Visegrad Conference on Common Environmental Problems 2013.

Transcription

1 The University of Economics in Prague Matej Bel University, Banská Bystrica Széchenyi István University, Gyor AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow The College of Informatics and Management in Bielsko-Biała METCENAS o.p.s., Prague with the Visegrad Fund support Visegrad Conference on Common Environmental Problems Proceedings of Extended Abstracts Editors: Dana Švihlová, Petr Šauer, Antonín Dvořák Prague, Czech Republic March 4 5, 2013

2 Acknowledgement: This proceedings book is one of the results of International Visegrad Fund s Standard Grant No The project was also cosponsored by the project partners shown above. Authors of the paper, 2013 Published by: Matej Bel University, Faculty of Economics, Banská Bystrica,

3 Contents Robert Bucki, Azra Korjenic Management of Stochastic Events in Support for Reducing Added Energy in the Polluted Environment: An Application for V Radoslav Bujnovský Diffuse Water Pollution from Agriculture as Local and Macro-regional Problem Bulla Miklós, Zseni Anikó Multidisciplinary Expert System for Ex-ante Sustainability Evaluation: An Application for V4 Countries Jan W. Dobrowolski Sustainable Development of the Region of the Polish Slovakian Boarder Park Pieniny Mts; Interdisciplinary and International Research and Education Zbyněk Dubský Visegrad Group the Political and Security Cooperation Lidiya S. Hryniv, Dmitry Khodyko Target-based Environmental Programming for the Carpathian Region: The Potential Contribution of Visegrad Group Petr Jančík, Irena Pavlíková, Jan Bitta Air Silesia New Common Access to the Cross Boarder Air Pollution Justyna Kobylarczyk Assessment of the Implementation of the Directives of the Visegrad Group in Selected Towns Mária Kozová, Zuzana Hudeková An Integrated Approach to the Adaptation Climate Change Strategies in Visegrad Cities: A Tool for Common Environmental Policy László Miklós, Anna Špinerová The Landscape and the Integrated Landscape Management Ingeborg Němcová Visegrad Group Countries: Economic Potential in the European Union Ivan Suchara, Julie Sucharová, Blanka Maňkovská Usage of Plant Indicators for Determining Air Pollution Levels and Long-range Transport of Air Pollutants in the Visegrad Area Jana Špulerová, Marta Dobrovodská, Dagmar Štefunková Trends and Threats of Traditional Agricultural Landscape in Slovakia Vlasta Švecová, Radim J. Šrám Air Pollution Problem on the Eastern Czech-Poland Border

4 Dana Švihlová, Pavol Kráľ, Miroslav Hužvár Comparative Analysis of Eco-innovation Policies in V4 Countries Kateřina Ventrubová, Jaromír Vašíček, Vilém Jarský Visegrad Group Contribution to European Forests 2020 Targets Concerning Estimation of Full Value of Forest Ecosystem Services Zseni Anikó Hungary and Its Common Environmental Issues with Slovak Republic in Respect of Water Management Lenka Zvijáková, Martina Zeleňáková, Slávka Gałaś, Miloslav Šlezingr, Judit Házi, Károly Penksza State of Environmental Impact Assessment in the Visegrad Group: The Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia Kamil Żyła, Jacek Kęsik, Marta Kęsik Exploitation of Social Aspects in International IT Systems for Reporting Environmental Issues: Case of Visegrad Group Countries

5 Preface The environmental problems in Europe are complex due to diversity of the history and economic background of the particular countries. The European Union through its policies set some strict guidelines, rules and regulations required for controlling pollution and also in maintaining the natural balance. Visegrad countries, as members of European Union, in spite of enormous effort to meet requirements still struggle with their historical burden and current lack of resources. The title of the International scientific Visegrad Conference on Common Environmental Problems indicates that its aim is the exchange of knowledge and experience from research of the significant environmental problems in Visegrad countries. The researchers from elite institutions were addressed to present the outcomes from their research in the environmental field. The conference will cover two problem areas: - Cross-country environmental problems of Visegrad group countries, - Visegrad group as a coalition in solving environmental problems. The organisers received 35 abstracts within the call for abstracts. This proceedings book collects extended abstracts of 19 papers selected for the conference. They cover both key conference problems. We believe that this International scientific conference will frame up conditions for effective interchange of research outcomes and for mutual communication which will continue in the future. Editors February,

