1 / 31

A journey approach....

An integrated management system for urban areas. A journey approach. How do we develop a sustainable future for our cities and citizens?. 15!. The answer is. MUE-25 reaching out to EU-27 cities. Lead Partner:. EUROPEAN MODULE City of Turku (Finland) City of Lahti (Finland)

tavon
Download Presentation

A journey approach....

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An integrated management system for urban areas A journey approach....

  2. How do we develop a sustainable future for our cities and citizens?

  3. 15! The answer is.............

  4. MUE-25 reaching out to EU-27 cities

  5. Lead Partner: • EUROPEAN MODULE • City of Turku (Finland) • City of Lahti (Finland) • Municipality of Växjö (Sweden) • Leeds City Council (UK) • Lewes District Council (UK) • Municipality of Ancona (Italy) • Siena Province (Italy) • City of Riga (Latvia) • Kaunas City Municipality (Lithuania) • Šiauliai City Municipality (Lithuania) • Local Government of Siófok (Hungary) • Local Government of Balatonfüred (Hungary) • City of Oslo (Norway) • City of Ludwigsburg, (Germany) • City of Stockholm, (Sweden) GERMAN MODULE 1. Ascha 2. Berlin-Lichtenberg 3. Donaueschingen 4. Neu-Ulm 5. County of Nordhausen 6. Paderborn 7. Wiesbaden 8. Tübingen 9. Ludwigsburg 10. Würzburg Observers: City of Friedrichshafen City of Nordhausen CIty of Elrich City of Erfurt 1. LBDCA, Lake Balaton Development Coordination Agency, Hungary 2. ACR+, The Association of Cities and Regions for recycling and Sustainable Resource Management, Belgium 4. ASSURRE, Association for the Sustainable Use and Recovery of Resources in Europe, Belgium 3. Energie-Cités, France Union of the Baclic Cities (UBC), Commission on Environment, Turku, Finland ICLEI – Local Governmentsfor Sustainability, Germany Bodensee-Stiftung, Germany UNEP/Grid-Arendal, Norway The University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom

  6. Challenges of urban areas • 80% of the population in Europe live in cities with at least 10.000 inhabitants • It is in cities that the effects of many environmental problems are most severly felt • Core set of interrelated and mutually reinforcing environmental problems • increasing levels of traffic, • air pollution, • ambient noise and greenhouse gas emissions, • neglect of the built environment, • improper land-use, • lack of open space, • soil contamination, • the generation of large quantities of waste and wastewater.

  7. Structural failures • insufficient co-operation beyond administrative boundaries; • insufficient horizontal co-operation; • insufficient harmonised data, tools and practices; • development occurs via short-term and isolated projects; • insufficient public participation; • insufficient vertical co-operation; • need for institutional and personal capacity; • separation of planning and implementation

  8. TSUE Communication 2006 Communication of TSUE confirms that: ”The integrated approach to environmental management at the local level and to transport in particular, based on effective consultation of all stakeholders, is key to successful implementation of environment legislation and to achieve long lasting improvements in environmental quality and performance.”

  9. Support for integrated management • The Council of the European Union (June 06) discussed the TSUE. The Council; • underlined the important role of integrated environmental management systems such as EMAS and ISO 14001. • welcomed the approach to highlight the importance of public participation in decision-making and the role that voluntary initiatives can play. • invites the Commission to provide support and impetus for public participation in particular by actively facilitating and promoting Local Agenda 21 and the Aalborg Commitments. • calls on the European Union, Member States and their cities, to improve the quality of life in cities and urban areas by promoting and implementing integrated environmental management • recommends an interregional and intersectoral approach.

  10. Sustainable Management of Natural Resources

  11. No compromises for future generations

  12. Quality of Life Economicactivities Natural Resources What should be sustained?

  13. What is meant by management ? • The Commission says integrated management……..what is management? • Any integrated management programme must conform to the basic elements of management • Often sustainability or environmental management strategies and/or tools do not meet the requirements of the concept management! • A generic management model • The Deming Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle

  14. What are the lessons learnt? • Management only takes place when we close the Plan-Do-Check-Act loop Therefore: any suite of tools developed, selected and used to implement an Integrated Management System should cover the P-D-C-A milestones

  15. Our starting point • Different cities, different realities, different baselines • Wish to develop s.t. adaptable and acceptable to all cities and towns • Reflection on principles for good governance (EU workgroup) • Consideration of realities of cities & towns • Utilisation of experience and expertise of PSG

  16. What we suggest ... • Good news: No new system! • Conformation of PDCA-cycle • Definition of a framework of few minimum elements allowing all cities and towns to link up • Agreement on key principles as foundation of any locally applied environmental or sustainability management system to allow for commitment independent from local framework conditions

