e-LUP

1. e-LUP kick-off e-LUP What and Why? Mikael Pihlström Helsinki, 6-7 February 2006

2. Title: Simulating land use processes – an interactive e-tool for SIA • focus on tools, models and communication technologies • but, dual structure; both e-textbook and e-tool • In the beginning was the Word ... 1. John • e-textbook in parallell English/Russian, freeware in internet • for multiple users, different scales ?

3. Specific verifiable aims… • To develop a new tool for training on sustainable impact assessment (SIA), applicable in a broad Eurasian context. The tool will be easy to use and easy to disseminate: a freeware electronic textbook and simulation tool based on complex, proven dynamic models. • To train in particular the use of dynamic models in policy assessment. To train modern landscape analysis and sustainability assessment tools in a unified exercise primarily for training in strategic policy analysis, but secondarily for other end-users also (e.g. local and regional administrations, research, education). • To embed the project and it’s main deliverable at the science/society interface, mainly by involving administrations, company personnel, researchers and students from the start, in producing the materialfor the e-textbook and in the last year of the project testing it.

4. … which fit the call (?) • V. Strategies for sustainable land management, including coastal zones, agricultural land and forests The objective is to contribute to the development of strategies and tools for the sustainable use of land, with emphasis on the coastal zones, agricultural land and forests, including integrated concepts for the multipurpose utilisation of agricultural and forest resources, and the integrated forestry/wood chain in order to ensure sustainable development at economic, social, and at environmental levels. Qualitative and quantitative aspects of the multi-functionality of agriculture and forestry will be addressed. Two parts will be addressed in this area, the first one dedicated to sustainable land-use (next slide) and the second one addressing the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the multifunctionality of the agriculture and forest/wood chain.

5. V.1 Sustainable use of land V.1.1 Land-use and landscapes in sensitive regions Concepts and strategies for sustainable land-use and landscape development, in sensitive regions such as mountains, coastal zones, islands as well as post-industrialised zones, will have to be defined, taking into account the existing knowledge on this matter. Modelling approaches for integrated land-management, highlighting regional issues, will be developed or improved if already existing. A European-wide knowledge and database on rural development practices, policies and other data, usable for modelling and future land-use management decisions, will be built. • V.1.1.1 Education and Training. Learning methods and tools for sustainability impact assessment and policy analysis relative to land use, in particular agriculture, forest, coastal zones and urban areas, stressing the role of information, innovation and communication technologies, and addressing industrials, local and regional institutions and academic needs. A special focus should be put on the transfer of methods and tools for their application and integration at the local, regional and national levels. NOW, ANNEX 1 TO THE CONTRACT IS OUR GUIDELINE!

6. We approach Sustainability Impact Assessment(SIA) largely through different land usecategories...

7. Sustainable development Johann Hattingh, Univ. of Stellenbosch

8. Sustainability = to meet the needs of the present generation without compromising those of future generations • Not new: Brundlandt Commission report 1987, the Rio Summit 1992, local agendas etc. • Related methodologies also not new: Cost-Benefit analysis in the 1950’s (or earlier), Environmental Impact Assesment (EIA) in the 1970’s (or earlier), EIA as Directive (EU legislation) since 1985. • In the Russian Federation environmental assessment (EA) system comprises state authorities environmental review (SER) and assessment of environmental impacts by developers (OVOS). Despite significant progress in the 1990’s (250 resp 48000 SERs in 2003, on federal resp. regional level) problems exist: regulations, closure of Ministry of Environment in 2000, the recent reorganisation of regional/central power (Cherp & Golubeva 2004). • SIA is implemented in many countries today; Australia, Norway, USA as well as by OECD, UNEP etc. • NEW, HOWEVER IS THE SCOPE AND DEPTH OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AIM TO INSTALL SIA AS A CENTRAL COMPONENT OF POLICY MAKING

9. Impact Assessment in the Commission • "Proposals must be prepared on the basis of an effective analysis of whether it is appropriate to intervene at EU level and whether regulatory intervention is needed? If so, the analysis must also assess the potential economic, social and environmental impact, as well as the costs and benefits of that particular approach. A key element in such as assessment is ensuring that the objectives of any proposal are clearly defined." – White Paper on European Governance, 2001, COM(2001) 428. • “Sustainable development should become the central objective of all sectors and policies. This means that policy-makers must identify likely spillovers – good and bad – onto other policy areas and take them into account. Careful assessment of the full effects of a policy proposal must include estimates of its economic, environmental and social impacts inside and outside the EU.” – The Commissions Strategic Objectives 2005-2009, COM(2005) 12.

