Transforming risks into cooperation - The case of Central Asia

Ob

Vo lg

a

Samara

Kapustin Yar Azgyr

akhan

Caspian Sea

ERBAIJAN Baku

Perm Omsk

Yekaterinburg

Transforming risks into cooperation

Kazan

Irtysh

Aktau

Tselinny (Kazsabton)

Chelyabinsk

Sem (Semipalatin

Magnitogorsk

Lira

Aral Sea Region

La Balk

KAZAKHSTAN

Aral Sea

Ferghana Valley

K Mailu

SayUtes UZBEKISTAN

TAJ

The case of Central Asia and South Eastern Europe

zhniy Novgorod

Environment and Security

Environment and Security / 1

TURKMENISTAN

2 / Environment and Security

The United Nations Environment Programme, as the world’s leading intergovernmental environmental organisation, is the authoritative source of knowledge on the current state of, and trends shaping the global environment. The mission of UNEP is to provide leadership and encourage partnership in caring for the environment by inspiring, informing, and enabling nations and peoples to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations.

The United Nations Development Programme is the UN´s Global Development Network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources which can help people build a better life. It operates in 166 countries, working with them on responses to global and national development challenges.

As they develop local capacity, the countries draw on the UNDP people and its wide range of partners. The UNDP network links and co-ordinates global and national efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

With 55 participating states, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe is a prominent instrument for early warning, conflict prevention, conflict management and post-conflict rehabilitation in continental Europe, the Caucasus, Central Asia and North America. Since its beginnings in 1973, the OSCE has taken a comprehensive view of security, including the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, economic and environmental co-operation, and political dialogue.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations, or of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expression of any opinion on the part of the co-operating agencies concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities, or of the delineation of its frontiers and boundaries.

Copyright Š 2003: UNEP, UNDP, OSCE. ISBN: 82-7701-023-0

“Sustainable development is an exceptional opportunity … to build markets … to bring people in from the margins …, to reduce tensions over resources, that could lead to violence; and to protect the ecosystems … on which all life depends.”

Transforming risks into cooperation

Kofi Annan, Global Environment Outlook, UNEP 2002.

The case of Central Asia and South Eastern Europe

Environment and Security

Environment and Security / 3

4 4 5

Preface Executive summary Introduction

8

Central Asia

8 10 13

Environmental risks in Central Asia Population density, ethnicity and socio-economic context Addressing environmental risks and regional cooperation

16

South Eastern Europe

16 18 23 24

Environmental risks in South Eastern Europe Conflict legacy Industrial pollution, agriculture and health Transboundary and regional co-operation

28 31

Conclusions The road ahead

32

Selected references

This report was prepared on behalf of UNEP (ROE), UNDP and OSCE by: Alexander Carius, Moira Feil (Adelphi Research) Jason Switzer (International Institute for Sustainable Development) Philippe Rekacewicz, Ieva Rucevska, Petter Sevaldsen, Otto Simonett (UNEP/GRID-Arendal) Stephane Kluser, Dominique Del Pietro, Ron Witt (UNEP DEWA~Europe /GRID-Geneva) The agencies would like to gratefully acknowledge the financial contributions to the Initiative made by the: Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment German Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs Text written by Alexander Carius, Moira Feil and Jason Switzer

4 / Environment and Security

“Environmental stress can … be an important part of the web of causality associated with any conflict.”

Preface Efforts to reduce the risks posed by scarcity, inequity and injustice can benefit both the planet’s biosphere and the people who live within it. Co-operation towards sustainable and equitable management of natural resources should strengthen social cohesion, forge bridges across cultural and political boundaries, and reduce vulnerability to crises.

Indeed, the achievement of security, where people can exercise their development choices in safety and freedom, is a vital precondition for sustainability.

To promote peace and stability through sustainable resource management and environmental co-operation is an objective that each of the agencies represented here pursues. This Initiative represents the first time we have brought our combined experience and strengths together in order to reflect on the many dimensions of this complex challenge.

Our institutions represent unique pools of knowledge and capability. The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) plays a key role in bringing environmental concerns onto the political agenda of participating states.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the leading source of knowledge on the current state of, and trends shaping, the global environment. The UNEP places

Brundlandt Report, World Commission on Environment and Development 1987: 291

the concept of human vulnerability to environmental change high on its programme of work towards sustainable development. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) promotes the incorporation of environmental components in all aspects of government policy, and in all sectors of society, in pursuit of the Millennium Development Goals.

People are increasingly vulnerable to environmental change. Some can cope, but many others remain at risk.

To integrate the environment with the economic, social, and political aspects of security – to achieve security “with a human face” – we must protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms, stimulate economic and environmental co-operation, and deepen political dialogue.

These are the stepping stones that must be crossed, if we are to achieve a more sustainable and equitable future.

Director, UNDP RBEC Regional Support Centre, UNDP Frits Schlingemann Director and Regional Representative in Europe, UNEP ROE Marcin Swiecicki Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities, OSCE Ben Slay

“Economic liberty, social justice and environmental responsibility are indispensable for prosperity.”

Executive summary This report focuses on the environmental stress affecting security in two case regions, Central Asia and South Eastern Europe. It provides maps with an overview on major environmental risks to human development and security. The maps are derived from information gathered at consultation workshops in Belgrade and Ashgabat, which were attended by local experts, government and non-government representatives.

The maps in this report reveal numerous environmental hot spots, where water and groundwater pollution, availability and distribution; legacies of conflict; industrial and agricultural pollution; toxic and radioactive waste; land degradation, salinisation and desertification; and depletion of natural resources negatively impact on economic development and public health. These effects become national security concerns when they are combined with high population density or urbanisation, socio-economic pressures, weak governance structures, and tensions between communities or transboundary disputes.

Environmental degradation and resource scarcity do not directly lead to conflict. They can, however, contribute to accelerating already existing political, social crises and instability. In order to address the socio-economic aspects

OSCE Charter for European Security, Istanbul, 1999.

of environmental problems, and particularly those of resource scarcity or resource pressure, migration and social tensions, integrated approaches that take political, economic, social and environmental dimensions into consideration are needed. The consultants stressed that basic policies and measures to address these links already exist, at global, regional and domestic levels, but implementation and subnational governance are lacking.

Derived from local expertise and experience, the recommendations given in this report include reinforcing transboundary co-operation through local-level pilot projects; improving and harmonising environmental monitoring and legal provisions; increasing enforcement capacities on national and sub-national levels; activating civil society involvement in policy making and co-ordinating donor activities.

This report follows the first public presentation of the Environment and Security Initiative (launched in 2002 by UNEP, UNDP and OSCE) at the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” in Kiev and connects with the 11th OSCE Economic Forum in Prague in May 2003. Its aim is to facilitate a collaborative process between key public officials and development partners and to address the interconnections between environmental and security issues.

Preface / Summary / Introduction

Environment and Security / 5

Introduction Why link environment and security?

A valuable partnership

Consensus is emerging around the globe, that environmental degradation, inequitable access to critical resources upon which people depend in order to meet basic needs, and competition to extract and control valuable commodities, are each potentially important contributors to conflict, that reduce the capacities of states to respond to crises. These factors can in many instances trigger or fuel violence, and increase vulnerability to natural disasters. However, environmental co-operation can be a powerful tool for preventing conflict, building mutual confidence, and promoting good neighbourly relations, including patterns of co-operation and collaboration that can later extend to other areas.

This Initiative presents a valuable approach in seeking to tackle the interconnections between environment and security because: • it is an open forum aimed at generating co-operation and ensuring co-ordination between international institutions drawing on their respective strengths and experience; • it is rooted in consultations with stakeholders in the regions, both from government and civil society, based on their analyses, thus creating credibility and local ownership of the Initiative; • it seeks to overcome disciplinary borders and integrate environmental, economic, social, political and institutional aspects of security; • it combines analytical, geographic and communication skills to address policy-makers at various levels; and • it aims at creating and implementing practical approaches to the connections between environment and security in vulnerable regions.

The Initiative The Environment and Security Initiative was launched in 2002 by the UNEP, UNDP and OSCE, with the common aim of facilitating a collaborative process between key public officials and development partners. The Initiative seeks to: • raise awareness as to the connections between environment and security and assess environmental risks and their impacts on security; • engage with governmental and non-governmental stakeholder groups, to identify both risks posed by environmental change, and opportunities for transboundary co-operation to promote sustainable development, peace and stability; • use the mapping of risks as well as needs and opportunities for environmental co-operation as part of an integrated assessment and consultative dialogue to improve sustainable resource management, crisis prevention and peace promotion; • create networks among stakeholder groups at national level to promote environmental co-operation and foster sustainable development as a tool for confidencebuilding and regional stability; • facilitate a platform for co-operation with other important institutions, such as the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), NATO’s Science for Peace Program, and the OECD – Development Assistant Committee.

About this report This report contains the preliminary account of the Initiative’s findings in two case study regions, Central Asia and South Eastern Europe. These regions were selected for pilot studies due to the complex web of environmental and socioeconomic conditions that together may pose a risk to stability and to the lives and livelihoods of the populations.

The report is a condensation of available data combined with input gathered through regional consultations in Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro (December 2002) and Ashgabat, Turkmenistan (January 2003). These regional consultations drew upon the contributions of representatives of foreign and environmental ministries as well as the civil society and experts from the regions’ countries. Participants identified the predominant environment and security concerns and sketched out relevant locations on draft maps.

