resources. Forests protect the land from floods, erosion, and keep the soil fertile, which is vital for agriculture, while forest catchments provide both fresh drinking and irrigation water for agricultural lands.

Armenia’s freshwater systems provide a range of vital regulating and maintaining ecosystem services through processes that move water, energy, nutrients, , and sediment across different landscapes and habitats, linking atmospheric, terrestrial, and groundwater. Watersheds in the Lake Sevan Basin, for example, not only feed springs in the Ararat Valley, but also regulate surface flows as well as provide water to be used for irrigation and energy generation.

7 See Section 3.1.1 for additional details on forest cover.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 23

4.2.3 CULTURAL SERVICES Cultural services result from meaningful interactions that people have with ecosystems, including outdoor recreation, aesthetic enjoyment, education, and the intrinsic spiritual value of land.

Tourism can be informative in estimating the qualitative and quantitative values for environment or ecosystem services. Armenia’s tourism sector has grown strongly in the past five years, in terms of income and arrivals. Armenia welcomed 1,652,000 international tourists in 2018, and inbound tourism has grown on average 9% per year between 2013 and 2018 (World Bank 2019). Tourism contributed $502.8 million US to Armenia’s GDP (3.9% share of GDP) in 2018 and provides employment to 36,900 people in the travel and tourism industry – 3.4% of the total workforce (World Economic Forum 2019). According to the Ministry of Economy, the top two reasons for choosing Armenia as a vacation destination is nature (69%) and historical and cultural (59%) (Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Armenia 2020).

The tourism sector, which relies on natural features of the country, has unrealized potential both as a tool for supporting economic development and for fostering economic growth (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019). In particular, this includes adventure tourism, eco-tourism, and cultural tourism. For example, Armenia’s forest ecosystems hold numerous cultural-historical and natural monuments (e.g., the Monastery of and the Upper Valley, a UNESCO heritage site) and provide tourists with a view of traditional lifestyle and crafts that are still maintained. A notable example of the ecosystem services that Armenia’s forests can provide to the tourism sector can be found in Dilijan, which has a permanent population of only 17,400 (National Statistical Service 2020). By virtue of its natural setting in a heavily forested mountain valley, Dilijan and Tavush Region are a major tourism destination. On August 17, 2018, Tavush region’s first tourist information center was opened in Dilijan with support from the EU. Detailed statistics on the number of visitors to Dilijan are not available; however, a 2014 city development plan published by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) estimated international arrivals were 28,000 (de Marcos n.d.).

Other cultural services besides tourism and outdoor recreation are also important to Armenia, although their value is often not easy to quantify or monetize. These additional cultural services include the use of land for educational purposes and spiritual and traditional uses of plants, animals, and natural ecosystems. A World Bank study from 2015 examined the willingness-to-pay of the in the United States to protect Armenia's Lake Sevan. The results showed that, on average, each household would be willing to provide a one-time donation of approximately $80 to prevent a further degradation of Lake Sevan and approximately $280 to restore the quality of the lake by increasing its water level (Laplante, Meisner and Wang 2005).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 24

LEGAL FRAMEWORK AFFECTING CONSERVATION

NATIONAL LAWS, POLICIES, AND STRATEGIES Armenia has a comprehensive institutional and legal framework for addressing biodiversity and conservation. Armenia’s legal framework for biodiversity has experienced some significant changes in recent years, most notably the introduction and passage of new legislation. Between 2014-2018, the GOAM adopted laws concerning flora and fauna, forests, SPNAs, education and other sectors aiming at ensuring conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). These legislative changes include multiple amendments to two laws -- the Law on Fauna and the Law on the Environmental and Nature Use Fees -- and over 20 decisions to improve legislation of protected areas.

New legislation appears to be more comprehensive than laws of previous eras; however, implementation continues to face challenges. Improvements to domestic capacity for implementing both legislation and national strategies for biodiversity conservation is lacking. Armenia continues to be heavily dependent on international actors and funding for development and implementation of many of its strategies and laws. Current legislation lacks clarification of the principles of sustainable use of biodiversity, monitoring mechanisms for determining assessment, and effective use of biological resources (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). According to interviewees, many of the codes still in place are based on old Soviet laws that do not reflect the status of biodiversity or elaborate on systems for proper enforcement. For example, the Wildlife Code prohibits capture of wildlife, yet lacks the capacity to enforce or monitor such actions. The EIA Code, passed in 2014, establishes the general legal and organizational principles for conducting mandatory EIAs of various types of development activities and concept documents. However, code lacks strong guidance for some important development projects, including SHPPs.

Many of Armenia’s laws related to biodiversity are currently still in draft form, which hinders the implementation of a comprehensive conservation framework.

• The draft law on Specially Protected Nature Areas (SPNA) defines and expands the roles of different authorities in the field of SNPA management. The legislation clarifies the provisions on buffer zones, establishment and management of ecological networks and ecological corridors, natural monuments, reserves, and protected landscapes (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). In addition, “protected landscapes” was added to the existing four SPNA categories. The draft SPNA law gives local self-governing bodies the ability to manage natural monuments and protected landscapes, strengthening community management, and clearly defines the parameters of allowed in each of the SPNA categories (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). • A draft law on “making amendments to laws on Flora and Fauna” has been submitted for approval. This law would install numerous changes related to the use of bioresources, regulation of use rights, and the definition of the procedure on provision of permits for keeping and performing inventory of animals in free and semi-free conditions (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 25

• A draft Water Code law “on making changes and supplements to the Water Code of the Republic of Armenia” was developed in 2018. This draft law includes new approaches to regulating the provision of water use permits for the construction of new SHPPs. This piece of legislation prohibits the construction of SHPPs in protected areas and conservation zones for populations of spawning endemic or endangered fish species (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). The adoption of this law will contribute to the conservation and balancing of the aquatic ecosystem in key waterways.

A key recommendation in the report to the Convention on Biodiversity in Armenia encouraged prioritizing developing a legislative basis for regulating the use of genetic resources and ensuring biosafety. The Law “On Flora” (23.11.1999) and Law “On Fauna” (16.03.2000) determine the national policy on scientifically justified conservation, protection and sustainable use of flora and fauna, yet do not set out regulations on GMOs (Ministry of Nature Protection 2004). These laws do define the concepts of “Genetically Modified ” and “Biological Technology,” in line with international obligations. Different articles in governing laws in Armenia also prohibit illegal import and export of animals and plants for acclimatization and selection purposes and the unwarranted use of biotechnologically developed living GMOs. However, these clauses do not regulate the issue of genetic resources. There is presently a draft law on “Biosafety Use of GMOs” that is in circulation.

Drafting and implementation of legislation suffers from the lack of capacity from those at every Ministerial level, resulting in delays to passage. Review processes for each piece of legislation are also extensive. Some interviewees referenced a lack of transparency around legislative development, which has made it difficult for experts to become involved in the drafting process and to include existing, relevant research data. Enforcement of laws is hampered by a lack of capacity in the government to conduct or review data collection or assessments, low public awareness of legislation, and a lack of adequate policing of legislative violations.

The table in Annex E describes the major national laws and strategies of Armenia related to biodiversity.

In addition, the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia (adopted in 1995, amended in 2005 and 2015), the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia (adopted 1998, entered into force 1999), the Law on Alienation of for the Needs of Society and State (2006), the Code of Civil Procedure (2018), and the Code of Administrative Procedure (2014) are included in Armenia’s broader institutional framework approach to biodiversity.

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS This section summarizes Armenia’s major international agreements related to biodiversity conservation.

The Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (ratified 2008) aims to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats, as well as to promote European cooperation in this field. Through the Bern Convention, Armenia is part of the Emerald Network of areas of special conservation interest. As of December 2019, Armenia has nominated 23 designated areas of the Emerald Network.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 26

The Convention on Biological Diversity (ratified 1993) focuses on conserving biological diversity; the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity; and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of utilization of genetic resources. Through its Strategy and Action Plan on Conservation, Protection, Reproduction and Use of Biological Diversity, Armenia has committed to achieving the Aichi targets for the Convention by 2020. Armenia is also a signatory to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity (ratified 2004). The Cartagena Protocol aims to ensure the safe handling, transport and use of living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on biological diversity and/or human health.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (acceded 2008) ensures that the international trade in specimens of wild animals does not threaten their survival.

The Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar) (acceded 1993) is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. Armenia’s three Ramsar sites are the Khor Virap Marsh, Lake Arpi, and Lake Sevan (further described in Section 3.3 above).

Armenia is a signatory to the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) (ratified in 1997), which obligates signatories to conduct an assessment of the environmental impacts of certain activities during planning. Signatories are also specifically required to notify and consult each other on major projects with transboundary ramifications.

The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was developed to promote economic prosperity, stability and security within the EU's neighbors, and to avoid new dividing lines between the enlarged EU and its neighbors. Through this policy, the EU offers its neighbors – including Armenia – a privileged relationship, building upon common values such as democracy and human rights, rule of law, good governance, market economy principles, and sustainable development. The Eastern Partnership (EaP) is a joint initiative involving the EU, its Member States and six Eastern European Partners: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine, as a dimension of the ENP. The Eastern Partnership aims at building a common area of shared democracy, prosperity, stability and increased cooperation, including in 2020 through modernized transport and increased political ownership of energy efficiency, among other elements.

The Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) (signed 2014) is an international organization for regional economic integration, made up of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and the Russian Federation. It creates a single integrated market, encouraging the free movement of goods, services, and common policies in transport, industry, agriculture, energy, foreign trade and investment, customs, technical regulation, competition, and antitrust regulation.

Armenia is party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), having ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2003 and the Paris Agreement in 2017.

Armenia is also party to the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (acceded 2020), the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972); the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 27

Species of Wild Animals (Bonn, ratified in 2011); the European Landscape Convention (ratified 2004), the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (1997); the UN World Heritage Convention (ratified in 1993), and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental (Aarhus Convention) (2001).

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS The main governmental agency overseeing the environment and biodiversity is the MoE. It is responsible for reasonable use of the environment and natural resources, ensuring the implementation of data on the environment and natural resources, and the development and implementation of the policy in environmental and natural resources education and awareness-raising. Specific to biodiversity, the MoE’s mandate covers the following:

• Protection of the environment, water, land, subsoil, fauna and flora; prevention or reduction of natural or man-made negative and harmful impacts; sustainable management of natural areas and forests; development and implementation of the policy of the Government of the Republic of Armenia in the spheres of defense, reproduction and use; • Development and implementation of policy in , aimed at solving the problems of climate change; • Development and implementation of policy in the fields of reasonable use, restoration, and reproduction of natural resources (except for mineral resources); • Development of the policy integrating protection of the environment into economic, social, and other spheres; • Observation, detection, and assessment of changes in the environment and natural resources; and • Development and implementation of ecological awareness, culture, education, and participation in the development of ecological education and science policy.

The MoE originated in 1991 upon Armenian independence and was first organized as the Ministry of Nature and Environmental Protection. On August 4, 1995, the Ministry was renamed the Ministry of Nature Protection and Subsoil by the decree of the GOAM and then again renamed as the Ministry of Nature Protection in November 1996. The ministry was liquidated for six months in 2000 and was included in the staff of the Ministry of Agriculture and Nature Use.

The MoE is presently headed by the Minister of Environment and is organized with deputy ministers and advisors. Its major sub-ministries related to biodiversity are as follows:

• The Water Policy Department, responsible for monitoring water abstraction, use and disposal, wastewater discharge and basin management, water permitting, and water pollution regulation; • The Department for Specially Protected Areas of Nature and Biodiversity Policy, responsible for natural resources management, nature and arboretums protected areas, and ecotourism development; development of policies related to biodiversity; responsible for the SPNAs, which are managed as per the laws and policy described in Section 5.1; and • The Hazardous Substances and Waste Policy Department, responsible for waste permissions and registrations, hazardous wastes, and air emissions regulation and permitting.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 28

Additional Ministries of note in the conservation sector include the following:

• The Ministry of Territorial Administration and is responsible for developing and implementing the government’s policies to balance and sustain development, including energy development, water infrastructure, and local governance; • The Ministry of the Economy, which oversees the country’s economic policy, and includes the agricultural, investment, industrial, and tourism sectors; and • The Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports, which ensures an informed citizenry and ensures the preservation of the country’s cultural heritage.

The capacity of these Ministries in biodiversity is relatively weak and expected changes to the MoE will only serve to further negatively impact these developments. Government interviewees expressed minimal understanding of biodiversity concerns and impacts beyond what could be found in national strategies and policies. Local NGO and donor interviewees expressed minimal confidence in government staffers’ abilities to identify and address conservation threats and drivers. In December 2019, it was announced that MoE budget cuts would result in layoffs of about 30% of the Ministry’s staff, which will further exacerbate concerns.

CONSERVATION INITIATIVES: GAP ANALYSIS The community of donors and NGOs is active in Armenia, including organizations that are focused on biodiversity and conservation. International donors focused on improving environmental and conservation policy and include the European Union and GIZ. International and regional NGOs are focused on advancing conservation policy and include Armenian Forests NGO (a project of the Tufenkian Foundation), Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus (REC Caucasus), and the Armenia Tree Project.

The government relies on these outside actors to propose and support initiatives across many sectors (economic growth, governance, climate, etc.) as they relate to biodiversity conservation; this is consistent with an overall reliance on foreign assistance for development. GIZ, for example, operates in Armenia through the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (BMZ’s) Caucasus Initiative, which includes environment and natural resources as priority areas of cooperation. Specific projects includes improving the preconditions for the sustainable and biodiversity-friendly use of natural resources in the South Caucasus prevailing land-use systems, with a special focus on for the rural population (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit n.d.).

The sustainability of this and other donor-sponsored approaches in the conservation space has been questioned by several expert interviewees, as no plan has been developed to mitigate reliance on foreign assistance over time. It is also not clear how these standards will be maintained once targets are achieved.

In another sector, the GOAM has made efforts in recent years to increase the efficiencies of fish farming operations with support of the international community (including through USAID projects). In 2008, the government over-issued fish farm permits in the Ararat Valley, which led to the drilling of unregulated wells and water resource depletion (USAID Global Waters 2019). Without reliable water meters, water service providers both over-extracted the rapidly depleting supply and charged users for

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 29

water resources they never received (USAID Global Waters 2019). In response, the GOAM focused their efforts on stricter regulation over water use permitting, permit-enforcing processes, and adjustments to the abstraction fees (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). Ararat, South and Akhuryan basin management plans developed and approved in 2016 and 2017 envisage the development of new surface and groundwater resources monitoring programs to ensure basin management plans that can weaken threats (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). The USAID/Armenia program PURE Water promotes and encourages fish farmers in the Ararat valley to adopt water-saving methods in order to reduce groundwater loss. Through communications and training on environmental and water preservation, PURE Water has engaged fish-farming communities to improve water management. In addition, the USAID/Armenia ASPIRED program worked to improve water saving and recycling technologies, including by promoting secondary use of water from fish farms for irrigation (USAID Global Waters 2019). However, measures to restore and conserve artesian groundwater have had mixed results, and further coordinated action across both a variety of government departments and stakeholders is needed (Yu, Cestti and Lee 2014).

The academic community is very active in researching and reporting on biodiversity in Armenia. Interviews were conducted with experts from multiple local academic institutions, many of which include individual, preeminent faculties in environmental science, including the American University of Armenia, the Armenian National Agrarian University, Institute of Botany aft. A.L. Takhtajyan NAS RA, Scientific Center of Zoology and Hydroecology NAS RA, and . Academic institutions like these lead the field of biodiversity monitoring, collecting data across Armenia’s species, ecosystems, and climate changes. These activities are not well-coordinated, however, and there are minimal mechanisms for disseminating this information publicly or providing collated data to spur informed government engagement.

Armenia is unique among countries in the region as it benefits from diaspora engagement and support of its environment and biodiversity. Organizations like the Armenia Tree Project have offices in both Yerevan and the United States, and tree-planting, environmental education, biodiversity monitoring, and other projects are coordinated with international best practices. GOAM engagement with these groups has slowly been increasing, although leadership and organization has been diffuse.

For a list of on-going conservation initiatives, see Annex E.

6 THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY The following tables outline the major threats and drivers to biodiversity in Armenia uncovered during the Analysis Team’s research. Threats and drivers were adapted based on literature review and remote interviews with stakeholders and experts. Note that threats are prioritized based on their significance and listed in descending order. The threats were grouped and ranked based on the synthesis of multiple sources, including desktop research and stakeholder consultations. While the prioritization is subjective, it reflects the scale of the effect and its potential impact on biodiversity in Armenia. In general, threats that are poorly controlled and directly decrease biodiversity were ranked higher than those that occur over longer time frames or that affect biodiversity in a less direct way.

