Addressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia: … · Environmental degradation and scarcity or ... outcome of human-induced transformation ... Addressing Environmental Risks in

Risks · Policies · CapacitiesAddressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia

En

vir

on

me

nta

l G

ov

ern

an

ce

Se

rie

s

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Belarus

Georgia

Kazakhstan

Kyrgyzstan

Tajikistan

Turkmenistan

Uzbekistan

Moldova

Russian Federation

Ukraine

This report has been written and produced by Alexander Carius, Moira Feil and Dennis Tänzler (Adelphi Research)

Copyright ©2003 UNDP

ISBN 92-990011-8-9

Published by: UNDP/Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS

Cover and layout design: EYES-OPEN, Berlin – www.eyes-open.de

Cover photo: Jack D. Ives

Printing and binding: Oktoberdruck AG, Berlin

Printed in Berlin, Germany

UNDP is the UN's global development network, advocating for change and connectingcountries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. We areon the ground in 166 countries, working with them on their own solutions to global andnational development challenges. As they develop local capacity, they draw on the people ofUNDP and our wide range of partners.

World leaders have pledged to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, including theoverarching goal of cutting poverty in half by 2015. UNDP's network links and coordinatesglobal and national efforts to reach these Goals.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarilyrepresent those of the United Nations, UNDP, UNEP or OSCE.

ëÂ

Ëfl

«ù

ÍÓÎ

Ó„Ë

˜ÂÒ

ÍÓÂ

ÛÔ

‡‚Î

ÂÌË

Â»

ÄÏÂÌËfl

ÄÁÂ·‡È‰Ê‡Ì

ÅÂÎ‡ÛÒ¸

ÉÛÁËfl

ä‡Á‡ıÒÚ‡Ì

ä˚„˚ÁÒÚ‡Ì

í‡‰ÊËÍËÒÚ‡Ì

íÛÍÏÂÌËÒÚ‡Ì

ìÁ·ÂÍËÒÚ‡Ì

åÓÎ‰‡‚Ëfl

êÓÒÒËÈÒÍ‡fl îÂ‰Â‡ˆËfl

ìÍ‡ËÌ‡

ì„ÓÁ˚ . èÓÎËÚËÍ‡ . ëÔÓÒÓ·ÌÓÒÚËìÒÚ‡ÌÂÌËÂ ˝ÍÓÎÓ„Ë˜ÂÒÍËı Û„ÓÁ ‚ ñÂÌÚ‡Î¸ÌÓÈ ÄÁËË

This brochure is available in Russian and English.

ùÚ‡ ·Ó¯˛‡ ÔÓ‰„ÓÚÓ‚ÎÂÌ‡ Ì‡ ÛÒÒÍÓÏ Ë ‡Ì„ÎËÈÒÍÓÏ flÁ˚Í‡ı.

Both language versions can be downloaded free of

charge at these sites:

http://www.undp.sk

http://www.un.org/publications

http://www.adelphi-research.org

Risks · Policies · CapacitiesAddressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia

En

vir

on

me

nta

l G

ov

ern

an

ce

Se

rie

s

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Belarus

Georgia

Kazakhstan

Kyrgyzstan

Tajikistan

Turkmenistan

Uzbekistan

Moldova

Russian Federation

Ukraine

Addressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia

While the linkages between environment andsecurity are broadly acknowledged and re-cognized, much work remains to be done onunderstanding the nature of the causes anddirection of the effects. Without such anunderstanding, policy responses will not havea lasting impact on the trends and dynamicsof a given sub-region. What is notable in casesof environmental insecurity is that the con-flicts or conflict potential is generally not theresult of an innate scarcity of resources, but afailure in the ability or willingness of states tofind workable solutions to the problems.While numerous inter-state agreements existon resource management and governance,there is a lack of implementation often due toinadequate resource management, exacer-bated by a lack of necessary wherewithal toimplement the necessary reforms.

Within the Central Asian context, thisstudy aims to address this problem both atthe national and sub-regional levels.

At the national level, it will provide in-formation on the legal, institutional andpolitical frameworks in each of the CentralAsian Republics in order to facilitate andimprove government functioning on a natio-nal basis. By determining which difficulties arethe result of institutional failure, solutions maybe found to amend or adapt existing frame-works, or, where necessary, identify where newmechanisms should be created.

Also, by ensuring that full information isavailable on the various national frameworks,the study allows for a sub-regional compari-son to be made. Such a comparison may helppolicy makers and international organizationsalike to identify the lacunae and misalign-ments in policy, as well as identifying areas –both geographic and thematic – where sub-regional cooperation is working or possible.

It is intended that this information willprovide the basis for sustained and dynamicpolicy dialogue at the sub-regional level onways to improve sub-regional cooperation inthe areas of environment and security. Thisstudy is a part of the joint initiative by theOrganization for Security and Cooperation inEurope (OSCE), the United Nations Environ-ment Programme (UNEP) and the UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP) topromote the use of environmental manage-ment as a strategy for reducing insecurity inthe sub-regions of South Eastern Europe andCentral Asia.

Andrej Steiner

Chief Technical AdvisorUNDP/Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS, Bratislava

page 1Preface

Table of Contents


page 2

Preface 1

Table of Contents 2

Executive Summary 3

1 Introduction 4

2 Kazakhstan 7

3 Kyrgyzstan 11

4 Tajikistan 16

5 Turkmenistan 21

6 Uzbekistan 25

7 Conclusions 29

8 Recommendations 32

9 Bibliography 36

This scoping report explores the potentialthreats to human development and securityemanating from environmental risks in fiveCentral Asian states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan).Adelphi Research prepared the report onbehalf of the UNDP Regional Office for Europeand the CIS in Bratislava, for presentation atthe Kiev Ministerial Conference in May 2003.It is a component of the Environment andSecurity Initiative, a joint UNDP, UNEP andOSCE project. It is based on publicly availabledata and consultation with UNDP and OSCErepresentatives in the countries.

This report assesses major environmentalrisks relating to security, and describes thesocio-economic context and institutional andpolicy framework available to address suchrisks in the five Central Asian countries.Building upon this analysis, the followingconclusions are drawn:

• Environmental degradation and resourcescarcity have not been a direct cause ofviolent conflict in any of the Central Asianrepublics, but have contributed to accele-rating existing political and social crisesand heightening ethnic tensions.

• Key environmental issues threateninghuman development and security in theregion include growing demand for water,high levels of water pollution, soil erosionand degradation and air pollution. Diffe-rences among countries are considerablebut smaller than the differentials betweencentral and peripheral areas withincountries.

• Traditional resource conflicts over sharedwater resources seem less likely than oftenassumed. However, the impacts of waterpollution upon human development andtransboundary security have beenunderestimated.

• The socio-economic burdens of environ-mental degradation disproportionatelyaffect weaker social groups. Environ-mentally triggered or heightened tensions

arise at the sub-state level and in alreadymarginalized and remote areas.

• Institutional structures are limited, especi-ally at sub-state level, and suffer fromweak implementation, limited technicalcapabilities and a lack of finance andhuman resources.

• The existing legislative and institutionalbasis is characterized by sectoral ap-proaches. There is a need to improvecoordinating institutional structures andparticipatory mechanisms.

The analysis presented in this scoping reportyields the following recommendations:

• Strengthen institutional capacities inthree key areas: (a) institutional andadministrative development, (b) sustain-able resource management, conflict pre-vention and mediation, and (c) regionalframework programmes.

• Improve environmental policies and fostertransboundary cooperation in vulnerableregions.

• Conduct integrated assessments.

• Enhance the knowledge base relating tolocal contexts.

• Develop early warning indicators andmonitoring systems.

In-depth assessments and consultations withnational and local stakeholder groups areessential to gain a common understanding ofthese risks and create ownership of respon-sive policies.

page 3


Executive Summary

Central Asia, encompassing the southernprovinces of the former Soviet Union,Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkme-nistan and Uzbekistan, is rich in naturalresources, most still untapped. In Kyrgyzstanand Tajikistan, large quantities of water arestored in the mountain glaciers. Kazakhstan,Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have huge andmostly unexplored oil and gas deposits.

At the same time, almost half of thepopulations of these countries live in povertyand lack sufficient natural resources to sustaintheir livelihoods, while the countries' wealth isunevenly distributed. The region suffers fromsignificant ecological disasters and the legacyof the past. Central Asia was the nucleartesting ground for the Soviet Union since thelate 1940s. This has impacted upon humanhealth and fragile ecosystems. To supplycotton crops to the Soviet Union, large-scaleirrigation systems were built, contributing tothe degradation of the Aral Sea and CaspianSea. The consequences of colonial authorita-rianism, forced secularization, central econo-mic planning and the establishment ofartificial borders in the region include severeecological degradation, forced migration ofethnic groups, and interethnic competition forland, water and other increasingly scarceresources. Environmental risks and social andeconomic development are intertwined,leading to the emergence of environmentallytriggered or accelerated crises and tensions atthe sub-state level.

While there are common characteristicsamong these countries, their political andsocial geography is highly diverse. In thisreport we take a closer look at the differencesbetween these countries and explore thepotential threats to human development andsecurity emanating from environmental risks.

Rationale of the study

Adelphi Research has been asked by theUNDP Regional Office for Europe and the CISto prepare a scoping report on environmental

risks in Central Asia and their potentialsecurity implications. This report was pre-pared between 15 March and 15 April 2003. Asmost of the existing reports on environmentalstress focus either on ecological disastersaround the Aral Sea and Caspian Sea or theregional dimension of environmental declineand political and social instability in CentralAsia, the present report examines the nationallevel in order to gain insights into the veryspecific differences among the environmentalrisks prevailing in these countries. The reportanalyses the main environmental risks, thesocio-economic conditions and policies, andthe institutions to address these challenges.

Environment and security linkages

Environmental degradation and scarcity orthe uneven distribution of natural resourceshave emerged as an important trigger or ac-celerating factor of tensions within and amongnations, although they occur mainly at thesub-state level. Environmental decline andresource scarcity lead by no means directly toviolent conflict. They are rather one strandwithin a complex web of causality in which aseries of socio-economic problems – such aspopulation pressure, poverty, forced migra-tion, refugee movements, political instabilityand ethno-political tensions – are intertwined.Environmental degradation and natural re-source scarcity are both causes and outcomesof these socio-economic problems or areintensified by them. The increasing scarcity offresh-water resources, the loss of ground covervegetation, desertification, global climatechange and rising sea levels are primarily theoutcome of human-induced transformationprocesses. These negative environmentalchanges are the result of resource-intensive,partially resource-wasting patterns of produc-tion and consumption, and of inadequateagricultural practices which, in combinationwith the above-mentioned socio-economicproblems, can expose national and inter-national security to substantial risks.

1 Introduction

The region suffers from

significant ecological

disasters and

the legacy of the past

Environmental

degradation and natural

resource scarcity are both

causes and outcomes of

socio-economic problems

page 4


“Environmental stress is seldom the onlycause of major conflicts within or amongnations. [...] Environmental stress can thus bean important part of the web of causalityassociated with any conflict and can in somecases be catalytic.” (WCED 1987: 291)

Since environmental degradation oftentriggers or accelerates already existing devel-opment dilemmas, it also affects basic humanneeds and sustainable livelihoods, and canbecome a substantial threat to human secu-rity. In this report we look at environmentalrisks that threaten human security and thelinkages among environmental degradation,unfavourable socio-economic conditions andtensions.

The Environment and Security Initiative

This scoping report is integrated within theEnvironment and Security Initiative, a long-term process to assess environmental risks,develop an assessment methodology andconduct regular consultations with localstakeholder groups. The initiative is a jointeffort of the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP), the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) and theOrganization for Security and Cooperation inEurope (OSCE) with pilot projects in CentralAsia and South Eastern Europe. It seeks tofacilitate a collaborative process with keypublic officials, NGOs and developmentagencies on security-related environmentalrisks, sustainable resource use and environ-mental cooperation in order to foster peaceand stability. It envisages developing a seriesof programmes and projects under the threekey areas of the initiative: VulnerabilityAssessment & Mapping, Policy Development& Implementation, and Capacity Building &Institutional Development. Further infor-mation on the Environment and SecurityInitiative is available from the website atwww.envsec.org.

Aim and scope of the report

This report will provide a better picture of thestrengths and weaknesses of national policiesand institutions to address environmentalrisks by comparing the Central Asiancountries. It will also help to identify wherenational and multilateral donors can assist.Our analysis focuses on environmental risksand their potential threats to human develop-ment and security. Elements of the concept ofhuman security comprise food and water,individual, community, environmental, healthand economic security. But we also considerthe occurrence of political tensions betweenstates and social tensions at the domesticlevel. The study provides a brief outline of themost relevant environmental risks that affectsecurity concerns for each of the countriesand an overview of key institutions dealingwith the socio-economic impacts of environ-mental risks. We examine the level of inte-gration of environmental concerns into othersectoral policies and evaluate to what extenteach country has already developed andimplemented policies and measures toadequately address these challenges.

The study provides a brief overview of thebasic structures of national environmentalpolicies and identifies deficits in the legalsystem and with regard to implementation. Itreviews the extent to which policies addressenvironmental, social and economic issues inan integrated fashion.