This exercise was part of a three-fold method based upon: • A survey of relevant literature; • Consultations with the regional and country offices of the leading agencies; and • An interactive mapping exercise with stakeholders from all the regions’ countries, in two-day consultative workshops.

The sections that follow present the results of the consultations and data-gathering exercises, elaborate on the implications for social stability and co-operation in the region, analyse and draw conclusions, and lay out a plan for further activities within the frame of the Initiative.

6 / Environment and Security

Environment and Security

Central Asia

Environment and Security / 7

8 / Environment and Security

Environmental risks in Central Asia Central Asia encompasses the southern provinces of the former Soviet Union, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The region is rich in natural resources, most of them still hidden in the ground. These resources have been industrially exploited and processed for decades, which has led to considerable environmental pollution through improper mining and industrial waste disposal.

Uranium has left Central Asia with poorly maintained radioactive waste storage sites. The risk for human health deriving from these sites is increased by the high vulnerability to seismic activity of the south-

eastern area of Central Asia, especially Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, where most of the water supply for the region originates. Kazakhstan’s already high level of natural radiation (UNECE 2000), is increased by the remnants of the Soviet nuclear test sites of Azgyr, Lira, Aral, Say-Utes and Semipalatinsk-Kurchatov. The legacy of chemical and biological research centres of the former Soviet Union adds to the environmental threat. Industrial pollution presents an additional security threat throughout the region.

Besides the negative impact on health, the transboundary pollution deriving from industrial production can increase the risk of tensions between states.

Radioactive, chemical and biological hazards in Central Asia RUSSIA a Volg Ural

Oral

KASPUTIN YAR

LIRA (Burlinskiy)

Kiziliar (Petropavlosk)

Kustanau Rudny ol Tob

Makinsk

Ishym Astana

Aktobe

Arkalyk

Karagandy

Emba

Atyrau

USTKAMENOGORSK

RR

SEMIPALATINSKKURCHATOV TEST SITE

SAY-UTES TEST SITE

Syr -Da Kzyl-Orda ria Chiili

MINING DIRECTORATE No. 6

KARAKALPAKSTAN NUKUS

Ayaguz

Zaisan

Saryshagan

Tyuratam

ARAL SEA

LAKE ZAISAN LAKE ALAKOL

LAKE BALKHASH

KAZAKHSTAN

VOZROZHDENIJE PENINSULA

Say-Utes

AZERBAIJAN

Semey (Semipalatinsk) Irtysh

Dzhezkazgan BAIKONUR ROCKET LAUNCHING SITE

AKTAU MANGYSHLAK ATOMIC ENERGY COMBINE (MAEK) KASKOR JSC (former Prikaspiyskiy Mining and Metallurgy Combine)

PAVLODAR

Kurchatov STEPNOGORSK

Turgai

AZGYR

RUSSIA

KAZSABTON (former Tselinny Mining and Chemical Combine)

ALMATY STEPNOYE TSENTRALNOYE

OTAR KARABALTA

R

ALATAU INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS

AK-TUZ

KADZHI-SAY SHEKAFTAR Bishkek MIN-KUSH TEREK-SAY Urgench Dashoguz ULUGBEK KYRGYZSTAN Turkmenbashi UZBEKISTAN Tashkent R MAILU-SUU A CHARKASSAR N Osh HA Navoy CHINA RG TURKMENISTAN TEO-MOYUN Bukhara FE KHAIDARKAN NURABAD ZAFARABAD VOSTOKREDMET (CHKALOVSK) Ashgabad Turkmenabad AND TABOSHAR (Chardzhou) R Karshi UCH-KUDUC

Amu

r ia Da

CASPIAN SEA

Mary

IRAN 0

200

400

Dushanbe

Kuliab KurganTube

KARA-KUM CANAL

600 km

AFGHANISTAN

TAJIKISTAN

PAKISTAN

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, UNEP/GRID ARENDAL, MAY 2003

Former nuclear test site.

Large portion of surrounding areas contaminated.

Nuclear power plant Power reactor Active

Closed

Cosmodrome and rocket launching test site.

Important environmental impact on the surrounding areas Uranium mining and milling facility. Radioactive waste related to exploitation

Fuel production Closed uranium mine

Research reactor R Active

R Closed

Radioactive waste storage site generally poorly maintained, and alleged to pose a significant risk to health and environment Old radioactive waste site (early 20th century)

Chemical and biological research center or production plants being dismantled

Non-radioactive waste site (mercury, antimony) Area of high seismic risk

Central Asia

Environment and Security / 9

As the region supplied cotton crops to the Soviet Union, large scale irrigation systems were built across Central Asia, contributing to the degradation of the Aral Sea and Caspian Sea, the reduction of the Amu Daria and Syr Daria as well as degradation and salinisation of land.

“Many glacial and obstruction lakes ... – [such as] Sarez – could result in … disasters on the regional scale.”

The scale of the disaster provoked by the desiccation of the Aral Sea is not yet fully understood. It has already led to the severe reduction of biodiversity in the region, negative impacts on human health, and, through the provocation of mass migration, increased population pressure elsewhere in the region. With the collapse of the Soviet water allocation system and the emergence of national interests, the continued use of intensive and often inefficient irrigation practices raised tensions between states. So far, no functioning regional regulation framework for the exchange of water and fuel has been agreed upon, which has repeatedly led to tensions between Uzbekistan and

Kyrgyzstan. Water management decisions often affect the whole region and cause concern amongst neighbouring states, when they are taken unilaterally. The combined effects of agriculture, industry and mining have exposed Central Asia’s water ways to serious contamination. Inefficient irrigation using polluted water may further degrade the land and reduce food quality. The concentration of pollution in downstream countries adds to existing tensions with upstream riparians over the management of water supplies.

Water management in Central Asia: RUSSIA state and impact Toward Russia

Plan for diverting Irtych and Ob rivers to Aral Sea Kiziliar (Petropavlosk)

and other CIS countries

Kustanau

RUSSIA a Volg

o Tob

l Rudny

Pavlodar

Ayaguz Dzhezkazgan

ARAL SEA

Aral

a r-D Sy

Almaty Karatau Dzhambul LAKE Bishkek ISSYK-KUL UZBEKISTAN Shymkent KYRGYZSTAN Urgench RESERVOIR-LAKE Naryn Namangan Tashkent

ria

LAKE

Amu

Turkmenbashi SARYGAMYSH

Areas under threat of flood and of pollution due to mismanagement of upstream water reservoirs and hazardous waste storage sites

dams and hydroplants projects SAREZ LAKE

Kurgan- TAJIKISTAN Tube

AFGHANISTAN Projected increase of water use demand from Amu-Daria by Afghanistan

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, UNEP/GRID ARENDAL, MAY 2003

Groundwater

2

Kerki KARA-KUM CANAL

Golden Century Lake in the Kara-Kum desert in Turkmenistan 400 600 km

Andizhan Kokand Osh RESERVOIR-LAKE CHINA OF TOKTOGUL FERGHANA RESERVOIR-LAKE VALLEY OF NUREK 1 Rogun (1) and Sangtuda (2)

r ia Da

Mary

Polluted water bodies Rivers and canals

OF SHARDARA

Navoy Dzhizzak Bukhara Turkmenabad Samarkand (Chardzhou) Karshi Dushanbe

TURKMENISTAN Ashgabad

Lakes

RESERVOIR-LAKE OF KAPCHAGAÏ

Nukus Dashoguz

200

Zaisan

LAKE ALAKOL

Kzyl-Orda

AZERBAIJAN

0

LAKE ZAIZAN

Saryshagan

Tyuratam

Aral Sea shoreline in the 1950s

UstKamenogorsk

LAKE BALKHASH

KAZAKHSTAN

KARAKALPAKSTAN

IRAN

Semey (Semipalatinsk)

Karagandy

Emba

Atyrau

CASPIAN SEA

CANAL sh IRTYSHKARAGANDY

Arkalyk Turgai

Aktau

Ekibastuz

y

Astana

Irt

Aktobe

Toward Western Europe and America

RUSSIA

Makinsk

Ishym

Ural

Oral

State of the Environment Report. Tajikistan 2002. http://www.grida.no/enrin/htmls/tadjik/soe2001/eng/

Impact Former bed of the Aral Sea, uncovered area entirely desertified and saline Areas directly affected by the consequences of the shrinkage of the Aral Sea (toxic salts), leading to salinization and desertification Migration from environmentally degraded areas

PAKISTAN

Share and distribution of Amu-Daria and Syr-Daria waters : lack of coherent multilateral policies among the five Central Asian countries

Concerns for the future and potential areas of tension Areas of intensive and inefficient irrigated agriculture practices with potential to sterilize soil and threaten human health Projected water infrastructure or management plans that could lead to international tensions or conflicts

10 / Environment and Security

Infant mortality, 1999 KAZAKHSTAN

Kustanau

Mortality, all causes, 1999

Kiziliar (Petropavlosk)

Kustanau

KAZAKHSTAN

Pavlodar

Kiziliar (Petropavlosk) Pavlodar

Oral

Oral Astana

Aktobe

Astana

Semey (Semipalatinsk)