Drivers can be relevant across threats and therefore are not listed in order of significance.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 30

6.1 THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION Mining, including Mining activities pose serious direct, indirect, induced, and cumulative impacts on mining waste biodiversity. At the site level, land preparation and expansion and waste management are destructive processes, changing abiotic and biotic conditions, and in some cases causing declines in rare and threatened species and ecosystems. Landscape and region-wide impacts on biodiversity also emerge through indirect/secondary and cumulative pathways. Negative impacts to biodiversity occur over great distances (e.g., sediment export along rivers) with the discharge of chemical and physical (i.e. dusts and aerosols) mining waste discharge. Indirect impacts occur when mining facilitates cause additional biodiversity loss. For example, mining associated infrastructure development can attract human populations causing new threats or exacerbate pre-existing threats, such as over- exploitation (e.g., hunting, fishing), invasive species, and habitat loss for other land uses. Cumulative impacts occur when multiple mines cause more biodiversity loss than the sum of individual mines. Armenia’s 5th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity (2014) identifies the production, accumulation, and storage of the wastes from the mining industry as the primary threat to the environment. Metal mining has a long history in Armenia and has been looked to as a sector for further development considering the country’s rich mineral resources. Statistics from the Ministry of Energy Infrastructures and Natural Resources indicate that there are more than 670 quarry sites and mineral mines, including 30 metal mines, that are registered in the state inventory of mineral resources. There are approximately 400 active mining or quarrying sites today, 22 of which are metal mines (copper and in particular). As a result of mining activities, about 8,000 ha of land have been degraded and an additional 1,500 ha are used to store tailing dumps, which commonly leach pollution affecting waterways and local biodiversity. According to recent data (2018) from the Hydrometeorology and Monitoring Center, 16 rivers in Armenia have been identified as having the highest degree of pollution as a result of mining activities (Ministry of Energy infrastructures and Natural Resources n.d.). The World Bank’s Strategic Mineral Strategic Sector Sustainability Assessment (2016) further outline negative impacts of mining in country, including the following: • The small metal mining companies that are involved in poorly managed “mining/exploration projects” are creating substantial damage to the environment; • There is significant ongoing pollution emanating from existing mines and processing activities, both to air and water; • There is an overall lack of adequate plans and funds to enable reclamation and rehabilitation of mines. What exist in the “Nature and protection and reclamation fund” is inadequate for its purpose, and in cases when the operations have had a history of being state owned (before privatization) there has been no formal division of liability between the state and the new owner;

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 31

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION and • Given the high seismic risk, and overall high risk for land instability, there exist excessive risks for waste facility collapses and/or accidents, caused by the inappropriate method of construction (the use of “up-stream raise” designs) that is used for tailings impoundment construction. The research on the environmental impacts of mining activities in Armenia to date is modest and does not allow for definitive conclusions to be drawn, beyond the fact that mining is causing impacts. However, serious heavy metal contamination of soils in both agricultural and inhabited areas have been reported in town (Gevorgyan, et al. 2013), Alaverdi (Petrosyana, et al. 2004), (Akopyan, et al. 2014), and Agarak (Ghazaryan, et al. 2013). Possible sources of elevated heavy metal levels include dust and waste deriving from mining and processing, as well as from emissions from smelting activities (Pipoyan, et al. 2019). Excessive water Major sources of water extraction and consumption in Armenia are municipal (including extraction and use drinking water), industrial (including generation of hydropower and commercial fishing), and agricultural. Excessive water extraction leads to salinization, erosion, and pollution – all of which affect natural ecosystems. In addition to overgrazing (see section below, Agricultural practices, including grazing), intensive artificial watering of areas where fruit and vegetables are cultivated have a major negative impact on Armenia’s semi-deserts. Over 80% of the land surface in Armenia is affected by desertification (Yu, Cestti and Lee, Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia 2014). Artesian water resources are used for drinking water and, more recently, for fish farms, This results in the depletion of water from upper soil layers, affecting natural ecosystems by causing excessive turf formation or eutrophication. The fish farming industry has rapidly expanded in recent years and the inefficient use of and excessive water withdrawals by fisheries has led to drainage of many springs and wetland areas. According to government statistics for 2018, water abstracted for fishing (492.6 MCM) was 18% of all water abstracted in Armenia and 41% of all groundwater abstracted. This issue is particularly troubling in Ararat Valley, where there is a rich supply of artesian groundwater and fish farming is concentrated. U.S. Geological Survey investigations in 2016 in cooperation with USAID’s Advanced Science and Partnership for Integrated Resource Development (ASPIRED) program concluded the area within the Ararat Basin with flowing wells decreased by more than 50% between 1984 and 2016 (Valder, et al. 2018).8

8 Investigations concluded that “the area within the Ararat Basin in Armenia with flowing wells (within the pressure boundary) was approximately 619 km2 in 1984, but decreased to 291 km2 in 2016 (more than a 50% reduction in area between 1984 and 2016)” (Valder, et al. 2018). Hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia can be found in the U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 32

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION Untreated/poorly Pollution by untreated wastewater severely degrades aquatic and wetland ecosystems treated and exacerbates serious risks to public health. There are growing concerns with respect wastewater to the declining quality of water, including due to the discharge of untreated or insufficiently treated wastewater into surface water bodies. From 2009 to 2018, the total wastewater volume increased by more than 70% (from 359.3 MCM to 612 MCM per year), and untreated discharge increased by 27% (from 75 MCM to 222.5 MCM per year) (Statistical Committee of Armenia 2018). Some of this increase can be attributed to improved measurement and the increase in discharge from fish farming (Yu, Cestti and Lee, Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia 2014). The areas that have no sewerage services (approximately 560–600 villages) rely on on- site sanitation solutions that are often managed by local governments. These local governments have not created dedicated services to supervise and service on-site sanitation facilities (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2017). Some of these on-site facilities discharge wastewaters directly into rivers, streams, and other water bodies. While the GOAM’s water sector strategy and financing plan (2018) envisages providing integrated wastewater services to off grid communities using a staged approach9, the costs associated with building wastewater networks in mountainous and remote regions means on-site solutions will remain necessary for years to come. Meanwhile, wastewater treatment facilities systems presently operating were constructed during the Soviet era and are in poor condition. Approximately 45-50% of total wastewater volume undergoes mechanical treatment and does not receive a chemical or biological treatment. Even though primary treatment removes a significant amount of harmful substances from wastewater, it is not enough to ensure that all harmful pollutants have been removed. Lack of wastewater networks and adequate treatment result in the remaining volume of untreated wastewater being discharged into open water bodies. Illegal/unregulated All forests in Armenia are state-owned, and about one third of the total forest area is in logging protected areas (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations 2004). Timber is a high-value product that is relatively easy to merge into legitimate market distribution channels when sourced illegally. Legally permitted timber harvest is not well regulated, and activities driven by financial incentives are not easily identified. A 2015 UNDP study suggests that up to 630,000 m³ of wood may be cut illegally every year. These volumes are higher than the capacity of Armenia’s forests to produce a sustainable yield, based on natural productivity, by a factor of at least 20 (United Nations Development Programme 2015). Wood harvesting and forest degradation have resulted in erosion, , and disturbance to the hydrological cycle. A third of the country’s area is considered eroded

9 The plan envisages introducing public–private partnership with a specialized (licensed) water supply and sanitation service provider.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 33

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION (Hayantar 2005). Local organization studies indicate logging has a significant impact on many species of birds and butterflies. These practices also support the penetration of arid species into forests and increase of pest outbreaks. Armenia’s forests support a broad range of species and play an important role preventing erosion, protecting soil and regulating water and climate. Climate change Climate change threatens biodiversity and ecosystems, including Armenia’s flora, fauna, bodies of water, and soil layers. Historically, various climate-related hazards have affected Armenia, including drought, floods, landslides, , and and desertification. These hazards have altered and in some cases adversely affected ecosystems (A. Gabrielyan 2014). Armenia has already begun to experience changes in climate, and projections indicate more warming, dry periods, and heavy events, leading to adverse impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems. Between 1960 and 2015, mean annual temperature rose (+0.1°C per decade), the snow line rose, snow accumulation and glacial volume declined, and average annual rainfall experienced no significant trends. By midcentury, mean annual temperature is projected to rise (+1.6°C to 2.2°C), monthly mean precipitation during summer months is projected to decline (-7% to -10%), the number of consecutive dry days is projected to rise (+7% to +11%), and extreme rainfall days are projected to become more common (+22% to +32%) (Minstry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2015), (USAID 2017). Changes in climate are projected to alter ecosystems, leading to the following: • Changes in species extents, a loss of biodiversity, and changes in phenology. Rising temperatures are projected to cause plant and animal species to continue to shift upwards in elevation (A. Gabrielyan 2014). Species that have historically inhabited Armenia’s highest altitudes may become extinct; climate change puts more than 15% of Armenia’s higher plant species at risk of extinction (Minstry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2015). Rising temperatures may lead to changes in migration patterns, the timing and location of breeding and spawning, the location of grazing or feeding areas, and changes in other key cycle events (A. Gabrielyan 2014). For example, the distribution range of the alpine butterfly species (Polyommatus myrrha cinyraea) is shrinking, and the species is at risk of extinction, due in part to the reduction of its host plant habitat (Aghababyan and Khanamirian, Assessment of Global Conservation Status of Polyommatus Myrrha Cinyraea – Endemic of Middle East and Southern Caucasus 2017). • Adverse effects on tree health and greater risk. Summer dry spells are projected to become more frequent, slowing tree growth rates, and leaving them more susceptible to pests and diseases. These changes are also projected to create conditions that are conducive to wildfires, driving an estimated 14 to 17 thousand hectares of forest loss by 2030 (Minstry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2015).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 34

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION • Accelerated desertification. Studies indicate that semi-desert and desert areas will expand by 30%, accelerating desertification (Minstry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2015). • Adverse impacts on water resources. Rising temperatures are projected to heighten evaporation rates, reduce winter snowpack, and diminish spring runoff, reducing Armenia’s already limited water resources. Aggregate river flow is projected to drop by nearly 12% by 2030 and nearly 40% by 2100 relative to the historical baseline (1961–1990). Lake Sevan, Armenia’s largest freshwater lake, is projected to experience a reduction in inflow of more than 50 million m3 by 2030, and more than 190 million m3 by 2100 relative to the baseline (Minstry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2015). Infrastructure Infrastructure development in Armenia poses an ongoing threat to biodiversity. development, Ecosystems can be destroyed during the creation or installation of infrastructure and including these structures can facilitate further destruction that continues for decades. hydropower Infrastructure development—including roads, dams, channels and pipelines—fragments natural habitats and contributes to habitat loss. Draining wetlands and digging channels for agriculture and irrigation alters riparian ecosystems irreversibly and leads to habitat loss. The development of hydropower infrastructure in Armenia has led to a loss of biodiversity and negative impacts to ecosystem watershed services and can affect the quality and quantity of water available. There is also a proliferation of illegal development in Armenia. which includes a failure to conform to normative and technical requirements, construction without permits, and violations of sanitary protection zone regulations for water reservoirs and water pipelines that endanger water supply security, and cause erosion, desertification, and mudflows. The construction of structures without the needed permitting can result in the degradation of lands, encroachment, unauthorized excavation, illegal waste dumping, water pollution, and forest loss, in addition to health and safety risks. Among the priority areas the Urban Development Committee of Armenia has identified for government action over the next five years is an amendment to the current legislation to prevent illegal construction and to regulate self-construction (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019). Deterioration of Lake Sevan contains 80% of Armenian water resources and plays an important role in water quality in regulating the country’s water balance in addition to supporting the agricultural, Lake Sevan industrial, and energy sectors (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 1999). About 90% of the fish catch and 80% of the crayfish catch of Armenia are from Lake Sevan. Maintaining and improving the water quantity and quality of the lake is considered a priority of the government. Despite the significant legislative and institutional reforms, e.g. Law on Lake Sevan, achieved by Armenia in terms of water resources management and protection, stresses on the lake remain a significant threat. There are four main sources of environmental stress adversely impacting Lake Sevan’s ecosystem and water quality. Stresses within the lake include unsustainable fishing

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 35

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION practices and the negative impact of rising water levels on water quality. The level of Lake Sevan fell dramatically due to active use for irrigating the and in hydropower during the period from 1930 to the 1970s, resulting in serious environmental and ecological problems, including deterioration of water quality, the draining of wetlands, destruction of natural habitats, species succession, and biodiversity loss. To re-establish the Lake‘s disturbed ecological balance, a series of measures were taken to increase water levels (although overall water levels still remain lower than needed to restore ecosystem health), including artificially adjusting the water levels. This has resulted in forests, recreational areas, abandoned structures, and motorways becoming submerged causing pollution as well as eutrophication from the breakdown of organic debris and sewage. Stresses on the littoral (nearshore) zone of the Lake result from unplanned conversion of shoreline areas for development and unstable levels of water. Construction along the Lake’s sensitive littoral zone without adequate environmental mitigation measures (e.g., buffering strip, landfills, sewage treatment, and disposal) increase liquid and solid waste loads into the Lake. It also limits the development of macrophytes (aquatic plants), which results in the loss of nesting areas for waterbirds and spawning areas for fish and frogs. Stresses from the surrounding basin on Lake Sevan include reduced water inflows into the Lake, over abstraction of Lake water, soil erosion and loss of vegetation cover; and increased water pollution. Intensive ‘blooming” of blue-green algae experienced beginning in 2018 was attributed to released water causing further eutrophication, resulting in the sharp increase in water temperature (up to 24oC), high concentrations of phosphate and ammonium ions (from agricultural runoff), and the result of large quantities of water being released from the lake (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). The discharge of untreated or insufficiently treated wastewater into Lake Sevan is of particular concern. All of Armenia’s wastewater treatment plants were built during Soviet times and are in need of rehabilitation or replacement. Stresses from outside the basin include the demand for fisheries products for domestic and international markets, the demand for water for irrigation, and climate change. The forecasted climate variation will result in significant changes to the water balance and water quality. Surface water evaporation rates have shown an increasing trend in recent years due changes in the temperature regime, which is expected to continue in the future (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2010). Changes in precipitation patterns will result in significant flow decreases in many of the rivers in the Lake Sevan basin, possibly by as much as 41% (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2010). Agricultural Intensive agricultural and livestock development on marginal lands and associated practices, including pollution of soil and water are a significant threat to biodiversity in Armenia. Agricultural grazing practices can include an excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides, which can lead to soil and water pollution, elimination of soil biodiversity (invertebrates, bacteria), change of

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 36

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION species composition of plant cover, and the reduction of valuable and rare plant species. Official data on the extent of the impacts do not exist. Across much of Armenia, landscapes face moderate to severe overgrazing pressures, corresponding to high rates of erosion, increasing soil salinity, lowered soil fertility, and loss of biodiversity (United Nations Development Programme 2015). Overgrazing of pastures and hayfields and the uneven distribution of pressure on pastures has also resulted in changes of ecosystems and varieties of plants. In particular alpine carpets are replaced by alpine meadows and sub-alpine weeds such as crowfoot, thistle, euphorbia, and various types of locoweeds (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). Overgrazing can threaten species registered in the Red Book of Armenia: Botrychium lunaria, Polystichum braunii, Eryngium vanaturi, and Stenotaenia daralaghezica (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Overgrazing leads to the loss of vegetation from riparian watershed areas and the consequent erosion of soils. Subsequently, overgrazing influences the grassland species, such as monophagous butterflies, which include number of regional endemics (e.g., Satyrus amasinus, Pseudochazara pelopea, and Chazara bischoffi (Acopian Center for the Environment 2013). Pests, diseases, and The distribution of invasive and expanding species in natural ecosystems can significantly invasive species change the biological diversity of native flora and lead to irreversible environmental consequences. Recent studies in Armenia have revealed that the density and variety of populations of invasive species has risen, which is affecting species composition of biodiversity and threatening native wildlife, the economy, and human and animal health (International Union for the Conservation of Nature 2011). The Global Invasive Species Database identifies 63 invasive species in Armenia (Global Invasive Species Database n.d.). Land-use change and increasing temperatures are the largest contributors to the increase of alien species (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019), (Aleksanyan 2012). The development of international trade and uncontrolled introduction of exotic plants have also resulted in an increase of the number of alien species, which can become invasive species over time. For example, since 1960 the number of fish species in Armenia has grown from 24 to 40 species due in large part to the introduction of fish from fish farming operations or the release from amateur fishermen (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). Alien species are also found in SPNAs, which can cause a serious impact on biodiversity and habitat loss. Additional analyses and studies are needed to better understand the risks posed by invasive alien species and to develop strategies and national plans for management and control.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 37

TABLE 7. THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY THREAT DESCRIPTION Illegal/unregulated/ Uncontrolled hunting and poaching remain a serious issue in Armenia despite steps taken 10 poorly regulated by the government in recent years. While a legal framework has been developed that hunting and fishing specifies hunting quotas and seasons for species of animals, gaps remain, including in the areas of decision making and enforcement. For example, the comprehensive information systems on biodiversity status that should underpin decision making on hunting seasons and quotas is not in place. Hunting seasons for birds are established so as not to overlap with breeding seasons; however, a changing climate has caused changes in ecosystem dynamics and increased the possibility of hunting and fall migration period overlaps (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). Hunters are not able to identify and distinguish between species of animals permitted for hunting and those on the IUCN Red List or the Red Data Book of Armenia (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). Enforcement of wildlife laws is minimal, especially beyond the boundaries of a few better-managed protected areas (e.g., State Reserves). The extent of poaching activities in Armenia is still not well understood. This is in part because the necessary stock-taking and monitoring necessary for effective bioresource management are yet to be undertaken. It is also due to a lack of understanding about the intentionality of hunters and anglers and their possible confusion due to their poor knowledge of species. A 2015 analysis by Bird Life International did indicate that as many as 24,300 – 57,700 individual birds may be illegally killed/taken each year (BirdLife International 2015). The priority species in Armenia that have been affected by poaching include the Caucasian leopard, brown bear, Caucasian red deer, bezoar goat, marbled duck, and white-headed duck (Zazanashvili, et al. 2013). Meanwhile, overfishing and illegal fishing activities in Armenia’s water bodies and in Lake Sevan in particular have caused an alarming decrease of fish stocks (Yu, Cestti and Lee 2014).

