kaia davis tan implementation of agenda 21 in norway

Implementation of Agenda 21 to Act on Environmental Issues in Norway

LX5103 Environmental Law Assignment

10th October 2011 A0066563Y

" The promises made at Rio can only be fulfilled in time to secure our future if governments are inspired and pressured by their citizens - by people willing to support difficult decisions and to demand change"

Gro Harlem Brundtland, Introductory message to Agenda for Change, Centre for our Common Future, Geneva, 1993.

Environmental Law Assignment: 10 October.2011 A0066563Y

2

Introduction Looking back at the entire Rio process, now almost 20 years after and with the ongoing battle against business-as-usual attitudes, climate change deniers, fossil fuel lobbyists and crumbling international agreements such as the Kyoto protocol, the Rio documents stands out as an incredible achievement by the world leaders and citizens. It is therefore somewhat surprising that the Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, who was attending the Earth Summit, returned from the meetings disappointed.1 There had been a strong drive in Norway before the meetings and expectations were high. Preparatory meetings were held, including the Bergen Conference in 1990 where the “precautionary principle” was added to the sustainable development principles and later included in the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21.2 Before Rio, Norway already had existing policies, regulations and legislation in place for some of the sections of Agenda 21, such as integrating sustainability concerns into environmental protection, ensure proper waste management, protecting the cultural heritage, strengthening the role of woman, youth and workers, and increasing assistance to developing countries.2

This paper will describe the most pressing environmental issues in Norway and evaluate how they can be addressed under Agenda 21 and by other environmental laws. The implementation of Agenda 21 in Norway will also be reviewed.

1 Lafferty WM, Nordskag M, Aakre HA. “Realizing Rio in Norway. Evaluative Studies of Sustainable Development”. ProSus, Oslo (2002) 2 The Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs’ guidelines and brochures, see http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud


3

Environmental Issues in Norway Air Pollution The air quality in Norway has improved since 1990, but air pollution still remains a problem.3 It is estimated that between 500 to 2000 die prematurely as a result of air pollution every year.3 The most vulnerable individuals are pregnant woman, the elderly and children. Particulate matter and nitrogen oxide contribute the most to local air pollution and this results in an increased incidence of respiratory illnesses etc. However, in 2009, Norway was for the first time under the EU limit for particulate matter in all cities, with the exception of Trondheim.3 Local air pollution is worse during the winter due to the use of studded winter tyres on cars, which grinds up 100 times more particulate matter than regular tyres, and because of burning wood in stoves.3 Another serious problem is transboundary air pollution in the form of hazardous substances, acid rain and ground level ozone from the european continent which has major impacts on the norwegian environment. Hazardous substances can be detected in every lake and the critical load of acidification is surpassed in 13 % of the land and water courses in Norway, causing damage to fish and freshwater ecosystems.3 The Health Authority has also issued warnings of high mercury levels in fresh water fish and recommends that pregnant woman refrain from eating large quantities. Ground level ozone from motor vehicles, industries, paints, fuels and cleaning agents, is also a problem to humans, vegetation and materials. The pollution from ground level ozone has not declined in the last 15 years.4 Thus, air pollution may be the most serious environmental issue in Norway, mainly because of the difficulties in removing the sources of pollution. Biodiversity, Marine and Oil Industry Inheriting a rich biodiversity from the past is something that people often take for granted, and the value is not apparent until it is gone. Changes in land use, transboundary air pollution and climate change are factors which has affected the biodiversity in Norway. Traditional farm land and hay meadows are being replaced with modern agriculture and wetlands are damaged by altered river systems, acidification and pollution.4 This has lead to loss of habitats and biodiversity. There are more than 4,000 species on the 2010 Norwegian Red List, of which 2,398 are critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable.5 More than 21,000 species were assessed for the 2010 Red List.5 Also, the introduction of alien species from international transport and warmer climate is a threat to indigenous flora and fauna. Marine life is mainly affected by shipping, the oil and gas industry, aquaculture and water pollution and in 1980, the ecology was severely hit in rivers and lakes due to acid rain. Although, reduction in emissions of sulphur and nitrogen has reduced acidification since then, there are other negative factors such as hydropower production and salmon lice from fish farming affecting the same ecosystems.4 As a result, 25% of rivers and lakes have poor ecological status today.4 Thus, there are areas where biodiversity is struggling to keep pace with developments and destruction of habitats across Norway. However, efforts have been intensified and yielded some good results, such as the successful breeding of the arctic fox and the 3 State of the Environment Norway under MoE. See www.environment.no 4 See www.environment.no a MoE website 5 The 2010 Norwegian Red List for Species, Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre, 2010