This report will be presented to the publicon the occasion of the fifth MinisterialConference “Environment for Europe” in Kievin May 2003, along side a further report of theEnvironment and Security Initiative and anoutline of the further development of theInitiative. Policy makers in national govern-ments and regional and international institu-tions as well as representatives of civil societymay benefit from this scoping report. It isintended to help them and UNDP to identifyareas of concern which need to be addressedthrough the means of the respective institu-

page 5

Environmental stress can

be an important part of the

web of causality associated

with any conflict

The concept of human

security comprises food

and water, individual,

community, environmental,

health and economic

security


tions. Special emphasis will need to be givento addressing the environmental factors thataccelerate or trigger conflicts, and to im-proving the socio-economic conditions forthe promotion of sustainable human develop-ment and peace. Although this report has anextensive scope, it can only be a preliminarystep towards more comprehensive integratedassessments, conducted jointly with localpartners in the region and agreed upon in asequence of consultation meetings.

Methodology

This report builds on publicly available dataand draws mainly on sources from UNDP,UNICEF, the World Bank and the AsianDevelopment Bank, as well as domestic docu-ments and reports such as National Environ-mental Action Plans, National EnvironmentalPolicy Plans and other official documents onpublic health, education and social policy.

Since official data – both on environ-mental quality as well as key economic andsocial indicators – vary considerably or arescarcely available for all countries underconsideration, UNDP country offices in Taji-kistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan andOSCE field presences in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistanand Turkmenistan cooperated in this jointeffort. They contributed to the preparation ofthis scoping report by providing data, relevantdocuments and comments on an earlierversion of the report. A questionnaire wasprepared and sent to the respective countryoffices and missions asking for key environ-mental risks and their security relevance,existing institutional structures as well aspolicies and measures in place to addressthese challenges. This survey provided animportant basis, allowing us to assess thecomplex links between environmental degra-dation and their implications in security terms.

Structure of the report

Chapters two to six comprise country casestudies, which follow the same structure. Ineach, section one provides an overview ofmajor environmental risks posing direct orindirect threats to national or human security.Section two elaborates on socio-economicconditions and capacities as key parametersfor an assessment of the vulnerability ofcommunities to environmental risks. Sectionthree presents a brief overview of policies andinstitutions to address the risks identified.Participatory elements in decision-making aswell as transparency and accountability ofgovernment policies and measures areconsidered a crucial element in effectivelyaddressing these links. We focus especially onpolicies and programmes which addressenvironmental risks and security threats in anintegrated fashion.

Against the background of this cross-country analysis, chapter seven drawsconclusions on key constraints for environ-mental governance in Central Asia. Chaptereight makes preliminary recommendationson ways to address these shortcomings.Several boxes throughout the report illustrateenvironment and security linkages, high-lighting regional specifics, hot spots orsuccess stories.

UNDP country offices

and OSCE field

presences cooperated in

this joint effort

Boxes throughout the

report illustrate environ-

ment and security linkages


page 6

Kazakhstan is located in the north of CentralAsia and is its largest country, reaching fromthe Caspian Sea to China. It also sharescommon borders with Kyrgyzstan, the RussianFederation, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.With a total population of 14.8 million spreadover more than 2.7 million square kilometresof territory, Kazakhstan is one of the mostsparsely populated regions in the world. Theethnic origin of about half of this population isKazakh. A strong Russian minority is locatedmainly in the north of the country and otherethnic minorities include Germans, Ukrainiansand Uzbeks. Fortunately, tensions amongthese groups have been less frequent than inneighbouring countries. Kazakhstan is richlyendowed with oil, gas and mineral resources.

Roughly the size of western Europe,Kazakhstan’s vast area encompasses a broadvariety of landscapes and ecosystems. Itsenvironmental problems are equally diverseand often specific to certain locations. Thechallenge for Kazakhstan’s government restsin adopting a differentiated response to theseproblems while systematically addressingother difficult issues, such as rising mortalityrates, slow political transformation andproblems of law enforcement. Due to itseconomic strength, Kazakhstan plays a crucialrole for stability in Central Asia. There is astrong link between such stability and theissues surrounding water quality monitoringand water sharing, both with neighbouringUzbekistan and with upstream states.

Security-relevant environmental risks

The most urgent environmental concernsinvolving threats to human security inKazakhstan are centred on water, radiationand waste. The Aral Sea represents a uniquedisaster with a sequence of devastating envi-ronmental and socio-economic effects, butwater supply and quality are of concernthroughout Kazakhstan and are identified aspriority areas by its National Environmental

Action Plan for Sustainable Development (UNECE 2000a: 12). Radiation derives from largegeological uranium deposits and waste fromuranium mining as well as the use ofKazakhstan for military nuclear testing by theSoviet Union. Industry also contributessubstantially to pollution caused by improperwaste treatment and management.

As an Aral Sea state, Kazakhstan is one ofthe immediate victims of the environmentaldevastation and collapse of the Sea’s eco-system, which derived from the shrinking ofthe Sea to almost half its original size due to areduction in average annual discharge from50 –60 km 2 before1960 to only 5 km 2, if at all,in the 1990s (UN ECE 2000a: 115). Thereduction of water volume in the lake is thebasis of a chain reaction leading to desertifi-cation, land salinization and contamination,air pollution and a dramatic loss of bio-diversity. The immediate socio-economiceffects of this disaster, such as unemployment,health problems and migration are alreadyhaving profound impacts on local andregional patterns of life. The impacts of saltand dust storms carrying particles from theprevious seabed are felt hundreds of kilo-metres around. The Aral Sea’s VozrozhdeniyeIsland history as biological and chemical testsite adds a further risk to human health.

Apart from environmental decline in theAral Sea basin, water supply for agricultureand industry and drinking water qualitystandards constitute a challenge throughoutthe country. With the environmental deteri-oration of the Caspian and the Aral Sea,Kazakhstan remains heavily reliant on riversystems for its water supply. The Syr Daryaconstitutes a vital source of water for bothKazakhstan and Uzbekistan and has led todisputes between these states. Ethnic ten-sions have also been fuelled by the questionof water allocations around the Arnasayreservoir, though the last remaining borderissues in this area between Uzbekistan andKazakhstan were settled in September 2002(see Box 1).

page 7

Environmental concerns

are centred on water,

radiation and waste


2 Kazakhstan

Another major environmental concern inKazakhstan derives from its high levels ofradioactivity. Natural radioactivity is two tothree times higher than the global average(UN ECE 2000a: 77) and the radioactive andtoxic pollution associated with former defenceindustries and test ranges based throughoutthe country still poses long-term health risks.The seriousness of this issue in the Semi-palatinsk region was recognized by the UN(Resolution 52/169 M) in 1997, stating that“radiological, health, socio-economic, psycho-logical and environmental problems” in thisarea would need the attention of theinternational community.

The third major environmental concernfor human security derives from largeamounts of industrial wastes and inapprop-riate waste management. “By 1998, accu-mulated hazardous industrial wastes amoun-ted to almost 3 billion tonnes” (UN ECE 2000a:69). Industry is located mainly in the east ofKazakhstan, where many of its rich naturalresources can be found. Improper wastedisposal and the large quantity of hazardous

wastes pose a substantial risk of conta-minating surface and groundwater by heavymetals (ibid: 72).

These environmental problems pose risksto human health and personal security but donot necessarily trigger violent conflict.However, tension may increase drasticallywhen the environmental pressures accu-mulate and coincide with declining lifeexpectancy, migration in response to adegrading natural environment, and anincreasing discrepancy between economicliberties and a reactionary political culture.

Socio-economic conditions

Kazakhstan has a comparatively strongeconomy in Central Asia. It is largely depen-dent on a narrow range of exports: mainly oil,gas and some industrial output (ADB 2002a:111). Growth of GDP reached 13.2 percent in2001 compared to 9.8 percent in 2000, andinflation dropped to 8.5 percent (ibid.). RealGDP per capita (in PPP) increased by almost$900 to $5871 in 2000 compared to the

High levels of radioactivity


page 8

The village of Bagys, located

about seven kilometres north

of Tashkent, was at the heart of

border disputes between Ka-

zakhstan and Uzbekistan until

2002. These two countries had

already signed an agreement

on 96 percent of their 2,440 km

common border in November

2001, but a stretch including

the settlements of Bagys, Arna-

say and Nsan, remained un-

resolved. These areas were left

in a legal limbo after leasing

agreements made during the

Soviet era were contested after

the collapse of the Union. The

controversy over ownership

was fuelled by the mosaic

ethnic composition of the areas

and water allocation disputes.

Frustrated by the failure of the

Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan joint

commission to settle its status,

the 2000 inhabitant village of

Bagys declared independence

on 30 December 2001. This

move led to the immediate

arrest of 30 villagers but also

prompted the governments to

resolve the issue. The area was

already under considerable

strain due to its high popu-

lation density, economic reces-

sion, declining living standards

and high unemployment.

Further disputes over land and

water held the potential to

dramatically heighten the risk

of open conflict. Following more

negotiations, an agreement

was finally signed by the

Kazakh President Nursultan

Nazarbayev and Uzbek Presi-

dent Islam Karimov on 10

September 2002, whereby Bagys

and Arnasay are Kazakh terri-

tory, and Nsan is Uzbek, reflect-

ing the ethnic majority of these

communities.The concession of

Arnasay was crucial to Ka-

zakhstan, since it enables access

to water.

Sources: ICG 2002a;

Eurasianet 2002a, Eurasianet 2002b

Box 1:

Bagys and the Arnasay

Reservoir – Territorial

disputes resolved

previous year (UNICEF 2002). According toSwisspeace’s risk assessments “Kazakhstan isthe only country in Central Asia whosegrowing economy is accompanied by aredistribution of wealth in the population”(Swisspeace 2003a: 3). Per capita income in2001 rose by over 10 percent relative to 2000,which in real terms signified an averagemonthly wage increase of 9.5 percent (ADB2002a: 111).The unemployment rate fell by 2.4percent to 10.4 percent compared to 2000,with women and young adults remainingmore affected than other groups. Thesedevelopments fostered a drop by 3.8 percentin the proportion of people living below theminimum subsistence level of 4637 tenge or$31 a month in 2001 compared to theprevious year (World Bank 2001a). Never-theless, this group still constitutes more than aquarter of the population. Compared to otherCentral Asian states, Kazakhstan has some ofthe lowest levels of poverty (UNICEF 2002).

However, the positive economic trend hasyet to have an impact on public health. Thegeneral health of the population is deterio-rating and HIV and AIDS are spreading rapidly(ibid.). Life expectancy in Kazakhstan hasdecreased from 67.6 in 1997 to 64.6 in 2000and is the lowest in Central Asia (ibid.). Despitethis development, public expenditure onhealth amounted to only 1.9 percent of GDP in2000, which even represents a decline by 0.2percent from the previous year, despiteeconomic growth (ibid.). Some of the socialdifficulties, such as the prevalence of HIV andAIDS, are more evident in Kazakhstan since itis the only Central Asian country acknow-ledging that AIDS is a crisis threatening theentire country (Eurasianet 2003). The educa-tional record of Kazakhstan is more promising,with an adult literacy rate of 98.5 percent in1998 and a high primary school enrolment forboth male and female students (UNICEF 2002).

The government tolerates civil society andnon-governmental organizations (NGOs) andtheir participation is regulated by the Law onNGOs (1996). In 1997, an NGO forum was held

in Almaty and in 2000, 300 active NGOs wereregistered (UN ECE 2000a: 17). The structuralprerequisites for political pluralism aredeveloping in Kazakhstan, with ten politicalparties registered at the parliamentaryelection on 10 October 1999. However, theimproved legislative and regulatory frame-work was severely undermined by illegalinterference by executive authorities, unfaircampaign practices, threats to media opera-tions, intimidation of opposition parties andcandidates, as well as widespread violationsduring vote count and tabulation of results(OSCE/ODIHR 1999: 3). The deficiencies inefforts by the election commissions andcourts to adequately address these issuesfurther reveal a lack of democratic culture.Kazakhstan’s Freedom House ranking for1999 –2000 concluded ‘not free’, with a degreeof political rights ranking of 6 and degree ofcivil liberties ranking of 5 (on a scale of 1 to 7,with 7 representing the lowest degree offreedom).

Economic growth and increasing econo-mic well-being cannot compensate for widersocial problems, such as declining healthstandards and life expectancy, weak socialsecurity, corruption and the obstruction ofopposition and free media. Social problemsare intensified by the overall environmentaldegradation. The combination of unfavour-able socio-economic conditions, high environ-mental stress and weak environmental poli-cies and laws, together with social impacts ofmarket liberalization and the continuingoppression of political freedom, can lead todistress and tensions.

Policies, institutions and capacities

Kazakhstan has taken a long-term approachto environmental policy development in itsStrategic Plan Up To 2030 ‘The Environmentand Natural Resources’. More immediateenvironmental issues are addressed in varioussectoral programmes (e.g. the Strategic WaterResource Plan, National Action Plan for

page 9

The positive economic

trend has yet to have an

impact on public health

The educational

record of Kazakhstan

is promising


Combating Desertification or Forest Pro-gramme, all by the Ministry of Agriculture) aswell as the National Environmental ActionPlan for Sustainable Development (NEAP/SD),which is the definitive policy programme forthe environment. NEAP/SD presents anintegrated approach towards environmentalpolicy. In addition, a Programme of EcologicalEducation was jointly approved by theMinister of Science and Education and theMinister for Natural Resources and Environ-mental Protection in 1999. The relevance ofthe environment to public health is recog-nized by the National Programme for Healthand Environment, which was also jointlyapproved by the ministers of health andenvironment in 1999.