6.2 DRIVERS OF THREATS

TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS

DRIVER DESCRIPTION Poor social and Disparities in social development and welfare/poverty levels have historically exerted economic destructive pressures on Armenia’s resources and ecosystems. While positive trends in conditions poverty rates discussed in Section 2 are notable, deep, and persistent economic disparities characterize the regions of Armenia. In 2016, the difference between the poverty rates in urban (28.8%) and rural (30.4%) communities was small. Nonetheless, that difference is large between Yerevan (24.9%) and other urban communities of the

10 Including the Law AL-176/2007 regarding ‘Hunting and management of hunting areas’ and the Law regarding ‘Wildlife of Armenia’. In 2018, the imports of fishing nets with a mesh size less than 50 mm were prohibited in Armenia to reduce overfishing.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 38

TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS

DRIVER DESCRIPTION country (33.2%). Unemployment in Armenia also remains high and volatile at 18%. Unemployment is mostly concentrated in urban areas, among the young and women. Youth unemployment (36.6%) is twice that of the population aged 25 to 64 (United Nations Development Programme 2020). As elsewhere, the global COVID-19 pandemic is expected to severely weaken Armenia’s economy in 2020 and beyond. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) expects the economy to contract by 1.5%, compared with growth of 5.5% anticipated prior to the pandemic. The shutdown and border closures are also expected to significantly impact Armenia’s largest sectors: agriculture, manufacturing, tourism, and wholesale and retail trade. As economic activities are curtailed, the unemployment rate is expected to increase, and the marked progress in poverty reduction could stall (Executive 2020). The heightened uncertainty and anticipated economic impacts resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic have the potential to deepen unsustainable management of natural resources and accelerate environmental degradation. Lack of Environmental management has improved over the last 20 years in Armenia, including via institutional clarifying and strengthening policies and strategies. These improvements are guided by capacity and international best practice, the reorganization of government authorities, and increased prioritization and a coordination with the international donor and local NGO communities. However, legacy of institutional capacity in Armenia continues to be low due to a lack of training, low pay, corruption inexperience, prolonged and heavy shortages of resources, a legacy of corruption, and high staff turnover. A deficiency of reliable data coupled with low monitoring capacity and the lack of government environmental expertise has impeded evaluating environmental threats, their causes, and the development of appropriate action plans. For example, there is no coordinated, integrated, and comprehensive monitoring of Armenia’s lands. Land monitoring remains spontaneous and sporadic, done by different organizations and consequently, there is no coordination of data collection and analysis. There is also no system in place to identify how to balance land degradation and loss of productive land with restoration within given land types, nor the transfer of such lands to other land types (e.g., from agricultural land to industrial land). In another example, the historic legacy of corruption has in the past extended to biodiversity licensing and permitting, which in some areas continues today. Poor management Armenia's energy sector has made significant progress in the last two decades, of energy supply successfully implementing reforms and increasing efficiency. Armenia has no domestic and consumption fossil fuel resources and the rejection of fossil fuel subsidies as part of energy sector reform has contributed to the low-carbon development trend. Armenia’s sustainable economic and energy development policy ensures both procurement guarantees and preferential tariffs for small hydropower plants, wind turbines, solar photovoltaic, and for electricity generated at biogas stations. As a result of large-scale gasification, more than 617 settlements use today and Armenia is one of the leaders in the world with 94.6% gasification rate. The fuel consumption structure in the road transport sector is quite specific considering the

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 39

TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS

DRIVER DESCRIPTION predominance of natural gas, which accounted for more than 63% of the total fuel consumed in road transport in 2016 (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019). Despite these generally positive trends, social pressures linked to poverty and the demand for inexpensive energy continue to put strains on Armenia’s forest resources. Due to the high cost of gas, firewood (and manure) are still widely used as fuel in rural areas, and unsustainable fuelwood consumption continues to be the main cause of forest degradation in the country. The cost of electricity almost doubled in price between 1999 and 2014, and prices for gas increased by 250% between 2007 and 2014 (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019). Depletion of river fish populations and their migration routes is a direct outcome of the development of SHPPs in Armenia. Despite Armenia’s EIA law, existing SHPPs were constructed without an appropriate level of oversight and environmental due diligence, and they continue to generate significant environmental impacts (discussed in Section 4). This includes impacts to biodiversity, ecological flows, landscapes change, and excessive use of water resources (Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). Lack of public From 2003 - 2004, the GOAM undertook the National Capacity Self-Assessment, which environmental revealed that there is a low level of environmental literacy and little knowledge about awareness global environmental issues and environmental agreements among the Armenian public. To address this, the government and multilateral organization-sponsored environmental education and awareness raising campaigns. These initiatives have sought to improve the capacity of stakeholders to increase the prioritization of environmental and natural resource management issues. Despite these campaigns, however, public environmental awareness and prioritization of natural resource management issues remain challenges today (United Nations Environment Programme 2019). Environmental pollution, from the mining sector specifically, has been an area of growing environmental awareness and concern to many in recent years. However, a general lack of capacity at government, non-governmental, and journalistic organizations combined with low public awareness and a reluctance to actively participate in environmental decision-making and problem solving remains an issue. The in Armenia is not strong enough yet to have a major impact on policy and development issues. For example, Armenia’s EIA law includes three articles mandating public participation. A 2018 assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of Armenian EIA revealed that participation and its effectiveness in mitigating environmental impacts are low (Geghamyan and Pavlickova 2019). While the movement towards greater environmental activism brings together NGOs, academic institutions, and a more organized and aware public and diaspora, these groups have limited resources and have wielded little influence on policy decisions to date. Poor knowledge of environmental issues combined with a lack of understanding of the value of natural resources can cause unsustainable consumption and increases the potential for illegal resource exploitation. This lack of understanding covers sustainable management of water, agriculture, knowledge of invasive species and the importance of species diversity,

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 40

TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS

DRIVER DESCRIPTION landscape and genetic diversity, and understanding of the overall value of natural resources. Environmental awareness in Armenia is not widely taught throughout the primary school system, resulting in the population’s undervaluing of natural resources over the long term. Lack of It is difficult to obtain reliable information about the nature and extent of Armenia’s environmental data environmental condition. In many cases, official data are inadequate by international and monitoring standards and the scientific accuracy of information appearing in numerous press reports is difficult to corroborate. Armenia’s 5th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity links a lack of data, stocktaking, and coordinated monitoring with increasing anthropogenic impacts on natural landscapes; disturbance and degradation of ecosystems; disturbance of terrestrial and water communities; change of species composition; and reduction of economically valuable species as well as rare species and those under the threat of extinction (Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union 2014). For example, little information is available on the extent of environmental pollution originating from the mining sector. In the water sector, the knowledge on availability and quality of groundwater resources in the country is limited due to the lack of monitoring, analysis and modelling of /water balance. Factors that hinder the mitigation of threats from alien invasive species include an absence of both economic and environmental assessments of damage. Meanwhile, forest biodiversity monitoring, scientific research on forests, and forest stock-taking are widely considered to be insufficient to support sustainable forestry management. The concept of environmental change indicators and their influence on biodiversity is underdeveloped and is not well understood by decision makers. This impedes funding and allocation, as funds which are being generated through various environmental fees are not directly allocated for environmental and natural resources monitoring. Limited capacity to Armenia has limited capacity to secure and mobilize resources for environmental secure resources investments, including for climate change. Even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, there for environmental was limited fiscal space and borrowing capacity, both of which are now expected to investments tighten further. There is also the issue in Armenia of under-execution of foreign financed capital spending, which, according to the IMF, reflects “(i) weaknesses in project planning and prioritization; (ii) uncertainties created by the existing project management structures; and (iii) delays in decision making by the implementation agencies in the context of the government’s anti-corruption efforts”. While the available data on government expenditures by function (COFOG) for 2018 and 2019 show that the expenditure on environmental protection in Armenia is largely comparable to many other countries in the region, there is scope to increase Armenia’s environmental financing and prioritize funding more efficiently to address the threats identified (Executive 2020). Legislative gaps and A lack of explicit and shared environmental objectives across government ministries and lack of sectoral strategies, and poor transparency on how environmental investments are transparency targeted and funded contribute to threats in Armenia. In addition, policy gaps undermine the implementation of successful environmental protection and sustainable development.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 41

TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS

DRIVER DESCRIPTION Armenia’s mining sector, for example, has yet to adopt global best practices, despite Armenia’s engagement with international initiatives like the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (World Bank 2014), (Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative 2020). There is also no uniform policy on how to assess the economic benefits, in terms of economic development, and environmental and social costs of mining projects. Currently legislation is focused on regulating the process of mining permits and assessing environmental risks via EIA. In the forestry sector, the few policy measures that have been introduced, while formally implemented, have led to superficial or incidental changes without addressing underlying problems, (e.g., the Forest Code). There is a tendency to fixate on illegal logging (among both government and NGOs) rather than the implementation of the principles of the Forest Code which are built on sound sustainable forest management and balancing economic, social, and environmental factors to ensure a sustainable forest sector (Fripp 2011). In the water sector, water use permits are one of the key tools for management and allocation of water resources in Armenia. Improved implementation of the water use permit system is constrained by deficiencies in permitting regulations and insufficiencies in the existing procedures. These include primarily (a) lack of regulations defining the marginal quantities of water use that do not require a water use permit (as required by article 22 of the Water Code); (b) weaknesses in compliance and enforcement; (c) low rate and fragmented nature of implementation, despite the formal public notification requirement (Yu, Cestti and Lee 2014); and (d) lack of transparency and coordination between different water entities involved in water management and use. Despite relatively good knowledge and high-level understanding of the land degradation situation in Armenia, there are no national programs, plans, laws, or regulations to secure enough healthy and productive natural resources by avoiding degradation and restoring degraded land (Global Environment Facility 2019). Grassland and pastureland management, for example, is scattered among several legal frameworks and codes. Moreover, a lack of comprehensive spatial planning undermines development, zoning, and construction regulation enforcement across the country (Gad Bigio, Von Culin and Karapetyan 2019). Weak coordination There is a general lack of coordination of actions among public administration bodies, between local self-governing bodies, international organizations, donors, and the private sector. government and This includes sustainability planning. There are no clear mechanisms of inter-sector other collaboration, while joint actions required for corporate responsibility and risk environmental management in the field of biodiversity management are not defined (Ministry of Nature actors Protection of the Republic of Armenia 2019). Poor coordination between government agencies is driven by under-financed sector administrations, capacity gaps, and unclear delineation of responsibilities. The limited financial resources of local authorities are considered one of the main obstacles to sustainable regional and local development in the country. This is particularly relevant considering the important role local governments

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 42

TABLE 8. DRIVERS OF THREATS

DRIVER DESCRIPTION play in environmental management. A good example of where more support and coordination are needed is in the water sector. The Water Policy Department issues water use permits to water users and ensures compliance with the permit requirements through monitoring. Currently, compliance involves a monitoring function and an enforcement action function conducted by the State Environmental Inspectorate. While separating these roles and responsibilities can be advantageous, cooperation and coordination among the agencies needs to be improved. Currently compliance with water permits is hampered by deficiencies in permitting regulations, insufficient cooperation among agencies, insufficient resources, and weak agency capacity (Yu, Cestti and Lee 2014). Moreover, the mandates guiding the six basin management organizations responsible for interfacing between the national government and the local communities in the basins are shared with other existing water resources management institutions, in the areas of water use planning, permitting, compliance, and enforcement (Yu, Cestti and Lee 2014).

7 ACTIONS TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY The actions necessary to conserve biodiversity in Armenia have been derived from document study, stakeholder interviews, and the expert judgement of the Analysis Team. These actions all relate to the drivers and direct threats discussed in detail in Section 6, with a focus on addressing the root causes of threats. Actions necessary are directed at all stakeholders operating in-country and have been grouped by sub-headings for clarity. As is evident in Table 6 below, most of the direct threats result from multiple drivers.

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY Poor social and economic Excessive water extraction and use Strengthen forest monitoring, conditions reporting, and verification (MRV) Untreated/poorly treated capability to assess effect of REDD+ wastewater strategy on GHG emissions, livelihoods, and other benefits Illegal/unregulated logging Support sustainable Infrastructure development, livelihoods/income-generating including hydropower activities for local citizens near protected areas Deterioration of water quality in Lake Sevan Introduce/boost eco-tourism initiatives (e.g., birdwatching in Lake Agricultural practices, including Sevan and Transcaucasian Trail) grazing through supporting

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 43

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY business/management capacity; Illegal/unregulated/poorly regulated improving marketing capacity, and hunting and fishing support development/creation of linkages with potential public and private partners (e.g., creation of Community-Public-Private Partnerships).

Explore opportunities that sustainably utilize wetland resources and implement poverty alleviation activities (e.g., ecotourism, basket weaving, beekeeping, etc.) Lack of institutional capacity and Excessive water extraction and use Increase investment in the MoE in prioritization and a legacy of terms of staff numbers, salary, and corruption Untreated/poorly treated technical expertise, especially in wastewater developing planning strategies and mitigating poaching Illegal/unregulated logging Improve awareness in law Infrastructure development, enforcement agencies about existing including hydropower national and international biodiversity laws Deterioration of water quality in Lake Sevan Build capacity and provide technical assistance for marz-level and Agricultural practices, including community-level governance grazing systems/structures/individuals

Pests, diseases, and invasive species Build capacity and provide technical assistance to water resource and Illegal/unregulated/poorly regulated waste management governance hunting and fishing systems

Promote actions to prevent, control or eradicate invasive alien species

Strengthen environmental monitoring, environmental compliance (EIA) oversight, and surveillance capacity

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 44

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY Enforce regulations on protected species and species of special concern

Support hands-on field training of CSOs/NGOs, local groups, field surveys and monitoring activities by the group of experts and local volunteer groups

Support training or capacity-building activities that focus on eco-friendly agricultural practices Poor management of energy Excessive water extraction and use Support policies and strategies supply and consumption encouraging the development and Illegal/unregulated logging implementation of clean, alternative energy sources to reduce demands Climate change on wood

Infrastructure development, Increase support for systemic including hydropower planning for nationwide energy development that compares a range Deterioration of water quality in of pathways, including different Lake Sevan mixes of generation technologies and strategic siting to minimize impacts

Lack of public environmental Illegal/unregulated/poorly regulated Develop and implement grazing awareness hunting and fishing plans

Pests, diseases, and invasive species Support valuation of ecosystems

Illegal/unregulated logging Update hunting and fishing licensing systems to support sustainable Climate change conservation of local resources and increase knowledge Deterioration of water quality in Lake Sevan Increase opportunities and funding for scientists to work on and Agricultural practices, including students to study biodiversity grazing conservation activities

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 45

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY Support ecosystem valuation studies and distribute the results to officials and the public

Promote holistic management of grazing areas

Support training or capacity-building activities that focus on eco-friendly agricultural practices

Promote fire risk and control

Promote ethical use of forests and other recreational zones as part of community participation and environmental education

Provide incentives for local communities to protect wetlands (e.g., moderate stipends, environmental conservation education, etc.)

Conduct public awareness and education campaigns on sustainable fisheries management

Raise awareness about the importance of environmental management, the interrelation between environmental management and conservation and improved livelihoods, and sustainable resource management and use

Enhance links between government, civil society, and educational/research institutions towards concerted work in public awareness of biodiversity

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 46

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY Promote and support public, community monitoring, local volunteer groups, and media performing independent monitoring, including for forests, arson and fire, indicators of pollution, biomonitoring, etc.