6 Hungary and Its Common Environmental Issues with Slovak Republic in Respect of Water Management Introduction Zseni, Anikó PhD* * Department of Environmental Engineering, Széchenyi István University 9026 Győr, Egyetem tér 1., Hungary ( zseniani@sze.hu) The paper deals with Hungary s common environmental issues with Slovakia, in respect of water management issues. Because not only the environmental protection but water management itself is very diverse but on the other hand is very complex the author does not undertake to give a general overview about the theme. But she makes an attempt to outline the Hungarian-Slovakian common work in water management with the help of the introduction of three different kind but common water issues of this two (or more) countries. First an integrated river basin management plan is being introduced: five country (including Hungary and Slovakia) share not only in the Tisza River watershed but in the resources, emissions, positive/negative impacts, effects and in the responsibility of appropriate water management as well. Secondly the author deals with a demonstration project on the Bodrog River. Project consortium consisted of partners from Hungary, Slovakia and Ukraine. Execution of demonstration projects of non-structural measures, and wide dissemination of the results of such projects may support implementation of other similar measures along the Tisza. Finally a project implemented in the framework of Cross-border Cooperation Programme between Hungary and Slovakia is presented. The aim of this project was to develop institution connection between two water management organizations from Hungary and Slovakia. Integrated Tisza River Basin Management Plan The Tisza River is the longest tributary of the Danube River. It flows through five countries: Ukraine, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary and Serbia. Its basin area is more than 157 thousand km 2. It is home to 14 million people. The Tisza River Basin is an important European resource. The high diversity of landscapes provides habitats for unique animal and plant life species. The biodiversity is rich. Number of protected areas and national parks is significant. Cooperation of the Tisza Countries has a long history. It is including the agreement on the protection of the Tisza and its tributaries in 1986 and the establishment of the Tisza Forum to address flood issues in The Tisza countries are all parties to the Danube River Protection Convention (signed in Sofia in 1994 and entered into force in 1998). This is the most comprehensive agreement in force for all Danube countries. Tisza countries are parties to the Carpathian Convention as well (signed in Kyiv, Ukraine in 2003 and entered into force in 2006) [ICPDR, 2010]

7 The Tisza Group was established by the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) to be the platform for strengthening coordination and information exchange related to international, regional and national activities in the Tisza River Basin and to ensure harmonization and effectiveness of related efforts. The Integrated Tisza River Basin Management Plan (ITRBM Plan) is based on Tisza countries national plans and is harmonized with the outcomes of the Danube River Basin Management Plan. The Joint Programme of Measures of ITRBM Plan builds on the results of the pressures and the water status assessment. As a consequence it includes the measures of basin-wide importance oriented on the agreed upon visions and management objectives for A subchapter of ITRBM Plan (Horizontal measures related to integration of water quantity and quality) deals with international coordination. Local action alone is not enough for most measures related to integrated water management; particularly those with a spatial dimension. Both positive and negative impacts materialize on a larger geographical scale and they can cumulate even if there are similar measures in the same basin. Therefore, the international dimension of measures related to integrated water management has to be identified and there should be action to solve the issue in an internationally coordinated way. The International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) particularly the Tisza Group the bilateral commissions, the work under the Carpathian Convention and other relevant international frameworks in the region should play a further role in that and should be expanded as much as possible. The Tisza Group recommends and requests further engagement with the bilateral commissions addressing water management in the Tisza River Basin, specifically by requesting that the issues of the ITRBM Plan is discussed at regular meetings of bilateral commissions ensuring that the ITRBM Plan is a recurring item on meeting agendas [ICPDR, 2010]. These measures could be developed within the existing structures of the ICPDR, but additional higher-level political commitment and funds are required to facilitate integration issues at bilateral and Tisza River Basin levels. Another subchapter of the ITRBM Plan deals with measures related to flood and excess water. There will be many future infrastructure projects related to flood protection. The hydromorphological impacts of future flood protection measures must be defined. For this, we need to know the exact measures and their hydraulic and ecological effects on the Tisza Basin scale. The implementation of the EU Floods Directive which contains the establishment of the preliminary flood risk assessment in 2011 and flood hazard and risk maps in 2013 can help in that. Sustainable forest management also has to play significant role in flood protection measures. Cooperation with relevant organizations such as UNEP-Carpathian Convention is a good potential for further investigating in this issue. Space for rivers should be the overarching strategy for sustainable flood protection measures within the Tisza Basin. Of course in some cases structural solutions like dyke and bank reinforcements are needed to protect urban settlements. Identifying measures that have benefits for both flood protection and nature protection (win-win measures) are part of such space for the river strategies [ICPDR, 2010]

