1 / 6

Participation of Environmental NGO’s in standardisation, perspective of a new member state

Brussels, 2nd December 2005. Participation of Environmental NGO’s in standardisation, perspective of a new member state. Janis Ulme Policy Director, Friends of the Earth Latvia EEB Executive Latvia. Contents of presentation. Situation of ENGO’s capacity Experiences from LV

tommywilliamson
Download Presentation

Participation of Environmental NGO’s in standardisation, perspective of a new member state

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. Brussels, 2nd December 2005 Participation of Environmental NGO’s in standardisation, perspective of a new member state Janis Ulme Policy Director, Friends of the Earth Latvia EEB Executive Latvia

  2. Contents of presentation • Situation of ENGO’s capacity • Experiences from LV • Value of participation and prospects for further work in light of COM(2004)130

  3. Background factors for participation • Civil society in new member states is much more dependant on external resources for its work than in the old member states • External resources become scarce • Environmental NGO’s capacity of addressing the policy, legislation and technical issues like standardisation procedures is below the needed level • Situation differs in Central European countries, Baltic countries and Eastern/South Eastern Europe. First four points pictured by the numbers of Latvia • 600 - 800 environmental NGO’s (normal % per capita) • However <10 out of those are national, taking up environmental policies, legislation and standards • ~ 15-20 persons personnel in total working on policies&legislation • Standardisation issues – 0,5? • 90 % of resources (personnel, finances) allocated – project based • Being largest and most diverse organisation, FoE Latvia holds just 5 staff on policy issues

  4. Experiences of the participation • Most experiences faced to know were “unintentional”, organisations faced standardisation issue when initially were trying to promote better policies and legislation • Participation of “professional associations” – a bit better and more targeted in approach • Examples • Tourism ecocertification campaign and cooperation with affected a number of national standards in tourism sector, up to the level that we had a discussion of transferring criteria of our campaign into national standard (which we refused) • Green consumption campaign brought us to product standards (3 years work) • Urban development campaign brought us to air quality standards (2 years work)

  5. Prospects of further work Example of FoE Latvia – national, medium sized organisation, being active in efforts to improve environmental policies. • Nationally • The impossibility to avoid working with standardisation recognised • Capacity issue - links with scientists helped • Next step – engagement on permanent basis with national standardisation authority (LVS) for priority areas • Internationally • Keeping “hands on pulse” • Best fora available and to be used – ECOS • National experiences and resources to be transferred and communicated

  6. Value of ENGO participation (NMS) • Reals integration taking place within process discussions • Contributions to awareness increase of all stakeholders • Better communication • “Prestige”(?) issue – standardisation is seen by many environmental NGO’s and within their constituencies as anti-environmental concept

More Related