Raise citizen awareness and knowledge of their rights, penalties for infractions, and the roles and responsibilities of legislation (e.g., EIA law) and law enforcement around biodiversity and natural resource management, including through the media

Expand efforts to understand citizen perspectives and/or concerns regarding environmental compliance and management, and natural resource or biodiversity conservation

Improve the capacity of local NGOs to monitor environmental compliance, do public awareness campaigns and share lessons learned

Lack of environmental data and Mining, including mining waste Apply international standards for monitoring storing and managing biodiversity Excessive water extraction and use data, including:

Climate change • Strengthen forest monitoring and reporting capability Deterioration of water quality in • Landscape-scale data Lake Sevan collection and management, standardized throughout the Pests, diseases, and invasive species country • Support mapping and Agricultural practices, including rehabilitation of degraded grazing

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 47

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY areas and hotspots, including mining areas • Strengthen water quality and quantity monitoring and analytical capabilities • Develop a national inventory of invasive alien species that currently or potentially impact the ecology • Establish monitoring and evaluation system for discrete ecosystems/habitats

Conduct resources surveys and develop management plans, integrating data from NGOs, civil society organizations, and/or academic institutions and consider their recommendations with respect to existing GOAM efforts

Support the government in developing a national cadaster system as well as feasibility study for integration of sector cadasters

Provide more funding, equipment, updated technology, and training for monitoring biodiversity conservation activities

Support projects that inventory species and ecosystems, especially around infrastructure development projects

Support solutions that protect species and ecosystems threatened by climate change (e.g., targeting protection of high-elevation areas where vegetation and species may shift as temperatures warm)

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 48

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY

Promote public, community monitoring and train local volunteer groups to performing independent monitoring Limited capacity to secure Mining, including mining waste Support development planning resources for environmental efforts to integrate local input into investments Excessive water extraction and use project development planning, EIA, and hand-over to local authorities, Illegal/unregulated logging enforcement bodies, or communities following implementation Climate change Support development of buffer Deterioration of water quality in water reservoirs below Lake Sevan Lake Sevan and Lake Arpi to increase the stability of water levels in those Agricultural practices, including water bodies grazing Work with NGOs and others to Pests, diseases, and invasive species increase reforestation activities and planting of fast-growing trees as a Illegal/unregulated/poorly regulated source of fuel and timber and to hunting and fishing introduce silviculture

Invest in soil and water conservation practices in the catchment

Improve infrastructure for management of effluents and solid waste management within the catchment areas of Lake Sevan

Improve water supply and discharge systems

Implement climate change mitigation and adaptation measures

Support restoration of ecosystems and ecosystem productivity, including those with a high capacity for carbon sequestration

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 49

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY

Improve capacity of government officials/staff in effective financial management

Support innovative financing for environment and climate change investments

Legislative gaps and lack of Mining, including mining waste Support water systems development transparency and integrated management, Excessive water extraction and use including updating the water catchment law, and support the Illegal/unregulated logging improvement of water abstraction regulations, which will increase the Agricultural practices, including efficiency of fish farms grazing Support the final passage of draft Infrastructure development, laws related to environment and including hydropower conservation and any additional mechanisms (i.e., monitoring and Illegal/unregulated/poorly regulated tracking) required for enforcement hunting and fishing Tie national and local legislative progress to international agreement requirements to motivate compliance

Enforce and strengthen regulations related to environmental compliance for construction and infrastructure development

Improve water and soil retention

Increase legal enforcement and public awareness, including via the media Weak coordination between Mining, including mining waste Promote a multi agency, multisector government and other ecosystem planning approach environmental actors Infrastructure development, including hydropower

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 50

TABLE 9. ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY IN ARMENIA AND LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS AND DRIVERS DRIVERS/INDIRECT THREATS LINKS TO DIRECT THREATS ACTIONS NECESSARY Coordinate and harmonize various Excessive water extraction and use planning models and strategy documents (e.g., forest management Illegal/unregulated logging plans, water user permits, energy strategy documents, basin Climate change management plans)

Agricultural practices, including Strengthen and harmonize grazing governance structures (e.g., water user monitoring and enforcement action functions)

Strengthen national and marz government capacity in monitoring, control, surveillance and communication/coordination

Improve coordination and communication between the government and the donor community

Support coordination between and among the government, NGOs, academic institutions, the public, and diaspora to influence policy decisions

8 “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY The following sections identify the extent to which USAID/Armenia meets the actions necessary to conserve biodiversity with respect to the most recent DOs described in the new CDCS (2020-2025). In certain descriptions, relevant programming conducted under the previous CDCS is also noted. Information from technical USAID documents, consultations, and interviews were also used. Note that all USAID/Armenia activities are required to comply with 22 CFR 216 USAID Environmental Procedures, which ensures that environmental factors and values are integrated into the USAID decision-making process, including with regard to the use of pesticides.

To increase readability and to reduce table size, the DOs, IRs, and their associated sub purposes are not spelled out below. The DOs and IRs are described in Section 1.2, Brief Description of the USAID Program in Armenia.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 51

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

DRIVER: POOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

Improve government effectiveness: USAID/Armenia does not now directly address these actions necessary. However, under DO 1, which advances Armenia’s • Strengthen forest monitoring, democratic transition, and Sub IR 1.1.3, USAID/Armenia may reporting, and verification (MRV) indirectly address the actions necessary if they support staff or capability to assess effect of REDD+ officials within the MoE or other biodiversity focused strategy on GHG emissions, government agencies. livelihoods, and other benefits.

Increase economic capacity-building: USAID/Armenia’s current CDCS only partially addresses these • Support sustainable concerns, though there is planned programming that will livelihoods/income-generating activities increase economic capacity building in Armenia under DO 2. for local citizens near protected areas DO 2 supports inclusive and sustainable economic growth, and, • Introduce/boost eco-tourism initiatives under Sub IR 2.3.2, more strategic management of energy and (e.g., birdwatching in Lake Sevan and water resources. The Investment Support Program provides Transcaucasian Trail) through support to the GOAM’s economic reform agenda by providing supporting business/management technical assistance on a broad range of economic growth capacity; improving marketing capacity, initiatives including tourism, agriculture, employment, trade, and support development/creation of ICT, and sectoral strategy development. The Rural Economic linkages with potential public and Development-New Economic Opportunities (RED-NEO) private partners (e.g., creation of Program likewise supports sustainable livelihoods through Community-Public-Private connecting producers and buyers, establishing networks to Partnerships). support economic development, and improving Small Medium • Explore opportunities that sustainably Enterprises and farms to develop and grow. utilize wetland resources and implement poverty alleviation activities The “My Armenia” Cultural Tourism Program bolsters the rural (e.g., ecotourism, basket weaving, private sector by offering a wide range of cultural tourism beekeeping). products and opportunities. While My Armenia does not specifically consider ecotourism, some of the beneficiaries and businesses associated with the programming include activities with some aspects of ecotourism (i.e., hiking, watching Bezoar goats). These offerings are not directly associated with ecotourism and may indirectly exacerbate some of the threats and drivers in DO 2.

DRIVER: LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND PRIORITIZATION AND A LEGACY OF CORRUPTION

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not now directly address these actions necessary. Under DO 1, which supports Armenia’s democratic

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 52

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

• Increase investment in the MoE in transition through monitoring of government institutions, terms of staff numbers and technical national reforms, officials, and strengthening policy processes, expertise, especially in developing USAID/Armenia may indirectly support staff or officials with the planning strategies and mitigating MoE, or other biodiversity focused government agencies poaching through a number of programs. • Improve awareness in law enforcement agencies about existing national and USAID/Armenia programming that improves government international biodiversity laws effectiveness includes the Civic Engagement in Local • Build capacity and provide technical Governance (CELoG) program, which encourages targeted assistance for marz-level, community- reforms to territorial and administrative reform; and the level governance ASPIRED and PURE water management activities. systems/structures/individuals • Build capacity and provide technical assistance to water resource and waste management governance systems • Promote actions to prevent, control or eradicate invasive alien species • Strengthen environmental monitoring, control, and surveillance capacity • Enforce regulations on protected species and species of special concern • Support hands-on field training of local groups, field surveys and monitoring activities by the group of experts and local volunteer groups • Support training or capacity-building activities that focus on eco-friendly agricultural practices

DRIVER: POOR MANAGEMENT OF ENERGY SUPPLY AND CONSUMPTION

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not directly promote sustainable utilization of forests, though it does support policies to adopt • Support policies and strategies clean, alternative energy. encouraging the development and implementation of clean, alternative USAID programming under DO 2 will provide technical energy sources to reduce demands on assistance in electricity market liberalization. The Mission’s wood Market Liberalization and Electricity Trade Program (MLET) • Increase support for systemic planning promotes market liberalization through reforms, supports for nationwide energy development electricity trade with Georgia, and improves energy supply

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 53

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

that compares a range of pathways, diversification, efficiency, and transparency. The MLET project is including different mixes of generation a combined effort to restructure the regulatory energy technologies and strategic siting to environment to reflect the cost of service and provide adequate minimize impacts returns on investment.

DRIVER: LACK OF PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not now directly address these actions necessary. However, under DO 1, IR 1.2, which promotes • Develop and implement grazing plans increased civic engagement, may be indirectly addressing these • Support valuation of ecosystems actions necessary if engaging civil society organizations and • Update hunting and fishing licensing youth groups on biodiversity. systems to support sustainable conservation of local resources and increase knowledge

Increase education

• Increase opportunities and funding for scientists to work on and students to study biodiversity conservation activities • Support ecosystem valuation studies and distribute the results to officials and the public • Promote holistic management of grazing areas • Support training or capacity-building activities that focus on eco-friendly agricultural practices • Promote fire risk and control • Promote ethical use of forests as part community participation and environmental education • Provide incentives for local communities to protect wetlands (e.g., moderate stipends, environmental conservation education.)

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 54

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

• Conduct public awareness and education campaigns on sustainable fisheries management • Raise awareness about the importance of environmental management, the interrelation between environmental management and conservation and improved livelihoods, and sustainable resource management and use • Enhance links between government, NGOs, and educational/research institutions towards concerted work in public awareness of biodiversity

Expand civil society development USAID/Armenia does not now directly address these actions necessary. USAID’s funding of CSO media activities includes • Promote and support public training in investigative journalism on the environmental impacts monitoring and local volunteer groups of mining. However, this is not the primary focus of the performing independent monitoring, investigative journalism activity. Under DO 1, IR 1.2, which including for forests, arson and fire, promotes increased civic engagement, USAID/Armenia may be indicators of pollution, etc. indirectly addressing these actions necessary if engaging civil • Raise citizen awareness and knowledge society organizations and youth groups. of their rights, penalties for infractions, and the roles and responsibilities of law enforcement around biodiversity and natural resource management • Expand efforts to understand citizen perspectives and/or concerns regarding environmental management and biodiversity conservation • Improve the capacity of local NGOs to do public awareness campaigns and share lessons learned

DRIVER: LACK OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AND MONITORING

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not now directly address these actions through dedicated programming. However, under DO 1 and

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 55

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

• Apply international standards for Sub IR 1.1.3, which builds capacity and commitment for targeted storing and managing biodiversity data, transformational reforms, USAID/Armenia may indirectly including: address the actions necessary if they are supporting staff or • Strengthen forest monitoring officials within the MoE or other biodiversity focused and reporting capability government agencies. • Landscape-scale data collection and management, standardized throughout the country • Support mapping and rehabilitation of degraded areas and hotspots • Strengthen water quality and quantity monitoring capabilities • Develop a national inventory of invasive alien species that currently or potentially impact the ecology • Establish monitoring and evaluation system for discrete ecosystems/habitats • Conduct resources surveys and develop management plans, integrating data from NGOs, civil society organizations, and/or academic institutions and consider their recommendations with respect to existing GOAM efforts • Support to the government for development of a national cadaster system as well as feasibility study for integration of sector cadasters • Provide more funding, equipment, and updated technology for monitoring biodiversity conservation activities

Increase economic capacity-building USAID/Armenia does not now directly address these concerns, though there is current programming that increases economic • Support projects that inventory species security in Armenia under DO 2, which supports inclusive and and ecosystems, especially around infrastructure development projects

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 56

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

• Support solutions that protect species sustainable economic growth and more sustainable management and ecosystems threatened by climate of energy and water resources. change (e.g., targeting protection of high-elevation areas where vegetation and species may shift as temperatures warm) Expand civil society development USAID/Armenia does not directly address actions, such as monitoring environmental networks. However, as part of IR 1.2, • Promote public, community monitoring USAID provides support to civil society organizations, including and train local volunteer groups to NGOs, foundations, think tanks, research centers, community- performing independent monitoring based organizations, and traditional and social media outlets, to improve their abilities to analyze government performance in a systematic, evidenced-based manner, monitor government reform processes, assess impact of reforms, and hold government officials accountable.

DRIVER: LIMITED CAPACITY TO SECURE RESOURCES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTMENTS

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not directly address these necessary actions. However, under DO 1, Sub IR 1.1.3, USAID supports • Support development planning efforts activities that strengthen Armenia’s capacity and commitment to integrate local input into project for targeted transformational reforms. USAID/Armenia may development planning, EIA, and hand- indirectly address the actions necessary if they are supporting over to local authorities, enforcement staff or officials engaged in reforestation or waste management bodies, or communities following positions. implementation • Support development of buffer water reservoirs below Lake Sevan and Lake Arpi to increase the stability of water levels in those water bodies • Work with NGOs and others to increase reforestation activities and planting of fast-growing trees as a source of fuel and timber and to introduce silviculture • Invest in soil and water conservation practices in the catchment • Improve infrastructure for management of effluents and solid

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 57

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

waste management within the catchment areas of Lake Sevan • Improve water supply systems • Implement climate change mitigation and adaptation measures • Support restoration of ecosystems and ecosystem productivity, including those with a high capacity for carbon sequestration • Improve capacity of government officials/staff in effective financial management

Increase economic capacity-building USAID/Armenia does not now directly address all of these actions through dedicated programming. However, IR 2.1 and • Support innovative financing for 2.2 encourage an improved enabling environment for trade and environment and climate change investment, which includes strategic investment into energy. investments USAID/Armenia may be able to indirectly address the actions necessary if they are supporting staff or officials within the MoE, or other biodiversity or climate focused government agencies.

DRIVER: LEGISLATIVE GAPS AND LACK OF TRANSPARENCY

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not directly address all of these necessary actions. • Support water systems development and integrated management, including However, under Sub IR 2.3.2, USAID/Armenia is engaged with updating the water catchment law, and programming to protect water resources through water support the improvement of water resource management. Given the critical concerns with water abstraction regulations, which will scarcity in Armenia, USAID advises the GOAM on hydropower increase the efficiency of fish farms development and water management. USAID currently engages • Support the final passage of draft laws with programming to increase the capacity of water related to environment and management bodies to improve the accessibility, quality, and conservation and any additional affordability of water services. The USAID indicator for mechanisms required for enforcement monitoring progress in water resource management includes • Tie national and local legislative the number of institutions with increased capacities through progress to international agreement participation in the river basin management planning process. requirements to motivate compliance In tandem with the GOAM, USAID sponsors programs such as ASPIRED and, previously, PURE Water.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 58

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

• Enforce and strengthen regulations on construction and infrastructure development • Improve water and soil retention • Increase law enforcement and awareness creation, including via the media

DRIVER: WEAK COORDINATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ACTORS

Improve government effectiveness USAID/Armenia does not directly address these necessary actions, specifically those with regards to multi agency • Promote a multi agency, multisector ecosystem planning and forest management plans. However, ecosystem planning approach under IR 2.1, USAID/Armenia provides support to political • Coordinate and harmonize various entities and institutions in order to enable free competition of planning models and strategy ideas and political support, as well as strengthen the integrity of documents (e.g., forest management Armenia’s political processes. USAID/Armenia programming, plans, water user permits, energy such as the SEPPA project, leverages the political will and strategy documents, basin management energy to build government capacity to respond to strategic plans) priorities, improve election administration and oversight, and • Strengthen and harmonize governance strengthen institutions of political accountability for inclusive structures (e.g., water user monitoring political competition. and enforcement action functions) • Strengthen national and marz As such, USAID/Armenia may be able to address the actions government capacity in monitoring, necessary if they are supporting staff or officials within the MoE control, surveillance, and or other biodiversity and climate focused government agencies communication/coordination to improve communication and coordination as part of • Improve coordination and strengthening government capacity. communication between the government and the donor community

Expand civil society development Under IR 1.1, USAID/Armenia supports regulatory changes conducive to diversification of funding opportunities, improved • Support coordination between and internal mechanisms enhancing NGOs’ organizational capacity among the government, NGOs, to govern themselves in a publicly accountable manner, and the academic institutions, the public, and strengthening of constituencies and improvement of NGOs’ diaspora to influence policy decisions public image and credibility.