4

recovery of the white-tailed eagle.6 The environment in the north is particularly vulnerable, and NGOs and the public are putting pressure on the government to regulate the oil and gas explorations there to eliminate the risk of oil spills and accidents.7 Noise The World Health Organisation warns that noise can cause several health problems such as stress, musculoskeletal disorders and may contribute to high blood pressure.8 Noise is the environmental issue that affects the most people in Norway. Half a million people have objectionable noise levels outside their homes and 200,000 suffer from sleep disturbances due to noise.6 Although rail and air traffic noise levels have reduced since 1999, road traffic which is the main contributor to noise pollution is still rising.6 This makes it difficult to keep up the pace with noise pollution control measures. Waste Waste production is increasing hand in hand with the rising GDP of Norway and with people’s affluence. Higher living standards, frequent redecoration and more home appliances and furniture contribute to the rise in waste production in Norway, which has one of the highest waste amount per capita in the world.9 Households were responsible for 21% of the total waste.10 Waste is also a source of air pollution due to landfills which releases methane and accounts for 2% of greenhouse gas emissions in Norway.10 This will also affect future generations since degradation of methane is slow. In addition, the environment is affected by some release of hazardous and toxic substances although it is only a limited problem due to strict controls.10 In 2009 there was a reduction of waste volumes for the first time since recording began, and Norway’s goal of recovering more than 75% of the waste was achieved in 2010.10 Release of methane and hazardous substances have also been reduced significantly due to a decline in landfilling and improved handling methods. The amount of “waste electrical and electronic equipment” or WEEE collected in 2010 was about 28 kg per capita which is higher than the one reported to EU.10 The reason for this is because Norway has a broader definition of waste labelled as WEEE than EU. Norway is a world leader in collecting and recycling electronic waste with an industry run program that collects 98% of this waste.11

6 See www.environment.no a MoE website 7 Bellona: “Årsrapport 2010”, www.bellona.org 8 WHO: http://www.euro.who.int/en/what-‐we-‐do/health-‐topics/environment-‐and-‐health/noise 9 OECD in Figures: http://www.oecdobserver.org 10 http://www.klif.no/no/english/english / 11 Simonsen, S.: “Electronic recycling done right”, The Environmental Magazine, 6 June 2010, see www.emagazine.com/archive/5187


5

Agenda 21 as a powerful tool to address environmental issues Air pollution Air pollution is addressed throughout Agenda 21 in the chapters 4, 6, 8 - 11, 15, 17 - 22, 34. An entire chapter is dedicated to the protection of the atmosphere in chapter 9, and section 9, B.2 on transportation is highly relevant for Norway’s air pollution issue. It states that “since the transport sector is also a source of atmospheric emissions, there is need for a review of existing transport systems and for more effective design and management of traffic and transport systems” (Agenda 21, section 9.13).12 The promotion of national development action programmes for urban air pollution and indoor air pollution is also particularly relevant and is set out in chapter 6, section 6.41 of Agenda 21.12 Thousands of residents in the cities of Bergen and Trondheim are affected by periods of severe air pollution mainly from high volume of traffic and poor road planning. Therefore, both chapter 8 and 10 which aims at bringing consideration for the environment into the decision-making process and land-use planning are important for policymakers and local authorities too.