Karagandy

Emba

Atyrau

Kzyl-Orda

Kzyl-Orda

Aktau Almaty

KARAKALPAKSTAN

Nukus Dashoguz Urgench

Nukus Dashoguz Urgench

KYRGYZSTAN

Tashkent

Osh

Bukhara

KYRGYZSTAN

Tashkent

Osh

Bukhara Ashgabad

Per 1,000 live births

Dushanbe

11 to 18 18 to 20 20 to 22 22 to 25 more than 25

Mary TAJIKISTAN

Mortality from infectious and parasitic diseases, 1999 Kustanau

Bishkek

UZBEKISTAN

Ashgabad

KAZAKHSTAN

Almaty

KARAKALPAKSTAN

Bishkek

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

Emba

Atyrau

Aktau

Semey (Semipalatinsk)

Aktobe

Karagandy

400 to 500 500 to 600 600 to 800 800 to 1,000 1,000 to 1,200

Mary

TURKMENISTAN

TAJIKISTAN

Mortality from all forms of cancer, 1999

Kiziliar (Petropavlosk)

Kustanau

KAZAKHSTAN

Pavlodar

Oral

Per 100,000 people

Dushanbe

Kiziliar (Petropavlosk) Pavlodar

Oral Astana

Astana

Semey (Semipalatinsk)

Aktobe

Aktobe

Karagandy Emba

Atyrau

Emba

Atyrau

Kzyl-Orda

Aktau

Nukus Dashoguz Urgench

Tashkent

Nukus Dashoguz Urgench

KYRGYZSTAN

Osh

Bukhara

Bishkek

UZBEKISTAN

Ashgabad Dushanbe

Mary

Per 100,000 people

Mary TAJIKISTAN

Tashkent

Bukhara

Ashgabad TURKMENISTAN

Almaty

KARAKALPAKSTAN

Bishkek

UZBEKISTAN

Kzyl-Orda

Aktau Almaty

KARAKALPAKSTAN

10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 more than 40

Semey (Semipalatinsk)

Karagandy

KYRGYZSTAN

Osh

Dushanbe

Per 100,000 people

TURKMENISTAN TAJIKISTAN

15 to 40 40 to 80 80 to 140 140 to 185 PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL MAY 2003

Maps based on statistical data presented by WHO Information Centre on Health for Central Asian Republics (CAR) in CAREINFONET 2000, Health of population and health care in Central Asian Republics.

WHO Information Centre on Health for Central Asian Republics Toktogul Street 62 720021, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan Tel: + 996 312 298791, 293508 - Fax: + 996 312 680830, 680940

Population density, ethnicity and socio-economic context The socio-economic burden of environmental degradation disproportionately affects the weaker social strata and locations. Despite general economic recovery since the mid 1990’s in the Central Asian region, a substantial number of people live in poverty and are lacking sufficient natural resources.

While the GDP (PPP) per capita varies substantially between the countries (UNICEF 2002), an even larger inequality is found between the core and more peripheral, remote areas in these countries, where marginalisation and large scale environmental pollution is often combined with heavy economic burdens.

“[The] sensitivity of the Central Asian ecosystems to human impact and unreasonable use of limited water resources ... create serious obstacles for … future development” Central Asian Consultative Meeting on Environment, Water and Security. Almaty, Kazakhstan, Regional Environment Centre for Central Asia. January 30-31, 2003.

Central Asia

Environment and Security / 11

Population density Kiziliar (Petropavlosk)

Kustanau

RUSSIA

Rudny

a Volg

RUSSIA

Makinsk

Pavlodar

Oral Astana Aktobe

Ekibastuz Semey Ust(Semipalatinsk) Kamenogorsk

Arkalyk Karagandy

Turgai Emba

Ayaguz

Atyrau Dzhezkazgan Aral

Saryshagan

Aktau

Kzyl-Orda

CHINA

Sy r-D

CASPIAN SEA

LAKE BALKHASH

KAZAKHSTAN Tyuratam

ARAL SEA

ar i a

Almaty Karatau

Nukus

AZERBAIJAN Dashoguz

Dzhambul Bishkek

Urgench

-Da Amu

Turkmenbashi

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

KYRGYZSTAN

Shymkent Tashkent

Naryn Andizhan Dzhalalabad Kokand Osh

Gulistan Bukhara FERGHANA Samarkand VALLEY Turkmenabad Karshi Dushanbe (Chardzhou) TAJIKISTAN Kuliab Mary Kerki Khorug KurganTube

ria

Ashgabad

IRAN 0

200

Zaisan

400

600 km

AFGHANISTAN

PAKISTAN

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, UNEP/GRID ARENDAL, MAY 2003

Socio-economic marginalisation and environmental pressures can lead to violent confrontations at the sub-state level if they are combined with high population density and a lack of social safety nets and institutional mechanisms to mitigate or prevent conflicts, as in the case of the Ferghana Valley.

This zone is one of the most densely populated areas where communities are exposed to a high level of environmental

Number of people per square kilometre Less than 1 1 to 10 10 to 25 25 to 50 50 to 100 More than 100

pressure: 20% of Central Asia’s population lives in the Ferghana Valley, which comprises of only 5% of the territory of Central Asia (UNDP 2003). Overpopulation, due to high growth and fertility rates and combined with inter-ethnic tensions, resulted in disputes over limited land and water resources.

“A lack of water, along with a lack of other natural resources, leads to increased poverty, the intensification of social discrepancies, the growth of inter-ethnic tensions and, ultimately, the emergence of armed conflicts.”

Statement by H.E. Ishenbay Abdyrazakov, Secretary of State of the Kyrgyz Republic at the 19th Special Session of the UN General Assembly New York, 22 June 1997

12 / Environment and Security

Population groups RUSSIA

Kiziliar (Petropavlosk)

Kustanau

RUSSIA Rudny

Makinsk

Oral

Pavlodar

Ekibastuz Astana Aktobe Karagandy

Atyrau

Aral Sea coastline in 1950

Lake Balkhash

Tyuratam

Aral Sea

Kzyl-Orda

KARAKALPAKSTAN

Turkmenbashi

IRAN 0

200

Tashkent FERGANA

TURKMENISTAN

Sea 400

Osh

Bukhara

Ashgabad Turkmenabad (Chardzhou)

600 km

KYRGYZSTAN

Urgench

Balkanabat (Nebit-Dag)

Caspian

Bishkek Shymkent

Dashoguz

Almaty

Dzhambul

UZBEKISTAN

Nukus

AZERBAIJAN

Semey (Semipalatinsk)

Dzhezkazgan Aral KAZAKHSTAN

Aktau

Oskemen (Ust-Kamenogorsk)

CHINA

Samarkand

TAJIKISTAN Dushanbe

Mary

PAMIR

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE AND UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL, MAY 2003

Turkic Kazakhs Turkmens Uzbeks Kyrgyzs Karakalpaks Uighurs

AFGHANISTAN

Indo-European Tajiks (Persians) Slavic Russians and Ukrainians

Borders with sporadic fields of land mines

PAKISTAN

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, most German people migrated back to Germany. According to the 1999 Kazakh census, 300,000 remained in Kazakhstan.

Sparsely populated territories

Central Asia is a multi-ethnic region. The border demarcations are sometimes unclear. The Ferghana Valley stretches over three Central Asian countries, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, with linguistically and ethnically distinct populations. The unclear borders crossing the Valley led to a disruption of the social and economic structures, further exacerbated

by population influx and density. Scarce natural resources and their intensive use as a source for basic human survival and livelihoods, high levels of pollution (mainly water pollution), soil degradation and overpopulation have led to major threats to human development and security. Several communities have experienced ethnic clashes triggering open violence since the late 1980s (UN FVDP 2000)

Central Asia

Environment and Security / 13

Addressing environmental risks and regional co-operation Environmental risks become security concerns when environmental migration is generated, access to resources for basic needs (water, soil, air and energy) is no longer secure, widespread negative impacts on public health are evident and agricultural productivity, energy security and economic development are undermined. The consultation meeting on Central Asia identified specific areas of concern, including the Pamir mountains in Tajikistan, Karakalpakstan, Amu Daria and Syr Daria, the Ferghana Valley, Semipalatinsk, Aktau and surroundings, the Caspian and Aral Seas and surrounding regions, Karakum Canal, Irtysh (Kazakhstan, Russia), the ecological migration in Kokshetau, the water reservoir in the Vilef and Sogdiyskaya (Tajikistan), the dumping site for radioactive waste in Mailu Suu, and the marshlands forming due to the melting of glaciers in the mountains between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.

At national level, relevant priorities in tackling security related environmental problems have already been identified within the respective countries’ national environmental strategies. They include the protection and sustainable use of water resources and development of modern technologies for water treatment (Tajikistan), hazardous waste treatment and storage and development of water management facilities (Kyrgyzstan), international co-operation on environmental protection and soil degradation – including Aral Sea protection and reduction of biodiversity loss (Uzbekistan), water quantity, pollution control and the reduction of land/soil degradation (including the Aral Sea) (Turkmenistan), governmental control over environmental protection and the greening of national policies (Kazakhstan).

“No society can achieve sustainable development without appropriate water resources … [C]ountries must work closely together … to find viable solutions.”

Chair’s Summary. Seventh Meeting of the OSCE Economic Forum, Prague, 28 May 1999.