As part of IR 1.2, USAID/Armenia provides support to civil society organizations, including NGOs, foundations, think tanks,

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 59

TABLE 10. “EXTENT TO WHICH” USAID CONTRIBUTES TO ACTIONS NECESSARY

ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CDCS AND ACTIVITIES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTE TOWARD ACTIONS NECESSARY

research centers, community-based organizations, and traditional and social media outlets, to improve their abilities to analyze government performance in a systematic, evidence- based manner, monitor government reform processes, assess impact of reforms, and hold government officials accountable.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 60

9 RECOMMENDATIONS

9.1 RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CONSERVE BIODIVERSITY USAID/Armenia administers dedicated funding for natural resource management under its previous CDCS, in the water and energy sectors. Funding is expected to increase and programming is expected to expand under the 2020-2025 CDCS. There continue to be varied opportunities to improve biodiversity as part of the existing Democracy and Governance and Economic Growth technical program areas. USAID/Armenia, through its existing and future programming, has the potential to further influence water conservation, improve renewable energy development, and increase support for SPNAs, contributing to the preservation and sustainable management of these resources. The Analysis Team recommends that USAID/Armenia considers biodiversity with respect to each of their programs and supports the ongoing concept of mainstreaming biodiversity within its own projects. Broadly, programming that funds eco- and wildlife tourism, agricultural development, energy development, and social development has the potential to positively or negatively impact biodiversity. If done well, these efforts can significantly improve and protect Armenian natural resources.

9.2 RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE NEW CDCS Specific recommendations provided below link to the priority drivers and threats identified in Section 6, build on the necessary actions developed in Section 7, and emerge from the analysis of the extent to which USAID/Armenia already addresses them in Section 8. Recommendations reflect the results of the cross-sectoral out-briefing workshop that included representatives from Mission technical teams and occurred at the completion of the stakeholder consultations. They are generally in line with Mission perceptions of practicable and actionable and are prospectively aligned with anticipated strategic priorities. They are not prescriptive, however, and will require further tailoring based on USAID programming under the new CDCS.

The categories below allow USAID/Armenia to appropriately focus certain actions on existing programming and additional actions on future programming. Recommendations are then listed and separated into actions specific to each technical office and into the following three categories:

• Attainable (Short Term): Working within existing programming and with a relatively low level of effort to integrate into the existing context in Armenia. • Strategic (Long Term): Adapting programs to improve the extent to which USAID is meeting the actions necessary to reduce threats over the long term. • For Future Consideration: Actions that are the most difficult to implement and require additional detailed review and evaluation and are provided for consideration by USAID.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 61

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

DO 1: DEMOCRACTIC TRANSITION ADVANCED

Capacity Building Invest in biodiversity Work directly with Provide technical capacity-building Parliamentary committees assistance on needed IR 1.1: Effective and activities for government and government conservation legislation accountable governance officials at every level to ministries/agencies (e.g., draft water institutionalized develop new and focused on biodiversity or resource codes), innovative ideas that conservation to including drafting, IR 1.2 Citizen engagement address social and strengthen policy, building coalitions of for democratic economic challenges, legislative, and support, and finalization/ consolidation increased especially in rural areas management capabilities. passage. or for vulnerable populations (e.g., job As part of Support projects that training, community decentralization efforts, bring together donor, engagement activities support local self- local, academic, and support). government in the other stakeholders to development of work jointly on nature Integrate environmental environmental protection, conservation activities. impacts knowledge into development, and spatial capacity-building plans. activities for all implementers. Train media and journalists on effective Provide technical reporting, including assistance to local investigative reporting, governments to better relative to climate change, address environmental government concerns, including on environmental initiatives, environmental and impacts. compliance, avoiding invasive species, and local policy development or community communications strategies.

Incorporate questions about the environment and natural resource management into citizen opinion surveys, focus

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 62

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

groups, and other data- collection tools and support government management and public dissemination of that information, including an emphasis on the link between natural resources and ecosystem services.

Support field training of local civil society organizations to field surveys and monitoring activities related to biodiversity.

Rule of Law Strengthen judicial Strengthen judicial Promote activities that practices related to enforcement of existing increase the capacity of IR 1.1 Effective and environmental crime, national laws and the media to report on accountable governance including by the international obligations biodiversity and climate institutionalized incremental via trainings and media change regulations and implementation of new campaigns. the changing legal policies and laws to framework. monitor how actions impact citizen behavior. (e.g., pilot programs to manage resources and address corruption).

Education Integrate conservation Develop outreach Develop research education into youth, programs that raise activities, including IR 1.2 Citizen engagement women, and vulnerable conservation awareness surveys, focus groups, or for democratic populations programming among school children, studies, on the impacts of consolidation increased to improve knowledge young adults, and the poor conservation and engagement. public throughout practices on women, Armenia, including those youth and the vulnerable that use new technologies throughout Armenia. like social media.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 63

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

DO 2: ECONOMIC SECURITY ENHANCED

Economic Support appropriate Strengthen environmental Promote projects and Development Projects review of all review of development initiatives that safeguard projects by requiring development projects sensitive ecological areas, integration of IR 2.1 Economic and ensure that especially those international best governance strengthened biodiversity is adequately practices (e.g., USAID or vulnerable to considered during International Finance infrastructure IR 2.2 Competitiveness of project development. Corporation) into development (e.g., Lake targeted sectors increased development planning, Sevan). Support the development and provide tools for of management action appropriate monitoring Advocate for developers plans for all types of and mitigation. to invest in conservation small and medium Engage diaspora initiatives or projects that enterprise projects, communities and offset associated negative especially those with organizations in activities impacts (including waste natural resource beyond tree planting, management projects). implications. including wildlife Management action plans monitoring, climate change mitigation, etc. may influence the design, process, and sale of goods and services in a way that supports biodiversity preservation.

Support community- based natural resource management programming designed to boost private-sector engagement and promote sustainable utilization of natural resources.

Job Creation Ensure that Provide training to Consider job training environmental sustainably harvest, programs focused on process, and market IR 2.2 Competitiveness of considerations are not improving conservation products derived from targeted sectors increased secondary to economic expertise, particularly in nature (e.g., organic growth objectives in any foods). rural areas or in USAID/Armenia projects communities around the

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 64

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

(e.g., prioritize job Support internships and SPNAs. creation in sectors such other educational as eco-tourism, and/or opportunities for high support sustainable school and university management positions in students interested in agriculture, water ecology to gain resources). appreciation for and practical experience in Propagate job biodiversity. opportunities – including 21st century jobs, for example in ICT – in both rural and urban areas to reduce reliance on illegal or extractive activities.

Energy Encourage efforts that Advance energy Promote mainstreaming diversify, promote, and development projects of biodiversity objectives IR 2.2 Competitiveness of improve renewable that both are into energy development targeted sectors energy production, costs, environmentally sound planning and strategies increased; IR 2.3 and use nationwide and and will support rural and (e.g., considering Sustainable management of in rural areas (e.g., in urban communities, hydropower plant natural resources solar or wind). Support especially renewable impacts on aquatic improved the development and/or energy and energy- connectivity). application of energy- efficiency projects, efficiency best practices. providing that facility siting is consistent with a biodiversity-friendly national programmatic strategy.

Eco- and Wildlife Support environmental Support economic Promote mainstreaming Tourism eco- and wildlife tourism activities that promote of biodiversity objectives and sustainably grow biodiversity conservation into tourism planning and IR 2.2 Competitiveness of Armenia’s tourism and preserve natural strategies (e.g., consider targeted sectors industry (e.g., through resources in or near tourism activities that increased; IR 2.3 strategic planning for tourism hotspots may support or promote Sustainable management of tourism development, including sustainable education on endangered natural resources especially activities that nature-related products, species for all visitors, improved will promote and clean production including bird watching encourage observation methodologies, green tours or establishment of

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 65

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

and monitoring). infrastructure, and rehabilitation preserves). improvements to waste management programs. Support policies and legislation that promote low impact energy use and green technologies as part of economic growth efforts.

Agriculture Provide support to rural Emphasize organic Promote mainstreaming communities to put production (or limited of biodiversity objectives IR 2.2 Competitiveness of greater value on best and targeted fertilizer and into agricultural planning targeted sectors practices, ecological pesticide use) in rural and strategies (e.g., increased; IR 2.3 concerns, and sustainable areas including programs provide support for Sustainable management of value chains with growth to maintain soil health, initiatives that promote natural resources potential, including improve crop good conservation improved through an emphasis on sustainability, reduce the practices but limit the organic certification and use of chemicals, and need for international relevant sectors in the other sustainable donor funding). tourism industry; practices. education campaigns; and funding mechanisms.

Water Continue or expand Expand waste Develop programming monitoring activities management or WASH focused on maintaining IR 2.2 Competitiveness of under the ASPIRED programming to focus on and improving targeted targeted sectors program, including activities that promote threatened waterways, increased; IR 2.3 increasing the number of water quality and address which contain unique Sustainable management of technological tools water pollution. biodiversity and impact natural resources utilized, the number of human health (e.g., from improved monitoring/ observation Support policymakers’ heavy metals from mining wells, and integrating efforts to utilize the and other pollutants). data management UNFCCC, EU systems. regulations, and other international agreements Support optimization of as guideposts for national additional groundwater policies and legislation. wells and develop well closure standards. Focus on the connection between healthy water Expand research, systems and healthy investment, and technical environment/ population

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 66

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

assistance into water-use to promote community infrastructure, such as engagement and support. water treatment, wastewater treatment, Support the development and/or (waste)water of buffer wetlands at low reuse/recycle systems to river currents, outflowing support both improved from major lakes (e.g., water quality and water Sevan and Arpi) to use efficiency. increase shoreline stability.

Consider projects that would support wetlands restoration to mitigate impacts of climate change, as wetlands can sequester carbon, accumulate water during floods, dispense water during droughts, and regulate local climates. Wetlands support also improves water filtration and natural biological diversity.

CROSS-CUTTING THEMES

Specially Protected Support efforts to Encourage the protection Strengthen biodiversity Nature Areas Support collect, share, and of additional lands, and related action plans manage biodiversity data particularly recognized with concrete, Cross-cutting throughout the SPNA and species’ reasonable budget system and with the habitats, under the SPNA proposals and public, including carrying system and/or the measurable results for all capacity studies. Emerald Network, and areas covered by the facilitate technical SPNAs. Explore supporting assistance, as feasible, to programming that promote SPNA increases funding to expansion. managing SPNAs,

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 67

TABLE 11: RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE 2020-2025 CDCS

DOS AND IRS ATTAINABLE STRATEGIC FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION (SHORT-TERM) (LONG-TERM)

including through Provide more funding, entrance and use fee equipment, and updated structures, taxes, and technology for monitoring eco-vacations where biodiversity conservation tourists work to clean or activities throughout otherwise improve the Armenia (e.g., advanced SPNAs. technological devises for species tracking or a national standardized system of species data).

Support the inclusion of other categories in SPNA legislation and policies, including Community Protected Landscapes.

Cooperation Support international Explore the formation of Explore the formation of donor and government a single multi agency a single biodiversity Cross-cutting biodiversity initiatives, ecosystem plan, including conservation funding especially those that various Ministries, mechanism coordinated strengthen the donors, NGOs, and other by donors and developing legal stakeholders to focus government to focus framework and efforts and avoid overlap efforts and avoid overlap governance structures in activities. in activities. (particularly in water use monitoring).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 68

ANNEXES Annex A: Scope of Work Annex B: Key Analysis Team Member Bios Annex C: List of References Consulted Annex D: Stakeholder Consultation Guidance Annex E: Table of National Laws and Strategies Related to Biodiversity Annex F: Table of Key Government-Administered Specially Protected Nature Areas (SPNAs) Annex G: Key Conservation Initiatives Annex H: Maps

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 69

ANNEX A. SCOPE OF WORK

1. BACKGROUND

As part of the documentation for the 2020 Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS), USAID/Armenia Mission is required by Section 119 of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, to prepare an analysis of biodiversity in Armenia.

By mandating FAA 119 analyses (hereafter referred to as “the analysis”), the U.S. Congress recognizes the fundamental role that biodiversity plays in supporting countries as they progress along the journey to self-reliance. The analysis will examine the country-level biodiversity conservation needs and the extent to which the mission is currently addressing the identified needs for biodiversity conservation. The report recommendations will help the mission identify ways to strengthen host country commitment and capacity to biodiversity conservation.

Armenia has made impressive progress in developing an extensive policy framework, based on the National Environmental Action Programs and the Biodiversity Strategy Action Plan (BSAP). While the BSAP has developed a comprehensive list of activities, it was developed many years ago and detailing the current situation and priority projects would be beneficial. There is also lack of attention paid to integrating biodiversity conservation concerns into sectoral and economic policies.

Despite the recent positive changes in Armenia as a result of the Velvet Revolution, Government systems remain centralized. Although significant numbers of regional and local staff exist on the ground, e.g., in protected area authorities, however, they lack even basic equipment and receive low salaries. Improved support to decentralized authorities, including new partnerships with local groups and communities, needs to be developed.

Environmental awareness and education have improved in recent years, primarily due to the efforts of environmental NGOs. However, much remains to be done, particularly with respect to biodiversity conservation. This extends from improving the understanding of biodiversity conservation and its importance in economic and social development by decision-makers and politicians, to linking biodiversity conservation to the immediate, day-to-day needs of local populations.

The aforementioned will be analyzed in 119 assessment in greater detail in order to address necessary actions to protect biodiversity in Armenia.

1.1 COUNTRY ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

Armenia’s biodiversity assessment shall include an analysis of:

• The actions necessary in Armenia to conserve biological diversity, and • The extent to which the actions proposed for support by the Agency meet the needs thus identified.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 70

The FAA 119 analysis for USAID/Armenia must adequately respond to the two questions for country strategies, also known as “actions necessary” and “extent to which.”

1.2 PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this task is to conduct an analysis of biodiversity in compliance with Sections 119 of the FAA of 1961, as amended, and ADS guidelines. The analysis will inform USAID/Armenia in the development and implementation of its CDCS. USAID’s approach to development requires that the Agency examine cross-sector linkages and opportunities to ensure a robust development hypothesis. Biodiversity conservation is a critical component in achieving self-reliance and should be considered in mission-strategic approaches to improve development outcomes. The analysis therefore can define opportunities to integrate biodiversity conservation into priority development sectors to support the journey to self-reliance.

While the analysis should not be used as a climate-risk assessment, climate change is a global concern and as such, the analysis will evaluate the threat to the country’s biodiversity from climate change. The analysis team should review Armenia’s and USAID mission reports on climate change and consider the overlap between the analysis and USAID-commissioned, country-specific climate analyses. Teams should also review other sources of climate information available such as the World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal and the United Nations Climate Change website.

2. STATEMENT OF WORK

To achieve the above-stated purpose, the analysis team, under the direction of the Team Leader, will proceed as described in this section. As described herein, the analysis is based on synthesis and analysis of existing information, coupled with key stakeholder consultations and site visits to ground-truth information. The analysis will not generate original primary data.

2.1 PRE-FIELD WORK ACTIONS

2.1.1 Desk-based Data Collection and Analysis

1. Gather and begin to analyze existing information to identify Armenia’s biodiversity status, key biodiversity issues, stakeholders, policy and institutional frameworks, and gaps in available information. Reports and other documentation to be reviewed include previous 119 analyses, current CDCS and mission project documents, information available online (websites of government ministries) on biodiversity conservation, project reports and evaluations, the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, and the National State of the Environment Report (https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/am/am-nbsap-v2-en.pdf; http://www.mnp.am/en/pages/148; http://www.mnp.am//images/files/nyuter/2015/January/Biodiversity_5th_report_ENG.pdf).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 71

2.1.2 Planning and Logistical Preparations

Note: The activities described in this Section may occur prior to, or in parallel with, activities described in Section 2.1.1.

1. Organize weekly planning meetings with the mission. The team should plan weekly calls with the activity manager ahead of in-country arrival to support planning and logistic preparations such as site visits, lodging and in-country travel, key informants, work plan development, key informant interview protocols, and political or other sensitivities. 2. Plan site visits. In coordination with the mission, the team should begin planning site visits based on the mission’s recommendations and the team’s preliminary review of key topics and information gaps. Site visits allow information gathering from key informants, and direct observation, and supplement information gathered from consultations, a literature review and other second-hand sources. Site visit locations should be finalized at least two (2) weeks prior to in- country fieldwork to allow the consultant to complete necessary logistical preparations.

2.2 DEVELOP AND SUBMIT DRAFT WORK PLAN. 10 days after the start of the performance period, the consultant will submit a draft work plan (Deliverable 1). The draft work plan will include a schedule of tasks and milestones, assessment methods, and a brief discussion of information gaps. The draft work plan will also include a preliminary:

1. List of the types of information to be obtained through further desk research and through consultations; and 2. Mapping of key people to engage throughout the analysis process. This may include US-based (predominantly Washington D.C.) stakeholders; mission staff, including the Mission Environmental Officer (MEO), program office, all sector technical staff, and the mission director; implementing partners; and other key in-country stakeholders (e.g., organizations, government bodies, the private sector and individuals knowledgeable about and/or implementing projects on environment and biodiversity and other sectors relevant to biodiversity conservation, such as agriculture, tourism, energy, water, anticorruption and governance). 3. Itinerary for in-country consultations and site visits, based upon information made available by the mission regarding of existing programming, areas of known concern and areas being considered for future programming. 4. Key informant interview guides to be used for stakeholder consultations. 5. Report outline based on the outline attached to the SOW (refer to Annex B: Analysis Report Annotated Outline in the FAA 119 Best Practices Guide), with differences noted and explained. 6. Schedule for written progress reports to, or calls with, the activity manager starting on the 10th day and weekly thereafter during the pre-field and field segments. If calls are chosen, they will be documented with written call notes provided to the USAID Activity Manager.