The problem of transboundary air pollution and the resulting acidification of water courses are thoroughly addressed in chapter 9, section D on transboundary atmospheric pollution, and to some degree in chapter 18 on the protection of freshwater resources where transboundary air pollution is problematic. The general objective set out in chapter 18 is “… to make certain that adequate supplies of water of good quality are maintained for the entire population of this planet, while preserving the hydrological, biological and chemical functions of ecosystems…”.12 Further, deposits of chemicals such as mercury in lakes and rivers are to some extent addressed by chapter 19 (management of toxic chemicals) and 20 (management of hazardous wastes). The long range effects of pollution mentioned in section 19.2 can be reduced if point sources in relevant countries are controlled.

Although there are only low levels of radiaoctive pollution remaining in Norway from the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, chapter 22 remains highly relevant for Norway, being in such proximity of Russia. The country is therefore an active partner in Russia’s nuclear programme and assists with risk assessments and funding of maintenance programmes.13 Agenda 21’s chapter 34 on Transfer of environmentally sound technology also covers aspects of this cooperation. Norway is mostly a recipient of transboundary air pollution, but we cannot neglect the high levels of greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industries. The Minister of Environment from 1990-1997, Thorbjørn Bentsen was criticised for his comments in Parliament during a climate debate: “We can turn off all the lights in Norway, stop all the cars, close down all the factories – and we still won’t make more than a minuscule contribution to reversing global greenhouse emissions”.14 Although Norway’s contribution to global emissions is only 0.3% this goes directly against the Polluter Pay’s principle and the democratic responsibility to share the burden of sustainable development.14 Chapter 9 points to sustainable development for energy

12 Agenda 21: United Nations, www.un.org/esa/sustdev/agenda21.htm 13 See Norwegian Radiation Protection Agency http://www.nrpa.no/ 14 See the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud


6

development and efficiency has had an impact on the oil and gas industry in Norway which is working on technology to reduce emissions and clean up production as well as contributing to carbon offsetting programs and other CSR initiatives.15 Loss of biodiversity Chapter 15 in Agenda 21 is dedicated entirely to conservation of biological diversity and points at human activity as the main cause of the decline in biodiversity. International cooperation, national action and local participation are essential to observe, study and evaluate biodiversity to restore richness. As mentioned in chapter 9, committed international cooperation is necessary to reduced greenhouse gas emissions, in the same way sulphur and nitrogen emissions were successfully regulated to ensure less acidification of land and water. On a national level, Norway needs to aim at implementing factors such as demographic dynamics and land-use planning addressed in chapter 5 and chapter 7 of Agenda 21. Protection of the oceans and freshwater sources (chapters 17 and 18) is also the responsibility of the government and industries, although transboundary pollution needs to be dealt with through international channels. Local Agenda 21 which has been widely implemented in Norway is also a useful tool to protect biodiversity, in particular to educate the public who can mobilize their local government and industries to action. Noise Noise is affecting more than 1 in 10 residents living in Norway. Thus, it is an important environment issue that Agenda 21 is addressing as part of the section on environmental health programmes aimed at reducing health risks (section 6.41). The government has tried to reduce the problem but is working against an uphill battle since the volume of traffic is increasing. Although the primary concern of section 7.48 is reducing energy consumption in transport it also describes noise arising from poor traffic management as one of many nuisances to be dealt with under sustainable transport systems. Perhaps aspects of the root cause of increased transport ought to be examined, such as unsustainable consumption, as it is addressed in chapter 4 of Agenda 21: “Changing Consumption Patterns”. Waste The first thought that comes to mind in the context of waste generation is that Norway is a typical use and discard society. Chapter 4 of Agenda 21 states that deterioration of the global environment is caused by industrialised countries’ unsustainable consumption and production.16 Strong words are used in section 4.3: “…[This] is a matter of grave concern, aggravating poverty and imbalances…”.16 Thus, the government, industries and consumers must raise the efforts to increase life cycles and cradle to cradle design of products, reducing the amount of waste and ensure proper handling and recycling. In particular, chapter 30 in Agenda 21 stresses that governments should strengthen businesses and industries to clean up their production and reducing wastes, including toxic and hazardous substances. At the other end of the life cycle comes disposal by consumers. In the example of wastes from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), a large portion of global WEEE ends up on landfills in developing countries, such as Ghana. This not only destroys their environment, but children from poor families are putting their health and lives in