The main institutional responsibility forenvironmental issues lies with the Ministry ofNatural Resources and Environmental Protec-tion, which is staffed with 1,149 inspectors(UN ECE 2000a: 15). The National Environ-mental Centre for Sustainable Development ismainly responsible for the preparation of theNEAP and its monitoring and has started workon the national Agenda 21 (ibid.). Theinstitutional set-up devolves some environ-mental policy responsibilities to oblast andlocal authorities, mainly for implementationand monitoring activities that concern theirterritories. The government has established“rules and procedures for coordinating theactivities of line ministries and regionalauthorities and integrating sectoral know-ledge” (ibid.). For the implementation of thecommon National Programme for Health andEnvironment, the cooperation of environ-mental inspectors with the Agency forEmergencies and Health and the Agency forLand Resources is based on respective proto-cols. According to the UN ECE EnvironmentalPerformance Review of 2000, “they set up adhoc commissions, if inspection of a particularsite requires it,” rather than cooperating in asystematic way (ibid.).

Kazakhstan has ratified the three Rioconventions (United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change, Conventionon Biological Diversity, Convention on Com-bating Desertification) and has signed theKyoto Protocol. It has accession status to theMontreal Protocol on Ozone DepletingSubstances, the UN ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution, is Party tothe UN ECE Convention on the TransboundaryEffects of Industrial Accidents and has ratifiedthe UN ECE Convention on the Protection andUse of Transboundary Watercourses andInternational Lakes as well as the AarhusConvention on Access to Information, PublicParticipation in Decision-Making and Accessto Justice in Environmental Matters.

The wide range of legislative efforts andpolicy programmes does not correspond tothe weak institutional structure at the sub-state level. Policy integration and institutionalcooperation are still underdeveloped and arefar from taking into account the importantlink between environment and both humanand national security. Furthermore, as withmost other states in Central Asia, there is asevere lack of financial resources for theimplementation of policy programmes andmonitoring activities, which are crucial for thedevelopment and adjustment of appropriatemeasures and policies.

Policy integration and

institutional cooperation

are still underdeveloped


page 10

Kyrgyzstan is a land-locked and predominantlymountainous country with an area of 198,500km 2, sharing common boarders with China,Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Naturalresources are limited; however, the mountainsstore water in their glaciers, an important eco-nomic resource.The majority of the 4.8 millionpopulation lives away from the mountainousareas in peripheral and often remote areas ofthe country. The ethnic composition of theregion is complex, with over 50 ethnic mino-rities, mainly Kyrgyz, Uzbek, Tajik and Russian.

High environmental stress, fragile localecosystems in remote areas, weak governancestructures, population pressure, continuingpoverty and ethnic tensions are potentialsources of – mainly sub-state – tensions andconflict and threats to regional stability. Thesouthern part of the country has sufferedmost from the economic transformation inthe past decade. Kyrgyzstan has experiencedoccasional tensions prior to and after inde-pendence, including the Osh-Uzgen riots.Earlier armed incursions from the IslamicMovement of Uzbekistan (IMU) (today’s Isla-mic Party of Turkestan) in the south ofKyrgyzstan and increased recruitment by theHizb-u-Tahrir (both fundamentalist Islamicorganizations) have led the government tointensify efforts towards social and politicalstability and economic development.


The most significant environmental problemsthreatening human development and securityin Kyrgyzstan are centred on irrigation foragriculture, and large-scale gold and uraniummining.This has led to the disruption of fragileecosystems mainly in mountainous regionsand cattle grazing areas, diminishing thelivelihoods of the rural population in remoteareas. Environmental stress in remote areasoften entails migration and extreme poverty.

Kyrgyzstan’s possession of sufficient watersupply, an otherwise rare resource in the

region, comes hand in hand with aconsiderable responsibility for this resource.This responsibility has not yet been fullyappreciated, as “for the time being there is nonational strategy for the use of waterresources or their protection” (UN ECE 2000b:78). The question of efficient water manage-ment is of concern for the whole region, sincemost agricultural activity depends on irri-gation. Not only Kyrgyzstan depends on waterresources for agriculture, industry and hydro-power generation. The downstream countriesUzbekistan, Kazakhstan and important partsof Tajikistan are reliant on the same sources.With the end of the Soviet Union, the previoussystem of allocation ceased to function, whichled to the emergence of newly definednational interests and, ultimately, tensionsover the allocation of water. As one conse-quence of such water conflicts, Uzbekistan haswithheld energy supplies for Kyrgyzstan.

The mining of uranium, heavy metals andmercury and the storage of past miningwastes have also become key environmentalproblems. The National Environmental ActionPlan (NEAP) for Kyrgyzstan (1995 – 1997)specifically highlights Mailii-Suu, where 13dumps and 23 uranium mining tailings sitesare located.The NEAP presents this area “as anexample of some of the major problemscommon at most mining and refininglocations in the country” (UN ECE 2000b: 53).At the same time the area presents parti-cularly high risks due to its proximity tohuman settlements, underground reserves ofnatural gas and oil, and the “very high pro-babilities of various kind of natural disasters”,such as earthquakes and landslides (ibid: 51).Environmental pollution by these dumpspresents potential human health risks, forexample by contaminating drinking waterand arable soil. These risks are emphasized byKyrgyzstan’s location as an upstream countrythat feeds a large number of streams inCentral Asia. More than 3500 rivers that rise onKyrgyz territory run further through neigh-bouring countries (ibid: 69).

page 11

Significant environmental

problems are irrigation

and large-scale gold and

uranium mining

Environmental stress

in remote areas often

entails migration and

extreme poverty


3 Kyrgyzstan

Additional environmental pressure resultsfrom soil contamination from agriculturalpractices. Mainly in the remote mountainousareas, poverty and lack of income alternativesforce local communities to engage in inten-sive cattle grazing, which contributes todeforestation and degradation of fragilenatural habitats. Highland communities areconfronted with shortages in energy supply,such as gas and electricity. As a consequence,they turn to locally available resources, mainlyillegal logging for wood fuel. Deforestationincreased annually between 1990 and 2000by 2.6 percent (FAO 2000: 164). Uzbeks andTajiks are using border territory for grazingand arable farming. Some have meanwhilebuilt permanent settlements. This is causingelevated environmental pressure and poten-tial for conflict. Forest decline is leading toconstraints of water supply and food avail-ability, which is posing significant threats tohuman security on the southern and northernslopes of the Ferghana Valley. Mailii-Suu onthe northern side of the Ferghana Valley andthe upland communities around the Valley arehot spots of environmental decline withassociated socio-economic impacts. Here only19 percent of the rural population has access

to piped drinking water and there is littlespace for dwellings (ADB 2002b).

A high level of environmental pressuredoes not necessarily lead to violent conflicts.However, scarce natural resources (mainlywater and fertile land) pose significant threatsto human security and regional stability ifenvironmental stress is combined with un-favourable social, economic and politicalconditions such as an overall lack of demo-cratic political culture, a weak governancestructure, poverty, mass migration, highunemployment, demographic pressure, incur-sions of Islamic extremists and ongoingborder disputes (Box 2 presents the exampleof Ferghana Valley).


Kyrgyzstan undertook economic and socialreforms early after independence in 1991.Positive signs of macro-economic stabilizationseem to continue. GDP rose by 5.3 percent in2001, and the monthly rate of consumer priceinflation dropped from 18.7 percent in 2000 to6.9 percent in 2001 (ADB 2002a: 116). AnnualGDP growth until 2004 is expected to remainat 4.5 percent, slightly lower than the 5 per-

Forest decline is leading

to constraints of water

supply and food availability


page 12

The Ferghana Valley stretches

over three Central Asian coun-

tries – Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan

and Uzbekistan – and is divided

by seven enclaves. The Kyrgyz

part makes up 40 percent of the

area and 51 percent of the

population of Kyrgyzstan. With

the collapse of the Soviet

Union, the Ferghana Valley be-

came divided among the Cen-

tral Asian states, in a situation

characterized by linguistically

distinct populations, artificial

borders, and disruption of social

and economic structures. Uzbe-

kistan has mined its borders

with Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan

in the Ferghana Valley and

along the margins of the Uzbek

enclave of Sokh. People in the

Valley are faced with unfavour-

able environmental and socio-

economic conditions. It is one of

the most densely populated

areas where communities are

exposed to a high level of

environmental pressure: 20

percent of Central Asia's popu-

lation lives in the Ferghana

Valley, which makes up only 5

percent of the territory of

Central Asia. Overpopulation

due to high growth rates and

one of the highest fertility rates

in Kyrgyzstan has often resulted

in conflicts over limited land

and water resources, combined

with inter-ethnic tensions. Since

the late 1980s, several com-

munities have experienced

ethnic clashes triggering wide-

spread violence.

Sources: UN FVDP 2000;

Tabyshalieva 1999

Box 2:

Ferghana Valley –

Ethnic tensions and

artificial borders

cent target of the National Poverty ReductionStrategy (ibid: 117). The value of the nationalcurrency has remained almost unchangedsince 2000. GDP per capita (in PPP) grew from$2250 in 1997 to $2711 in 2000 (UNICEF 2002).However, growth prospects are constrainedby the low level of diversification and theeconomy’s reliance on volatile gold markets.Between January and September 2002,industrial output declined by 17.3 percent,basically induced by a decline of the miningsector. The country’s largest gold mine inKumtor alone accounts for roughly 9 percentof GDP (Community Business ForumKyrgyzstan 2003).

Due to high income inequalities thegenerally positive macro-economic develop-ment has not yet led to an increase in thequality of life for most of the population.According to the World Bank, 48 percent ofthe total population lives below the nationalpoverty line (World Bank 2001b). The ruralpopulation is most affected with 56.4 percentliving in poverty in 2001, this ratio reaching upto 81.4 percent in the districts of Batken, Jalal-Abad, Talas and Naryn (ADB 2002b). Theminimum wage is $2 a day, and staggeringhyperinflation in the early post-independenceperiod wiped out the lifetime savings of mostfamilies. The cost of living increased by 17percent in 2000 alone, and the social securitysystem has largely collapsed. Even basicnecessities such as gas and electricity havebecome increasingly out of reach for manyfamilies (ICG 2001: 14). A heavy burden ofexternal debt (reaching 130 percent of GDP in2001) and a weak banking sector threateneconomic and political reform.

The Human Development Index remainedstable over the past four years with a slightincrease in 2000. But poverty and margi-nalized development opportunities parti-cularly jeopardize stability in the south whereisolation, border disputes, lack of investment,and ethnic differences remain critical. Esti-mates for the unemployment rate in 2000 are at 7.5 percent, while the actual rate is

considerably higher due to hidden unem-ployment, especially among younger people(ADB 2002a: 115). Growing unemployment,rising costs and stagnant wages led to modestprotests in 2000 and 2001 in Bishkek, Naryn,and Jalal-Abad (ICG 2001: iii).

Mass migration poses additional threatsto security, with thousands leaving theimpoverished southern regions because ofthe lack of fertile land, unemployment andpoverty. Serious consequences are expectedwith regard to unresolved border disputes ifsettlements in border regions are abandonedand economically marginalized, whileUzbekistan is focusing investment in theseborder regions (Jumagulov 2003).

Civil society in Kyrgyzstan is developing,although the country’s Freedom House ratingon civil liberties and political rights declinedfrom “partly free” to “not free” in 2001(Freedom House 2002). Nevertheless, civilsociety groups and media increasinglyinfluence government policy and legislation.Parliament is a progressively active andresponsive balance to government. Localelections in over 460 villages and citiesrepresented the first direct local elections inCentral Asia. However, the presidential andparliamentary elections held in 2000 did notmeet international standards, since theopportunity for particular political parties andcandidates to be represented in the newparliament was systematically undermined(OSCE/ODIHR 2000a: 1). Concerns amonginternational experts were also raised aboutthe first referendum which took place inFebruary 2003. Constitutional changes willincrease the president’s power in relation tothe parliament and constitutional provisionsmay limit human rights (OSCE/ODIHR 2003: 1)

Government-supplied social services,critical to maintaining public support for re-form, are still inadequate. Public expenditureon health declined from 1992 to 1999 from 3.4to 2.1 percent of GDP (UNICEF 2002). Wide-spread poverty and very limited prospects foreconomic growth will continue to influence

page 13

Growth prospects are

constrained by the low

level of diversification and

the economy’s reliance on

volatile gold markets


both the general health status and theoperations of the new health care systems aswell as people’s attitudes towards transition.While it has embarked on educational reform,Kyrgyzstan’s educational system is yet in apoor state characterized by mis-investmentand misgovernment (USAID 2003).

With the environmental context alreadyconstituting considerable pressure, conflictscan be triggered by corruption in combina-tion with comparatively low economic growth,income inequalities, population pressure,poverty and unemployment, migration,suppression of opposition forces and media,income inequalities, the decline of socialinfrastructure (social security, pension, educa-tion and health systems), ethnic tension anddrug trafficking. In the Ferghana Valley, over-population is leading to conflicts over limitedland and water resources, combined withinter-ethnic tensions. Since the late 1980s,several communities have experienced ethnicclashes triggering widespread violence.