Due to the transboundary dimension of environmental pollution, co-operation is necessary at regional level in order to reduce environmental pressure and the security risks deriving from it. Transboundary co-operation on water allocation has been subject of various regional and bilateral negotiation processes and projects in recent years, often resulting in formal agreements, joint commissions and the development of policies and measures for joint water management. However, the consultation meeting on Central Asia revealed a gap between the policy processes and their implementation. Participants stressed the need for: • improving the co-ordination and co-operation between governments and between donors; • strengthening the political will, both internally (to take action) and internationally (to co-operate); • increasing funding as well as technological and administrative capacities; • improving the implementation and enforcement of laws and compliance mechanisms; • starting further monitoring and information management systems; • implementing transnational policy learning on best practices; and • integrating policies across sectors (industrial development, foreign policy, agriculture, environment).

Environmental decline or resource scarcity do not directly lead to violent conflict; they are one strand within a complex web of causality in which a series of socio-economic problems, such as population pressure, poverty, forced migration, refugee movements, political instability and ethno-political tensions are intertwined. In Central Asia there is a need for improved regional co-operation combined with efficient and local implementation mechanisms.

14 / Environment and Security

4

B osn a

N e re

tv

a

Tar a

J iu

Ji u

6

Environment and Security

South Eastern Europe Environment and Security / 15

16 / Environment and Security

Environmental risks in South Eastern Europe South Eastern Europe in this report covers the following countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, and Kosovo. The past decade of conflict and transition has left the region with a legacy of inadequate growth, declining living standards and high environmental stress. The region is mainly affected by heavy industrial pollution in urban-industrial areas, intensive agriculture with yet uncalculated health impacts, a lack of water technology and infrastructure, and industrial pollution from the mining sector. The entire region has however been supported by large scale environmental protection and co-operation efforts financed by bilateral and multilateral donors, mainly in the framework of the Regional Environmental

Urban population as a percentage of the total population (2001)

RUSSIA

GDP per capita Purchasing Power Parity curent USD (2001)

RUSSIA

40 to 44

2,700 to 5,800

44 to 52

POLAND

52 to 64

GERMANY

5,800 to 9,200

POLAND

9,200 to 14,700

GERMANY

64 to 75 CZECH REPUBLIC

14,700 to 17200 CZECH REPUBLIC

UKRAINE

SLOVAKIA

SLOVAKIA

UKRAINE

AUSTRIA

AUSTRIA MOLDOVA

HUNGARY

MOLDOVA

HUNGARY SLOVENIA

SLOVENIA CROATIA

CROATIA

ROMANIA

ROMANIA

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

BULGARIA

BULGARIA MACEDONIA

MACEDONIA

ITALY

ITALY

ALBANIA 0

100

ALBANIA

200 300 km

TURKEY

GREECE

0

100

200 300 km

Under 5 mortality rate per 1 000 births (2001)

RUSSIA

TURKEY

GREECE

Life expectancy at birth years of age (2001)

RUSSIA

68 to 70

5 and less

70 to 72

6 to 14

POLAND

POLAND

72 to 73

15 to 24

GERMANY 25 and over

CZECH REPUBLIC

GERMANY

73 to 75

CZECH REPUBLIC

UKRAINE

UKRAINE

SLOVAKIA

SLOVAKIA

AUSTRIA

AUSTRIA MOLDOVA

HUNGARY

MOLDOVA

HUNGARY

SLOVENIA

SLOVENIA

CROATIA

CROATIA

ROMANIA

BOSNIAHERZÉGOVINA

ROMANIA

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

BULGARIA

BULGARIA ITALY 0

100 200 300 km

MACEDONIA

ITALY

ALBANIA

MACEDONIA ALBANIA

GREECE

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL MAY 2003

TURKEY

0

100 200 300 km GREECE

TURKEY

South Eastern Europe

“[Unresolved environmental problems] are among negative factors influencing subregional and transborder co-operation in Central and Eastern Europe.”

Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe (REReP), the UNECE environmental conventions, the EU accession process for Romania and Bulgaria and regional conventions on the Black Sea, The Danube River and the Carpathian mountains.

Transboundary efforts towards environmental protection and regional environmental co-operation are important, since many natural resources span more than one country, and environmental degradation impacts across borders.

Third Meeting of the OSCE Economic Forum, Prague 9 June 1995.

CO2 emissions in million tonnes per capita (1999)

RUSSIA

Environment and Security / 17

Health expenditure per capita current USD (2000)

RUSSIA

0.5 to 2

40 to 50

2 to 4

POLAND

100 to 240

POLAND

4 to 6

GERMANY

240 to 360

GERMANY

7 to 11 CZECH REPUBLIC

450 to 800 CZECH REPUBLIC

UKRAINE

UKRAINE

SLOVAKIA

SLOVAKIA AUSTRIA

AUSTRIA MOLDOVA

HUNGARY

MOLDOVA

HUNGARY SLOVENIA

SLOVENIA CROATIA

CROATIA

ROMANIA

ROMANIA

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

BULGARIA

BULGARIA MACEDONIA

MACEDONIA

ITALY

ITALY

ALBANIA 0

100

ALBANIA

200 300 km

TURKEY

GREECE

0

100

200 300 km

Renewable water resources, in m3 per capita per year (2000) 1,000 to 1,700 Water stress

RUSSIA

9,000 to 10,000

GERMANY

Countries part of the Regional Environmental Reconstruction Program (REReP) for South Eastern Europe

RUSSIA

2,500 to 3,100

POLAND

TURKEY

GREECE

POLAND GERMANY

12,000 to 17,000

CZECH REPUBLIC

CZECH REPUBLIC

UKRAINE

SLOVAKIA

UKRAINE

SLOVAKIA

AUSTRIA

AUSTRIA MOLDOVA

HUNGARY

MOLDOVA

HUNGARY

SLOVENIA

SLOVENIA

CROATIA

CROATIA

ROMANIA

BOSNIAHERZÉGOVINE

ROMANIA

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

BULGARIA

BULGARIA ITALY

MACEDONIA

ITALY

ALBANIA 0

100 200 300 km GREECE

MACEDONIA ALBANIA

TURKEY

0

100 200 300 km GREECE

TURKEY

18 / Environment and Security

Land mine concentrations in the former Yugoslavia

AUSTRIA HUNGARY Ljubljana Zagreb

Subotica

CROATIA

Rijeka

Vojvodina

EastSlavonia

Kraj

BanjaLuka

Brcko

Belgrade

ina Zadar

Knin Split

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA Sarajevo Gorazde Mostar

ADRIATIC SEA

ROMANIA

Novi-Sad

Serbia SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

Novi-Pazar Montenegro

Kosovo

Dubrovnik

BULGARIA

SLOVENIA

Pristina

Podgorica Skopje ITALY MACEDONIA

High concentrations of land mines

GREECE

ALBANIA 100 km

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE AND UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL, MAY 2003

Conflict legacy “As Yugoslavia was absorbed in the war in the early 1990s … [t]he international embargo put pressure on the country’s natural resources and pollution … went largely unchecked …”

The Environmental Performance Review (EPR) of Yugoslavia 2002. http://www.unece.org/env/epr/studies/serbia_and_ montenegro/chapter00.pdf

Even though the UNEP PCAU (Post Conflict Assessment Unit) concluded that the war in the former Yugoslavia did not result in an environmental disaster, people in the region perceive warrelated environmental impacts as substantial threats to their economy, their health and their livelihoods. The legacy of military activities in the Balkans resulted in the degradation of ecosystems due to hazardous and toxic waste (depleted uranium, landmines, and pharmaceutical waste), the destruction of the water infrastructure, loss of institutional and administrative

South Eastern Europe

Environment and Security / 19

Land cover map of South Eastern Europe Botosani Suceava

Satu Mare Baia Mare

Iasi

Zalau Oradea

Piatra Neamt Cluj-Napoca Bacau Targu Mures

Arad Subotica

R O M A N I A

ZAGREB

Timisoara

Focsani

Sibiu

Vo j vo d i n a

C ROAT I A

Rijeka

Galati

Brasov

Osijek

Braila Buzau

Novi Sad Ramnicu Valcea

Republica Srpska Brcko

Banja Luka

Ploiesti Pitesti

Novo Beograd BELGRADE

A

BOSNIA -

BUCHAREST

Tuzla

Serbia

R

I

A

H E R Z E G OV I N A B o s n i a c - C r o aSARAJEVO t Federation

T

Split

Kragujevac

Ruse

SERBIA AND

Dobrich

MONTENGRO

I

Pleven

Shumen Varna

Nis

C

International boundary Republic boundary Autonomous boundary Inter-entity boundary line NATIONAL CAPITAL 100'000 to 1 million

K B L A C

Montenegro

Forests Grassland Rainfed arable land S E Irrigated arable land A Shrubland Wetland Inland water Urban area Ice and snow

BELGRADE

Constanta

Craiova

D Split

Drobeta - Turnu Severin

Pristina

Sliven

SOFIA

Kosovo

Podgorica

Burgas

Pernik Stara-Zagora

S E A

B U L G A R I A Plovdiv Shkoder

Tetovo

SKOPJE

Gostivar

MACEDONIA TIRANE Bitola Fier

ALBANIA Vlorë

Korçë

A E G E A N Lambert Azimuthal Equal-Area Projection 0

S E A

150

300 Kilometers

UNEP/DEWA/GRID-GENEVA - MAY 2003

capacities and increased pressure on local ecosystems due to refugees and returning populations. As a consequence of the conflict, living standards have sharply declined, evidenced by higher poverty, inequality and unemployment and limited prospects for economic growth.