2.3 REVISE THE WORK PLAN. Following receipt of mission comments and suggestions on the draft work plan, the team will revise the work plan and submit a revised version 2-5 days before the start of the field work.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 72

2.4 MISSION AND FIELD CONSULTATIONS AND SITE VISITS

After arrival in-country, in coordination with the activity manager, the analysis team will:

1. Conduct in-brief meetings with the MEO, program office representative and key Mission technical staff. • Orient the attendees to the overarching objective of the 119 analysis, the methodology to be used (i.e., approach the analysis team will take to conduct the analysis and recommendations for potential biodiversity linkages with other sectors), and the agreed upon itinerary per the approved work plan. Ideally this will have already been circulated within the mission prior to the team’s arrival in country. • Understand the mission’s planned timeline for new CDCS development. • Gain an understanding of the status of the new CDCS development/results framework and anticipated changes to overarching strategic goals and/or development objectives, to the extent they are known at the time of fieldwork. • Review with the mission the approach to the assignment and learn specific mission areas of interest or concerns regarding the planned itinerary and consultations. • Learn of any sensitivities related to the exercise (e.g., political constraints, mission challenges in working with the host country government or other generalized in-country implementation challenges) that could refine the analysis team’s consultations and strategic or programming recommendations (i.e., the potential for raising expectations and the need to be clear about the purpose of the analysis). • Identify any additional organizations to be contacted and site visits to be planned, including advice and protocol on approaching USAID partners and host country organizations with respect to the assignment. 2. Meet (separately) with all mission technical teams to: • Understand current programming (geographic areas of focus, earmarks and related mandates or constraints) and the ways in which it may have supported or contributed to actions necessary to conserve biodiversity. • Learn about planned or potential future programming or strategic orientation.

2.5 MEET WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND UNDERTAKE SITE VISITS IDENTIFIED IN THE WORK PLAN.

2.6 CONDUCT EXIT BRIEFING: Prior to departure, conduct an exit briefing with the mission, including Mission Director, program office, MEO and all technical teams, to provide them with an overview of the analysis and preliminary report findings (Deliverable 2).

2.7 PREPARATION OF THE FAA 119 ANALYSIS

1. Prepare and submit draft report (Deliverable 3). The analysis team will analyze the information gathered and will prepare a draft analysis report in accordance with the outline attached to the SOW and responsive to the legislative requirements listed in Section 1.1 above. The report will: • Be between 30-50 pages, depending on the complexity of the analysis (excluding annexes) and submitted for review by USAID.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 73

• Copy edited, formatted and in compliance with USAID branding requirements. • Follow the outline and include the information recommended in Annex B of the SOW. 2. Submit revised report (Deliverable 4). The mission review period for draft reports will be 15 days. The mission should send the analysis report to the relevant regional bureau and pillar bureau staff in Washington for their review and concurrence.

Following receipt of USAID comments on the draft report, the analysis team will prepare and submit a final analysis within 15 days that incorporates USAID comments.

3. SCHEDULE

The assignment is expected to last about 3-3,5 months from the date of contract signing to submission of the final deliverable. This includes two weeks of preparations, approximately two weeks of in-country field work, three weeks to produce the draft report following in-country work, three weeks for USAID review of the draft report, and three weeks to produce the final report.

Table 1: Weekly activities and milestones

Week Activity/Milestone Comments Week 1 X X Week 2 X X Week 3 X X … X X … X X Week 16 X X

4. DELIVERABLES

The following are the deliverables for this task:

Deliverable 1. Draft work plan and schedule submitted within 10 working days of the team lead’s period of performance. The work plan will address all elements specified in 2.1.2.

Deliverable 2. Exit briefing, and associated media such as PowerPoint, hand-outs, etc., prior to the analysis team’s departure from the country or at a time requested by the mission if the team is locally based.

Deliverable 3. Draft FAA 119 analysis report, conforming to all requirements specified in section 2.3 submitted working days after the conclusion of in-country work.

Deliverable 4. Revised draft of FAA 119 analysis report for regional and pillar bureau staff review and concurrence. USAID Review staff include Europe and BEO, Mark Kamiya, and others.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 74

5. STAFFING AND ESTIMATED EFFORT

The analysis team shall include a Team Leader, with the following qualifications:

• Post-graduate qualifications (master’s level degree or higher) in , ecology, zoology, forestry, ecosystem conservation, political economy, political ecology, environmental policy, , or a closely related field; • Knowledge of USAID’s strategic planning process both broadly and as related to biodiversity; • Expertise in assessing environmental threats; • Experience in the geographical region and the specific country; • Experience coordinating analyses and leading teams; • Exceptional organizational, analytical, writing and presentation skills; and • Fluent in English and preferably the language spoken in the analysis country.

Including the Team Leader, the exact team composition shall be proposed by the consultant for approval by the mission and should ensure appropriate coverage across the below technical areas, tailored to the types of programming and environmental conditions prevalent in the specific country or region of focus.

The level of effort (LOE) requirements for this task are:

• A total of 66 days for Team Lead • A total of 60 days for Expert 1 • A total of 40 days for Expert 2 • A total of 30 days for Expert 3 • A total of 10 days for home office support staff (e.g. logistical planning; GIS support; research/writing support, accountant). • A total of # days for technical quality assurance/quality control • A total of # days for copy-editing, formatting and branding (i.e., document production), and prepare 508 compliant version of document for posting on DEC and ECD

6. ROLE OF THE USAID MISSION

USAID acknowledges that substantial mission engagement is required in support of the analysis team. To this end, the mission is responsible for arranging the following prior to the analysis team’s arrival in- country:

• In-briefing meetings with technical offices, including notifying relevant mission offices (as elaborated Section in 2.1.2, above) and ensuring their direct participation. When key offices are not able to participate, the mission will look to include appropriate alternatives that may participate on their behalf. • Time for the exit-brief presentation. • Separate, scheduled meetings with the MEO, front and program office.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 75

Such support includes providing the analysis team with the following:

• A list of key USAID documents (mission wide activity descriptions, reports and evaluations) to review with links or copies of the documents; • A list of USAID programs for each technical team with brief descriptions of technical remit, A/COR (and contact info), implementing partner (and key point of contact) and maps, ideally a country map showing the geographic location of all programs; • A list of key and/or recommended stakeholders (with contact information); • Assistance to the team in making initial contact to arrange interviews, particularly to host country government stakeholders for whom USAID mission outreach is often required; • Preparation of letters of introduction, as needed; • Candidate site visits or key criteria to support analysis team identification of potential site visits; • A list of relevant donor projects as available; • Logistics support for site visits, i.e. suggestions for lodging, in-country air travel, rental car agencies and logistics specialists; and • Review and feedback on the draft analysis report.

ANNEX B. KEY ANALYSIS TEAM MEMBER BIOS Alla Aleksanyan holds a PhD in Biology/Biodiversity and Ecology from the Institute of Botany aft. A.L. Takhajyan NAS RA in Yerevan, Armenia. Alla is a lecturer for the Chair of Biology and Biotechnologies at the Armenian National Agrarian University (ANAU). She develops and implements new methods for teaching to reflect changes in forestry and biology research. At present, Alla is the head of the division of International Grants Projects for the International Relations Department, where she is responsible for participation, coordination, and implementation of ANAU grant projects. Ms. Aleksanyan also holds the position of Senior Researcher for the Department of Geobotany and Eco-physiology at the Institute of Botany aft. A.L. Takhtajyan NAS RA. As a Senior Researcher, Alla does ecological consultancy work including: conducting surveys environmental impact assessments; presenting research results in journals and at academic conferences; and hosting trainings at seminars and workshops in topic areas of nature conservation, biodiversity, macroecology, invasion biology, climate change, and plant molecular biology. Ms. Aleksanyan is currently the Team Lead for a scientific project that studies the influence of invasive species on carbon storage in Armenia.

Karen Aghababyan holds a PhD in Biology with a specialization in Zoology from Yerevan State University. and Ecology from the Institute of Botany aft. A.L. Takhajyan NAS RA in Yerevan, Armenia. Karen specializes in theoretical and practical knowledge of ecology of terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, population and habitat modeling, and biodiversity of birds and butterflies in Armenia. Karen is the Executive Director of Towards Sustainable Ecosystems (TSE), an NGO that works with butterfly and bird conservation in Armenia. He is also a Legal Advisor to the Minister for the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Armenia. As Legal Advisor, his role is to advise on the Ministry’s ecotourism strategy, develop systems of biodiversity monitoring, and support the process of ratification of the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA). Karen is also an associate professor at the Eurasia International University, where he designs and conducts environmental courses for undergraduate students.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 76

Paola Bernazzani is a conservation biologist and biodiversity specialist with 20 years’ experience in the environmental field. She is currently a principal at ICF where she manages and directs projects. She leads the conservation planning practice within the Eastern line of business. Paola’s focus is the integration of science with policy and planning. She works throughout the US and internationally on environmental issues including endangered species compliance, regulatory strategies, conservation of rare species, and compensatory mitigation. She presents frequently on the role of science in the planning process and has published several articles, including papers on participant perspectives of habitat conservation plans and climate change in the regulatory environment. She is a reviewer for the journals Conservation Biology and Environmental Management. Paola has done trainings domestically and internationally, including stakeholder outreach, and she teaches regularly at UC Davis extension program. Paola has a Master of Science degree in wildlife biology from the Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management at the University of California, Berkeley and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Environmental Studies and Anthropology from Yale University.

Elisa Perry is a Senior Associate at the Cadmus Group with over twelve years’ experience with international development programs in Eurasia. In the Caucasus, she has managed USAID-, DFID, and Swedish International Development Agency-funded governance and democracy programs focusing on civil society, elections, local government, and women’s political participation in Armenia and Georgia. In 2010, she served as a graduate fellow at the Caucasus Research Resource Center in , where she conducted in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis on the social and economic statuses of Armenians, , and Georgians. A specialist on the Eurasia region, she has implemented multiple international programs in Armenia, Georgia, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine, for the U.S. government, the World Bank, and private enterprises. She previously served as the lead Russia-Eurasia staffer on the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight. She holds a Masters degree in Law and Diplomacy from the Fletcher School at Tufts University, where her thesis focused on the democratic and economic impacts of the Georgia-Russia war of 2008, and a Bachelors degree in International Affairs from the Elliott School at the George Washington University. Raymond Von Culin, is a Yerevan-based Associate at Cadmus, and an international urban and environmental assessment specialist with over 8 years of experience working in emerging and developing economies on matters related to infrastructure development, natural resource management, biodiversity, disaster response and recovery, , health, and pollution. His areas of expertise include performing assessment scoping exercises, developing safeguard instruments to ensure compliance with host country and donor safeguards requirements, and improving institutional capacity and procedures to guide future project design and policy implementation. Mr. Von Culin has successfully supported projects with the Asian Development Bank, World Bank, USAID, Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute. Previous professional experience in Armenia for Mr. Von Culin includes: providing environmental safeguards management support to World Bank projects; working with Armenia’s Ministry of Nature Protection to identify and prioritize a project pipeline for the water sector and Lake Sevan watershed; and conducting a national assessment of the urban sector in Armenia to support development of the Asian Development Bank’s 2020 country partnership strategy.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 77

ANNEX C. LIST OF REFERENCES CONSULTED Acopian Center for the Environment. 2013. Monitoring Atlas on Butterflies of Armenia. Field Guide, Yerevan: Acopian Center for the Environment.

Aghababyan, K., G. Khanamirian, H. Ter-Voskanyan, A. Khachatryan , M. Wikström, and P. Adriaens. 2020. Annotated Checklist to Birds of Armenia. Technical Report № BLA-2020-001., Yerevan: BirdLinks Armenia NGO. doi:DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31616.17920/1.

Aghababyan, K., and G. Khanamirian. 2017. Assessment of Global Conservation Status of Polyommatus Myrrha Cinyraea – Endemic of Middle East and Southern Caucasus. Butterfly Conservation Report, Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund.

Aghababyan, K., and Khanamirian. 2020. "Butterfly Conservation Armenia."

Akopyan, K, Varduhi Petrosyan, Ruzann Grigoryan, and Dzovinar Melkom Melkomian. 2014. "Thorough Risk Assessment of 11 Communities in Armenia." Blacksmith Institute.

Aleksanyan, Alla. 2012. Flora and Vegetation of Deciduous Open Arid Woodlands of Southern Armenia. PhD Thesis, Yerevan: National Academy of Sciences of Republic of Armenia.

Armenian Environmental Network. n.d. Lake Sevan. Accessed June 3, 2020. https://www.armenia- environment.org/proj-page-lake-sevan.

Aubrey, David G. 2014. Reducing Transboundary Degradation in the Kura- River Basin. Final Terminal Evaluation Report , UNDP/GEF.

Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation Union. 2014. Fifth National Report of the Republic of Armenia to the Convention of Biological Diversity. Yerevan, Armenia: Republic of Armenia Ministry of Nature Protection.

BirdLife International. 2015. Important Bird Areas: Armenia. Accessed May 20, 2020. http://datazone.birdlife.org/country/armenia/ibas.

—. 2020. World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas: Armenia. http://www.keybiodiversityareas.org/site/mapsearch.

Central Intelligence Agency. 2018. The World Factbook: Armenia. February 1. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/am.html.

CIS-Legislation. 2020. Armenia Legislation. Accessed June 2, 2020. https://cis- legislation.com/docs_list.fwx?countryid=002&page=5.

Convention on Biological Diversity. 2020. Principles. May 19. https://www.cbd.int/ecosystem/principles.shtml.

—. 2016. Text of the Convention. May 13. Accessed June 2, 2020. https://www.cbd.int/convention/text/.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 78

Council of Europe and the European Union Joint Programme. 2012. Emerald Network of Nature Protection Sites, Phase II. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.euneighbours.eu/en/east/stay- informed/projects/emerald-network-nature-protection-sites-phase-ii.

Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. 2003. Caucus Biodiversity Hotspot. Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund.

Cyrs, Thomas. 2016. "Noah’s Valley is drying up." Open Democracy, July 4. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/noah-s-valley-is-drying-up/. de Marcos, Fernando. n.d. 6. Armenia: Urban Development in Secondary Cities (Financed by the Urban Environmental Infrastructure Fund under the Urban Financing Partnership Facility), City Development Plan – Dilijan. Yerevan: Asian Development Bank.

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit. n.d. "Environmental Programme for the South Caucasus page." https://www.giz.de/en/worldwide/76256.html.

Directorate for Democratic Participation. 2019. "Group of Experts on Protected Areas and Ecological Networks." Progress in the Enforcement of the Revised Calendar for the Implementation of the Emerald Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest 2011 - 2020. Strasbourg: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats. 1-4. https://rm.coe.int/progress-in- the-enforcement-of-the-revised-calendar-for-the-implementa/168097e1c7.

Dudley, Nigel. 2008. Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland: IUCN.

Executive, IMF Statement by the Alternate. 2020. Second Review Under the Stand-by Arrangement, Requests for Augmentation of Access, Modification of Performance Criteria, and Monetary Policy Consultation Clause—Press Release; Staff Report; Staff Supplement; and (May).

Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. 2020. Armenia. Website, EITI.

Farhadin, Mohammad S., Mohsen Ahmadi, Elmira Sharbafi, Sadegh Khosravi, Hossein Alinezhad, and David W. Macdonald. 2015. "Leveraging trans-boundary conservation partnerships: Persistence of Persian leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor) in the Iranian Caucasus." Biological Conservation 191: 770 - 778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.08.027.

Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 2004. "Armenia Forests and the Forestry Sector Page." (UN Food and Agricultural Organization).

Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 2015. Global Forest Resources Assessment. Rome: FAO.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2016. AQUASTAT Armenia. Accessed May 22, 2020. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries_regions/Profile_segments/ARM- WR_eng.stm.

—. 2020. Armenia at a Glance. http://www.fao.org/armenia/fao-in-armenia/armenia-at-a-glance/en/.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 79

Fripp, Nils Junge and Emily. 2011. "Understanding the Forestry Sector of Armenia." Forest Law Enforcement and Governance.

Froese, R., and D. Pauly. 2019. FishBase. https://www.fishbase.in/country/CountryChecklist.php?resultPage=2&what=list&trpp=50&c_cod e=051&cpresence=Reported&sortby=alpha2&ext_CL=on&ext_pic=on&vhabitat=all2.

Gabrielyan, A. 2014. "National Climate Vulnerability Assessment: Armenia." Climate Forum East (CFE) and the Armenian Climate Forum.

Gabrielyan, Gagik. 2015. "Aquaculture Sector Review: Armenia." World Bank Group.

Gad Bigio, A., R. Von Culin, and A. Karapetyan. 2019. "Armenia’s Transformative Urban Future: National Urban Assessment." (Asian Development Bank).