Officially, no connection between environ-mental stress and conflict is made bygovernmental institutions, parliamentarians,

civil society groups or the scientific com-munity. However, stakeholders at the sub-national level seem to be aware of these risks.

The management of natural resources andenvironmental policy is spread widely acrossseveral ministries and agencies. With theMinistries for Ecology and Emergencies beingmerged, environmental considerations havedeclined. Major tasks of environmental stateagencies such as the state forestry serviceresponsible for natural resources and natureconservation are treated separately fromimportant issue areas such as air pollution,industrial pollution, and land and waterresources, which belong to the Ministry forEmergencies. Even though economicincentives for environmental protection exist,they mainly serve fiscal purposes and do notencourage sustainable resource use.

Responsibilities to address socio-econo-mic impacts of environmental stress arespread widely across several institutions, suchas the Ministry for Emergencies (humanitarianaid and relief during natural disasters), thestate sanitary inspection and supervisionservice (sanitation), oblast water basin depart-ments (water), state registrar (arable land),various state programmes such as “Araket”(poverty) and the state migration service.

Kyrgyzstan’s

educational system is

yet in a poor state


page 14

The governments of Kyrgyzstan

and Kazakhstan requested

assistance to the UN Economic

Commission for Europe (UN

ECE) and the UN Economic and

Social Commission for Asia and

Pacific (UNESCAP) to establish

an intergovernmental trans-

boundary water commission

aimed at effectively implement-

ing the intergovernmental water

agreement on the Chu and

Talas rivers. The Organization

for Security and Cooperation in

Europe (OSCE) has been invited

to assist in the facilitation of

this project, which started in

early 2003. The project intends

to establish good governance

in managing shared water

resources between Kyrgyzstan

and Kazakhstan through devel-

oping institutional arrange-

ments, policies and procedures

as well as capacity building

activities. The project includes

negotiating and establishing

rules and procedures of opera-

tion of the joint commission to

be adopted by the parties as

well as an analysis of the water

resources and policy recom-

mendations for developing eco-

nomic instruments for sustain-

able water management. This

pilot project may serve as an

example for improved coopera-

tion on transboundary waters in

the region, thus contributing to

enhanced regional cooperation.

Source: OSCE 2002

Box 3:

Water cooperation on

the Chu and Talas rivers

page 15

Environmental impacts on

public health are rarely

assessed and monitored

Policy coordination is

predominantly restricted

to formal consultation


Environmental impacts on public health arerarely assessed and monitored by the Ministryfor Emergencies and Ministry for PublicHealth. Both lack technical capacity andsufficient institutional mechanisms forcoordination. Even though provisions for theintegration of environmental considerationsinto other policy areas (health, agriculture,etc.) exist, policies and measures are poorlydeveloped and lack implementation. Policycoordination is predominantly restricted toformal consultation with the parliament onpresidential decrees. Institutional arrange-ments and mechanisms for integratedenvironmental assessments and policy moni-toring for cross-sectoral issues exist, butimplementation has yet to be improved. Thecomprehensive development framework2001 aims to improve the legal basis forenvironmental policy and suggests decen-tralizing strategies for environmental protec-tion in mountainous areas (ADB 2002a).

There are initial attempts to includeenvironmental considerations into securityconcepts and agencies. In August 1997 theNational Security Service adopted Decree No.3 on “Projecting of concepts and measures onproviding ecological security.” The Presi-dential Decree No. 221 on “Concepts ofNational Security”, adopted on 13 July 2001,also includes environmental issues, amongeconomic, political, social, and military threats.The strategy is to be implemented by localpolice forces, the Ministry for Ecology and Emer-gencies and the National Security Services.

Kyrgyzstan has ratified the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Changeand has accession status to the Convention onBiological Diversity, the Convention onCombating Desertification as well as the Mon-treal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Sub-stances, the UN ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution and theAarhus Convention on Access to Information,Public Participation in Decision-Making andAccess to Justice in Environmental Matters.However, financial and technical capacities to

effectively implement these conventionsthrough domestic programmes and projectsare absent. Here, the government basicallyrelies on external funding from various donoragencies.

Officially, no transboundary efforts onenvironmental cooperation have been initi-ated to specifically promote stability andpeace, but there are some projects whichaddress transboundary cooperation, such asthe recent initiative on water cooperation onthe Chu and Talas rivers (see Box 3). Thegovernment of the Kyrgyz Republic is alsoaddressing a transboundary environmentalproject in Gorno-Badakhshan. The Swissgovernment is currently supporting a watermanagement project in the Ferghana Valley,on water allocation and utilization among theneighbouring countries. Biodiversity conser-vation across borders is promoted throughthe West Tien Shan Interstate BiodiversityProject (funded through TACIS) and operatesin Sary-Chelek and Besh Aral (KyrgyzRepublic), Aksu Djabagaly (Kazakhstan), andChatkal (Uzbekistan). Even though trans-boundary environmental cooperation is offi-cially promoted, practical implementation ofprojects still requires assistance.

Tajikistan lies in the south-east of the CentralAsian region, sharing borders with Afgha-nistan, China, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.With93 percent of Tajikistan’s 143,100 km 2 totalarea considered mountainous, more than halfof its territory lies at a height of at least 3000mabove sea level and includes some of CentralAsia's highest peaks. Frequent earthquakes ofvarying degrees and natural disasters arereported. The 6.7 million population consistsof a 67 percent Tajik majority with a strongUzbek minority of 23 percent; 70 percent ofthe population lives in rural areas. Afterindependence in 1991, the country fell into acivil war lasting from 1992 to 1997 betweenold-guard regionally based ruling elites,disenfranchised regions, democratic liberalreformists, and Islamists who were looselyorganized in a United Tajik Opposition. As aresult, not only the economic, social andpolitical transformation was slowed down butthe country also suffered significant damageto the energy and agricultural infrastructureand the social security system. Frequentoutbreaks of violence make Tajikistan a ratherunstable country.

Tajikistan is characterized by ongoingdegradation of land resources and limitedavailability of clean water, a slowly stabilizingeconomy, enormous social problems andinsufficient state capacity relying on externalassistance. In contrast to some other CentralAsian countries, scarce water resources are nota general concern due the mountainousprofile of Tajikistan. However, there is a highsusceptibility to natural disasters due to a veryhigh dependency on hydropower andagricultural production.


The major environmental problems ofTajikistan are the impacts of natural disasters,increasing land degradation, and limitedavailability of clean drinking water, all of whichare mutually reinforcing. The UNICEF Multiple

Indicator Cluster Survey 2000 found that just57 percent of the population has access tosafe drinking water (UNICEF 2000). In addition,the negative developments with regard todeforestation, desertification and thedeterioration of wildlife and protected areas,especially during the civil war, need mention.Among the natural disasters are on the onehand earthquakes, landslides, mudslides andflash floods, which were responsible for 200people killed and damage estimated atseveral million US dollars in the second half ofthe 1990s and which affect Tajikistan eachyear (ADB 2000: x). On the other hand thecountry faces frequent droughts, which havenegative impacts for hydropower and agricul-tural production. Since the population is con-centrated in particularly vulnerable areas thenegative impacts on people and their liveli-hoods are further increased. The governmentis largely unprepared for these events due to areactive approach towards dealing with crises,as well as a lack of financial resources andinvestment in preventive activities that mightreduce risks and social vulnerability.

The agricultural and industrial use of themountainous land and lowland plains in thewest of the country has led to land erosionand salinization problems. The problem ofland erosion is leading to a process of deser-tification, especially in mountain regions. Thisaffected about 60 percent of the irrigatedlands at the turn of the century (ADB 2000: xi).Salinization of land has become a widespreadproblem, caused partially by the high degreeof mineralization of water used for irrigationand partially by poor irrigation practices.While only 7 percent of Tajikistan's territory isarable, agriculture nevertheless plays a keyrole for the economy. Additional contami-nation of land derives from uranium miningwaste with negative health impacts. In someareas radiation levels exceeded safety stan-dards up to tenfold.

The mountainous profile of Tajikistanensures that water quantity is not a majorconcern in this country. But as an upstream

The country fell into

a civil war lasting

from 1992 to 1997

Tajikistan is characterized

by ongoing degradation of

land resources and limited

availability of clean water


4 Tajikistanpage 16

page 17

Waterborne diseases

increased tremendously

in the 1990s


country,Tajikistan has responsibilities towardslower level countries. Despite a generally highquality of water, drinking water standards arenot always met, with poor sewage treatmentand informal garbage dumps contaminatingthe water. Only 21 percent of treatmentfacilities operated satisfactorily in 1998 (ibid.).In addition, salinization of land, use of pesti-cides and mining discharges have negativeimpacts on fresh water.

The effects of the adverse environmentalconditions are widely felt by the population:“Each of the major impact groups – humanhealth, human welfare and environmentalresources – are adversely affected by environ-mental degradation and depletion of naturalresources,” the Asian Development Bankstates (ibid: 60). Waterborne diseases, such astyphoid, cholera and leptospirosis, increasedtremendously in the 1990s. Outbreaks oftyphoid intensified in 1995 and 1996 when6000 people died, which is more than 10percent of the number of civil war victims(ibid.). Another consequence of the watercontamination is an increase of the morbidity

of people. Despite international agenciesproviding chlorine in order to control typhoid,negative impacts could not be prevented. Thegovernment was not able to respondappropriately due to a lack of resources.

The issue of water pollution has gained atransboundary dimension by becoming apoint of contention between Tajikistan andUzbekistan. Water quality is also an issue inother transboundary contexts (at the SyrDarya and Zeravshan rivers). Monitoringstations are essential to assess the extent ofthe problems. A regional Global EnvironmentFacility-funded project is establishing 26monitoring stations in the region – five ofthem in Tajikistan – at critical points tomeasure transboundary water pollution. TheGovernments are also making an effort toengage in constructive policy dialogue andexchanges among policy makers and scien-tists occur frequently (ibid: 15 –16). Anotherexample of Tajik-Uzbek cooperation ontransboundary environmental issues is theTajik Aluminium Plant in Tursunzade, des-cribed in Box 4.

The Tajik Aluminium Plant,

Tadaz, in Tursunzade is one of

the largest smelters in the

former Soviet Union and is

located only 10km from Uzbe-

kistan’s south-eastern border.

Its annual discharge is around

40,000 t of harmful substances,

of which 300–400 t are extre-

mely dangerous hydrogen fluo-

ride. The emissions are heavily

polluting the area around

Tursunzande as well as the

Uzbek oblasts of Kashkadarya

and Surkhandarya, contami-

nating soils and crops as well as

livestock. The human health

impacts are alarming, with the

affected regions recording high

incidences of disorders of blood

and hematopoietic organs, the

musculoskeletal system, birth

defects and tumours. In order

to address the situation appro-

priately, the governments of

the Republic of Uzbekistan and

the Republic of Tajikistan signed

an Agreement on Cooperation

in Improving the Environ-

mental Situation in the Zone

Affected by the Tajik Alumi-

nium Plant in November 1994.

The agreement was the basis

for cooperation between the

Uzbek and Tajik national envi-

ronmental protection agencies

and a joint draft programme of

scientific and technical mea-

sures to improve environmen-

tal conditions at the plant

between 1996 and 2000. In

1998 the factory installed air

pollution control devices in an

effort to reduce harmful emis-

sions. Implementation of other

substantial measures is still

lacking. Nevertheless, Tajikistan

and Uzbekistan have recognized

the security relevance of this

issue and are cooperating to

address the problem jointly.

Sources: ADB 2000;

Fluoride Action Network 2003

Box 4:

Transboundary environ-

mental cooperation –

Tursunzade Aluminium Plant


Tajikistan is still recovering from the legacy ofthe civil war, which significantly impededeconomic development. The 1997 peaceagreement brought a turnaround in GDP andthis trend accelerated in 2001, when GDPgrowth rose to 10 percent from 8.3 percent(ADB 2002a: 119). The inflation rate droppedbelow 10 percent in 2002, after beingconstantly between 30 and 40 percent from1997 to 2001 (UNICEF 2002). These improve-ments of the overall macroeconomic condi-tions are attributed to a substantial increase inaluminium production and an expansion ofagricultural production, despite continueddrought conditions. At present, the agricul-tural sector contributes around 20 percent toGDP and accounts for more than half ofemployment (ADB 2002a: 118). Hence thesector is a crucial factor for the overall develop-ment of the Tajik economy, not only in termsof privatization processes but also withrespect to the provision of rural finance fornon-cotton activities with the aim ofdiversifying agricultural production.

Tajikistan is rich in natural resources,namely minerals (gold, silver, and uranium),water and hydropower. It is the world's thirdlargest producer of hydropower and 90percent of the energy generating capacity ofthe country is hydroelectric, with the mostimportant hydroelectric stations located onthe Vakhsh (US DoE 2002). A major portion ofthis hydroelectric capacity is used inaluminium production, which consumes 40percent of all the country's electricity and isthe main export good. According to the USDepartment of Energy there is a greaterhydroelectric power capacity in Tajikistanthan in any other country in Central Asia. Atpresent only 5 percent of this capacity is used(ibid.). New hydropower plants and therespective transmission and distribution linesare currently supported by the AsianDevelopment Bank.Tajikistan is a net importerof oil and gas although the country has own

deposits of both resources. There has been along period of decline in oil production since1992, due to the civil war impactingnegatively on the economy and a resultinglack of investment in infrastructure.

