Implementing the Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) and environmental policies in Central Asia
Introduction
Access to environmental data and information has been recognized as a critical aspect of environmental policy as it conditions decision making at all levels (Kobayashi, 2012; Engel-Cox and Hoff, 2005). In recent decades, numerous initiatives facilitating access to environmental data have been elaborated and implemented in an increasing number of countries.1 One such key initiative is the Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS), a joint initiative of the European Commission and European Environment Agency to establish with the Member States an integrated and shared EU-wide environmental information system (EC, 2008). SEIS’ three dimensions – Content, Infrastructure and Cooperation – are meant to facilitate systematic environmental assessments and reporting, by interlinking existing data and information flows relevant for national authorities in their monitoring and assessment activities and by advancing sharing and comparability of environmental indicators to harmonize environmental monitoring requirements.
SEIS has already proved useful for environmental assessments and environmental policy beyond EU Member States. For example, SEIS contributes to Environmental Performance Reviews (EPRs) conducted by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) in Central Asia. EPRs are invaluable voluntary instruments in the region aiming to assess the progress countries have made in reconciling their environmental and economic targets and in meeting their international environmental commitments. In addition, EPRs promote the convergence of environmental policies throughout the region, and since 2017, have included the review of relevant goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
While significant progress has been made, there are still limitations in the provision of environmental data and information. The availability and accessibility of datasets and related information vary significantly per thematic area (air pollution, climate change, water etc.) and approaches taken by countries to generate, share and present information – based on different national legislative backgrounds, ministerial setups, competencies and strategies – can differ significantly, create inconsistencies and complicate comparisons (UNECE, 2016a). Moreover, institutional and financial barriers arising from accessing existing data and information, coupled with license conditions for its use, may limit such access (Beniston et al., 2012). In some cases, data content or its monitoring prove to be politically sensitive.
Nevertheless, the UNECE policy promoting SEIS and facilitating data harmonization across the 50 pan-European countries has had an observable positive impact on Central Asian countries’ noticeable progress regarding the dissemination and comparability of environmental data and information (CAREC, 2013). However, progress along one fundamental principle of SEIS – making citizens active users of environmental data – has seen very limited advancement in Central Asia. In general, regional public demand for environmental information is still weak and primarily limited to a few governmental agencies and research institutes (UNECE, 2019). However, there is evidence that grassroots level demand for environmental data is growing as demonstrated by some environmental NGOs and citizens that collect and share their own environmental data on issues they are interested in.
This paper discusses the prospects to increase citizens’ demand for environmental information in Central Asia in the course of implementing environmental policy reforms. It reviews three important policies being implemented in the region, namely the Aarhus Convention, the Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) and the introduction of the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) system. Having selected these three policies based on their strong focus on access to environmental data and information, and their break with the old Soviet approach to environmental policy by encouraging new users of data to emerge. The advancement of the three policies is assessed over the last two decades to understand how their development is related to the collection and access to environmental data and information in the region, particularly regarding SEIS’ implementation.
The analysis is based on secondary data from EPRs and State of Environment Reports (SOERs) for the five Central Asian countries, Aarhus Convention national implementation reports, IWRM and IPPC implementation data, reports on progress in establishing SEIS in the region, data and reports from national State Statistics Committees and relevant ministerial databases, as well as World Bank and UNECE publications on the implementation and reform of environmental policies in the region.
Section snippets
Current development of SEIS in Central Asia
Since the collapse of the USSR, external pressure from international actors (organizations, conventions, research institutions, programs, donor community etc.) has been the key driver to modernizing Central Asia’s environmental data and information collection. Such pressure, as well as growing concern about environmental issues and especially water management in the region over the last decade, has positively impacted the region’s establishment of international standards for environmental data,
Current development of environmental policy reforms in Central Asia
Reshaping environmental policy in Central Asian countries has been ongoing for two decades, but the USSR’s legacy lives on in many institutions in the region with their technocratic central planning and lack of data sharing practices (Burkhanov, 2018; Sievers, 2003). This section assesses how the development of SEIS can contribute to the region’s implementation of the following three important environmental policies selected for their strong focus on access to environment-related data and
Implications for SEIS implementation in Central Asia
The slow implementation pace of the three selected policies as analyzed above provides grounds for a cautious assessment of environmental policy reform in Central Asia. These policies require much better environmental data than is presently publicly available at the national level in the region. Further development of SEIS in Central Asia could fill existing data gaps in relation to these particular policies as SEIS emphasizes the importance of the free flow of environmental information from
Conclusion
Central Asia is broadly regarded as an economically limited region with multiple environmental and other problems inherited from its Soviet past. While the conventional view is that efforts reforming environmental policy in the region have not been effective, this review argues that significant progress has been made. Although some Central Asian countries (resource-rich Kazakhstan and the more financially challenged Kyrgyzstan) are more reformist than others (Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and
References (59)
Setting the stage for a Shared Environmental Information System
Environmental Science and Policy.
(2019)- et al.
Obstacles to data access for research related to climate and water: implications for science and EU policy-making
Environmental Science and Policy
(2012) - et al.
Integrated water resources management in Central Asia, as a way of survival in conditions of water scarcity
Quaternary international
(2013) - et al.
