Environmental Impact Assesment and Strategic Environmental Assesment – tools for biodiversity conservation Emilian Burdusel – Clubul ecologic UNESCO Pro Natura

Content: EIA/SEA and biodiversity Legislative framework in EU and Romania Implementation in Romania Proposed solutions

EIA/SEA and biodiversity Biodiversity values are often underestimated. They include: Economic values: biodiversity goods and products are sold for income or used as inputs to other economic activities Social values: employment, health, quality of life, social security, appreciation. Intrinsic values: in many cultures and societies, all or some components of biodiversity have “intrinsic” value in their own right, irrespective of any material contribution to human wellbeing. EIA/SEA provides opportunities to ensure that biodiversity values are recognized and taken into account in decision-making.

EIA/SEA and biodiversity Aim for Conservation and “No Net Loss” of Biodiversity. Biodiversity must be conserved to ensure it survives, continuing to provide services, values and benefits for current and future generations. Take an Ecosystem Approach. The CBD advocates an “ecosystem approach” because people and biodiversity depend on healthily functioning ecosystems that have to be assessed in an integrated way, not constrained by artificial boundaries. Seek Sustainable Use of Biodiversity Resources. Use IA to identify, protect and promote sustainable use of biodiversity. Recognize the benefits of biodiversity in providing essential life support systems and ecosystem services such as soil formation, water purification, breakdown of wastes, flood control…. Ensure Equitable Sharing. Ensure traditional rights and uses of biodiversity are recognized in EIA and the benefits from commercial use of biodiversity are shared fairly.

Legislative framework in EU and Romania The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Ramsar Convention, and the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) recognize IA as an important decision-support tool to help plan and implement development with biodiversity “in mind.” Biodiversity in EIA and SEA, Background Document to CBD Decision VIII/28 – Commission for Environmental Assessment, The Netherlands

Legislative framework in EU and Romania Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC 3. Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. In the light of the conclusions of the assessment of the implications for the site and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, the competent national authorities shall agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general public. 4. If, in spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It shall inform the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted.

Legislative framework in EU and Romania Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC: Article 6(3) and (4), transposed in Romanian legislation in: –Protected areas law: Emergency Ordinance no. 154/2008 that modified EO no. 57/2007 –EIA legislative act: Governmental Decision no. 445/2009 –SEA legislative act: GD no. 1076/2004 must be adapted according with the Habitats Directive, article 6(3),(4) There is not available yet a Guide on adequate evaluation, including the biodiversity aspects on EIA/SEA. A Ministerial Order is in the process to be approved.

Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites. Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

km LEGEND Motorways Roads with 4 lanes Deva Nadlac Arad Timisoara Lugoj Sibiu Brasov Ploiesti Bucuresti Pitesti Fetesti Cernavoda Constanta Focsani Buzau Marasesti Albita Giurgiu Bors Natura 2000 sites – 17%, National protected areas – 7%

Implementation in Romania -Problems- The lack of a methodological guide on adequate assessment The quality of the assessment in terms of including biodiversity aspects The dependency by beneficiary (lack of impartiality) of expert companies which elaborates studies The lack of biodiversity experts involved in EIA/SEA The public participation methods in EIA/SEA are not adapted to the needs of local communities (rural population) leaving in or near protected areas.

Implementation in Romania -Proposed solution- To adopt The Guide on adequate EIA/SEA, including biodiversity aspects To integrate the adequate assessment in the current EIA/SEA procedure To improve the methods for checking the quality of the assessment in terms of including biodiversity aspects (independent experts) To control more the public participation methods in EIA/SEA in order to be more adapted to the needs of local communities (rural population) leaving in or near protected areas.

Thank you very much!