Despite resistance from vested interests,the government continued to pursue macro-economic stabilization and structural reformat the beginning of the new century.The AsianDevelopment Bank sees the external debtrepayments as the greatest danger to theeconomy. In 2001, 1.7 percent of GDP wasscheduled for servicing external debt com-pared to 0.3 percent in 2000 (ADB 2002a: 119).In addition, annual GDP growth is expected tobe less dynamic in 2002 and 2003. Theeconomy remains highly dependent onforeign trade with cotton and aluminiumresponsible for more than 80 percent ofexport earnings (Ibid.). As in 2001, fluctuationsin international prices could cause shifts in theterms of trade, impacting seriously on theoverall economic performance of the country.In addition, the global oversupply of alumi-nium is likely to lead to a reduction of its pricein the future. Additional risks arise from thefurther occurrence of droughts, causing a risein wheat and power imports.

These risks need to be seen in the light ofthe country's overall social conditions. Taji-kistan is the poorest among the countries ofthe former Soviet Union and one of thepoorest countries in the world. According toWorld Bank statistics 80 percent of thepopulation lived under the poverty line in2001 (World Bank 2002). There has been nonoteworthy increase in GDP per capita (PPP)since 1997, which figured $1152 in 2000(UNDP 2002). The overall economic growth ofthe past years has not led to an improvementof the employment rate or the level ofpoverty. United Nations statistics indicate thatthe employment rate dropped continuouslyfrom 72 percent in 1990 to 54 percent in 2000(UNICEF 2002). As a result, an estimated200,000 people left the country in search ofwork in 2001, most to the Russian Federation,

Tajikistan is the world's

third largest producer of

hydropower

Tajikistan is the poorest

among the countries of the

former Soviet Union


page 18

while local estimates even consider 1 millionTajik people to be seasonal labour migrants(ADB 2002a: 118). Social grievances are alsoreflected by the highest under-five mortalityand infant mortality rates among the CentralAsian countries (UNICEF 2002).

Many of the current problems of Tajikistanwere caused by the long-lasting civil war ofthe nineties, which inhibited major reformsteps to foster economic restructuring, socialwell-being and increasing state capacity.These challenges need to be addressedagainst the background of poor politicalconditions. Both Tajikistan's presidential andparliamentary elections, in 1999 and 2000,respectively, were widely considered to beflawed and unfair but peaceful (OSCE/ODIHR2000b: 2 – 3). Moreover, government stillrestricts press freedom as well as the freedomof assembly and association, although bothare provided by the Constitution (ibid.). Thisoverall political situation is also reflected inthe Freedom House's rating of the country'sperformance on political rights and civilliberties which is considered as 'not free'(Freedom House 2002). However, the inclusionof a declared Islamic Party and several otherparties in the parliamentary electionsrepresented an improvement in citizens’ rightto choose their government. Other challengesfor the government comprise the demobi-lization and reintegration of former oppo-sition troops and the building of public trustin the banking sector.


According to Article 36 of the Constitution ofthe Republic of Tajikistan “the state guaran-tees the right of citizens to a favourableenvironment.”As a basic environmental policymeasure, the Law on Nature Protection wasadopted in 1994 accompanied by the StateEcological Programme (1996) and the StateProgramme on Environmental Education(1997). Since the beginning of the newcentury a number of environmental plans

have been adopted that specifically deal withgrowing environmental concerns such asdesertification, biodiversity or public healthprotection. Most recently, a law on EcologicalExpertise has been passed.

The Ministry of Nature Protection is incharge of environmental management and isassisted by 11 offices providing administrativeand technical support. In addition, otherministries such as the Ministry of EmergencySituations and Civil Defence, the Ministry ofAgriculture and the Ministry of WaterResources play an important role in environ-mental policy-making. However, due to a lackof coordination for environmental protectionamong these ministries, the implementationof policies is not yet effective. Moreover, thesize of the Ministry of Nature Protectiondecreased from about 900 in 1991 to less than250 at the end of the century. The insufficientnumber of staff is also due to a significantreduction of funding in the course of the civilwar and resulted in serious institutionalweaknesses (ADB 2000: xii). This situation isreinforced by weaknesses in terms of policiesand legislation. Fees, taxes and fines toprevent environmental damage are noteffective since they are too low to encouragecompliance. In addition, the instrument ofenvironmental impact assessment authorizedunder the basic Law on Nature Protection hasnot yet been passed into law despite intensivelobbying efforts.

Several bilateral agreements indicate thatthe connection between environmental stressand conflict is taken seriously by Tajikistan.The agreements between Uzbekistan andTajikistan on issues of pollution from the TajikAluminium Plant in Tursunzade and UzbekBekabad’s metallurgic and cement plants aswell as the joint statement made by thegovernments of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan onthe water conflict in Isfara district show thatthe foreign policy dimension of environ-mental pollution is tackled more effectivelythan the root causes themselves.

Tajikistan has ratified the United Nations

page 19

Several bilateral agree-

ments indicate that the

connection between

environmental stress

and conflict is taken

seriously by Tajikistan


Framework Convention on Climate Changeand has accession status to the Convention onBiological Diversity, the Convention onCombating Desertification as well as theMontreal Protocol on Ozone DepletingSubstances and the Aarhus Convention onAccess to Information, Public Participation inDecision-Making and Access to Justice inEnvironmental Matters. However, implemen-tation of the respective environmental goalsdepends mainly on assistance by externaldonors.

Although the country is signatory to theAarhus Convention and the Law on NatureProtection allows public participation, mecha-nisms to involve the public in respectivepolicy processes need to be elaborated. TheLaw on Public Organizations makes noreference to participation in policy develop-ment. However, there is already a fair in-

volvement of experts and scientists, andactivities of NGOs are growing. In 2000, 42environmental organizations were registered,ten of which are considered active (ADB 2000:82). Half of the active organizations areinvolved in country-wide activities. The mainfocus of the NGOs lies in the field ofenvironmental education and training butalso information sharing and networking.

Mechanisms to involve

the public in respective

policy processes

need to be elaborated


page 20

Turkmenistan lies in the south-east of CentralAsia, to the west of the Caspian Sea. It reachesfurthest south of all countries in Central Asia,bordering with Afghanistan, Iran, Kazakhstanand Uzbekistan. It has a total area of 488,100km 2.Turkmenistan possesses large reserves ofnatural gas and substantial deposits of oil.Thecountry is characterized by aridity, incor-porating the Kara-Kum desert, one of thelargest sand deserts in the world. With 4.7million inhabitants, Turkmenistan has thesmallest and ethnically most homogeneouspopulation of the Central Asian republics, withTurkmens representing the vast majority. Ithas been largely free of inter-ethnic hostilities,even though tribal allegiances are potentialsources of tension.Turkmenistan is headed bythe autocratic president Saparmurat Niyazov.The country is rather impoverished and hasremained largely closed to the outside worldsince independence in 1991.

Turkmenistan is characterized by limitedwater availability and water bodies pollutedby agricultural and industrial effluent, arelatively closed and centralized economy,limited political rights and civil liberties and alack of transparency and participatory ele-ments in policy-making.The resource conflictsand ethnic tensions occurring in many otherCentral Asian states are not in evidence. Higheconomic growth and subsidies for basiccommodities compensate demands of thepoorer part of the population.


Natural habitat transformation, biodiversityloss, soil erosion and salinization, use of riversfor irrigation and human activities, water andsoil pollution by pesticides and the building ofdams have all contributed to environmentaldegradation in recent years. The depletion ofTurkmenistan's biodiversity is occurring inconnection with human-induced desertifica-tion of oases and mountain landscapes.Environmental degradation is boosted in

connection with dropping groundwater levelsand water losses from the Kara-Kum canal dueto increased irrigation for urban and industrialuse (Ladonina 2001:19). Overuse of fertilizersand pesticides for agricultural crops has ledindirectly to health impacts upon thepopulation.

Domestic and industrial wastewater isdischarged to the deserts, affecting ground-water locally. Agricultural drainage water,which is discharged to rivers without control,has increased the levels of minerals, phenols,pesticides and other chemicals in waterbodies. As a result, the rivers have reacheddangerously high concentrations of salts andchemicals, especially in lower reaches. Drink-ing water quality is therefore a major problemin many regions of Turkmenistan (Ministry forNatural Resource Use and the Environment1998).The local population in the Dashkhovuzprovince south of the Aral Sea has sufferedfrom hepatitis and intestinal diseases due topolluted drinking water and the region hasbeen declared by a presidential decree as anecological disaster zone (ibid.).

The water scarcity has an immediateinfluence on the natural environment andhuman living conditions and a secondaryimpact on agricultural productivity. Turk-menistan has experienced tensions withUzbekistan over water allocations from one ofthe most important water sources in theregion, the Amu Darya, flowing through theeastern part of the country. At the same time,this crucial water source has been regularlylisted among the most polluted water bodiesin Central Asia. The pollution penetratesadjacent land, where the river’s water is usedfor agricultural irrigation, reducing thequantity and quality of food production. Thecombination of these issues poses consi-derable risks to the health and well-being ofthe population, which is necessarily con-centrated around the available water sources.

Cotton is at the heart of a system ofpolitical and social control that has remainedunchanged since independence. Turkme-

Rivers have reached

dangerously high

concentrations of salts

and chemicals

Cotton is at the heart

of a system of political

and social control


5 Turkmenistan page 21

nistan is the tenth largest cotton producerand 50 percent of its irrigated land servescotton production. The agricultural sector isalmost completely dependent on water fromthe Amu Darya and its tributary rivers Murgaband Tedgen. As cotton is vital for foreignexchange and political patronage, the kind ofreforms needed to reduce water use – par-ticularly privatization of farming and realisticpricing of water to encourage conservation –have never been initiated. Due to its relianceon agriculture Turkmenistan considersirrigation a key security issue (ICG 2002b: 2).

Water consumption is expected to in-crease significantly, since cotton production isplanned to triple by 2010 and harvesting alsoto grow.To match the ever increasing demandfor water for irrigation, Turkmenistan isplanning the Golden Century Lake, a vastartificial lake fed by agricultural run-off in themiddle of the Kara-Kum desert (see Box 5).


Turkmenistan is a potentially wealthy countrywith large reserves in natural gas and anextensively irrigated agricultural system. Afterseveral years of economic decline afterindependence, the economy began to recover

in the late 1990s when GDP grew by 7 percentdue to increased agricultural production andrenewed gas sales. Production of natural gasonly represents half of its total productioncapacity and is planned to increase by 40percent in 2002 (ADB 2002a: 123). Economicdata varies considerably among sources. Theinflation rate is below 20 percent. Monetarypolicy measures brought down inflation from23.5 percent in 1999 to 7.4 percent in 2000 (6percent in the first half of 2001) (ibid: 122).Domestic statistics show annual GDP growthbetween 17 and 18 percent in recent years,based on increased gas sales and large publicinvestment. Annual GDP growth is expectedto reach 11 percent in 2002 and 2003, with theofficial target being 18 percent (ibid.)

However, economic growth masks thecountry’s very limited reform progress sinceindependence. The banking sector – mainlypublic sector banks and government – re-mains underdeveloped. The economy ischaracterized by a dominant role of the statein the economy and its maintenance of anextensive system of regulations and controlsover trade and industrial activity. Pooreconomic management is evident, withpractically all sales of cotton and wheatregulated by the state.

Turkmenistan

considers irrigation a

key security issue


page 22

Turkmenistan recently announ-

ced a plan to build over the next

10 years a 3460 square kilometre

Golden Century Lake, a vast

artificial reservoir fed by agricul-

tural run-off in the middle of the

Kara-Kum desert. It is expected

to guarantee water security and

create some 4000 square kilo-

metres of farmland capable of

growing 450,000 tonnes of cot-

ton and 300,000 tonnes of grain

annually. Scientists’ fears that

this large-scale infrastructure

project will wreck the already

fragile ecosystem and that water

will simply evaporate in the

middle of the desert are denied

by the government. These plans

have provoked concerns in

neighbouring Karakalpakstan.

Turkmenistan is already taking a

third of Amu Darya’s water,

which is mostly lost in the desert

due to the unpaved nature of

the Kara-Kum canal, running

1100 km through the desert,

thus being the largest irrigation

canal in the world. There is also

an ethnic dimension to the

project, since there are fears,

especially among the Uzbek

minority, that there will be

resettlement of people to the

vicinity of the lake once the

project is completed. Unilateral

decisions on water manage-

ment leading to overuse of

already limited resources, such

as the Golden Century Lake,may

pose risks to regional stability.

Source: ICG 2002b

Box 5:

Dropped in the desert –

the Golden Century Lake

The export dependent economy is largelybased on natural gas and cotton. The RussianFederation, Ukraine and the CIS are therecipient of 88 percent of Turkmenistan’snatural gas exports. Exports grew in 2001 by 9percent, due to increased demand, a new gaspipeline to Iran and re-sales through theRussian Federation to the CIS (ibid: 121).Industrial production (mainly gas and oil)increased by 27 percent. Cotton exports grewby 7 percent in 2001 (ibid.). The governmentembarked on structural agricultural reforms toincrease grain production to self-sufficiencylevel, but success in this is not yet evident.Rural development is critical as rural regionsaccount for 26 percent of GDP and are a sourceof livelihood to 54 percent of the population.