Scutari, Prespa and Ohrid dramatically reduced ground water levels. Military waste, in particular land mines and unexploded bombs, has impacted soils, watercourses and lakes, and has rendered difficult or impossible the use of large areas of arable land, which in turn has and is affecting the return of refugees.

The lack or the destruction of waste water treatment facilities led to the contamination of rivers and water reservoirs. The leakage of hazardous material from war-damaged industrial plants also affected the safety of drinking water supplies.

Uncontrolled irrigation for agriculture around the lakes

In Bosnia and Herzegovina nearly 20% of the forest lands are inaccessible because of landmines. Refugees contributed to forest depletion in the vicinity of major refugee camps in Albania and FYR Macedonia, due to their relying on fuel wood for cooking and heating.

“[E]nvironmental problems caused by the stream of refugees … became an issue, with sanitation and drinking water services under enormous pressure.”

The Kosovo Conflict: Consequences for the Environment.

UNEP/UNCHS, 1999.

20 / Environment and Security

Population groups

SLOVAKIA Bratislava

Dr av

Budapest

HUNGARYSerbia and Montenegro: war aftermath and return of refugees (Kosovo, Serbia) Serbian Serbian refugees from minority Croatia (Vojvodina) in EastSlavonia Drav Mures a

Chisinau

e

Rijeka

T isza

Zagreb

Vojvodina

CROATIA Bihac Banja Luka

a

Belgrade

Bucharest

Dr

Craiova

ina

Sarajevo

a rav Mo

Nis

Novi Pazar

Montenegro D

Prizren Tetovo

Skopje Kocani MACEDONIA

ar

Tirana

V

Durrës

BLACK SEA

Sofia

Kosovo

r in

Kukës

ITALY

Pristina

Pec

Podgorica

Varna

Iskar

Burgas

Tundza

Dubrovnik

Danube

SERBIA MONTENEGRO

Mostar BosniaHerzegovina: refugees return

Constanta

Serbia Kragujevac

Gorazde

ADRIATIC SEA

Braila Dan ube

ROMANIA

Pancevo Brcko

BOSNIA Tuzla HERZEGOVINA Knin

Brasov

Novi Sad

Vukovar

a Bosn

Sav

Zadar

TîrguMures

t

SLOVENIA

Pru

LAKE BALATON

Ljubljana

UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

Danube

AUSTRIA

UKRAINE

Bitola

BULGARIA

Edirne TURKEY

dar

Bosphorus Istanbul MARMARA SEA

Albanian minority in Macedonia

ALBANIA

0

50

100 150

200 km

Dardanelles

GREECE

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE AND UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL MAY 2003

Croats

Montenegrins

Greeks

Romanians

Bosniaks1

Macedonians

Turks

Hungarians

Serbs

Albanians

Bulgarians

Germans

South Eastern Europe is a multi-cultural region where ethnic differences, especially under severe economic constraints, have often been perceived as threats. War, ethnic conflicts and economic decline forced people to migrate across the

TURKEY

AEGEAN SEA

Valachs

Political tensions

1. Muslims according to the former Yugoslavia census.

entire region and outside South Eastern Europe, fragmenting families and societies and destroying institutions and critical infrastructure.

South Eastern Europe

Environment and Security / 21

Population density in South Eastern Europe Botosani

Satu Mare Baia Mare

A

Suceava

Zalau

H

N

OLD

Iasi

Oradea

Piatra Neamt Cluj-Napoca

Bacau

Targu Mures Arad Subotica

ZAGREB

Timisoara

C R O AT I A

k

A R O M A N I Sibiu

Osijek

Focsani Galati Braila

Brasov

Vojvodina

Buzau

Novi Sad Ramnicu Valcea Ploiesti

Republica Srpska

Drobeta - Turnu Severin

BELGRADE

A

BOSNIA -

Tuzla

BUCHAREST Constanta

Craiova

Serbia

Kragujevac

R

Ruse

I

B o s n i a c - C r o SARAJEVO at Federation

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

Dobrich

A

Pleven

Shumen

Nis

T

I

Montenegro

C

A SOFIA B U L G A R I

Pristina

Kosovo

Podgorica

TIRANA Bitola

ALBANIA

A E G E A N

VlorĂŤ

Lambert Azimuthal Equal-Area Projection 0

S E A

R

Some 600,000 to 800,000 people emigrated to other European countries while 10,000-15,000 sought asylum in the United States and Australia SWEDEN 77 000

AUSTRIA Ljubljana

LIECHT. 260

FRANCE 16 500 SWITZ. 32 000

Vojvodina

Since 1991, between 3.7 and 4 million people have been displaced or became refugees within the former Yugoslavia

SLOVAKIA 2 400 HUNGARY 10 000

Zadar

Knin Split

ADRIATIC SEA

Brcko

Belgrade

BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA Sarajevo Gorazde

Serbia SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO Novi-Pazar

Mostar

Montenegro Dubrovnik

ITALY

Kosovo

AUSTRIA 55 000

Skopje

BLACK SEA

Croats

MEDITERRANEAN SEA

Spheres are proportional to the number of asylum seekers.

ITALY 35 000

MACEDONIA

Muslims Serbs

GREECE 160

0

Pristina

Podgorica

TURKEY 35 000

SPAIN 3 676

ROMANIA

Novi-Sad

ina

CZECH REP. 2 800

LUXEMBOURG 2 500

EastSlavonia

BanjaLuka

Kraj

POLAND 675

BELGIUM 5 000

Subotica

Zagreb

Rijeka CROATIA

DENMARK 20 000

THE NETHERLANDS 43 000

Population displacements 1991 to 2001

HUNGARY

SLOVENIA

NORTH SEA

PORTUGAL 150

300 Kilometers

150

UNEP/DEWA/GRID-GENEVA - MAY 2003

FINLAND 3 000

GERMANY 320 000

OCEAN

A

Fier

NORWAY 19 000

ATLANTIC

S E

Plovdiv

SKOPJE

MACEDONIA

A

Refugees and displaced people from the former Yugoslavia since 1991

IRLAND 20

Tetovo

Gostivar

E

International boundary Republic boundary Autonomous boundary Inter-entity boundary line NATIONAL CAPITAL 100,000 to 1 million

UNITED-KINGDOM 8 000

K B L A C

Stara-Zagora

Shkoder

S

Burgas

Sliven

Pernik

People per square km from 1 to 10 10 to 50 50 to 500 500 to 5,000 more than 5,000

Varna

BULGARIA

D

H E R Z E G OV I N A

Split

Pitesti

Novo Beograd

Brcko

Banja Luka

500

1 000 km

PR, LMD AND UNEP/GA, MAY 2003

Between 1993 and 1994, up to 4 million people have been displaced or were considered refugees within the former Yugoslavia (UNHCR 2000 Statistics). The return of migrants

Others (Albanians, Hungarians)

GREECE ALBANIA

100 km

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ, LE MONDE DIPLOMATQUE AND UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL MAY 2003

and refugees to their original destination creates a major challenge in terms or social and economic integration, and increases pressure on natural systems.

22 / Environment and Security

Major industrial sites and water pollution a n ube)

SLOVAKIA

za Ti s

U K T i sa

(D

u

D on a

Sz

am os

Duna ( D a nube)

So m

es

Baia Mare

T i s za

AUSTRIA

Dr

Sav

n to l a Ba

au

Cluj-Napoca

4 Paks

a

C

r i s ul Alb

D rava Maro

S L OV E N IA

Krsko 1 (Slovenia)

s

Zlatna

Subotica M

ur

ZAGREB av

C R O AT I A

D

S

va

pa

Ve l i ki

Be

a

li K

K a n al

T is

Ma

ana

Sisak

g

ki ejs

Ka

R O M

Calan

Hunedoara

a

Vo j vo d i n a

Copsa Mica

Deva

Timisoara

Kutina Rijeka

Plomin

es

r

a

Ku

Viskovo

nal

l

Vra s

s

mi

Ta

ac

ki K an

Un

J iu

Sa va

Tim is

Novi Sad

al

a

Brcko

Pancevo

Dr

Ugljevik Sabac

Lukavac

BOSNIA

Smederevo

Tuzla

Lazarevac

A

Zenica

R

SARAJEVO

N e re tv

D

apad na M ora

6

Cacak

Lom

MONTENEGRO

r in a

I

a

A

Serbia na

a rav

I

SOFIA Pernik

Be l

Pristina

i Dr i m

Gnjilan Jegunovce

Drin

r da

Kavadarci

ku mb

in

Lake Ohrid

Nuclear power generation site

v o ll

D

e

Fier

Heavy polluted water

Os

Stri m o

Lake Prespa

m

u

Patos Vlore

Bitola Suvodol

Lake Dojran

nas

ALBANIA

Radovis Negotino Va r

Ohrid

Elbasan

ta Me s

D r ini Z i

MACEDONIA

TIRANA Sh

Kocani

Veles

Kicevo

Sharra Durres

Zletovo

SKOPJE

S a trum

r

Rubik Furshe-Kruje

Tetovo Gostivar

Pazardzhik

Kriva Palanka Sasa

Kumanovo

A

Kremikovtsi

Kosovo

Lake Scutari

Hazardous industrial site

Waste disposal site

Leskovac

Trepca

Podgorica

Cetinje

Mining site

Mo

Tar a

T

Tivat Kotor

I TA LY

Rozaje

Berane

Niksic

E

Nis

Zvecan

Montenegro

S

Kozloduy

Ju z

Pljevlja Gacko

C

Bor

Kragujevac va

V a rda

K

D

Konjic

Lucani Z

Ji u

HERZEGOVINA

Isalnita Craiova

Prahovo

SERBIA AND

Kakanj

rka

Kostolac ora ka M v a Veli

B osn a

V r ba s

Jajce

Maglaj

BELGRADE

ina

Doboj

2

Dej

Cr isul Rep Oradea e de

Mu r

H U N G A R Y

VBallsh jo s e

Aliak m on

as

NATIONAL CAPITAL 1 to 5 million inhabitants 100,000 to 1 million

S

G R E E C E in

P

International boundary Republic boundary Autonomous boundary Inter-entity boundary line

