Fact-sheet 29 - Regional - 8284-00/2011 8284-01/2014
6.5
On which assumptions were the outcomes based?
(i) and (vi)
6.6
Which risks for the achievement of outcomes were
formulated?
(i) and (vi)
6.7
Is the intervention exemplary/ a model for other
interventions, does it form structures and can it be
up‐scaled?
7.
Assessment of the impact in general
Sources
7.1
Which is the most important positive impact of the
intervention?
Interviews
7.2
Which is the most important negative impact of the
intervention?
Phase 1:
‐ Institutional support and readiness of relevant authorities to engage in regional cooperation, and resources made available
for participation in Themis activities.
‐ Beneficiaries would be willing to cooperate and give access to information in a transparent manner.
‐ Active and responsible people identified in each of the beneficiary countries.
‐ Relevant authorities would be willing to enable all stakeholders to take part in Themis activities and be able to allocate
resources to implement the project.
‐ Smooth and regular communication.
‐ Observance of deadlines from all actors involved in the implementation.
‐ A high level of involvement, cooperation and participation of all the stakeholders.
Phase 2:
Formulates as assumptions only external factors that are beyond the scope of the projects but can affect its success.
Explanation
Raising awareness and improving knowledge about a so far not very well known issue, which is environmental crime in the
involved Ministries of Justice and Environment, and among the judges and prosecutors, the practitioners from the
enforcement agencies (police, customs), environmental inspectors, e.g.
Phase 1:
‐ Lack of cooperation by stakeholders.
‐ Carrying out activities with limited value added to what has already been done, in particular by other regional projects.
‐ Lack of effective coordination and interaction with on‐going activities related to the subject matter of the contract, resulting
in overlaps, confusion and waste of valuable resources.
‐ Insufficient ministerial capacity to absorb assistance and cooperate at the regional level.
‐ Lack of competent staff with good English skills.
‐ Lack of adequate financial resources to fully implement the Multi‐Annual Work Programme.
‐ Weaknesses in communication with some of the beneficiary countries’ administrations
‐ Corruption affecting target groups and target sectors.
Phase 2:
‐ Lack of political will necessary to achieve the project objectives and insufficient engagement of decision‐makers.
‐ Lack of institutional support and readiness of relevant authorities to engage in regional cooperation under Themis.
‐ Lack of effective coordination and interaction with other on‐going and past initiatives, resulting in overlaps, waste of
valuable resources and no added value. Lack of adequate resources, financial or otherwise.
‐ Lack of interest and involvement in Moldova.
Page 11
Fact-sheet 29 - Regional - 8284-00/2011 8284-01/2014
8.
Assessment of the impact in relation to the key
environmental criteria
Assessme‐
nt 1‐7[1]
Sources
8.1
How, and to what extent, did the intervention
(positively and negatively) plausibly contribute to
changes in the key criteria ʺenvironmental
protectionʺ, and which external factors contributed
to these changes?
4 (v) p. 45 and
interviews
8.2
How, and to what extent, did the intervention
(positively and negatively) plausibly contribute to
changes in the key criteria for ʺsustainable
management of natural resourcesʺ, and which
external factors contributed to these changes?
4 Interviews
8.3
… ʺreduce conflicts about the use of resourcesʺ
4 Interviews
8.4
… ʺimprovement of standard of livingʺ
4 (v) p. 45
8.5
… ʺimproved access to energy and resourcesʺ
8.6
… ʺcontribution to climate change adaptation and
mitigationʺ
The workshop participants learned that environmental standards exist that are protected by law, and that the violation of
these standards has to be conceived as environmental crime.
In the current phase, standard operational procedures (SOPs) for the inspectors will be developed in some of the countries,
for them to be informed about which authority is responsible and how to act step by step in case of environmental crime.
SOPs are also requirements in the margin of the EU accession process. In the first phase, all relevant issues, like water‐use
and waste‐water treatment, use and deposit of chemicals, air pollution, were covered and discussed in the capacity‐building
workshops and meetings. In Kosovo, a workshop to improve institutional capacity around the issue of illegal building is
planned for the end of the year. In Macedonia, participants of the Themis network wish to work on the development of a by‐
law on professional standards for the environmental inspectors so that their preservation of evidence in a criminal case can
be used in court.
Conflicts about resources between their use and protection were also the subject of debate.
The qualitative data gathered by REC in the stakeholder consultation demonstrate that all of the respondents were of the
opinion that the project has contributed considerably to long‐term social, economic and technical changes. The number of
supportive project partners actively involved (e.g. INECE, INTERPOL, IMPEL, Croatian and Czech Environmental
Inspectorate, Austrian Lebensministerium), strengthens international cooperation and further contributes to long‐term
changes for the beneficiary countries. But it is impossible to attribute changes in the areas of income and employment to the
project.
Explanation
Based on the results from the stakeholder consultation and interviews, a general conclusion is that Themis has contributed
considerably to the enhancement of environmental awareness, especially among the beneficiary organizations but also
beyond, through the workshops, conferences, training, visits etc. The documentation process regarding environment, such
as in the environmental impact assessments, has significantly improved in some of the countries, but the enforcement is still
very low.
Page 12
Dostları ilə paylaş: |