15 U.T.O.G (Utdanning til Olje og Gassindustrien): www.utog.no 16 Agenda 21: United Nations, www.un.org/esa/sustdev/agenda21.htm


7

serious danger by extracting metals from the discarded equipment.17 Since Rio, Norway has worked to reduce waste and today 78% of the total waste is recovered.18 Also, most of the hazardous waste is treated within the country with 11% being exported to approved locations abroad. Less than 5% is handled in unknown ways.18 The trade in dangerous goods have been curbed by new laws, for example, the number of carcinogenic compound that can be legally sold dropped from 3500 in 1988 to below 550 in 1995.19 Treatment of different types of wastes are widely covered in chapters 19-22 of Agenda 21. However, for Norway which already has good infrastructure and regulations in place to manage waste disposal, the challenge remains to significantly reduce total waste production through a fundamental change in consumption and production patterns.

Implementation of Agenda 21 in Norway

The Rio Documents and Conventions are well known amongst people in Norway, and they are often referred to in the media. Although Agenda 21 has lead to changes in norwegian policies and laws, it is difficult to pinpoint the specific impact because of other factors such as the common sense of threat and the desire to change our current course to the future which also exert influence.

Leading up to Rio

Environmental management systems of natural resources evolved in Norway over a long period as part of common law.19 There were also several changes in the years leading up to the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992. In 1972 the Ministry of Environment was set up and after a heated public debate the government incorporated environmental considerations such as emission data of certain pollutants into the economic calculations of industrial growth in Report no. 71, 1974-1977.19 From then on, environmental issues became an important part of the Long Term Programmes, a 4-year plan presented to the Norwegian Parliament (“Storting”).20

When the World Commission on the Environment and Development (WCED) published its report in 1987, the Norwegian Prime Minister, Gro Harlem Brundtland demanded that all departments and ministries assessed the recommendations in the report and provided feedback on implementation20. She also asked for comments from local authorities, businesses, NGOs and unions. These efforts led to the white paper “Environment and development. Programme for Norway’s follow-up of the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development” (Report no. 46, 1988-1989). One resulting policy was the establishment of a “green budget” representing the environmental content from all ministries as part of the State budget and an annual debate on state of the environment is being held yearly.20 As part of the preparations for the Earth Summit, Norway also presented the report “Characteristics of the development of North-South relations and Norway’s cooperation with developing countries” where “promoting sound management and utilisiaton of natural resources and a minimum burden on common resources (air and water)” is being emphasised

17 Dannoritzer, C.: “Pyramids of Waste Documentary”, Article Z Media Production, (2010) 18 See www.environment.no. 19 See the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud 20 See the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud


8

(NOU 1995: 5).19

Implementing Agenda 21

Although, Norway had implemented many changes for sustainable development before the Rio process, it was necessary to assess at the country’s policies after Agenda 21 and the Rio Documents. An evaluation presented to the Parliament in December 1992 describes the national strategies to follow up on the Convention on Biological Diversity, The Forests Principles and the Rio Declaration (Report no. 13, 1992-1993).20 Norway also developed strategies of environmental development assistance in addition to existing policies (Report no. 19, 1995-1996).21 A special environment grant for the environment was re-formulated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1993 along with previously introduced grants for woman and culture for developing countries21. In the review of environmental measures and policies in 1997, 5 years after the Earth Summit, the precautionary principle was emphasised in “An environmental policy for sustainable development” (Report no. 59, 1996-1997). It also mentioned future generation’s right to the environmental capital and equitable distribution of wealth in the world.