eio

s

South Eastern Europe

Environment and Security / 23

Industrial pollution, agriculture and health Dni ste r

Beyond the direct effects of war on industrial pollution through leakage, and the destruction of infrastructure, water and soil contamination also results from the process of heavy industrialisation undertaken prior to the conflict, and from deficiencies in the treatment of water, and in the management and storage of solid and hazardous waste.

t

Prut P ru

R A I N E Suceava Sir

et

B

i st

M O L D O VA

Iasi

a

i

rt

Tomesti Mures

Dn

Piatra Neamt

er

i st

Savinesti Bacau Targu Mures Onesti Borzesti S i re

Medias

t

A N I A

P r ut

O l t Fagaras Bu

za

Codlea Brasov

u

Galati Braila

Campulung

Tulcea

Ar g

Curtea de Arges Ramnicu Valcea es

Watercourses have been heavily contaminated with polluting leakage of hazardous substances from wardamaged industrial plants. However, in many cases the destruction of industry during the war also had temporary positive effects on the environment, by significantly reducing air and water pollution from declining and/or obsolete industries. Water management systems in the region suffer from weak institutional structures and a lack of governance, inefficiencies in operation, a lack of planning or even financial viability.

Ploiesti Pitesti

Ol t

Ia l o m i t a

Stolnici Slatina

1 Cernavoda

BUCHAREST es Arg

Du na v

b e)

Ruse

Pleven

Ya n t r a

I s kur

Turnu Magurele

u (D a n

Shumen Targoviste

Devnya

K B L A C Pirdop

B U L G A R I A Tu n d

zha

Burgas

Stara-Zagora Radnevo

S E A

Galabovo

Plovdiv

Marit s

a

Large parts of South Eastern Europe are heavily industrialised but lack adequate environmental safeguards, resulting in serious environmental degradation and impacting negatively on health. Air pollution and soil degradation deriving mainly from the chemical industry and from mining, cement and fertiliser production, have led to severe ecological damages and adverse human health impacts in local “hot spots”. Major industrial “hot spots” close to urban areas often pose severe threats to health. Agricultural production is likewise characterised by inefficient practices in many places, with high water demand and overuse of fertilisers. Drinking water supplies are threatened by water shortages and poor water quality, often caused by the discharge of untreated wastewater.

Dimitrovgrad

Asenovgrad

In Kosovo, environmental pollution from industrial activities (relying mainly on agriculture, mining and textiles) has been further exacerbated by the conflict. Yet there are also reverse trends. In Serbia and Montenegro, for example, wars and economic decline have not negatively affected infant mortality, as infant mortality even declined during the past decade by nearly 50% (UNECE 2001).

The management of nuclear power plants and nuclear safety is an important regional concern due to its potential transboundary effects. Besides Cernavoda in Romania, the operation of the old units in Kozloduy (Bulgaria’s nuclear power plant) is of major concern, since these older reactors lack modern safety standards.

Kurdzhali Smolyan E vro s

N e sto

s

A E G E A N T U R K E Y

E A

0

Lambert Azimuthal Equal-Area Projection 150 300 Kilometers

“Significant parts of watersheds of rivers and lakes … belong to neighboring countries … [and] water demands for agricultural and household use are not always met.”

UNEP/DEWA/GRID-GENEVA - MAY 2003

State Of Environment Report 2000, Republic of Macedonia. http://www.soer.moe.gov.mk/

24 / Environment and Security

Transboundary and regional co-operation The establishment of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe in June 1999 provided a hope for political stabilisation and European integration for South Eastern Europe. Initiated in June 1999, it involves over 40 states and international and regional organisations. It aims at supporting SEE states in their efforts to achieve peace, build democracy, respect human rights and achieve economic growth and prosperity.

Using the stability pact framework, environmental ministers agreed in Skopje in March 2000 on the creation of the Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe (REReP). Today, over 100 projects on transboundary environmental co-operation among SEE states have been initiated to strengthen institutional and policy development, to support environmental civil society, to enhance environmental co-operation mechanisms and cross border projects, and to reduce environmental health threats and loss of biodiversity.

With the assistance of international organisation and donors, all countries have embarked on the development or the completion of National Environmental Action Plans, and Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria have completed National Biodiversity Strategies.

Several of the REReP projects have resulted in bilateral agreements on environmental protection. Regional approaches to cross-border nature conservation and river basin management resulted in the preparation of river basin

agreements on the river Sava, on coastal management (Black Sea and Mediterranean Sea) and on the Carpathian Convention, to be signed in Kiev in May 2003. Bulgaria and Romania are accession countries to the European Union, benefiting from its large scale support framework and accession instruments.

The UNECE Environmental Conventions constitute an important framework for environmental protection and cooperation in the region. Relevant conventions include those on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (1979), Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (1991), Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents (2000), Access to Information, Public-Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (1998), and Protection and Use of Transboundary Water Courses and International Lakes (1992). UNECE conventions on water, environmental impact assessments and industrial accidents provide mechanisms to promote conflict prevention and settlement of disputes over transboundary environmental issues (Bosnjakovic 2001).

Transboundary co-operation has been established in the region as an important tool to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts on the economy and health of affected communities and to explicitly create trust and confidence among nations, which previously experienced political tensions and even violent conflict.

“Regional environmental co-operation [is] important for peace and stability in South-Eastern Europe”.

Preparatory Seminar for the Eighth OSCE Economic Forum on “Environmental Impact of Conflicts and Rehabilitation Measures”, Sarajevo, 13-14 December 1999.

South Eastern Europe

Environment and Security / 25

Transboundary and regional environmental co-operation SLOVAKIA

U K R A I N E

AUSTRIA M O L D O VA

H U N G A R Y

SLOVENIA

Lower Danube Green Corridor / Ramsar Convention on Wetlands Initiative

Kopacki Rit

ZAGREB

R O M A N I A

Vo j vo d i n a

C R O AT I A

Republica Srpska BELGRADE

Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve

Cazanele Forest Reserve Djerdap National Park BUCHAREST

B O S BN oI As n i

A

aNational Serbia c - C r oPark at ion H E R Z E G OFVe IdNeAr a tTara SERBIA AND SARAJEVO MONTENEGRO National Park Sutjeska

D

R

I

K B L A C

A

National Park Durmitor Montenegro

T

I

Lake Scutari Transboundary Environmental Management S

I TA LY

SOFIA

Kosovo

C

E

A

National Park Mavrovo

S E A

B U L G A R I A SKOPJE

MACEDONIA (F. Y. R . O.M ) TIRANA National Park National Park Pelister Galichica Lake Ohrid Prespa Lake Lake Prespa National Park ALBANIA

Lake Do誰ran A E G E A N

T U R K E Y

G R E E C E

S E A

REREP (Regional Environmental Reconstitution Programme)

0

Multilateral agreements on marine areas

Lambert Azimuthal Equal-Area Projection 150 300 Kilometers UNEP/DEWA/GRID-GENEVA - MAY 2003

Convention for the Protection of the Black Sea against Pollution Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean Sea Multilateral agreements on freshwater basins Danube River Protection Convention Sava Basin Commission Initiative Tisza River Programme Bilateral agreements NATIONAL

LOCAL Water management

Transboundary protected areas

Water management - in preparation phase Environmental co-operation

Bilateral conservation projects

Environmental co-operation - in preparation phase

Bilateral conservation projects - in preparation phase

Inter-entity/republic environmental co-operation Inter-entity/republic environmental co-operation - in preparation phase Draft Carpathian Convention

International boundary Republic boundary Autonomous boundary Inter-entity boundary line

26 / Environment and Security

Aktau

Conclusions / The road ahead

Environment and Security

Environment and Security / 27

28 / Environment and Security

Conclusions Participants of the regional consultation workshops in Belgrade and Ashgabat welcomed the Environment and Security Initiative by UNEP, UNDP and OSCE as a collaborative mechanism to integrate security, environment and development concerns in the regions.

noted that sustainable and equitable management of the environment can be an effective means for building peace, and reducing vulnerability both of individuals and nations.