  17. Approaches of the IMS • Journey approach: allowing to consider different starting points a, framework conditions and ambitions • Modular approach: allowing to ‘grow the system’ based on gradual expansion • Framework approach: allowing for integration of locally applied instruments and step by step completion and advancement

  18. What we suggest: a road-map • Integrate instruments with framework system • A city-wide EMAS, or a ecoBUDGET process can fulfil the purpose • Integrate existing management instruments to carry out elements – do not duplicate. Use their particular strenghts (e.g. SOE-reports, indicators, environmental action plans, local pollution registers) • Link the management system to central decision making (city council) • Widen focus to other stakeholders in order to address whole urban area • Integrate sustainability dimensions – thematic reference to the Aalborg Commitments)

  19. Gradually expand the system • First - territorial expansion: apply environmental management system to the whole urban area (e.g. appropriate choice of indicators and targets) • Second - actor expansion: include stakeholders in the city and co-operation with neighbouring municipalities • Third – dimension expansion: integrate other dimensions of sustainability into the environmental management system Remark: Aalborg Commitments as reference document to identify direct and indirect sustainability aspects of urban areas

  20. Integrate existing practices

  21. Integration of governmental levels Common indicators/targets National Environmental Management National National indicators/targets State/regional EnvironmentalManagement State/Regional State/provincial indicators/targets LocalEnvironmentalManagement Municipal Local indicators/targets

  22. Integrated management system for urban areas

  23. Key criteria of an integrated management system • Cyclical management instrument • Participative approach for development of objectives and targets for quality of life, environmental quality and economic prosperity • Polical ratification of SMART targets • Co-operative implementation of measures • Multiple evaluation of achievements (Council, administration, community) SMART targets: Specific Measurable Achievable Realistic Time related

  24. Taking Commitments to the street with IMS

  25. When ready? Manual + Online Guidance in beginning of 2008 www.mue25.net

  26. The answer is 15! = 10 Aalborg Commitments 5 steps

  27. The answer is 15! 1 whole urban area 2 approaches the Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment and the Aalborg Commitments 3 dimensions of sustainable development 4 future generations 5 steps = 15 or an integrated management system for urban areas

  28. Project duration March 2005 - February 2008 Funding European Commission DG Environment, Finnish Ministry of the Environment, German Federal Environment Foundation (DBU), German Federal States of Baden-Württemberg and Bayern participating cities Budget 2.9 Meuro MUE-25 Basic Facts

  29. Thank you for your attention CONTACT Project Coordinator Ms Annika Claesson annika.claesson@ubc.net Tel. +358 2 262 3180 Fax. +358 2 262 3425 Union of the Baltic Cities (UBC) Commission on Environment Environment and Sustainable Development Secretariat The Old Observatory, Vartiovuori 20700 Turku, Finland www.mue25.net

  30. Questions from facilitator • Contribution of the project to Aalborg Committment and Thematic Strategy on Urban Environment?Providing a integrated management system adopted to structure and needs of local authorities in order to manage all strategic aspects of sustainability within the whole urban area. Flexible framework which allows integration of existing tools and systems and fullfils requierements of EMAS and ISO 14001. Political involvement on highest level (City Council) and involvement of stakeholder as minimum requirements.Support of European Agenda on Climate Change and other EU policies and legislation? • Climate Change and all other European Environmental and Sustainability Policies are strategic aspects of local authorities and therefore the most significant aspects of the MUE System and all elements (Baseline Review, Strategic Programme and Action Plan), MUE supports implementation of Key Performance Indicators to push maximum improvement of all significant aspects.Main hindrances/challenges for implementing and mainstreaming urban sustainability management systemsThematic Strategy and AC not implemented into national policies. Not enough political involvement and support on local level and lack of sensitation and training of political decision makers. EMS implemented for house keeping issues and isolated within environmental department. No real direct and short term incentives /benefits to convince political decision makers

  31. Questions from facilitator • Recommendations to EMAS Revision process?Political involvement and participation of stakeholder as requirements of EMAS III. Indirect aspects = strategic aspects as key aspects to improve for local authorities. From implementation in one service /department to whole urban area and from Environmental management towards sustainability management.Incentives / framework conditions which should put in place to motivate cities to implement EMS or SUM?EMS should become mandatory as an instrument to fulfil legal compliance and should be voluntary regarding performance above legal compliance.Financial advantages (additional taxes income for environmental investments, plus points for EU-funding, others) for local authorities with EMS /SUM. Campaigns /training to motivate political decision makers (EMS good for political image).What will happen with the results /products of your project after the end of the project phase?Manual and virtual training centre to support implementation of Thematic Strategy on Urban Environment; further projects to implement integrated management system in different member states. Influencing EMAS Revision and offering training to competent bodies and verifiers

More Related