The area where the government has been the most successful in implementing Agenda 21 is through supporting local authorities’ efforts at adopting Local Agenda 21. 21 In fact, The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities was a key contributor to chapter 28 – “Local authorities’ initiatives in support of Agenda 21” (http://www.un.org/esa/earthsummit/norway/lok/engmunic.htm). In 1991, they organised the 30th International Union of Local Authorities World Congress in Oslo, where the Oslo Declaration on Environment, Health and Lifestyle was adopted and later used as a basis for including local authorities’ initiatives in Agenda 21. 21 However, after the Earth Summit, many NGO’s felt that the Agenda 21 implementation process was too slow and they launched an intense campaign to ensure that Local Agenda 21 (LA21) was adopted. 21 In 1996, the local environmental development programme was in place and with strong support from the government, the LA21 process took over. 21 The Ministry of Environment is giving significant financial support to “LA21 nodes” in most Norwegian counties, and to the “Environmental Home Guard” which has been a driving force in the LA21 process.22 The MoE is also giving financial support to the innovation centre “The Ideas Bank” as well as several LA21 initiatives such as an influential environmental certification project for companies, awarded by the GRIP Centre and the Sustainable Local Communities Project.22 Some of these groups are now self-financing and is no longer receiving funding from MoE.23

21 See the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud 22 See www.regjeringen.no/ Norwegian Government Report 40 (1998-1999) 23 See www.miljofyrtarn.no


9

Passing of environmental laws to address issues:

The most significant addition of environmental laws in Norway during the Rio Process was the amendment of the constitution on the 19 June 1992 to include Article 110b: "Every person has a right to an environment that is conducive to health and to a natural environment whose productivity and diversity are maintained. Natural resources should be managed on the basis of comprehensive long-term considerations whereby this right will be safeguarded for future generations as well. In order to safeguard their right in accordance with the foregoing paragraph, citizens are entitled to information on the state of the natural environment and on the effects of any encroachment on nature that is planned or carried out.” The authorities of the State shall issue specific provisions for the implementation of these principles."24 In line with chapter 36 of Agenda 21, and the Århus Convention in 1998, another amendment arised in 2004 when article 100, which relates to freedom of speech, changed to include the following paragraph: “Everyone has a right of access to documents of the State and municipal administration and a right to follow the proceedings of the courts and democratically elected bodies. Limitations to this right may be prescribed by law to protect the privacy of the individual or for other weighty reasons.”24

These two articles of the constitution give people in Norway a strong legal framework when they need to deal with environmental issues. There are several other laws in place to protect natural resources and the environment. The Pollution Control Act covers both air pollution and noise pollution, and specific for air pollution there is the Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Act which aims to “limit emissions of greenhouse gases [from activities in Norway] in a cost-effective manner”.25 There are also extensive regulations related to local air quality controlled by the Climate and Pollution Agency.26 The most important tool to combat transboundary air pollution and acid rain for Norway is the Sulphur Emissions Reduction Protocol under the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution which entered into force in 1983. Despite the extensive legal framework that overhangs air pollution, it is likely to be effective for curbing some of the future emissions and issues, but as is the case in many environmental ills, it is ineffective for the existing acidification deposited in the past and similarly, the increase in transportation on roads passing through densely populated areas. The protection of the biodiversity comes under the Nature Diversity Act of 19 June 2009. The Act includes section 9 -“the precautionary principle”, section 14 –“Other important public interests and Sami interests” and section 26 – “Trade, etc.” in which CITES is mentioned.27 Norway has ratified CITES but unfortunately with reservation

24 See The Norwegian Constitution www.stortinget.no/en/In-‐English/About-‐the-‐Storting/The-‐Constitution/The-‐Constitution/ 25 See www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/md/documents-‐and-‐publications/acts-‐and-‐regulations/acts.html?id=704 26 See www.klif.no/no/english/english/Legislation/ 27 See www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/md/documents-‐and-‐publications/acts-‐and-‐regulations/acts.html?id=704


