Specific Objectives:
Create a transboundary management regime and coordinating body;
Assist countries in the formulation, review and endorsement process of a Strategic Action Programme (SAP);
Improve financial/legal/operational mechanisms for pollution reduction and sustainable resource use;
Formulation of National Action Plans by Inter-ministerial Committees;
Improve conservation of biodiversity in the Dnipro River Basin;
Enhance communication among stakeholders and encourage public awareness and involvement in addressing the problems of the Dnipro Basin; and
Build capacity for SAP implementation.
3. Specific Objectives
1. Create a transboundary management regime and
coordinating body;
2. Assist countries in the formulation, review and
endorsement process of a Strategic Action Programme
(SAP);
3. Improve financial/legal/operational mechanisms for
pollution reduction and sustainable resource use;
4. Formulation of National Action Plans by Inter-ministerial
Committees;
5. Improve conservation of biodiversity in the Dnipro River
Basin;
6. Enhance communication among stakeholders and
encourage public awareness and involvement in
addressing the problems of the Dnipro Basin; and
7. Build capacity for SAP implementation.
UNDP-GEF Dnipro Basin Environment Programme 3
4. Project Results
Major Outputs Include:
• A revised Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
• A Strategic Action Programme
– Priority Investments Portfolio (PIP)
– A regional Biodiversity strategy for protecting key
habitats and species
• SAP implementation mechanisms
– Report on the state of the Dnipro basin environment;
– Transboundary Monitoring Program
– Interstate Environmental Database
• Increased public awareness and dissemination
of environmental information on the Basin to all
stakeholders, including the general public.
UNDP-GEF Dnipro Basin Environment Programme 4
5. Existing Legal and Institutional
Framework
• Dnipro basin countries are parties to
number of global and regional (UN ECE)
conventions
• To facilitate the fulfillment of their
international obligations Dnipro countries
are implementing bilateral agreements
and adopt appropriate national by-laws
and regulations
UNDP-GEF Dnipro Basin Environment Programme 5
6. From Kyiv Declaration to
Agreement on SAP endorsement
• 5th Pan European Conference
“Environment for Europe”, 22-24 May,
2003, Kyiv
• Ministers signed the Kyiv Declaration on
Cooperation for Environmental
Rehabilitation of the Dnipro Basin
• Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of
Use and Protection of the Dnipro Basin.
SAP document constitutes an integral part
of this Agreement
UNDP-GEF Dnipro Basin Environment Programme 6
7. Steps to be taken to Ensure
Sustainable Use and
Environmental Protection
• The provision of improved legal and institutional
mechanisms
• The establishment of institutional framework
(Commission) for international management of
the basin
• The provision of a legal and institutional
framework for encouraging and promotion of the
public participation
• The harmonization of legislation with the EU
UNDP-GEF Dnipro Basin Environment Programme 7
9. Success Indicators to Measure
Legal Progress
• Integration of the basin management principle
into environmental legislation
• Economic and administrative instruments for
nature use management
• Signing of the multilateral Agreement
• Establishment of Dnipro Commission
• Sustainable operation of the Dnipro basin
Council
• Availability of objective monitoring information
and sustainable information exchange
• Sustainable cross-border cooperation, based on
existing bilateral agreements
UNDP-GEF Dnipro Basin Environment Programme 9
Notes:
Dnipro river basin (Area / Population)
Belarus
Russia
Ukraine
Total area – 51100 km 2
22.9%
19.8%
57.3%
Total population - 32 million
19.4
11.1
68.5
Notes:
The Dnipro basin has been described as a “classic example of unsustainable development” due to the past legacy of trying to convert a traditionally agricultural region into a major industrial one in the space of a few decades.
The situation has been complicated by the extreme social and economic difficulties all three riparian countries are facing in the transition to market economies. In the Dnipro Basin, this combination of circumstances has resulted in:
intensively farmed areas with a history of over-fertilisation (to compensate for the loss of agricultural land due to urban, mining and industrial development) but with little current use of agrochemicals but severe erosion and falling productivity;
a high industrial density and urban population;
the excessive damming of the river system, with its six major reservoirs on the main stream and over 500 smaller dams on the tributaries to generate electricity for heavy industry;
the practice of flooding of fertile lands in river valleys in connection with the construction of dams; and the draining of wetlands to provide more land for agriculture, resulting in a gross reduction of biodiversity in the whole region;
large-scale and extensive water extraction for agricultural and industrial use, particularly for metallurgic industrial complexes;
poorly regulated deposits of tailings from mining complexes including wastes from uranium mining;
Notes:
1. A number of thematic reports have been published on issues directly related to transboundary management of the Dnipro. These will include
a ‘State of the Dnipro’ report based on existing information, supplemented by new studies conducted within the scope of the Project;
feasibility studies on the use of economic instruments (for municipal and industrial control of transboundary pollutants);
evaluations of improved practices for managing agricultural waste from intensive animal husbandry;
evaluations of the regulatory system for pollutant discharge compliance and polluter responsibility;
review of Environmental Impact Assessment policies and practices;
management review of holding ponds for industrial waste;
review of waste management guidelines and practices for nuclear facilities and disposal sites;
an assessment of operational capacities and practices regarding the transboundary environmental consequences of water abstraction and water returns from treatment plants;
Core Institutional Arrangements
Steering Committee:
The project was governed by a Steering Committee composed of a Deputy Minister (designated National Focal Point) from each country along with the UNDP GEF Regional Coordinator for Europe/CIS (or their designated representatives) together with representatives of participating agencies. It met annually and functioned as the principal policy guidance body of the Project.
Joint Management Committee:
The JMC were composed of the three National Focal Points (NFPs) for the Project and the UNDP GEF Project Manager. The JMC functioned at a more operational level than the Steering Committee. It met less frequently and was responsible for ensuring three country progress in project execution.
The National Project Management Committee:
These were the work horses of the project. Chaired by a Deputy Minister in each country they met on average every 3 months or so to ensure national execution of the Project and approve programme results. Membership of the NPMC included government and non-government stakeholders with the objective of obtaining a broad participation of all sectors engaged in national decision-making with respect to the Dnipro Basin.