8 Execution of demonstration projects of non-structural measures, and wide dissemination of the results of such projects may support implementation of other similar measures along the Tisza. In the following the UNDP/GEF demonstration project on the Bodrog River will be introduced, as an example for a Hungarian-Slovak-Ukrainian common environmental issue. Bodrog project ( ) Making space for water in the Bodrog River Basin The International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) has commissioned the Global Water Partnership Slovakia to lead a consortium to implement a project aimed for integrated flood protection. The project is a component of the UNDP/GEF (United Nations Development Program / Global Environment Facility) financed initiative Integrating multiple benefits of wetlands and floodplains into improved transboundary management for the Tisza River Basin. The Global Water Partnership Slovakia led consortium consisted of partners from Hungary, Slovakia and Ukraine. The Bodrog River Sub Basin creates part of Tisza catchment area. Three countries sharing its territory: Slovakia, Hungary and Ukraine. In past decade the Bodrog River Basin is exposed to severe flooding. The three countries within the Tisza catchment have developed its own mitigation strategy and plan focused on flood management and flood prevention. However, there is missing harmonization of national strategies within Bodrog River Basin and common understanding of proposed measures and activities on the cross-border scale and unsatisfactory involvement of local stakeholders (municipalities as well as NGOs). The main objective of the project was to mitigate consequences of floods through consistent and holistic management of flood risk in the countries of Bodrog river basin i.e., Ukraine, Slovakia and Hungary. A corporate Strategy for mitigation of floods in countries of Bodrog River Basin was developed and partnerships between national and local levels were created in order to implement practical and sustainable solutions for flood prevention. The project activities considered the maintenance and/or restoration of floodplains by creating space for water during flood events, as well as measures to prevent and reduce damage to human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activities. The involvement of municipalities, river basin organizations, NGOs, farmers, spatial and urban planning authorities was crucial. Therefore the project activities focused on establishment of close cooperation with and among stakeholders involved. [GWP Slovakia et al., 2011] The following three activities were implemented during the project: (i) formulation of the Strategy for mitigation of floods for Bodrog River Basin countries, (ii) pilot projects and (iii) dissemination of project results. The flood mitigation and flood protection approaches based on restoration of floodplain habitats could result in lower investment costs in some cases and win-win situations with objectives set by implementation of Water Framework Directive. This approach must be however tested. Therefore, the project intends to implement the pilot investments in order to showcase the reduced financial requirements of flood protection in Bodrog catchment. [GWP Slovakia, 2009; GWP Slovakia et al., 2011] Pilot projects focused on improvement of conditions of original floodplains and wetlands affected by current land uses and environmentally inappropriate flood protection measures and activities. A concept was formulated by the project partners to accomplish the pilot investments in each country of the Bodrog River Basin. Project areas of Bodrog River Basin

9 demonstrate practical solutions in three specific areas in Slovakia, Hungary and Ukraine: Viss-Oxbow (Hungary), Senné depression bisected by the Cierna Voda River (Slovakia), Tova River (Ukraine). The interventions of the pilot demonstration projects serves as a good example of floodplain restoration and originates better flood control conditions by creating temporary space for water during flood events. In the same time these measures are improving habitat conditions (e.g. water regime) and creating new opportunities in connection to agricultural use. Such simple solutions can be implemented in other sub-river basins as well. The stakeholder workshops and meetings enabled to strengthen understanding of linkages between the Bodrog project and the ITRBM Plan. Experiences showed that early involvement of local stakeholders in the design process helped to find consensus among the partners and helped the designer to submit the plan for license in time. [ICPDR, 2010]. There are a lot of administrative curbs ranging from sectoral approaches to transboundary issues. In order to implement an effective integrated ecosystem management, it is necessary to establish functional public private partnership. All activities served as examples for the implementation of the national plans. The pilot project activities carried out focused on small scale restoration measures a simple technical solution, restoring an old sluice and constructing a new one. The technical solution took into account the limited available financial source. The intervention utilized affordable conditions, which does not require big investments and complicated maintenance of water construction. The main lesson learnt from the project is that success of such project relies on long-term and complex work with local stakeholders focused on showing practical examples and advantages of alternative solutions to local stakeholders. The project was focusing on engagement of stakeholders identified based on the Stakeholder Analysis. Even though the same methodology was applied in the Bodrog River Basin countries, the experiences are different depending on specific conditions and circumstances in those countries. The results of the project could be easily replicated at several other sites either in the Bodrog Basin or elsewhere in the Tisza River Basin. [GWP Slovakia et al., 2011] HUSK: Hungary-Slovakia Cross-border Co-operation Programme The Operational Programme Hungary - Slovak Republic involves Community support for specific Hungarian and Slovak regions that lie along their common border. These are the Hungarian regions of Győr-Moson-Sopron, Komárom-Esztergom, Pest, Nógrád, Heves, Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg and Budapest and Slovak regions Bratislavský kraj, Trnavský kraj, Nitriansky kraj, Banskobystrický kraj and Košický kraj (Graph 1)