GDP per capita (in PPP) grew from $2109in 1997 to $3956 in 2000 (UNICEF 2002). Evenwith high levels of income inequality, povertyincidence is rather low according to domesticstatistics. These indicate that only 1 percent ofthe total population lives below the relativepoverty line (defined as the proportion of thepopulation living on less than 50 percent ofthe country’s average per capita income).However, the World Bank also states that halfthe population lives on less than theminimum wage and poverty is increasingamong the most vulnerable segments of thepopulation (World Bank 2002a). On the otherhand, poverty and marginal developmentopportunities, particularly in arid areas, havebeen offset by heavy subsidies for basiccommodities (water, energy, bread). Nearly 80percent of total annual public expenditure hasbeen allocated to social and public services.No data is available on unemployment andthe functioning of the social insurance systemestablished by law in 1991.

Widespread poverty, heavy foreign debt,and the unwillingness of the government toadopt market-oriented reforms are majorconstraints to economic development in thenear future.

The country’s Freedom House rating hasconsistently been “not free” as civil liberties

and political rights are violated significantly.Media and communication is monopolizedand controlled by the state (Freedom House2002). The political system is characterized bypatronage and corruption, a highly restrictivevisa regime, control and suspicion of civicaction and the media, and state control over,and distortion of, the economy. Turkmenistanis headed by the autocratic President Sapar-murat Niyazov, who has been appointed presi-dent “without term of expiration of hismandate” in 1999, by an unanimous decisionof the People's Council, a body includingcentral and local government authorities, theparliament and state-controlled civicorganizations.

Widespread poverty will continue toinfluence both health status and the ope-rations of the health care system. The infantmortality rate is high, with 74 deaths per 1000live births (UNICEF 2002). According to theresults of the 2000 Turkmenistan Demo-graphic and Health Survey, 47 percent ofwomen and 36 percent of children areanaemic. The educational system has under-gone major reforms and succeeded in raisingthe literacy rate to 99.6 percent. However, ithas been seriously affected by the reductionof the number of compulsory school yearsfrom 10 to 9, which prevents students frombeing eligible for institutions of highereducation in the rest of the former SovietUnion, as well as by cuts in the budget and thesubsequent dismissal of some 10,000 school-teachers in 2000. Moreover, curricula areundergoing an increasing ideologization, withthe Ruhnama, a moral and spiritual codeofficially written by the President himself,playing a central role at all levels of theeducational system. Population has grown by2.5 percent annually with a comparativelyhigh fertility rate of 33 births per 1000. TheHuman Development Index for Turkmenistanincreased between 1996 and 2000 (UNDP2000). However, this increase mainly resultedfrom GDP growth, without significant im-provement of the economic or general living

page 23

Civil liberties and

political rights are

violated significantly

Turkmenistan is a

potentially wealthy

country with large

reserves in natural gas


Policy integration seems

to remain at a

very provisional level

The lack of government

tolerance has led

NGOs to focus on non-

contentious issues


page 24

conditions. UNDP no longer publishes anational human development report since2000 because the Programme is not satisfiedwith the data provided by the government.


Basic environmental policy measures are theNational Environmental Programme and theNational Environmental Action Plan, both of1998. Basic environmental laws have beencreated in the aftermath of independenceincluding the codes on land, responsibility forecological violations, sanitation, forests, airpollution and fauna.

The management of natural resources andenvironmental policy is mainly concentratedin the Ministry for Natural Resource Use andEnvironment Protection. Even though econo-mic incentives for environmental protectionexist, they mainly serve fiscal purposes and donot encourage sustainable resource use.Policy integration seems to remain at a veryprovisional level and substantial informationis not available.

Officially, government institutions, parlia-mentarians, civil society groups and thescientific community make no connectionbetween environmental stress and conflict.Even though the Presidential Programme“Strategy for Social and Economic Develop-ment for the Period 2000 –2010” mentions“ecological security”as one key target, it mainlyconsiders securing environmental assets.Substantial transboundary efforts in environ-mental cooperation have not been initiated,even though the international donorcommunity is pushing for cooperative effortsto promote stability and peace in the region.For instance, the Turkmen government did notpublicly acknowledge or discuss the issue ofwater shortage in 2002, when its neighbouringstates sought relief for a drought that hadbeen affecting the region for several years.

Turkmenistan has ratified the UnitedNations Framework Convention on ClimateChange, the Kyoto Protocol and the Con-

vention on Combating Desertification. It hasaccession status to the Convention on Biolo-gical Diversity, the Montreal Protocol onOzone Depleting Substances and the AarhusConvention on Access to Information, PublicParticipation in Decision-Making and Accessto Justice in Environmental Matters. However,financial and technical capacities to effec-tively implement these conventions throughdomestic programmes and projects areabsent. Here, the government basically relieson external funding from various donoragencies. On the other hand, some projectshave indeed been conducted to implementobligations under global environmental con-ventions, such as the GTZ (German TechnicalCooperation) funded pilot project on par-ticipatory resource management, introducingsustainable land use practices and fosteringinter-communal learning in agricultural prac-tices (Bensmann 2002: 19).

Public participation is guaranteed by theEnvironmental Protection Act which containsseveral legal provisions for public associa-tions, access to the legislative process, filingenvironmental complaints, access to informa-tion and public participation in decision-making. Turkmenistan is a signatory to theAarhus Convention and the OSCE has facili-tated a workshop with several local environ-mental NGOs on its implementation. However,the 1998 State of the Environment report listsonly three basic public environmental organi-zations: the Society of Natural Protection ofTurkmenistan, the “Katena” Ecological Club inAshgabat and the Ecological Club in Dashk-hovuz. The lack of government tolerance hasled NGOs to focus on non-contentious issues.However, NGOs such as water user associa-tions have taken up issues at the local level tosome effect. In 1993 –1994 a cooperation oflocal greens and international NGOs succee-ded in stopping organized poaching of largegame and endangered species in naturereserves (Watters 1999: 91).

Uzbekistan is located at the heart of CentralAsia, surrounded by Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,Tajikistan and Turkmenistan and sharing acommon border with Afghanistan in thesouth. Its total area of more than 477,400 km 2

embraces landscapes ranging from steppeand desert in the west, to richer farmlandalong the country's three major rivers towardsthe mountainous region in the east.Uzbekistan holds a variety of resources,including natural gas and oil, gold and silverand has by far the largest population inCentral Asia, counting roughly 25 millionpeople. The majority of the population isethnic Uzbek, though several substantialminorities, including Kazakhs, Karakalpakians,Tajiks und Turkmens, are part of this multi-ethnic state.

With the Aral Sea and Ferghana Valley,Uzbekistan is directly confronted with twomajor hot spots in Central Asia, posingsignificant threats to human developmentand regional stability. Environmental stresstriggers social and economic decline and viceversa, resulting in political and social tensionsor even open violent conflict, as in theFerghana Valley. The supply and quality ofwater, ethnic tensions, weak capacities andslow economic and structural reforms accu-mulate to heighten security concerns.


Uzbekistan’s main environmental problems arecentred on water and agriculture. Besides theAral Sea, Uzbekistan struggles with watersupply and contamination problems through-out the country and the whole region. Theagricultural heritage makes land deteriorationand contamination Uzbekistan’s secondlargest problem for human security.

The Aral Sea catastrophe dates back todecisions taken by the Soviet Union in the1960s, when every effort was made toincrease cotton production, mainly byincreasing irrigation. The necessary water was

tapped from rivers that feed the Aral Sea. ThisSoviet water management had a series ofcatastrophic environmental effects, whichbear heavily on the region and most im-mediately affect the autonomous Republic ofKarakalpakstan. They include environmentalconsequences, such as the reduction of theAral Sea volume to less than half its size, thecomplete devastation of its ecology and thevirtual extinction of fish. Desertification of vastareas, including the Amu Darya and Syr Daryadeltas, “is changing the climate in the region”(UN ECE 2001: 64) and has reduced the Sea’svicinity to a lifeless desert. The environmentalchanges impact directly on the population.The loss of fish has virtually destroyed the pre-viously important fishing sector in the region,leaving 60,000 people unemployed (ibid.).

Desertification and soil erosion causewinds to carry salt and dusts for hundreds ofmiles to be deposited over cultivated land andin human lungs. An additional threat to healthis posed by Vozrozhdeniye Island’s history as atest site of the Soviet Defence Ministry (seeBox 6). The lack of employment and fear ofhealth risks has led to migration from the AralSea region, uprooting people and increasingpopulation density in other areas of thecountry.

Water quantity and quality are a keyconcern throughout Uzbekistan. In fact, “themajority of the country’s waterways are eithermoderately or heavily polluted” posing aconsiderable threat to human health anddegrading irrigated land (ibid: 5). Pollution ismainly caused by agriculture, industry andhuman settlements. The allocation of crucialwater supplies has led repeatedly to tensionsbetween Uzbekistan and its downstreamneighbours as well as upstream states, leadingUzbekistan to severely reduce its trade andfrom time to time close its borders.

The legacy of mono-cultivation of cottonalong Uzbekistan’s river beds, accompaniedby heavy irrigation and extensive use ofpesticides, has led to widespread salinity andcontamination throughout the country and

Water quantity and

quality are key concerns

throughout Uzbekistan

Allocation of crucial

water supplies has led

repeatedly to tensions


6 Uzbekistan page 25

has severely reduced biodiversity. Sinceindependence, Uzbekistan has made substan-tial efforts to increase agricultural diversityand modify irrigation practices. However, theeconomic significance of agriculture pairedwith an increased area of arable land indicatescontinuing environmental pressure for theecosystem and humans living within it.


Agriculture remains a strong economic sectorin Uzbekistan, accounting for 30 percent ofGDP and 40 percent of employment (WorldBank 2001e). Despite continuing droughtconditions, cotton yields increased by nearly10 percent in 2001 and growth in industrialoutput accelerated to 8.1 in 2001 from 5.8percent in 2000 (ADB 2002a: 124). Real GDPper capita (PPP) stood at $2.441 in 2000 andhad increased by almost $200 in each of theprevious two years. While small-scale privateactivity led to a strengthening of the servicessectors by 14.2 percent in 2001 (ibid.),Uzbekistan’s economy remains highly statecontrolled, as the repressive import measuresin response to a fall in commodity prices inneighbouring states have shown (Swisspeace2003b: 3). The cost of local consumer goods

often puts them beyond reach for thepopulation (ibid.), due to low incomes and aconsumer price inflation rate of 26.6 percentin 2001 (ADB 2002a: 124).

According to official statistics, unemploy-ment is 0.4 percent, “actual unemployment,however, is estimated to be much higher; andhidden unemployment in the rural sector hasbeen rising” (ibid: 125). Lack of transparency,central steering mechanisms and sloweconomic reform efforts are making theirmark on Uzbekistan’s economic competitive-ness. According to the World Bank, 29 percentof the population was below the nationalpoverty line in 1999 (World Bank 2001e). Atthe same time, Uzbekistan invests moreheavily in its social systems than mostcountries in Central Asia, with public healthexpenditure reaching 6.6 percent of GDP in1999 (UNICEF 2002). The life expectancy of 69years (2000 figures) is the highest in CentralAsia (UNDP 2001). According to UNICEF dataof 2000, Uzbekistan’s health situation isremarkably good, though environmentalcauses and especially the 45 million metrictons of salty and contaminated dust spread-ing from the dried up Aral Sea seabed eachyear are considered to have a negative healthimpact (Medecins Sans Frontiers 2000).

Uzbekistan has

made substantial efforts

to increase

agricultural diversity


page 26

Vozrozhdeniye Island, the Re-

naissance or Rebirth Island, is

located in the Aral Sea between

Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. As

early as 1936, Vozrozhdeniye

Island was transferred to the

authority of the Soviet Ministry

of Defence for use by the Red

Army's Scientific Medical Insti-

tute. Due to its isolated loca-

tion, it was used as a test site for

biological agents and aerosols,

such as anthrax, plague and

smallpox between 1952 and

1992. After the site was officially

closed in 1992, military experts

from both Russia and the

United States have been in-

volved in efforts to deconta-

minate the area. In October

2001, the U.S. Department of

Defense and the Uzbek Ministry

of Defence signed an agree-

ment allowing the Cooperative

Threat Reduction programme

to spend up to $6 million to

destroy residual spores and

therefore reduce risks to the

environment and human health.

The threat of substances buried

in the ground being spread by

rodents has increased substan-

tially since the shrinking of the

Aral Sea, revealing a connection

between Uzbek mainland and

the Island, which is gradually

increasing.

Sources: Global Security Org

2003; UN ECE 2000a

Box 6:

Vozrozhdeniye Island

Uzbekistan’s paternalistic economic approachturns repressive and authoritarian where civilsociety, civil liberties and political rights areconcerned. The Freedom House ranking ofUzbekistan remains ‘not free’, with the civilliberties improving marginally to 6 andpolitical rights remaining at 7, on a scale of 1to 7. The non-existence of political rights isconfirmed by the Limited Election AssessmentMission, which observed the 1999 parlia-mentary elections instead of a standardElection Observation Mission, due to “seriousconcerns that the electoral framework inUzbekistan could not permit a pluralist andcompetitive election” (OSCE/ODIHR 2000c: 2).They concluded that the electorate had nogenuine choice between political alternativesand that “fundamental freedoms in Uzbe-kistan are severely restricted” (ibid.).