Baltic Sea

South Eastern Europe to Central Asia:

LATVIA RUSSIA

POLAND

CZECH REPUBLIC

LITHUANIA

Minsk Moscow

BELARUS

Kazan

SLOVAKIA

SLOVENIA

HUNGARY

MOLDOVA

iep

r

RUSSIA

n

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

Dn

Do

ROMANIA

Samara

Kiev a

UKRAINE BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA

Vo lg

CROATIA

Nizhniy Novgorod

D

an KOSOVO ub Kozloduy e ALBANIA MACEDONIA BULGARIA Belene

South Eastern Europe

Kapustin Yar

Volgograd Cernavoda

Azgyr

Astrakhan Black Sea Caspian Sea

GEORGIA

ARMENIA

AZERBAIJAN Baku

Mediterranean Sea

Reconstructing South Eastern Europe Limited rule of law: Political systems being rebuilt. Limited regulation and enforcement capacity. Dramatic collapse of economic activities. Informal and illicit markets dominate economy.

Rapid impoverishment of population and degradation of environment.

Governance in transition: Re-emergence of rule of law and restoration of formal economy, limited by dependence on obsolete infrastructure and industrial capacity.

Legacy of war: Countries having experienced armed conflict between 1991 and 2001. Widespread destruction of infrastructure.

Unexploded ordinance and landmines render large areas unsafe for development. Hundreds of thousands still displaced.

PHILIPPE REKACEWICZ - UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL MAY 2003

Nuclear legacies Active nuclear powerplant Nuclear powerplant closed or under construction Nuclear industry and research site (civil and military).

Fuel production or recycling

Radioactive waste site associated with uranium mines (active or closed) and other hazardous waste storage ponds Nuclear weapons test site. Large areas contaminated with radioactive fallout Area contaminated through mismanagement of radioactive waste.

Conclusions Environment / The road and ahead Security / 29

“Cognizant … [that] implementation of environmental action plans requires political will … [Ministers expressed their] determin[ation] to achieve significant success in combating environmental degradation.”

Tehran Declaration On Cooperation among ECO Member States on Environment, 15 December 2002.

acknowledged the importance of the Initiative as a contribution to the Environment for Europe process and understood its complementarity to other regional programs, such as the UNECE Environment, Water and Security Initiative or the Regional Environmental Action Plan for Central Asia.

political transition and environmental risks RUSSIA

Irtysh Perm

Ob Omsk

Yekaterinburg

MONGOLIA Tselinny (Kazsabton)

Oksemen (Ust-Kamenogorsk) Semey (Semipalatinsk test site)

Chelyabinsk Magnitogorsk

Lira

Aral Sea Region

KAZAKHSTAN

Lake Balkhash Almaty

CHINA

Aral Sea

Ferghana Valley Aktau

KYRGYZSTAN Mailu Suu

SayUtes

Central Asia

UZBEKISTAN TAJIKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

Soviet legacy management Aral Sea and Surrounding Region Diversion of rivers feeding the Aral Sea led to exposure of seabed to open air, allowing airborne transport of salts and heavy metals in a radius of 600 - 800 km. Desertification and salinization of arable land, resulting in the collapse of fisheries and agriculture, impoverishment, and outward migration.

Ferghana Valley Highly populated, ethnically diverse region with severely degraded forests and soils, limited rule of law, and widespread traffic in contraband merchandise. Lack of energy sources and supply. Region under the threat of collapse of the Kyrgyz radioactive tailing ponds

Water-related tensions: Conflicts over distribution of water between upstream and downstream countries. High economic dependence on irrigated agriculture (rice and cotton), with steadily deteriorating soils.

Kyrgyzstan and South Kazakhstan mines Presence of poorly-maintained radioactive waste sites in seismically active zone, located near highly populated areas and important surface water

North-East Kazakhstan: Tselinyy-Pavlodar-Semei-Oksemen and Aktau on the Caspian Sea coast Area contaminated with radioactive fallout from experimental nuclear explosions and inadequate waste storage. High mortality rate compared to Central Asian average.

30 / Environment and Security

“Comprehensive and coherent conflict prevention strategies offer the greatest potential for promoting lasting peace and creating an enabling environment for sustainable development.”

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan at the United Nations Security Council on 7 June 2001.

During the consultation meetings, numerous hot spots were identified by participants where environmental stress resulted in environmental migration or population displacement and insecure access to resources for basic needs, undermining agricultural productivity, economic development and widespread impacts on public health. The problems include: • Water and groundwater pollution, availability and distribution, effected by energy generation, agricultural production and leakage from hazardous waste dumps, and impacting on economic development and public health; • The legacies of conflict and of the ageing of industrial and power generation developments, impacting negatively on human health through toxic and radioactive waste, and on regional stability through transboundary air and water pollution; • Land degradation through over-use of pesticides and fertilisers, desertification, salinity and wind erosion, often resulting in population migration or displacement; • Depletion of natural resources, deforestation and erosion in mountain areas, impacting on and being caused by migration and poverty; • Direct legacies of previous conflicts, including migration, and the foreclosure or contamination of lands and water bodies due to land mines, depleted uranium and unexploded ordinance. Conflicts have displaced peoples across South Eastern Europe and Tajikistan. In the wake of conflicts, the return of refugees is generating local tensions related to contested ownership of land, as records are incomplete or non-existent, and ethnic and historical anger simmers beneath the surface; • Policy failure and a lack of financial means to maintain ageing industrial sites, to repair and upgrade sewage, water and air treatment facilities, and to ensure the safe disposal of waste and of harmful chemicals. Each poses serious threats to the health and safety of people in the regions; • Environmental disasters (landslides and earthquakes) including human-induced ones and their potential interaction with other risks impacting on migration.

In order to address the socio-economic aspects of environmental problems, and particularly those of resource scarcity or resource pressure, migration and social tensions, integrated approaches are needed. These approaches must take political, economic, social and environmental dimensions into consideration. Examples might include mechanisms to integrate the poverty-environment connection into environmental policy; and environmental concerns in poverty reduction strategies. In addition: • Water resource and water facility management capacity should be strengthened (including distribution and allocation). Ageing sites should be refurbished or remedial action taken to restore environmental equilibrium and reduce migration; • Transboundary co-operation could be reinforced through local-level pilot projects, and by extending existing regional collaborative schemes into other areas (e.g.

Commissions on Water Management); • Transnational policy learning among states and civil society in the case study regions and donor countries should be enhanced, and could focus on experiences that have worked in the past (e.g. successful river basin management commissions); • Monitoring and enforcement capacities should be improved, and government capacity reinforced, particularly at sub-national level; • Legal provisions and regulations should be improved and further clarified, to tackle the specific problems outlined above, and international legislative harmonisation pursued; • Participatory decision-making mechanisms and civil society capacity should be strengthened to enhance transparency and reinforce implementation; and • Regional focal points for co-ordinated and integrated responses to these problems should be established or reinforced, building on successful existing processes and institutions e.g. the Regional Environmental Centres.

Participants stressed that basic policies and measures to address these links already exist, at global, regional and domestic levels, but lack implementation at the sub-state level.

They called upon the partner organisations of this Initiative to develop a plan for further action and committed to a continued and deepening co-operation in the development and implementation of the Environment and Security Initiative.

Conclusions Environment / The road and ahead Security / 31

The road ahead The presentation of the preliminary findings on the links between environment and security in South Eastern Europe and Central Asia, in May 2003, at the Fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” in Kiev and at the 11th OSCE Economic Forum in Prague, is a starting point for the second phase of the Initiative. During this phase the UNEP, UNDP and OSCE will actualise their partnership, broaden its membership, and solidify its capacity to promote peace and human security. The three organisations will continue consultation meetings with stakeholder groups in the case study regions with the aim of discussing the results with experts from each of the regions, improving the accuracy of the maps and analysis and identifying priority areas for the implementation of activities. In this context, the Initiative acknowledges the offer of the government of Tajikistan to host the next consultation meeting on Central Asia in Tajikistan.

As a first step to improve the understanding of the complex linkages between the degradation of natural resources, relevant socio-economic conditions and tensions or even violent conflicts, the UNDP commissioned a study on “Addressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia – Risks, Conditions, Policies, Capacities”, embedded in the Environment and Security Initiative. This overall report will also be presented at the fifth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” in Kiev.

To address the issues identified as priority concerns for the environment and security, the OSCE, UNDP and UNEP will present a paper on “Addressing Environmental Risks and Promoting Peace and Stability – The post Kiev Process” in Kiev and Prague in addition to the reports already mentioned. They will then develop activities within the framework of the Initiative, around three axes: • Vulnerability assessment, early warning and monitoring of regions “at risk”: Continue and strengthen the assessment for the two pilot regions, applying similar assessment strategies to additional vulnerable regions (e.g. Caucasus and Russia), issue areas and sectors, and launch a comprehensive awareness generation and communications campaign through publications and dissemination, training and education, consultation and dialogue. Promote vulnerability assessment, develop appropriate indicators, set up integrated database and establish a long-term monitoring system.

• Integrated policy development and implementation: Promote the integration of conflict and environment

linkages in the full spectrum of policies and programs, from Multilateral Environmental Agreements and Conflict Prevention activities through national, regional and sectored environmental plans and assessments, whilst forging links with other assessment efforts, research networks and policy programs.

• Institutional development, capacity building and advocacy: Facilitate regional, national and civil society programs to strengthen institutional and individual capacities to prevent and resolve disputes peacefully and use environmental co-operation to strengthen socio-economic development. This will be addressed through informal and formal dispute resolution mechanisms and peace-building measures, by increasing access to and the sharing of information, and by implementing stakeholder training projects.

