Global Environment Outlook 3 (GEO 3)

1 3 6

STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND POLICY RETROSPECTIVE: 1972–2002

experience with actual cultivation is still limited. In Western Europe, the public is generally sceptical about GM foods and organisms. There is strong support for labelling, public consultation and more comprehensive regulation and monitoring. Apart from food safety, concerns have also been expressed about adverse effects on the environment and biodiversity; for example, genetic transfers with native species. While developers of GMOs see a huge market opportunity, food producers are under pressure from consumers who wish to avoid GMOs. Efforts in Western Europe are currently aiming to inform, involve and consult the public about GMOs, in order to reach a consensus on regulation. In Eastern Europe some NGOs are trying to bring the issue into the open and a regional biosafety process, started in 1995 in Hungary, is also furthering discussion. The European Commission has proposed new legislation to harmonize action and to facilitate agreement on marketing authorization (EC 1998). Current European legislation is consistent with the Biosafety Protocol that was adopted in January 2000 as part of the CBD. The potential risks of GMOs to biodiversity are the subject of ongoing research. Public awareness also needs to be raised to ensure a well-informed and balanced multi-stakeholder dialogue and decision process.

Economic transition in Eastern Europe has caused biodiversity funding to dry up. In Bulgaria, for example, domestic financing collapsed in the mid-1990s and up to 90 per cent of all biodiversity financing now comes from foreign sources — the EU and bilateral funds, with € 4-6 million provided annually by the Netherlands alone; Germany and Switzerland are also major contributors. However, foreign aid rarely exceeds 10-15 per cent of the required funding. Some popular parks in Central Europe are partially financed by park fees but these never cover more than 50 per cent of the costs of park maintenance (OECD 1999). Financial support for biodiversity in Central and Eastern Europe

Countries in Central and Eastern Europe still possess a wealth of well-preserved landscapes, ecosystems and species that are rare or already extinct in Western Europe. Most protected areas in these areas had been designated by the end of the l970s, often surrounded by large buffer zones and connected by habitat corridors linking sites. However, with economic transition, the system of nature protection came under intense pressure as state financing declined and it is now in jeopardy (see box). Genetically modified organisms Genetically modified organism (GMO) technology could play an important role in increasing agricultural production in Europe. However, the release of GMOs into the environment remains a subject of controversy. Experimental releases of GM crops have been conducted in both Western and Eastern Europe but

References: Chapter 2, biodiversity, Europe

OECD (1999). Environment in the Transition to a Market Economy: Progress in Central and Eastern Europe and the New Independent States . Paris, OECD Centre for Cooperation with Non-Members Siriwardena, G.M., Baillie, S.R., Buckland, S.T., Fewster, R.M., Marchant, J.H. and Wilson, J.D. (1998). Trends in the abundance of farmland birds: a quantitative comparison of smoothed Common Birds Census indices. Journal of Applied Ecology . 35, 1, 24-43 UNEP-WCMC (2001a). GEO3 Endangered Animals Snapshot . United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre http://valhalla.unep-wcmc.org/isdb/geo3.cfm [Geo- 2-064] UNEP-WCMC (2001b). GEO3 Protected Areas Snapshot . United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre http://valhalla.unep-wcmc.org/wdbpa/GEO3.cfm [Geo-2-065]

EC (1998). Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 90/220 on the Deliberate Release into the Environment of Genetically Modified Organisms . Brussels, European Commission EEA (1999). Environment in the European Union at the Turn of the Century . Copenhagen, European Environment Agency EEA (2000). Environmental Signals 2000 . Environmental Assessment Report. 6, Copenhagen, European Environment Agency EEA (2001). Europe’s Environment: The Dobris Assessment . European Environment Agency Hoffmann, L.B. (2000). CIP: Stimulating positive linkages between biodiversity and agriculture. Recommendations for the EC-Agricultural Action Plan for biodiversity . Tilburg, European Centre for Nature Conservation http://reports.eea.eu.int/92-826-5409- 5/en/page002new.html [Geo-2-062]

Baldock, D. and Long, T. (1987). Environment under Pressure: the Influence of the CAP on Spain and Portugal and the IMPs in France, Greece and Italy. A report to WWF . London, Institute for European Environmental Policy Barr, C., Bunce, R., Clark, R., Fuller, R., Furse, M., Gillespie, M., Groom, G., Hallam, C., Horning, M., Howard, D. and Ness, M. (1993). Countryside Survey 1993: Main Report . London, Department of the Environment BirdLife International (1995). The Structural Funds and Biodiversity Conservation: Summary. Brussels, BirdLife International European Community Office Casado, S., Florin, M., Molla, S. and Montes, C. (1992). Current status of Spanish wetlands. In M. Finlayson and others (eds.), Managing Mediterranean Wetlands and their Birds. Wetlands International Publication No 20 . Wageningen, Wetlands International Donald, P.F., Green, R.E. and Heath, M.F. (2001). Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe’s farmland bird populations. Proceedings of The Royal Society of London Series B - Biological Sciences . 268, 1462, 25-29