Civil society organizations and NGOs exist,though they are viewed with suspicion by thegovernment and their activity is mainlyrestricted to uncontroversial topics which arecomplementary to government concerns. Forexample, a project by a local NGO in Karakal-pakstan aimed at educating women and theirfamilies about the important link betweenenvironmental issues and human health. Withan estimated 7000 people imprisoned forreligious or political beliefs (Human RightsWatch, 2002), it is questionable whether alter-native views are openly and freely articulatedby the wider public.

A lack of public awareness makes itdifficult for a large part of the population toadequately and proactively respond to envi-ronmental and economic pressures. The po-tential for the combination of these pressuresto result in disorder and conflict is seriously in-creased by the restrictive measures of thegovernment.


After more than ten years of political,economic and social transition followingindependence, Uzbekistan still has a rather

autocratic system. Basic democratic structuresneed to be improved and principles im-plemented. The observation of the 1999parliamentary and 2000 presidential electionsin Uzbekistan concluded that “the principle ofseparation of powers between the executiveand legislative branches enshrined in theConstitution is not respected” (OSCE/ODIHR2000c: 4). In general, the state is marked by acentralized authority and hierarchical institu-tional structure.

Environmental concerns are addressed bythe State Committee for Nature Protection,with a total staff of 1864 (UN ECE 2001: 44). Itreports directly to parliament, which ensuresits genuine independence and signifies thehigh priority accorded to environmental pro-tection in Uzbekistan. Some environmentalfunctions are fulfilled by the Ministry of Health,the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry ofAgriculture and Water Management and theState Committee for Safety in the Manufac-turing and Mining Industries. The socio-eco-nomic impacts of environmental stress aredealt with by the Ministry of Economics andDepartment of Statistics, under the Cabinet ofMinisters. Environmental issues are mainlyaddressed in the National EnvironmentalAction Plan and the National Action Plan forEnvironmental Protection. Unfortunately,these programmes lack implementation,“including legislative and institutionalmeasures and defined financing” (UNECE2001: 18). Public participation is regulated bylegislation, for example in the environmentalsphere by the Environmental Protection Lawand Law on Ecological Expertise, but is mainlyrestricted to scientific expertise consultation.A more general cross-sectoral cooperation ofinstitutions or integration of related policiesdoes not occur in a systematic way.

Uzbekistan’s relationships to its neigh-bouring states have exhibited strong self-isolation tendencies (Swisspeace 2003b: 3). Atthe same time, Uzbekistan recognizes theneed for regional environmental cooperationto reduce security risks deriving from de-

page 27

Fundamental freedoms

in Uzbekistan are

severely restricted

Public participation

is mainly restricted

to scientific expertise

consultation



page 28

grading environmental conditions. In autumn2002, the last remaining border disputes withKazakhstan were settled. The area of concernhad been highly contentious due to its ethniccomposition and access to water. Never-theless, the issue of water allocations remainsa source of tension between Uzbekistan andits neighbouring states.

At the same time, Uzbekistan is involved inmany regional organizations and projects,such as the International Fund for Saving theAral Sea, the Interstate Coordination WaterCommission, the Regional EnvironmentalCentre, the Aral Sea Basin Capacity Develop-ment Project (1998 –2001), the Regional Projecton the West Tain-Shan Biodiversity Saving(2001 –2003) and the Regional EnvironmentAction Plan Development, though the effecti-veness of some of these programmes and orga-nizations is severely jeopardized by a lack ofclearly defined responsibilities, implemen-

tation schemes and finance. At an internatio-nal level, Uzbekistan has ratified the UnitedNations Framework Convention on ClimateChange, the Kyoto Protocol and the Conven-tion on Combating Desertification. It hasaccession status to the Convention on Biolo-gical Diversity and the Montreal Protocol onOzone Depleting Substances.

Against the background of the country casestudies, we conclude that environmentaldegradation and resource scarcity have notbeen sole causes of violent conflict in any ofthe Central Asian republics, but have exacer-bated existing political and social crises andethnic tensions. Only in the cases of theFerghana Valley and the civil war in Tajikistandid we find an explicit link between environ-mental stress and violence.

The Central Asian states face tremendouschallenges to manage the process of political,economic and social transformation towardscompetitive and open market economies.They still suffer in ecological, economic,political and social terms from the Sovietlegacy – notably large-scale irrigation systemsfor agricultural production (mainly cottonmonocultures), artificial borders, disruption ofhistoric social and economic structures andmass migration and displacement.

National patterns ofenvironmental risks

In Kazakhstan we found severe impacts onhuman health through industrial productionat a low level of technology. Water pollution,radioactive waste, and industrial pollution inindustrial-urban areas are key environmentalpressures. Water quality and supply are themajor environmental concerns and have beenidentified as priority areas by the NationalEnvironmental Action Plan. The Aral Searepresents a unique disaster with a sequenceof devastating environmental and socio-economic effects. Radiation deriving fromlarge geological uranium deposits and ura-nium mining wastes, in conjunction with theimpacts of Kazakhstan having been the nuc-lear test ground for the former Soviet Union,significantly affects human health. Industryalso contributes substantially to pollutioncaused by improper waste treatment andmanagement.

In Kyrgyzstan, environmental degradationis more closely related to poverty and security,

though only indirectly. High environmentalpressure on vulnerable local ecosystems inremote and often mountainous areas iscombined with an overall weak governancestructure, high population pressure, con-tinuing poverty, and ethnic tensions. However,outbreaks of violence only occur at the sub-state level where the majority of the po-pulation lives in poverty. Nevertheless, theKyrgyz government is the only one in theregion that explicitly refers in policies andlaws to the linkage between environmentalstress, poverty and security risks.

Tajikistan is characterized by ongoingdegradation of land resources and limitedavailability of clean water. A high incidence ofpoverty and a slowly stabilizing economy,enormous social problems and still insuf-ficient state capacity make the country mostvulnerable to environmental decline.Tajikistanis the only country which experienced large-scale violence during the civil war between1992 and 1997. In contrast to other CentralAsian republics, scarce water resources are nota general concern. This is due to the moun-tainous profile of the country. But waterinfrastructure, such as the dam in Lake Sarez, isin a poor condition and vulnerable to seismicactivity. High susceptibility to natural disastersis caused mainly by high dependency onhydropower and agricultural production.

Turkmenistan is characterized by limitedwater availability and severe pollution ofwater bodies due to agricultural and industrialeffluent, with large-scale impacts on humanhealth assumed. Although the economy isrelatively closed and centralized, Turkme-nistan has experienced steady economicgrowth in recent years. This is attributable torising agricultural output and the country’shuge oil and gas reserves. Nonetheless, thecomparatively prospering economy contrastswith extremely limited political rights and civilliberties, a lack of transparency and practicallyno participatory elements in policy-making.The resource conflicts and ethnic tensionsexperienced in many other Central Asian

Environmental

degradation and resource

scarcity have not been sole

causes of violent conflict

Central Asian states face

tremendous challenges to

manage the process of

political, economic and

social transformation


7 Conclusions page 29

states are not in evidence, according to officialinformation. High economic growth andsubsidies for basic commodities partiallyaccommodate the demands of the poorerpart of the population.

Uzbekistan is experiencing the humandevelopment impacts of large-scale humaninterference in fragile ecosystems. The legacyof irrigation for monoculture cotton cultiva-tion and extensive use of pesticides has led towidespread salinity, soil erosion and conta-mination. The Soviet irrigation system forcotton monoculture generated a series ofcatastrophic environmental and social effects.Allocation of crucial water supplies hasrepeatedly led to tensions between Uzbe-kistan and its downstream neighbouringstates. Moreover, the decline of the Aral Seahas caused migration from that region, raisingpressures on natural resources in alreadypopulated areas.


Key environmental issues threatening humandevelopment and security in the region arethe growing water demand mainly forirrigation (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistanand Turkmenistan), high levels of waterpollution (Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan), soil erosion and degradation(Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan)and air pollution by industrial activities(Kazakhstan and Tajikistan).Differences amongcountries are considerable but smaller thanthe differentials between central andperipheral areas within countries.

Water pollution caused by industrialactivities, uneven distribution and availabilityof water resources, land degradation throughsalinization, and radioactive toxic waste havebeen identified as major environmentalconcerns in the region. Water-related pro-blems have been found to have the mostobvious but often only indirect impacts onsecurity. Even though there is no general

scarcity of water resources in terms of totalwater availability at the regional level, water isunevenly distributed. Huge amounts of waterare stored in the mountains in Tajikistan andKyrgyzstan. But even in these countries, highdemand for water resources, mainly for irri-gation, and water losses due to inappropriatewater infrastructure impose significant con-straints upon water supply. Allocation ofcrucial water supplies has repeatedly led totensions.

Transboundary cooperation on theallocation of water has been the subject ofvarious regional and bilateral negotiationprocesses and projects in recent years, oftenresulting in formal agreements, joint commis-sions and the development of policies andmeasures. Traditional resource conflicts overshared water resources seem less likely thanoften assumed.

In contrast to the well known problem ofuneven distribution and allocation of waterresources, engendered mainly by risingdemand for water, the impacts of water pollu-tion have been underestimated. Waterpollution affects human health in both urbanareas and local communities and waterpollution can even provoke transboundarytensions. Freshwater is highly exposed toindustrial and agricultural pollution, withconcomitant human health effects. Through-out the region, drinking water is frequently,sometimes heavily polluted. Since river basinsare shared between numerous states, waterpollution is necessarily a regional concern.Other forms of pollution can also affect trans-boundary relations negatively. For example,air pollution became a point of controversybetween Tajikistan and Uzbekistan becausethe Tajik aluminium factory in Tursunzade isclose to Uzbekistan’s border and birth defectsare unusually high in the region. An agree-ment has been reached between bothgovernments to resolve the environmentalproblems associated with emissions from thefactory.

Differences among

countries are considerable

but smaller than

the differentials between

central and peripheral

areas within countries

The impacts of water

pollution have

been underestimated


page 30

Marginalization and economic pressure

Marginalization or uneven distribution ofnatural resources and large-scale environ-mental pollution is often combined withheavy economic burdens affecting the poorestcommunities in the countries. These com-munities have limited income alternatives,and limited access to public health servicesand social safety nets. Environmentallytriggered or heightened tensions ensue at thesub-state level and in already marginalizedand remote areas. Here, scarce naturalresources and their intensive use as a sourceof basic human survival and livelihoods, highlevels of pollution (mainly water pollution),soil degradation and overpopulation are en-gendering major threats to human develop-ment and security.

The existing institutional structure islimited and suffers from weak implemen-tation, limited technical capabilities andlacking finance and human resources.Similarly, the legislative and institutional baseis largely characterized by sectoral approacheswith little or ineffective coordinating struc-tures. There is awareness of the links betweenenvironmental stress and human develop-ment and security in Turkmenistan andKyrgyzstan, with ‘environmental security’being a key component of national environ-mental policy strategies. Beyond thesenormative programmes, however, there is alack of substantive moves towards con-sidering these links in an integrated fashion.

Weak governance structures

In practically all branches of government,policy reforms depend largely on externalassistance. External debt has created heavyburdens; as a result, the pace of reform hasslowed. Across all five Central Asian countries,the institutional framework to addressenvironmental risks exhibits similar patternsof weak institutional structure, essentially

building on earlier processes of institutiona-lization in environmental policy in the post-independence era. Basic competencies havebeen allocated to several line ministries andbasic environmental legislation has beendeveloped. Nevertheless, institutionalizationis lacking at provincial and municipal level.Efforts to further develop appropriate legalstructures largely depend on funding for pilotprojects and general assistance by externaldonors. Implementation deficits are reportedfrom all countries, being more dramatic at thelocal level, where government policies rarelyhave any impact. Even though legal provisionsfor formal policy coordination and prere-quisites for integration exist, practical coor-dination and integration among governmentagencies needs improving.

Access to information and public partici-pation in environmental decision-making is akey component of good environmentalgovernance and a substantial element ofdemocratic patterns in open societies. Legalprovisions for public participation exist, eitherin the constitution or the various basicenvironmental laws. However, access toinformation and public participation variessignificantly. Comparatively autocratic govern-ment structures leave little room for activeparticipation.

With regard to civil liberties and politicalrights, the five countries are similar, allremaining at the bottom end of the FreedomHouse Index. OSCE/ODIHR assessments ofparliamentary and presidential electionsconfirm that elections do not yet meetinternational standards.

page 31

Environmentally

triggered tensions ensue

in already marginalized

and remote areas

Implementation

deficits are more dramatic

at the local level


Building upon the conclusions set out above,this scoping report proposes enhancing andstrengthening capacities and institutions –both of government agencies and civil society– in order to reduce environmental risks andtheir impacts on human development andsecurity.

Strengthen institutional capacities

Following independence, Central Asian stateshave made considerable efforts to establishenvironmental institutions. Apart from thelack of financial means to implement policies,integrative approaches to tackle the impactsof environmental stress on human develop-ment and security still need to be improved.Experiences with suitable institutional ar-rangements for policy integration need to becommunicated and, where necessary, adaptedto Central Asia at both the national and locallevel.We suggest concentrating on three mainissues of integration: (a) institutional and ad-ministrative development, (b) sustainable resource management, conflict preventionand mediation, and (c) regional frameworkprogrammes.