10 Graph 1: HUSK regions (source: European Commission, 2013) The programme is under the European Territorial Cooperation Objective, co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). On 20 December 2007, the European Commission approved a Cross-border Cooperation Programme between Hungary and the Slovak Republic for the period (Number of decision: C/2007/6488). The overall strategic goal of the HUSK Programme is to increase the level of economic and social integration in the Hungarian-Slovak border area by strengthening economic competitiveness, increasing social and cultural coherence among people and communities, improving accessibility and communication as well as protecting natural assets [HUSK, 2013]. The expected main impacts of the HUSK Programme are the following: improved cross-border connections; enhanced joint management of public services and resources; more business start-ups and tourism products; and local communities more motivated to engage in cross-border cooperation to improve the region s attractiveness [HUSK, 2013]. The Operational Programme is structured along 3 priorities: Economy and Society (Priority 1); Environment, Nature Protection and Accessibility (Priority 2); Technical Assistance (Priority 3). The objective of Priority 2 aims to encourage joint actions designed to protect the natural environment. One of the key focuses is to develop the transport infrastructure, including road constructions, border-crossing facilities across rivers and public transport. The communication infrastructure will also benefit from support in an effort to improve information flows

11 Developing of institution connection between Hungary and Slovakia As flood, inland water and water quality damages are presented on both Hungarian and Slovakian sides of the concerned rivers, tasks of protection and prevention also need on both sides of the border. To share the best accessible practice in protection and prevention, the Tisza and Catchment Area Subcommittee of the Hungarian-Slovak Cross-border Waters Committee has inspired a project about developing of institution connection between Hungary and Slovakia. The HUSK 0801/072 Developing of Institution Connections in the Spirit of the Cross-Border Waters Agreement project was implemented with co-financing of European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Hungarian Republic and the Slovak Republic in the framework of the Hungary-Slovakia Cross-border Co-operation Programme Project lead partner is the North Hungarian Environment and Water Directorate, while Cross- Border Partner is the Affiliated Branch of the Slovak Water Management Inc. in Košice [ÉVIZIG, 2013]. The aim of the project is to develop the operative collaboration and communication between the two water management organizations in the interest of the tasks concerning cross-border waters. In the framework of the project conferences, workshops, study tours were organized. The closing document of the project consists among others the recommendations for the Tisza and Catchment Area Subcommittee of the Hungarian-Slovak Cross-border Waters Committee. Conclusion Choice of river basin management issues to demonstrate Hungarian-Slovakian common environmental issues seems to be a good decision. Watersheds are not confined to the boundaries of national borders, so cross-border cooperation is/should be implicit in water policy planning, water management and river basin management as well. References European Comission (2013), Regional Policy Operational Programme 'Hungary - Slovak Republic'. Official web page of European Comission. ALL&gv_PGM=1290&gv_defL=9&LAN=72013, (accessed 9 Feb. 2013) ÉVIZIG (2013), HUSK 0801/072 Intézményi kapcsolatrendszer kiépítése a magyar szlovák határvízi megállapodás szellemében. Official web page of ÉVIZIG. (accessed 9 Feb. 2013) GWP Slovakia (2009), Making Space for Water in the Bodrog River Basin. Project proposal. Global Water Partnership Slovakia. GWP Slovakia et al. (2011), Making Space for Water in the Bodrog River Basin. Final Report of IC WD 386 Demonstration Project. Global Water Partnership Slovakia

12 HUSK (2013), Hungary-Slovakia Cross-border Co-operation Programme. Official web page of Hungary-Slovakia Cross-border Co-operation Programme (accessed 9 Feb. 2013) ICPDR (2010), Integrated Tisza River Basin Management Plan. International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River. Keywords: integrated river basin management, Tisza River Basin, Bodrog River Basin, HUSK Programme