Małgorzata Górska Important Birds Area Casework Officer OTOP - the Polish Society for the Protection of Birds Reconciling socio-economic goals and nature conservation Even if difficult and there are other priorities for some interest groups it is necessary if we want to ensure: • good quality of life of people (now and future), • favourable conditions for wildlife existence, • lasting of ecosystems services. Can nature conservation goals and socio-economic needs co-exist? (1) • EU Member States have a good tool to integrate those - nature directives, • There are positive and negative examples, • Main causes for conflicts: – lack of will to integrate nature conservation with economic progress, – little experiences on local level, – no ambition for new challenges, – low awareness on nature conservation importance, – no tradition for public consultations. Can nature conservation goals and socio-economic needs co-exist? (2) • Main lessons-learnt: – Usually there is an alternative solution (integrating different needs), – All stakeholders want to be considered in decision-making processes, – More consulted decision – better decision, – All MS must respect the same EU directives (no exceptions), – Citizens want decision-makers to respect and support nature conservation Rospuda Valley Fot. Piotr Malczewski Via Baltica expressroad (Poland) • Stakeholders involved in decision-making process on road route: – Governmental Road Agency, – Infrastructure and Environmental Ministries, – local authorities, – local people, – NGOs, – scientists. Via Baltica campaign - NGO coalition Via Baltica expressroad (Poland) • Initial position head on collision as focused entirely on development objectives <> environmental obligations and social aspects ignored Via Baltica expressroad (Poland) • Demonstration of what is possible: – Social conflict when some stakeholders rights and legal requirements were ignored, – Waste of time and money for fighting each other, – Risk to lose a case at the European Court of Justice, + Citizens strong opposition to law-breaking, public rights ignorance and damage to nature, + Successful new approach - a sustainable solution was found (win-win) and is now going forward, + More positive approach adopted by some developers and more sustainable projects prepared. What worked? • SEA recommended by the Bern Conv. Standing Committee • Infringement procedure by the EC • Examining the case by the domestic courts • Public support for nature conservation • Promoting of the alternative solutions • Coalition of NGOs with others’ support Via Baltica expressroad (Poland) Other positive examples • UK ports sector, • UK wind sector (London Array wind farm), • The Øresund fixed link between Denmark and Sweden Negative examples • Timber harvesting in Białowieża Primeval Forest (PL) - even during the birds breading period, • Planned regional airport construction between Narew and Biebrza National Park (PL) with EU funds, • Planned new dam construction on Vistula river (PL), • Tourism developments in Danube Delta (Romania), • Wind sector in Bulgaria. Bulgaria - conflict • Over 55 SPAs threatened by development projects • Kaliakra – a key point on the Via Pontica migration route – 364 projects with insufficient or no EIA/AA will destroy over 40% of the SPA – Includes permissions for over 200 wind turbines Solutions • Strong regulation in Bulgaria – starting to improve but still not there! • Strategic planning needed – especially for wind energy • 4 BirdLife infringements open – damage is still happening now - EC needs to progress these as soon as possible Opportunities • Less conflicts if all stakeholders involved and nature and social aspects considered from the beginning, • Better decisions (and project) after real public consultations, • EU financial support for good projects (and no EU funds for bed projects and MS ignoring nature directives), • Biodiversity conserved at local level. Integrating development and environment objectives - recommendations • Good strategic planning and good project planning, • Respecting nature protection legal requirement and social aspects, • Including all stakeholders in decision-making process from the beginning, • No EU money for controversial projects, • EC infringement procedures against MS breaching EU nature directives. Integrating development and environment objectives - recommendations • Good strategic planning and good project planning, • Respecting nature protection legal requirement and social aspects, • Including all stakeholders in decision-making process from the beginning, • No EU money for controversial projects, • EC infringement procedures against MS breaching EU nature directives. Thank you! [email protected].