10

on various baleen whale species. In addition, there are laws that protect various important habitats, notably in the North of Norway and Svalbard, which is home to polar bears and is protected under the Svalbard Environmental Protection Act. These Acts are important for the protection of wildlife, however, there is also a need to prevent further impact from change in land-use. It is for example imposed by law to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment for any projects deemed to have an impact on nature as set out in the Planning and Building Act.27

For waste there are regulations such as the Product Control Act and Product Regulations which controls waste from industries. These have been efficiently enforced and resulted in less hazardous chemicals, toxic waste and WEEE on landfills and in the environment. The purpose of the Product Control Act is to “prevent products from causing environmental disturbance”, and it encompasses pollution, waste and noise.27 There are also the Waste Regulations, which mainly relates to recycling and recovering of waste.27 With these laws and regulations in place, resulting in some improvement of waste generation and handling, the next step would be to target consumption directly. This may be achieved by using “smart” bins that measures household waste and imposes taxes or similar incentives for waste reduction.


11

Conclusion Norway has a good track record of cleaning up industries and taking care of its natural resources, but there are still environmental issues that are hard to tackle. Air pollution in Norway is interlinked with the demands for domestic economic growth as well as transboundary pollution involving the international arena. The continuous increase in transportation volumes not only leads to more air pollution problems in cities, but also unhealthy noise levels for the population. Factors such as climate change and pollution is affecting the biodiversity and this are also issues that are difficult to address, whereas the problem of waste is an issue that can be effectively regulated and monitored at the end of the pipe. Agenda 21 is a powerful tool for addressing these environmental issues, ranging from providing action plans for local authorities in most Norwegian counties, to increasing Norway’s pressure on foreign countries that cause transboundary pollution. During the 1980s and 1990s there was a strong drive for change to incorporate sustainable development in Norway and it is therefore difficult to attribute policy implementations to specific contents of the Rio Documents. However, the desire for incorporating the pressing issues addressed in those documents was evident, and the influence between Agenda 21 and Norway went both ways. Although Norway is a leading country in development assistance, carbon offsetting and recycling efforts, there is still a need for a fundamental change in the individualistic materialism and energy intensive lifestyles that comes with wealth. Thus, it is not necessarily the people’s conviction or the legal framework that represent the greatest challenge in Norway, but to change the culture of a typical developed country in which unsustainable consumption forms the baseline for economic growth and prosperity.


12

Bibliography Dannoritzer, C.: “Pyramids of Waste Documentary”, Article Z Media Production, (2010) Agenda 21: United Nations, www.un.org/esa/sustdev/agenda21.htm Bellona: “Årsrapport 2010”, www.bellona.org Climate and Pollution Agency, www.klif.no Lafferty WM, Nordskag M, Aakre HA. “Realizing Rio in Norway. Evaluative Studies of Sustainable Development”. ProSus, Oslo (2002) Miljøfyrtårn www.miljofyrtarn.no. Last accessed 6 Oct. 2011 Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority: http://www.nrpa.no/eway/default.aspx?pid=240. Last accessed 6 Oct. 2011 OECD in Figures: http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/search.php?_FB[q]=waste&SUBMIT[submit2]=Search (2005) Simonsen, S.: “Electronic recycling done right”, The Environmental Magazine, 6 June 2010, www.emagazine.com/archive/5187. SOE (State of the Environment Norway) under MoE: www.environment.no. Last accessed 6 Oct. 2011 The Norwegian Constitution www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/The-Constitution/The-Constitution/ The 2010 Norwegian Red List for Species, Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre, 2010. The Norwegian Government’s website, Long term programmes: http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fin/dok/regpubl/stmeld The Norwegian Ministry of the Environment’s website: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/md.html The Norwegian Ministry of Foreign affairs’ guidelines and brochures: “Norway’s implementation of agenda 21”: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud U.T.O.G (Utdanning til Olje og Gassindustrien): www.utog.no. Last accessed 6 Oct. 2011 WHO: http://www.euro.who.int/en/what-we-do/health-topics/environment-and-health/noise