10. Impact assessment – guidelines for EC staff • Key analytical steps in impact assessment 1. Identify the problem. 2. Define the objectives. 3. Develop main policy options. Does the Union have the right to act? 4. Analyse their impacts. 5. Compare the options. 6. Outline policy monitoring and evaluation. Stakeholder consultation & collection of expertise can run throughout the process. Remember: Impact assessment is an aid to political decision-making, not a substitute for it. • Principles of ”Ex Ante” evaluation and proportionality: The impact assessment’s depth and scope will be determined by the likely impacts of the proposed action (principle of ‘proportionate analysis’). The more significant an action is likely to be, the greater the effort of quantification and monetisation that will generally be expected. Besides, depending on the political and legal nature of the proposal under preparation, its sectoral particularities and the point in the policy-making process at which the IA is undertaken, some aspects of the analysis will often have to be developed more than others. http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/impact/index_en.htm

11. WHAT ARE THE LIKELY ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? • Identify environmental, economic and social impacts, why they occur and who is affected (incl. outside EU). About 30 major impact categories are listed in the guidelines. • Assess the impacts inqualitative, quantitative and monetary termswhere possible and appropriate.Qualitative assessment of which impacts are the most significant, then advanced qualitative and/or quantitative analysis of those • A useful approach to identifying impacts is to build a causal model. • Weigh-up the positive and negative impacts for each option. Where feasible, display aggregated and disaggregated results. • Tools: Macroeconomical equilbrium models (GEM E-3), sectoral models (PRIMES, CAPRI), EIA models (ECOSENSE, SMART), discounting and monetisation of non-market impacts, Life Cycle assessments. • Methods to compare impacts: Cost-effectiveness and Cost-benefit analyses, Multi-Criteria analysis, Risk and Sensitivity analysis, Qualitative reasoning, Delphi and Foresight methods. • And now: THE SIA-tools from FP6-projects

12. Review of extended Impact Assessments carried out by EC in 2003 (Bartolomeo et al 2004) • Review of European Employment Strategy • Communication on immigration, integration and employment • Proposal for a Framework Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on unfair commercial practices • Legislation on the Kyoto flexible instruments Joint Implementation (JI) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) • Communication: Basic orientations for the sustainability of European tourism • Policy on fixed pack sizes in selected sectors (wine, spirits, coffee, flour etc.) • Framework Legislation on Chemical Substances • Directive establishing strategies to prevent and control pollution of groundwater • Reform of EU sugar policy • Communication on the transition from analogue broadcasting to digital broadcasting: Digital switchover in Europe • Support for private sector development in Mediterranean • Amendment of regulation on the common organisation of the raw tobacco • Proposal for a Directive on non-discrimination on the basis of sex (Art. 13) • Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on batteries and accumulators Issues more or less related to land use are bolded

13. Review (cont.) • Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing measures for the recovery of the southern hake stock and the Norway lobster stocks and amending Regulation (EC) No 850/98 on the conservation of fishery resources • Communication from the Commission to the Council and European Parliament on "Information and Communication Technologies for Intelligent Vehicles" • Proposal for a renewal/revision of Council Regulation laying down the requirements for the implementation of development cooperation operations which contribute to the general objective of developing and consolidating democracy and the rule of law and to that of respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms • Proposal for a Decision replacing Decision 1692/96/EC on the Community guidelines for the development of the transeuropeannetwork in the field of transport (TEN-Guidelines) • Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council concerning measures to safeguard Security of Electricity Supply and infrastructure investment • Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down a series of guidelines for Trans-European energy networksand repealing decisions 96/391/EC and 1229/2003/EC • Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing measures for the recovery of the sole stocks in the Western Channel and the Bay of Biscay from IQ Tools (courtesy Klaus Rennings, ZEW Mannheim)

14. Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA), at very macro level: WTO • The European Commission has commissioned an independent assessment (from IDPM) of the impact that WTO trade negotiations may have on sustainable development. • The final part of the third phase in the SIA programme is currently underway - due to be completed mid 2006. This final phase is to provide the following studies: • A final global overview Trade SIA of the potential impact on sustainable development of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) negotiations as single undertaking. • A Trade SIA of Fisheries Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM), the University of Manchester

15. WWF/Oxfam Response to the WTOSIA studies • SIAs are important tools than can help deliver more sustainable trade, but they are limited.  They cannot rectify negotiating agendas that are inadequate which fail to recognise and address the impacts of trade on sustainable development • The pro-liberalisation bias built in to the methodology excludes other measures such as no growth or trade in a different form • Closely related to this point is the issue of timing.  It is essential that studies are scheduled carefully so that the results can feed into the negotiations.  Some areas of Doha are on a fast track (e.g. DSU), and cannot wait until 2005 for SIA results • We are disappointed at the limited range of scenarios that will be consideredbythe study. The argument that other parties can construct their own scenarios isnot valid as few have the resources to do so. Note. There were many positive comments as well. IDPM replied and pointed out that many criticisms are being addressed in revised versions. Not very clear answer on the “pro-liberalisation” issue.

16. What is our position? In discourses between decision makers and stakeholders concepts ”power” and ”values” are present, while the scientific community prefers to concentrate on ”knowledge”. Knowledge, however, always has a larger context and may have implicit values. WE MUST CLEARLY STATE OUR ASSUMPTIONS =TRANSPARENCY!

17. Communication • Project website will open very soon: http://www.helsinki.fi/bioscience/elup

18. Thank you.