Galstyan, S. 2016. "Specially Protected Nature Areas of Armenia for Conservation of Forests and Biodiversity." WWF Armenia.

Geghamyan, Sophya, and Katarina Pavlickova. 2019. "Does the Current State of Environmental Impact Assessment in Armenia Pose a Challenge for the Future?" Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. doi:10.1142/S1464333219500042.

Gevorgyan, A. 2014. "Scoping Study of Economic Significance of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) of the Forestry Sector of Armenia."

Gevorgyan, A. 2017. "The National Coaching Workshop: Criteria and indicators for Sustainable Forest Management for Armenia." UNDP Armenia.

Gevorgyan, Armen. 2014. Scoping study of economic significance of ecosystems and biodiversity (TEEB) of the forestry sector of Armenia. Yerevan: European Union; IUCN; World Bank; and WWF.

Gevorgyan, GA, LR Hambaryan, KV Grigoryan, and SH Minasyan. 2013. "Heavy Metal Pollution of the Catchment Basin of the Voghchi and Meghriget Rivers (Armenia) and Risks to the Environment Associated with Water Pollution." Academic Journal of Science 2.

Ghazaryan, K.A., H.S. Movsesyan, N.P. Ghazaryan, and K.V. Grigoryan. 2013. "The Ecological Assessment of Soils Around Agarak Town." Biological Journal of Armenia 39-43.

Global Environment Facility. 2019. "Implementation of Armenia’s LDN Commitments Through Sustainable and Restoration of Degraded Landscapes." Project Identification Form.

Global Forest Watch. 2019. Armenia. Accessed June 3, 2020. https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/ARM?dashboardPrompts=eyJvcGVuIjpm YWxzZSwic3RlcEluZGV4IjowLCJzdGVwc0tleSI6InZpZXdOYXRpb25hbERhc2hib2FyZHMiLCJm b3JjZSI6dHJ1ZX0%3D&map=eyJkYXRhc2V0cyI6W3siZGF0YXNldCI6IjBiMDIwOGI2LWI0MjQt NGI1Ny05ODRmLWNhZG.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 80

n.d. Global Invasive Species Database. Accessed June 4, 2020. http://www.issg.org/database.

Gokhelashvili, Ramaz. n.d. Asia: Iran, Turkey, and Armenia. Accessed May 18, 2020. https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/pa0805.

Grimmett, Richard, Mojmir Mrak, Jorge Fernández Orueta, Edward Perry, Marcos Valderrábano, Pete Wood, and Catherine Numa Valdez. 2017. Ecosystem Profile: Mediterranean Basin Biodiversity. Critcal Ecosystem Partnership Fund.

Gundimeda, H. 2012. "Payments for Ecosystem Services Feasibility Study for Lake Sevan, Armenia." GOST Advisory.

Harrison, Paula, and et al. 2014. "Linkages Between Biodiversity Attributes and Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Review." Ecosystem Services 191-203.

Hayantar. 2005. "National Forest Program of the Republic of Armenia."

Hovhannisyan, A., A. Alexanyan, T. Moth-Poulsen, and A. Woynarovich. 2011. "Review of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Potentials in Armenia." FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular 48.

International Union for the Conservation of Nature. 2011. "Aliens: The Invasive Species Bulletin." Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group 43.

International Union for the Conservation of Nature. n.d. Improving Forest Law Enforcement and Governance in the European Neighborhood Policy East Countries and Russia Factsheet. The European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI). https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/import/downloads/enpi_fleg_fact_sheet.pdf.

—. 2011. New Red Book of Armenia published. February 10. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://www.iucn.org/content/new-red-book-armenia-published.

—. n.d. Protected Area Categories. Accessed May 27, 2020. https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected- areas/about/protected-area-categories.

—. 2020. "Table 8a: Total endemic and threatened endemic species in each country (totals by taxonomic group)." IUCN Red List. March 19. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/summary-statistics.

K., Aghababyan, Ananyan V., Kalashyan M., and G. Khanamiryan. 2010. "Analysis of Forest Pests and Pestholes Exacerbated by Climate Change and Climate Variability in Syunik Marz of Armenia and To Identification of the Most Applicable Prevention Measures."

Khanjyan, Nazik. 2004. Specially Protected Nature Areas of Armenia. Yerevan: Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia .

Knuth, Lidija. 2006. Greening cities for improving urban livelihoods: Legal, policy and institutional aspects of urban and peri-urban forestry in West and Central Asia (with a case study of Armenia). Rome: FAO.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 81

Korepov , M., and K. Aghababyan. 2020. "Breeding of Saker Falcon Falco cherrug in Armenia." Sandgrouse 118-121.

Lanskoy, Miriam. 2019. "Armenia's Velvet Revolution." Journal of Democracy (Johns Hopkins University Press) 30: 85-99.

Laplante, Benoit, Craig Meisner, and Hua. Wang. 2005. Environment as Cultural Heritage: The Armenian Diaspora’s Willingness to Pay to Protect Armenia’s Lake Sevan. World Bank.

Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Armenia. 2020. Fish-Breeding. http://old.minagro.am/en/agriculture-in- armenia/%d5%b1%d5%af%d5%b6%d5%a1%d5%a2%d5%b8%d6%82%d5%ae%d5%b8%d6%82%d5% a9%d5%b5%d5%b8%d6%82%d5%b6/.

Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Armenia. 2008. "National Report on the State of Plant Generic Resources in Armenia."

Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Armenia. 2020. "Tourism Development Concept Paper."

Ministry of Energy Infrastructures and Natural Resources of the Republic of Armenia . 2020. Hydropower. http://www.minenergy.am/page/448.

Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Armenia. 2020. February 17. http://www.mnp.am/am/post/4479.

—. 2020. Discussed the Possibilities of Introducing a Pilot Project of Ecosystem Service Delivery in Tsakhkadzor. May 19. http://www.mnp.am/en/post/4487.

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Armenia. 2020. The Government Has Approved a Draft Amendment to the 2020 Budget Law. April 23. Accessed May 22, 2020. http://www.minfin.am/hy/content/karavarutyuny_hastatel_e_2020_tvakani_byujei_masin_orenqu m_popokhutyunneri_nakhagitsy/#sthash.bKQGQIfs.ruInqZjk.dpbs.

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia . 2019. Sixth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Yerevan: Republic of Armenia.

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2014. “Strategy and State Program of Conservation and Use of Specially Protected Nature Areas. Yerevan: KfW bank.

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2011. Developing the Protected Area System of Armenia. UNDP Project Document – Amendment for split of the project into two subprojects, Yerevan: United Nations Development Programme.

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2013. Legends of Nature: Protected Areas of the South Caucasus - Armenia. Yerevan: The World Wildlife Fund; The Caucasus Nature Fund.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 82

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 1999. Republic of Armenia First National Report to The Convention on Biological Diversity incorporating a Country Study on the Biodiversity of Armenia. Yerevan: Republic of Armenia.

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2010. Second National Communication on Climate Change. Yerevan, Armenia: Lusabats Publishing House.

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2010. The Red Book of Animals of the Republic of Armenia. Yerevan: Republic of Armenia.

Minstry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. 2015. "Armenia's Third National Communication on Climate Change." Report, Yerevan.

Mkrtchyan, Anahit, and Erik Grigoryan. 2014. Forest Dependency in Rural Armenia. Yerevan: European Union.

National Statistical Service. 2020. Statistical Committee of the Republic of Armenia. May 27. https://www.armstat.am/en/.

Neljas, Aap. 2018. ECEAP Analysis: Outcome of the Armenia Velvet Revolution. Estonian Center of Eastern Partnership.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2017. Reforming Sanitation in Armenia: Towards a National Strategy. OECD Studies on Water, Paris: ECD Publishing.

Pascual, Unai, Roldan Muradian, Luke Brander, Erik Gómez-Baggethun, Berta Martín-López, and Madhu Verma. 2010. "Chapter 5: The economics of valuing ecosystem services and biodiversity." In The Econoimcs of Ecosystems and Biodiversity Ecological and Economic Foundations, by ed. Pushpam Kumar. London, Washington: Earthscan.

Petrosyana, V, Anna Orlovab, Charles Dunlap, Emil Babayane, Mark Farfelb, and Margrit von Braun von Braun. 2004. "Lead in Residential Soil and Dust in a Mining and Smelting District in Northern Armenia." Environmental Research. n.d. "Petrosyana, V. Anna Orlovab, Charles E Dunlapc, Emil Babayane, Mark Farfelb, Margrit von Braun (2004). Lead in residential soil and dust in a mining and smelting district in northern Armenia: a pilot study. Environmental Research. Volume 94, Issue 3, Marc." Environmental Research.

Pipoyan, D., S. Stepanyan, S. Stepanyan, M. Beglaryan, and N Merendino. 2019. "Health Risk Assessment of Potentially Toxic Trace and Elements in Vegetables Grown Under the Impact of Kajaran Mining Complex." Biological Trace Element Research. https://www.cens.am/article/health-risk- assessment-of-potentially-toxic-trace-and-elements-in-vegetables-grown-under-the-impact-of- kajaran-mining-complex.

PlantLife. 2019. Armenia. http://www.plantlifeipa.org/criteria.

2005. RA Governmental Decision N1232Ն, National Forest Program of the Republic of Armenia. Yerevan: Republic of Armenia.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 83

RAMSAR. 2011. "Annotated List of Wetlands of International Importance: Armenia." Armena | RAMSAR. Accessed May 20, 2020. https://rsis.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/rsiswp_search/exports/Ramsar- Sites-annotated-summary-Armenia.pdf?1589973917.

RAMSAR. 2004. "Wetlands in Armenia – Their Values and Threats and Their Contribution to Sustainable Development and Poverty Alleviation." 5th European Regional Meeting on the Implementation and Effectiveness of the Ramsar Convention.

Rayvush, George, Alla Aleksanyan, Karen Aghababyan, Ashot Aslanyan, Marine Oganesyan, Samvel Nahapetyan, Marine Arakelyan, Astghik Ghazaryan, and Mark Kalashian. 2016. The "Emerald" Network in the Republic of Armenia. Yerevan: Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia.

Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus. 2014. Support Development of Biodiversity Conservation Policies and Practices in Mountain Regions of the South Caucasus. Accessed May 19, 2020. http://rec- caucasus.am/support-development-of-biodiversity-conservation-policies-and-practices-in- mountain-regions-of-the-south-caucasus/.

Republic of Armenia. 2006. "About Special Protected Distributions of Nature."

Republic of Armenia. 1999. "First National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity." A Country Study on Biodiversity, Yerevan.

Republic of Armenia. 2005. Forest Code. ARLIS.

Republic of Armenia. 2005. "National Forest Program of the Republic of Armenia." RA Governmental Decision N1232Ն. https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/meetings/20170913/National_Forest_Program_Ar menia.pdf.

Republic of Armenia. 2010. Second National Communication on Climate Change. Yerevan: "Lusabats" Publishing House.

—. 2019. Sixth National Report of the Republic of Armenia Convention on Biological Diversity. Yerevan.

Republic of Armenia. 2015. Strategy of the Republic of Armenia on Conservation, Protection, Reproduction and Use of Biological Diversity . Yerevan, Armenia: Republic of Armenia. https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/am/am-nbsap-v2-en.pdf.

Science and Policy for People and Nature Secretariat. 2019. Ecosystem services. Accessed May 15, 2020. https://ipbes.net/glossary/ecosystem-services.

Shahnazaryan, N., and A. Harutyunyan. 2017. Ecosystem Services in Armenia: Overview of Different Activities on Ecosystem Services Implemented by the Government of Armenia and Different Organizations in the Period of 2011-2017. Yerevan: GIZ.

Statistical Committee of Armenia. 2018. "Environmental Statistics of Armenia for 2018 and Time-Series of Indicators for 2014-2018."

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 84

Strokov, A., and I. Poleshkina. 2016. "Economic Evaluation of Ecosystem Services in Tavushkaya Oblast of Armenia." Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal 110-131.

Suny, Ronald Grigor, and Aleksey Aleksandrovich Mints. 2019. Armenia. October 4. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Armenia.

Ter-Gazarian, Karen. 1997. "Issues and Opportunities in the Evolution of Private Forestry and Forestry Extension in Several Countries with Economies in Transition in Central and Eastern Europe." Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

2013. Threats to Armenia’s Biodiversity. Accessed June 3, 2020. http://csr-biodiversity.am/en/project- backgrounds/threats-to-armenia%E2%80%99s-biodiversity.html.

Trifonova, Tatiana. 2016. Intensive Fish Farming as a Contributor to the Depletion of Underground and Surface Water Resources in the Ararat Valley. Ithaca, NY: CUL Initiatives in Publishing (CIP).

United Nations Development Programme. 2020. Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts in Mountain Forest Ecosystems of Armenia. https://www.am.undp.org/content/armenia/en/home/operations/projects/environment_and_ener gy/adaptation-to-climate-change-impacts-in-mountain-forest-ecosyste.html.

United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Environment Programme. 2014. "Ecosystem Services and their Role in Poverty Alleviation in Armenia - A Case Study of Karaberd Gold Mine." Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services.

United Nations Development Programme. 2015. Mainstreaming Sustainable Land and Forest Management in Mountain Landscapes of NorthEastern Armenia. Project Document, Armenia: GEF.

United Nations Development Programme. 2020. "Poverty Reduction Overview - Armenia."

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Forest Landscape Restoration in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Economic Commission for Europe Committee on Forests and the Forest Industry.

United Nations Environment Programme. 2019. Environmental Education Armenia. December. Accessed August 28, 2020. https://www.am.undp.org/content/armenia/en/home/projects/environmental- education.html.

USAID. 2017. Climate Risk Profile: Armenia. June. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://www.climatelinks.org/resources/climate-change-risk-profile-armenia.

USAID Global Waters. 2019. Raising Voices to Save Water: Reducing Groundwater Loss in Armenia’s Ararat Valley. USAID.

USAID. 2016. "South Caucasus Water Program."

Valder, J.F., J.M. Carter, C.J. Medler, R.F. Thompson, and M.T. and Anderson. 2018. "Hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia." U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 40.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 85

Vermishev, M. 2003. Capacity Building in the Republic of Armenia for Technology Needs Assessment and Technology Transfer for Addressing Climate Change Problems - ―Armenia - Country Study on Climate Change‖ Project II phase. Yerevan: UNDP, GEF, Ministry of Nature Protection in the Republic of Armenia.

World Bank. 2019. International tourism, number of arrivals - Armenia. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.ARVL?locations=AM&view=chart.

—. 2014. Sustainable and Strategic Decision Making in Mining. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/18958.

—. 2020. The Wold Bank in Armenia: Overview. April 16. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/armenia/overview.

World Economic Forum. 2019. Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index 2019. https://reports.weforum.org/travel-and-tourism-competitiveness-report-2019/country- profiles/#economy=ARM.

World Lakes. 2004. Lake Profile: Sevan. Accessed June 3, 2020. http://www.worldlakes.org/lakedetails.asp?lakeid=8636.

Yu, Winston, Rita E. Cestti, and Ju Young Lee. 2015. Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia. Washington D.C.: World Bank Group.

Yu, Winston, Rita E. Cestti, and Ju Young Lee. 2014. Toward Integrated Water Resources Management in Armenia. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.

Zazanashvili, Nugzar & Garforth, Mike & Jungius, Hartmut & Gamkrelidze, Tamaz & Montalvo, and Cristian. 2013. Ecoregion Conservation Plan for the Caucasus. WWF-Caucuses Programme Office.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 86

ANNEX D. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION GUIDANCE NOTE: The questionnaire evolved relative to each interview. The questions are not necessarily sequential; they can be used to help guide a semi-structured interview and information gathering process.

Stakeholder Consultation Questionnaire – USAID/Armenia FAA 119 Biodiversity Analysis

Name: ______Date: ______

Title: ______Organization: ______

Primary Locations of Interest:

______

Cooperating Organizations:

______

Source(s) of Funding:

______

BIODIVERSITY (Species & Ecosystem including Aquatic Resources)

1. Are biodiversity resources (species and ecosystems) under threat in Armenia? a. If so which resources? 2. What are the top 2 or 3 threats11 to biodiversity to the resources you mentioned? What are the top 2 or 3 threats in Armenia overall? 3. Are biodiversity resources increasing or decreasing? 4. What are some of the factors (e.g., underlying drivers12) leading to the increase or decline of biodiversity? a. How would you rate these drivers in terms of importance or priority? 5. Which are some of the species/ecosystems experiencing significant changes? 6. What actions would you say need to done to either: encourage/promote the increase or stop/prevent the decline of species/ecosystems? a. Which actor(s) within the country are best suited to undertake these actions? (e.g., Government of Armenia? NGO community? Bilateral or multilateral donors? Private sector? Community-level actors?)

11 A direct threat to biodiversity is a human action or unsustainable use that immediately degrades biodiversity (e.g., deforestation resulting for agricultural expansion, overfishing.) 12 A driver is a constraint, opportunity or other important variable that positively or negatively influences direct threats (e.g., demand for seafood).