Science–policy data compact: use of environmental monitoring data for air quality policy
Environmental Science and Policy
(2005) - et al.
Coping with change: responses of the Uzbek water management regime to socio-economic transition and global change
Environmental Science and Policy
(2010) - et al.
Water user groups in Central Asia: emerging form of collective action in irrigation water management
Water Resource Management
(2010) Transformations and current trends of water governance in Central Asia
ReCCA-Conference 2014 (No. 212552). Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO)
(2014)- et al.
European Union External Environmental Policy: Rules, Regulation and Governance Beyond Borders
(2017) Institutional development of Water Users Associations in Kyrgyzstan, Thesis
Rochester Institute of Technology.
(2004)- et al.
Case Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee
(2016)
Case Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee
Environment statistics in Central Asia: progress and prospects
ERD Working Paper
Policy-making styles in Central Asia: The Soviet legacy and new institutions
Policy Styles and Policy-Making
Citizen science in hydrology and water resources: opportunities for knowledge generation, ecosystem service management, and sustainable development
Frontiers in Earth Science
Towards Implementation of Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) in Central Asia. Analytical Review
Should we think about adaptation to climate change in Central Asia? Adaptation to climate change: regional challenges in light of world experiences
Water in Central Asia: past, present, future
European Commission Communication, Towards a Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS)
East Region Synthesis Report. Building a Shared Environmental Information System with the Eastern Neighbourhood. Outcome of cooperation, 2010-2014
EU Shared Environmental Information System Implementation
Institutions and transition: does a better institutional environment make water users associations more effective in Central Asia?
Water Policy
The Impact of Best Available Techniques (BAT) on the Competitiveness of European Industry
Joint Research Centre, Report EUR
The NGO Paradox: Democratic Goals and Non-democratic Outcomes in Kazakhstan
Europe-Asia Studies
Institutional and policy analysis of river management decentralization
The Principle of Managing Water Resources at the Lowest Appropriate Level - When and Why Does It (Not) Work in Practice?
Forging policy and institutional frameworks to promote access to environmental information
The French experience of environmental data sharing: why France supported the INSPIRE European initiative? Networks and Communication Studies
NETCOM
Where Water Meets Agriculture: The Ambivalent Role of Water Users Associations
Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making: Implementation of the Aarhus Convention
Praha: Ústav státu a práva AV ČR
Environmental governance and policy in Kazakhstan (No. 365)
Cited by (10)
Ecological security warning in Central Asia: Integrating ecosystem services protection under SSPs-RCPs scenarios
2024, Science of the Total EnvironmentForest data governance as a reflection of forest governance: Institutional change and endurance in Finland and Canada
2022, Environmental Science and PolicyCitation Excerpt :These novel ways of producing and accessing data are expected to yield multiple benefits: improved cost-efficiency of management; new innovations; new business opportunities and services; more democratic and transparent governance (cf. Huijboom and van den Broek, 2011) and enhanced climate change adaptation and mitigation (Vedeld et al., 2020). Despite widespread policy efforts toward more open sharing of environmental data (cf. Aggestam, 2019; Beniston et al., 2012; Mangalagiu et al., 2019), the formation and updating of governance regimes for the management of digital data has not kept up with technological developments (Hartter et al., 2013). By data governance, we refer to private and public actors, institutions as the rules of the game that structure and direct human action, and their interactions regarding production, access and use of data.1
The spatial spillover effect and nonlinear relationship analysis between environmental decentralization, government corruption and air pollution: Evidence from China
2021, Science of the Total EnvironmentCitation Excerpt :iv) There is no scale effect of local air pollution, but the level of local air pollution is affected by the expansion of the economic scale of neighbors which is an inverted “U” connection. Environmental decentralization is manifested in the separation of central and local environmental management power (Mangalagiu et al., 2019). The expansion of local environmental management power helps to formulate environmental management policies that are in line with local conditions (Sheng et al., 2020).
Introduction to the special issue on a Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) for evidence-based policymaking
2020, Environmental Science and PolicyIs sharing truly caring? Environmental data value chains and policymaking in Europe and Central Asia
2020, Environmental Science and PolicyCitation Excerpt :The significant variation in performance cannot be attributed purely to a revised assessment framework as it is also impacted by the limited number of data flows accounted for in 2019. Fig. 6 additionally makes a distinction between EU Member States (hollow circles/triangles) and other European and Central Asian countries as some of the sub-regional variations highlighted in the 2016 progress report remain (Aggestam, 2019; Mangalagiu et al., 2019). More detailed information on how the 34 countries have performed across the environmental data value chains is available in Table A1 (see the Appendix).
Acquiring air quality monitoring data through the hierarchy or the market: A case study of Shandong province, China
2020, Science of the Total EnvironmentCitation Excerpt :Although seemingly a scientific or engineering challenge, how the monitoring system works also depends on institutional and human factors. Thus, socio-economic analysis of the monitoring system can help advance evidence-based environmental policymaking (Mangalagiu et al., 2019). Adopting transaction cost economics perspective, this paper investigates the principal-agent problem in acquiring air quality monitoring data through the government hierarchy and the market.