The Environment and Security Initiative represents a unique attempt to flexibly co-ordinate and integrate the wide variety of efforts by various stakeholders and actors, towards the common goals of the Initiative. Its three axes provide a framework into which many activities and projects that seek to address either environment or security links can be integrated and co-ordinated, to more efficiently achieve their common aim of a more secure and sustainable future.

The Initiative will be governed by a management board of representatives of the lead agencies, with an advisory committee providing scientific and policy advice. A Project Manager will be appointed to co-ordinate activities amongst the institutions and act as the secretariat for the Initiative.

The UNDP, UNEP and OSCE commit themselves to a twoyear process to achieve the initial aims of the Environment and Security Initiative and to raise and generate the necessary donor support to develop this Initiative into a type II partnership for “Environmental Peace Making – Mitigating Environmental Risks and Promoting Peace and Stability through Sustainable Development and Environmental Co-operation”.

The UNDP, UNEP and OSCE invite other organisations, institutions, foundations and donors to join the Initiative as full partners, to sponsor and co-operate in the implementation of activities within the framework of the Initiative, and to lend their expertise to this common effort to address threats to security triggered or accelerated by environmental stress.

32 / Environment and Security

References Text

Maps

Bosnjakovic, Branko 2001: The UN ECE Environmental Conventions: Their Role and Potential to Promote Conflict Prevention and Settlement of Disputes in transboundary Environmental Issues, in: Petzold-Bradley, Eileen, Alexander Carius and Arpád Vincze: Responding to Environmental Conflicts: Implications for Theory and Practice. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer, 263-282.

Central Asia

Glantz M. (Ed.), 2002. Water, Climate, and Development Issues in the Amudarya Basin, Informal Planning Meeting 1819 June 2002 The Franklin Institute Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA http://www.esig.ucar.edu/centralasia/ UNDP 2003: Addressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia.

Risks, Conditions, Policies, Capacities. Bratislava: United Nations Development Programme UNEP/UNCHS BTF 1999: Environmental Damage Assessment at Industrial Sites. United Nations Environment Programme, United Nations Commission on Human Settlements, Balkan Task Force.

UN ECE 2000: Environmental Performance Review of Kazakhstan.

Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.

UN ECE 2001: Environmental Performance Review Serbia and Montenegro. Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.

UN FVDP 2000: United Nations Ferghana Valley Development Programme homepage [1 April 2003]. http://www.ferghana.elcat.kg/

Health indicators CAREINFONET, Health of Population and Health Care in Central Asian Republics 2000, World Health Organization (WHO) Information Center on Health for the Central Asian Republics (CAR). WHO Database Online CAR DPS/2000. http://www.who.dk/observatory/Studies/20011008 1 Population density and ethnic patterns and conflicts Latest Census data from the Central Asian Republics. Consultations with desk officers from Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Radioactive, biological and chemical waste Kenley Butler, “Weapons of Mass Destruction in Central Asia”, Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), Washington DC, October 2002. http://nti.org/e_research/e3_19a.html Status Report: Nuclear Weapons, Fissile Materials, and Export Controls in the Former Soviet Union, 2001, Center for Nonproliferation Studies and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/print/nsr.htm Amy Smithson, Toxic Archipelago: Preventing Proliferation from the Former Soviet Chemical and Biological Weapons Complexes, The Henry L. Stimson Center, December 1999. http://www.stimson.org/cbw/pubs.cfm?ID=27

UNICEF 2002: TransMONEE Database [3 April 2003]. http://www.unicef-icdc.org/documentation/transmonee.html

National States of Environment reports (SoE) for all countries of Central Asia http://www.grida.no/aral/main_e.htm

The World Bank 2000: The Road to Stability and prosperity in South Eastern Europe. A Regional Strategy Paper. World Bank. Europe and Central Asia Region.

Additional information: Bureau des Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM), France, Paris.

The World Bank 2002: Transistion – The First Ten Years: Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

World Bank. Europe and Central Asia Region. http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ECA/eca.nsf/Attachments/Transition1/ $File/complete.pdf

Water issues Iwao Kobori and Michael H. Glantz (eds.) Central Eurasian Water Crisis: Caspian, Aral, and Dead Seas. United Nations University, 1998.

Regional Environment Report: State of Environment of the Aral Sea Basin, Regional report of the Central Asian States, 2000. http://www.grida.no/aral/aralsea/ Central Asia: Water and Conflict, Asia Report no. 34. International Crisis Group (ICG), Osh/Brussels, May 2002. http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/projects/asia/centralasia/ reports/ A400668_30052002.pdf United Nations High Commissionner for the Refugees (UNHCR), Geneva, 1996, 1998 and 2003. http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/statistics http://www.unhcr.ch/pubs/sowr2000/sowr2000toc.htm

References Environment and Security / 33

South Eastern Europe Base Map – Political boundaries – Rivers – Lakes United Nations Cartographic Section http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/english/htmain.htm National Imagery and Mapping Agency http://www.nima.mil/ ArcWorld, ESRI http://www.esri.com/data/ EROS Data Centre, United States Geological Survey http://edc.usgs.gov/ Land cover Pan-European Land Cover Monitoring (PELCOM) database. http://cgi.girs.wageningen-ur.nl/cgi/projects/eu/pelcom/public/ Data download at: http://dataservice.eea.eu.int/dataservice Population density LandScan data set, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Global Population Project for estimating ambient populations at risk. http://www.ornl.gov/gist/landscan/ Transboundary cooperation United Nations Economic Commission for Europe’s Environmental Performance Reviews (UNECE’s EPRs). http://www.unece.org/env/epr/ UNEP ROE consultation.

Hazardous Industrial facilities United Nations Economic Commission for Europe’s Environmental Performance Reviews (UNECE’s EPRs). http://www.unece.org/env/epr/countriesreviewed.htm United Nations Environmental Programme’s State-of-theEnvironment (SoE) Reports from Europe and the Newly Independent States and country consultation. http://www.grida.no/soe/europe/ Water pollution areas Country consultation.

Internal migration and refugee movement, land mines and ethnic groups Population displacement data from: United Nations High Commissioner for the Refugees (UNHCR), Geneva, 2003. http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/home?page=statistics US Committee for Refugees (USCR), Washington DC, 2003. http://www.refugees.org/world/articles/RR_December_2002_lead.cfm Global Internally Displaced People (IDP) Project of the Norwegian Refugee Council, Geneva, 2003. http://www.idpproject.org/about_the_database.htm

Radio Free Europe - Radio Liberty. http://www.rferl.org United States Committee for Refugees (USCR). http://www.refugees.org United Nations High Commissionner for Refugees (UNHCR). http://www.unhcr.ch and http://www.unhcr.ba/maps/ Amnesty international. http://web.amnesty.org/ Norwegian Refugee council. http://www.nrc.no/engindex.htm ReliefWeb (OCHA). http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/WCT?OpenForm Location of landmines from: South-Eastern Europe Mine Action Coordination Council (SEEMACC) and International Trust Funds (ITF) for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance.

Ethnic Patterns based on latest National Census data available for the ReREP countries.

1st and 5th Report of the High Representative for Implementation of the Bosnian Peace Agreement to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Office of the High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina (OHRBH), Sarajevo. http://www.ohr.int/ohr-info/maps/ Additional information from Articles 1992-1995 from Daily Newspapers: Herald Tribune, The Guardian, Libération, Le Monde, Le Figaro, The Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal.

Additional Socio-Economic Information Online database for World Development Report 2003. World Bank, Washington DC. Figures from 1999, 2000 and 2001. (Child mortality, GDP, Health Expenditures, Life expectancy, Renewable water availability, CO2 emissions, and Urbanization rate).

World Resources 2002-2004: Decisions for the Earth – Balance, Voice, and Power, World Resources Institute (WRI), Washington DC; and World Resources 2000-2001 – People and ecosystems: The Fraying Web of Life, World Resources Institute (WRI), Washington DC.

34 / Environment and Security

Hossein Fadaei United Nations Environment Programme 15 chemin des Anémones 1219 Chatelaine SWITZERLAND Tel: +41 (022) 917 8628 Fax: +41 (022) 917 8024 hossein.fadaei@unep.ch Andrej Steiner United Nations Development Programme Grösslingova 35 811 09 Bratislava SLOVAKIA Tel: +421 (02) 59 33 74 16 Fax: +421 (02) 59 33 74 50 andrej.steiner@undp.org Gianluca Rampolla Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Kärntner Ring 5-7 A-1010 Vienna AUSTRIA Tel.: +43 (01) 514 36 151 Fax: +43 (01) 514 36 96 grampolla@osce.org

Environment and Security / 35

ATIA

Gulf of Finland

36 / Environment and Security

ESTONIA Baltic Sea

St. Petersburg

LATVIA RUSSIA

LITHUANIA POLAND CZECH REPUBLIC

BELARUS

Minsk Moscow

Niz

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY Paks-Tolna

Kiev

BOSNIARZEGOVINA

UKRAINE

RUSSIA

n

Do

MOLDOVA

r

iep

Dn

ROMANIA

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

D

an KOSOVO ub Kozloduy e LBANIA MACEDONIA BULGARIA Belene

Volgograd Cernavoda

Astra Black Sea

GEORGIA

ARMENIA Mediterranean Sea

AZ