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 87

CLIMATE CHANGE

1. Are climatic changes affecting Armenia? How? 2. What are some activities either accelerating climate change or mitigating climate change effects in Armenia? 3. Are you aware of any proposed activities to address climate change issues in Armenia?

GENERAL QUESTIONS

1. What are the links between the environment (e.g. biodiversity, ecosystems, water/air quality, wildlife corridors and habitats, vegetation, etc.) and: a. Agriculture (e.g. subsistence or commercial) b. Nutrition c. Energy Production (e.g. hydroelectric, oil and gas) d. Natural Resource Use e. Fisheries f. Wildlife trade (e.g., skins, animal parts) g. Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) h. Politics/Governance (e.g. government regulations, corruption, armed forces, ministries)

2. What are the opportunities for protecting and conserving biodiversity from any identified detrimental types of activities?

3. Are there specific governmental or international policies that encourage or discourage the conservation biodiversity in Armenia? (please specify referenced policies)

4. Are there specific departments, institutions, organizations, or donors that either facilitate or impede conservation efforts in Armenia?

ANNEX E. TABLE OF NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES RELATED TO BIODIVERSITY TABLE . NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES PERTAINING TO BIODIVERSITY

NAME TYPE DATE DESCRIPTION Atmospheric Air Protection Law 1994 Provides for the quality of the atmosphere, Law elimination and prevention of air pollution, regulates public communications on these issues. Defines norms of permissible concentrations and negative impacts, as well as norms of permissible pollution from movable and unmovable sources. Law on Compensation Tariffs Law 2017 Establishes compensation tariffs for caused damage for Damage Caused to Flora due to hunting or destruction of Red Book plant and Fauna as a Consequence and animal species. Envisages penalties for both of Violation of Environmental vertebrate and invertebrate endangered species. Protection Laws

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 88

TABLE . NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES PERTAINING TO BIODIVERSITY

NAME TYPE DATE DESCRIPTION Environmental Impact Law 2014 Confirms legal basis for state environmental impact Assessment and Expertise expertise of a proposed activity or concept Law document. Presents the standard steps of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in Armenia. Establishes general legal and organizational principles for conducting mandatory EIA of various types of activities and concept documents of development. Classifies activities into three categories reflecting different levels of environmental impact assessment according to severity of possible impacts. Environmental Oversight Law Law 2005 Regulates organization and enforcement of oversight of the implementation of environmental legislation; defines the legal and economic bases underlying that oversight, including relevant procedures and conditions. Flora Law Law 1999 Defines maintenance, protection, usage, and regeneration of flora. Includes objectives of flora examination, state monitoring, state inventory, requirements and approaches of Red Book preparation on flora, conditions, irregularities, limitations on usage, basis of termination of the right to use, provisions on flora maintenance, economic encouragement of usage and supervision. Fauna Law Law 2000 Defines policies of maintenance, protection, usage and regeneration of fauna. States objectives of surveys, state monitoring, state inventory; outlines requirements and approaches of Red Book categorizations of fauna, conditions, and irregularities. Limits the allocation of fauna objects for usage, defines the basis of termination for right to use. Provides provisions on fauna maintenance, and economic encouragement of usage and supervision. Forest Code Law 2005 Regulates sustainable forest management, including guarding, protecting, rehabilitation, afforestation and rational use of forest and forest lands. Includes regulation of forest data collection, monitoring, and control. Land Code Law 2001 Defines the main directives for management of state lands, included those allocated for agriculture, urban construction, industry and mining, and energy production, among others. Defines lands under specially protected areas and other reserved lands. Establishes measures aimed at land protection, and land rights of state bodies, local authorities, and citizens. Law on Lake Sevan Law 2001, Establishes legal and economic basis of state policy amended on natural development, recovery, reproduction of 2020 natural resources, preservation and use of Lake Sevan. Confirms the Lake as home to ecosystems of strategic purpose for the country, requiring natural

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 89

TABLE . NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES PERTAINING TO BIODIVERSITY

NAME TYPE DATE DESCRIPTION protection, and of economic, social, scientific, historical and cultural, esthetic, health, climatic, recreational and spiritual value. National Strategy and Action Strategy 2014 Responds to the UN Conference of Parties to the Program to Combat Convention to Combat Desertification by outlining Desertification in the Republic efforts to achieve land degradation neutrality, by of Armenia improving populations’ living conditions; improving conditions of affected ecosystems; generating global benefits through implementation of the convention; and mobilizing resources to support implementation of the convention through partnerships between national and international actors. Rates of Nature Protection Law 2006 Sets the rates for nature protection payments and Payments the mechanism of their calculation. Specifies rates of payments for emissions to air and water; increased rates are set for Yerevan and protected areas. Specially Protected Natural Law 2006 Defines legal basis and state policy for development, Areas Law restoration, maintenance, reproduction and use of nature and ecosystems of SPNAs. Divides specially protected natural areas into four categories: State Sanctuaries, National Parks, State Reserves and Natural Monuments; and Other types (areas of international, national, and local significance.) Lacks regulation for Community Protected Landscapes, which can be important for biodiversity and are located where SPNAs cannot be developed. Strategy and Action Plan of Strategy 2015 Developed and submitted as part of the the Republic of Armenia on Convention on Biological Diversity as per Conservation, Protection, requirements of Article 6. Considers Armenia’s Reproduction and Use of performance against initial plan developed in 2010, Biological Diversity success at achieving Aichi targets, and presents additional strategy for future efforts. Successes include improvement of legislative and governance frameworks, establishment of new SPNAs, establishment of preconditions for biodiversity inventory and monitoring, promotion of scientific research, and implementation of activities on public awareness raising and ecological education. Future actions to be undertaken include: development and introduction of realistic and effective management mechanisms to solve conservation problems; identification and prevention of the main threats to biodiversity and ecosystems; improvement of intersectoral relations in biodiversity management; provision of social and economic benefits to population through sustainable use of biological resources; awareness raising on biodiversity and public engagement in decision-making processes. Strategy and State Program of Strategy 2014 Defines history and current state of SPNAs in Conservation and Use of Armenia and in light of conservation and

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 90

TABLE . NATIONAL LAWS AND STRATEGIES PERTAINING TO BIODIVERSITY

NAME TYPE DATE DESCRIPTION Specially Protected Nature sustainable use. Considers SPNAs as they relate Areas (SPNA) to ecosystem services, climate change, desertification, international standards, cultural heritage, and other factors. Tax Code of the Republic of Law 2016 Section 8 of the law outlines the provision of the Armenia new Armenian Environmental Tax. A tax on air emissions, pollution of water resources, and certain defined types of wastes. Section 10 of the Tax Code outlines a natural resources utilization payment for activities such as water extraction, salt, and mineral mining, and other activities defined therein. Wastes Law Law 2004 Provides the legal and economic basis for collection, transportation, disposal, treatment, re-use of wastes, as well as prevention of negative impacts of waste on natural resources, human life, and health. Defines objects of waste usage, principles and directions of state policy, principles of state standardization, inventory, and introduction of statistical data, implementation of requirements, principles of wastes processing, requirements for presenting wastes for the state monitoring, activities to decrease the amount of the wastes, including nature utilization payments. Also includes provisions for the compensation of damages caused to human health and environment by legal entities and individuals using wastes, and requirements for state monitoring and legal violations. Water Code Law 2002 Protects Armenia’s water resources and ensures citizens and economic sectors water access through effective management of resources and protection. Regulates the responsibilities of state/local authorities and public; the development of national water policy and program; management of water resources register and monitoring system; public access to the relevant information; water use and permitting systems; transboundary water resources use; water quality standards; and the protection and state supervision of water resources.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 91

ANNEX F. TABLE OF KEY GOVERNMENT-ADMINISTERED SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE AREAS (SPNAS) TABLE 12. KEY GOVERNMENT-ADMINISTERED SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE AREAS (SPNAS)

NAME DATE OF AREA LOCATION PROTECTED ESTABLISHMENT (HA) (MARZ) AREA/SPECIES

NATIONAL PARKS Arevik 2009 34,402 Syunik Forests, woodland, meadows/endangered and rare species Dilijan 2002 24,000 Tavush Forest flora and fauna

Lake Arpi 2009 23,850 Shirak Mountain steppes, subalpine meadows, lakes, wetlands, rivers Sevan 1978 150,100 Gegharqunik Fresh water ecosystems

STATE RESERVES Khosrov Forest 1958 29,000 Ararat Azat River water resources, juniper and oak, arid mountain vegetation, rare animals and plants Shikahogh 1958 10,000 Syunik Oak, hornbeam and oak-hornbeam forests, oriental beech, yew, oriental plane and animals Erebuni 1981 89 Kotayk Wild-growing relatives of cereals

STATE WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES Akhnabad Taxus Grove 1958 25 Tavush Relict yew

Aragats Alpine 1959 300 Aragatsotn Glacial Lake Kari, alpine meadow Arjatkhelni Hazel 1958 40 Tavush Flora

Arzakan- 1971 14,500 Kotayk Forest fauna

Banks' Pine Grove 1959 40 Tavush Relict hazelnut, yew Boghakar 1989 2,728 Syunik Endemic and rare flora and

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 92

TABLE 12. KEY GOVERNMENT-ADMINISTERED SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE AREAS (SPNAS)

NAME DATE OF AREA LOCATION PROTECTED ESTABLISHMENT (HA) (MARZ) AREA/SPECIES fauna species

Gandzakar 1971 6,800 Tavush Forest fauna

Getik 1971 6,000 Gegharkunik Forest fauna

Goravan Sands 1959 200 Ararat Sand desert ecosystem with unique species 1972 1,900 Syunik Forest fauna

Gyulagarak 1958 2,586 Lori Relict pine forests Hankavan Hydrological 1981 9,350 Kotayk Hankavan mineral water Herher Open Woodland 1958 6,139 Vayots- Relict juniper Dzor forest Ijevan 1971 7,800 Tavush Forest fauna

Jermuk Forest 1958 3,865 Vayots- Oak forests, Dzor rare animals Jermuk Hydrological 1981 18,000 Vayots- Jermuk mineral Dzor water Juniper Woodlands 1958 3,312 Gegharkunik Forest fauna

Khor Virap 2007 50 Ararat Flora and fauna

Khustup 2014 6,947 Syunik Flora and fauna

Margahovit 1971 5,000 Lori Forest fauna

Rhododendron caucasicum 1959 10,000 Lori Relict Caucasian rhododendron Plane Grove 1959 60 Syunik Singular natural grove of oriental plane in the Caucasus Sev Lake 1987 240 Syunik Water resources of volcanic lake Vordan Karmir 1987 220 Armavir Flora and fauna

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 93

TABLE 12. KEY GOVERNMENT-ADMINISTERED SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE AREAS (SPNAS)

NAME DATE OF AREA LOCATION PROTECTED ESTABLISHMENT (HA) (MARZ) AREA/SPECIES 1972 4,200 Vayots- Forest fauna Dzor Zangezur 2009 17,369 Syunik Flora and fauna

Zikatar 2010 1,500 Tavush Flora and fauna

Source: (Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Armenia 2020)

ANNEX G. KEY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES TABLE 13. KEY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES

PROJECT NAME IMPEMENTER/ DURATION FUNDING PURPOSE FUNDER (PROJECT AMOUNT DATES) Conserving Flora and Fauna Unspecified Unknown FFI is carrying out baseline work to threatened trees in Int’l establish a conservation regime for the Armenia critically endangered Armenian endemic Gergeranian pear, one of 12 endemic pear species. Catalyzing Financial UNDP, GEF, 2009 – 2018 5.8M USD The overall objective of the project was Sustainability of Caucasus to secure long-term financial Armenia's Protected sustainability of the Armenian protected Protected Areas Areas Trust area system. In summary, the project System Fund was to assist with creating a process to establish a conservation trust fund with the aim of protecting and strengthening the network of national parks and nature reserves in Armenia. GEF SGP Sixth UNOPS, GEF 2017-2018 39.1M USD Project supports the creation of global Operational Phase- environmental benefits and the Strategic safeguarding of the global environment Implementation through community and local solutions using STAR that complement and add value to Resources, Tranche national and global level action. 2 (Part IV) (Global) Integrated GIZ / German 2015 - 2019 EUR Within the framework of the Caucasus Biodiversity Federal Ministry 19,450,000 Initiative of the German government, Management, for Economic (Armenia, IBiS cooperates primarily with the South Caucasus Cooperation Azerbaijan environment ministries of the three (IBiS) (Armenia, and and different countries of the South Azerbaijan and Development Georgia) Caucasus. The program follows a multi- Georgia) (BMZ); level approach. At national level, it Austrian promotes the development or revision Development of biodiversity strategies and Cooperation regulations, particularly in forest and (through pasture management, and in erosion

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 94

TABLE 13. KEY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES

PROJECT NAME IMPEMENTER/ DURATION FUNDING PURPOSE FUNDER (PROJECT AMOUNT DATES) Austrian control. The experience gained from Development the pilot measures at district, municipal Agency) and local levels are incorporated into this process. As part of these pilot measures, relevant actors are provided with the skills needed to implement integrated approaches for sustainable management of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Promotion of WWF 2015-2020 8M Euro The foundation of this new concept is Ecological Germany, biodiversity conservation at the Corridors in the WWF landscape level and increasing the South Caucasus Caucasus, involvement of local citizens. Such a (Regional) KFW large-scale project will ensure the overall sustainability of WWF-Caucasus Programme in the region. The project will provide financial resources in support of environmentally sustainable land use practices in selected ecological corridors, thus connecting protected areas to ensure their biological stability. This will contribute to the conservation of biodiversity in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia without reducing income of the poor part of rural population. Transboundary Joint WWF, KFW 2015-2020 5M Euro The aim of this project is to further Secretariat Third develop the ECP and promote its Phase (TJS III) implementation in Armenia, Azerbaijan, (Regional) and Georgia. It will contribute to the conservation of biodiversity in these countries without impairing living standards of local population in the long-term. Reducing conflicts and crisis prevention shall be achieved through contributions through supporting regional sector communication channels. The target groups are populations adjacent to all protected areas of the South Caucasus. The project shall realize indirect effects for the benefit of these communities through technical and financial support to intermediary structures (ministries, administrative agencies, institutions and other actors in the nature conservation sector). In addition, sector reforms will be supported, including local population engagement with biodiversity, as well as promotion of these resources.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 95

TABLE 13. KEY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES

PROJECT NAME IMPEMENTER/ DURATION FUNDING PURPOSE FUNDER (PROJECT AMOUNT DATES) Helping countries EU, UNDA, 2013-2018 Unknown A regional program with Armenia, leapfrog to a green UNIDO, & 2018 - Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova economy -- EaP UNECE, WB 2021 and Ukraine. The Project aims to GREEN, & introduce sustainable consumption and EU4Environment production into national development plans, legislation and regulatory frameworks; promote the shift to a green economy in selected economic sectors; and mainstream the use of Environmental Impact Assessments. German-Armenian Acopian Center 2018 – 2021 Unknown A collaborative 4-year academic Network on the for the exchange program which supports the Advancement of Environmenatl, AUA faculty and researchers in Public Participation Universito of acquiring knowledge on the public GIS for Ecosystem Hohenheim participation GIS-based ecosystem Services as a Means services concept and how it can be used for Biodiversity in biodiversity conservation and Conservation and sustainable development. Sustainable Development (GAtES Project) Upscaling of Global UNEP, GEF 2018 – 2021 2.2M USD The project empowers decision-makers Forest Watch in in government and civil society with Caucasus Region technology and information to help reduce deforestation, facilitate commitments to restoration, and conserve forest biodiversity by developing innovative user-friendly tools that easily share information and provide on-the-fly analyses. Environmental GIZ. BMZ, 2018 – 2021 Unknown The projects goal is to improve the Programme for the sustainability of natural resource use in South Caucasus the South Caucasus, with a special (ECOserve) (South focus on energy security for the rural Caucasus: Armenia, population. Azerbaijan and Georgia)

Adolescents for ADA & 2019 – 2022 Unknown The project works to empower youth, Climate Action in UNICEF schools and communities to develop Communities viable mechanisms for integrating strategic climate action in their community plans. The program also works to develop environmental and climate change centered curricula for schools. Additional organizations, including the Swedish International Development and Aid Agency, Caucasus Nature Fund, the U.S. Forest Service, and others, support programming that addresses the environment or climate more broadly.

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 96

ANNEX H. MAPS

Figure 3: Map of Land Cover of the Republic of Armenia

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 97

Figure 4: Map of Water Bodies and Landscape Designations of the Republic of Armenia

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 98

Figure 5: Map of the Major Water Bodies and Rivers of the Republic of Armenia

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 99

Figure 6: Map of the Protected Areas of the Republic of Armenia

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 100

Figure 7: Map of Armenian Mines

USAID/ARMENIA | BIODIVERSITY (FAA 119) ANALYSIS 101