First, a survey of institutional options forpolicy integration should be conducted, as-sessing existing legal provisions and insti-tutional arrangements for cross-sectoral inte-gration outside Central Asia and identifyingthe preconditions for adapting them toCentral Asia. This relates to the integration ofpolicies on the environment, natural resour-ces, health and social security as well asforeign and security policy.

Second, a survey needs to be conducted inorder to systematically analyse the level ofintegration of environmental concerns inprogrammes and projects addressing conflictprevention and peace promotion in theregion as well as dispute resolution mecha-nisms and mediation techniques – and, viceversa, the integration of such issues intoenvironmental affairs.Transboundary environ-mental cooperation has been effective in

achieving regional stability at the politicallevel. Nonetheless, environmental quality,natural resources and social conditions con-tinue their decline in many instances. Theretherefore remains a need to increase the under-standing of institutions and policies which helpto effectively address both spheres – theimprovement of environmental quality andsustainable resource use and the fostering ofregional stability and peace.

Third, it would be expedient to conduct asurvey on how to better integrate the socio-economic and security dimension into theRegional Environmental Action Plan (REAP)for Central Asia. REAP is the major regionaleffort and framework for improving sustain-able development and environmental protec-tion in the region. We recommend initiating adialogue with key proponents of the facili-tating and participating stakeholders withinthe REAP process. This dialogue would tackleissues of policy integration to address envi-ronmental risks and their impacts on humandevelopment and security.

Improve environmental policies invulnerable regions

The transboundary effects of resource scarcity– mainly water scarcity – have become thefocus of concern for national governmentsand the international community alike. Oneeffect of this has been that environmentalpollution at the national level and its securityimplications have been largely underestima-ted. Policies for pollution prevention andcontrol need to be developed and imple-mented especially in areas with weak gover-nance structures and high levels of social andeconomic vulnerability.

Conduct integrated assessments

Security-relevant environmental risks arisemainly at the sub-state level where environ-mental stress and unfavourable socio-econo-mic conditions are exacerbated. Operational


page 32 8 Recommendations

conflict impact assessment tools need to bedeveloped which allow stakeholders especi-ally at the sub-state level to analyse the rootcauses and triggering and accelerating factorsof environmental conflicts. Future assess-ments should extend beyond single issuessuch as water stress, ethnic tension or migra-tion and consider these aspects in anintegrated manner.

Fact-finding and appraisal missions toregions which have been identified as mostprone to affect human development andsecurity may assist in identifying pilot projectswhich help to address these challenges. Theyshould be carried out in close cooperationwith UNDP country offices and OSCE fieldpresences, based on their experience andpresence in Central Asia. Fact-finding reportsshould also identify to what extent thesechallenges have been or need to be consi-dered by external donor programmes andprojects in the region.

Enhance knowledge about local contexts

This scoping report has identified aspects ofenvironmental stress and its impact onhuman development and security. However, ithas also found that important information toassess developments at the sub-state level isunavailable or limited. To increase our know-ledge and understanding of the complexinterplay between environmental stress andhuman development and security, in-depthanalysis at the national and local level isessential. Case study reports should be carriedout by twinning teams of external and in-country experts and stakeholders. To ensurecomparability, they should use a commonmethodology and follow a similar structureand approach. These reports should beembedded in a consultative process at thenational level, including workshops withrepresentatives of government, civil societyand UNDP country offices and OSCE fieldpresences.

Develop early warning indicatorsand monitoring systems

Indicators of environmental stress and socio-economic conditions are only available at thenational level and are insufficient to serve thepurpose of establishing an early warningsystem. Based on existing early warningsystems for environmental stress, health,economic performance and social developmentand integrated early warning mechanisms,relevant data need to be collected systemati-cally at the local level. These data can providethe basis for regular assessment reports onlocal hot spots to be conducted by local stake-holders. Existing Peace and Conflict ImpactAssessments may serve as examples. As a firststep, pilot regions need to be identified incooperation with national and local stake-holder groups, and external donor agenciesneed to be integrated into a comprehensiveand continuous monitoring system for envi-ronment and security in Central Asia.

Communicate success stories

Peace and conflict impact assessments andenvironmental performance reports focuspredominantly on analysing tensions, con-flicts and environmental decline. However,there are several examples of successfullymitigated or solved conflicts and tensionswhich had emanated from environmentaldecline. Information on success stories, espe-cially at the local level, are rarely available tothe public and donor agencies. Lessons fromsuccessful local projects and transboundaryenvironmental cooperation creating mutualbenefits in environmental, social andeconomic terms should be systematically ana-lysed and communicated. A compilation ofsuccessful approaches in best practicemanuals can provide guidelines for decisionmakers at the national and local levels. Theseshould contain recommendations on institu-tional settings and procedures which provedsuccessful, enabling decision makers to

page 33


transfer these approaches to other regionsand problem areas.

Facilitate consultation andownership

Lack of civil society participation in decision-making and access to information has beenidentified as a major constraint to effectivelyaddressing environmental risks and theirimpact on human development and security.This scoping report should be distributedwidely and discussed with national and localstakeholder groups in the respective coun-tries. It would be useful to facilitate nationalstakeholder dialogues, which can then bedeveloped further into regular regional roundtables. Awareness needs to be raised of thepotential of the link between environmentalrisks and unfavourable socio-economic con-ditions to threaten human development andsecurity. Consultative workshops with repre-sentatives of donor agencies, including UNDPcountry offices and OSCE field presences, willprovide information on how best to tacklethese challenges and help governments andcivil society groups identify and focus on areasof concern.

Raise awareness and fostertransboundary networks

Raising awareness of environment and secu-rity linkages and agreeing on areas for furtherenvironmental cooperation will largely de-pend on the availability and transparency ofinformation. A comprehensive informationsystem and network should be establishedwhich contains integrative regional, nationaland local assessment reports and analyses. Itmay also serve the purpose of policy co-ordination, especially among donor agencies,by facilitating information on donor pro-grammes and projects which jointly addressthe environment and security linkages inCentral Asia. Regular policy briefs and manualson policy development and implementation

can foster transboundary learning processeswithin the region. A web-based informationsystem in English and Russian will enable stake-holders to share experience on successfulapproaches and will facilitate contacts amonglocal stakeholders and external expert bodies,NGOs and government agencies.

Since most of the vulnerable regions are inremote areas with no access to moderncommunication technologies, where policybriefings and manuals may be inappropriatemeans for reaching local communities, othermethods and means of communication needto be applied.

The allocation of environmental assets asbasic resources for human development andsecurity carries an important transboundarydimension, as does environmental pollution. Itwould be valuable to create transboundarynetworks bringing together representativesof national government agencies and civilsociety groups. Here they could exchangeinformation and experience on addressingand mitigating environmental problems andtheir socio-economic impacts. This can en-hance cross-border learning processes onsustainable resource management in additionto improving socio-economic conditions.

Improve donor coordination

National and regional donor round tablesshould be organized to share information andcoordinate assistance. An initial donor roundtable should address the challenges identifiedin this scoping report and facilitate a dialogueamong donor agencies on sustainable re-source management and human develop-ment and security. One topic of discussion willneed to be how best to integrate these issuesin donor assistance programmes for theregion. Past approaches by national donoragencies may be taken as examples to analyseconditions for success as well as barriers andconstraints to integrative approaches, extend-ing beyond sector-specific projects.


page 34

Develop training programmes

Training programmes on sustainable resourcemanagement and dispute resolution andprevention techniques should be developedand carried out in the areas most prone toconflicts and tensions. Training programmesneed to be tailored specifically to the re-quirements of local communities, recognizingthat technical capacities in often remote areasare limited. To sustain such training pro-grammes, the development of appropriatemanuals and the training of trainers areessential elements.

page 35



ADB 2000: Environmental Profile of Tajikistan. Manila: Asian

Development Bank.

ADB 2002a: Asian Development Outlook 2002. Bangkok: Asian

Development Bank.

ADB 2002b: Country Strategy and Program Update (2003–05).

Kyrgyz Republic. Bangkok: Asian Development Bank.

Bensmann, Marcus 2002: Gardens in the sand, in: Akzente

special. Global Environmental Policy: From Rio to Johannes-

burg, pp. 18– 20.

Community Business Forum, Kyrgyzstan 2003: Kumtor

Operating Company. Available at: http:// www.kyrgyzstan

cbf.org/Business/Kumtor_Operating_Company/

kumtor_operating_company.html [1 April 2003].

Eurasianet 2002a: Uzbekistan Daily Digest:‚ Kazakh, Uzbek

presidents sign accord resolving border disputes’ 10

September 2002. Available at: http://www.eurasianet.org/

resource/ uzbekistan/hypermail/200209/0008.shtml;

[12 April 2003].

Eurasianet 2002b: Kazakh Daily Digest: ‘No disputed issues

left between Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, say presidents’ 12

September 2002. Available at: http://www.eurasianet. org/

resource/kazakhstan/hypermail/200209/0017.shtml

[12 April 2003].

Eurasianet 2003: Experts See Limited Progress in Kazakh

stan’s Aids Policy. 15 January 2003. Available at http://

www.eurasianet.org/departments/recaps/articles/

eav011503.shtml [10 April 2003].

FAO 2000: Global forest resources assessment 2000. FAO

Forestry Paper 140. Rome: Food and Agricultural

Organization of the United Nations.

Freedom House 2002: Annual Freedom in the World Country

Scores 1972 –73 to 2000 –2001. Washington, D. C.: Freedom

House.

Fluoride Action Network 2003: Tajik Aluminum –

Environmental Disaster in Central Asia. Available at:

http://www.fluoridealert.org/tajik.htm [10 April 2003].

Global Security Org 2003: Vozrozhdeniye Island. Available at:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/

vozrozhdenly.htm [1 April 2003].

Human Rights Watch 2002: World Report 2002. Uzbekistan.

New York: Human Rights Watch.

ICG 2001: Kyrgyzstan at Ten: Trouble in the “Island of

Democracy”. ICG Asia Report No. 22, 28 August 2001.

Osh/Brussels: International Crisis Group.

ICG 2002a: Central Asia – Water and Conflict. ICG Asia

Report No. 34, 30 May 2002. Osh/Brussels: International

Crisis Group.

ICG 2002b: Central Asia – Border Disputes and Conflict

Potential. ICG Asia Report No. 33, 4 April 2002.

Osh/Brussels: International Crisis Group.

Jumagulov, Sultan 2003: Kyrgyzstan: Migration Prompts

Security Worries. Reporting Central Asia No. 197, 8 April

2003. London: Institute for War and Peace Reporting.

Ladonina, Nina N., Dimitry A. Cherniakhovsky, Igor B.

Akarov, and Victor F. Basevich 2001: Managing

Agricultural Resources for Biodiversity Conservation.

Case study of Russia and CIS countries. Study

commissioned by Environment Liaison Center

International. Final Draft.

Medecins Sans Frontier 2000: Uzbekistan – Environmental

Disaster on a Colossal Scale. Available at:

http://www.msf.org/content/page.cfm?articleid=

6589D208-DC2C-11D4-B2010060084A6370 [3 April 2003].

Ministry for Natural Resource Use and Environment

Protection of Turkmenistan 1998: State of the

Environment: Turkmenistan. Ashgabad: Ministry for the

Environment.

OSCE 2002: Background document for the Ninth meeting

of the Economic and Environmental Sub-Committee of the

Permanent Council – Report of the OCEEA on follow up

activities to the Tenth OSCE Economic Forum.

SEC.GAL/221/02, 11 December 2002.

OSCE/ODIHR 1999: Election Observer. The Republic of

Kazakhstan Presidential Election, 10 January 1999.

Assessment Mission. Warsaw: Organization for Security and

Cooperation in Europe/Office for Democratic Institutions

and Human Rights.

OSCE/ODIHR 2000a: Election Observer. Kyrgyz Republic

Parliamentary Elections, February 20 and March 12, 2000.

Final Report. Warsaw: Organization for Security and

Cooperation in Europe/Office for Democratic Institutions

and Human Rights.

9 Bibliography page 36

page 37


OSCE/ODIHR 2000b: Election Observer. Republic of Tajikistan

Elections to Parliament – 27 February 2000. Final Report.

Warsaw: Organization for Security and Cooperation in

Europe/Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights.

OSCE/ODIHR 2000c: Election Observer. Republic of Uzbekistan

Election of Deputies to the OLIY MAJLIS (Parliament), 28 April

2000. Limited Election Assessment Mission Final Report.



OSCE/ODIHR 2003: Kyrgyz Republic Constitutional

Referendum. Political Assessment Report, 2 February 2003.



Swisspeace 2003a: FAST Early Warning Systems – Kazakhstan

Quarterly Risk Assessment (November 2002 to January

2003). Bern: Swisspeace.

Swisspeace 2003b: FAST Early Warning Systems – Uzbekistan

Quarterly Risk Assessment (November 2002 to January

2003). Bern: Swisspeace.

Tabyshalieva Anara 1999: The challenge of regional

cooperation in central Asia: preventing ethnic conflict in

the Ferghana Valley. United States Institute of Peace.

Available at: http://www.usip.org/pubs/

peaceworks/pwks28.pdf.

UN 1997: UN Resolution 52/169 M – International Coopera-

tion and Coordination for the Human and Ecological

Rehabilitation and Economic Development of the Semi-

palatinsk Region of Kazakhstan. New York: United Nations.

UN ECE 2000a: Environmental Performance Review of

Kazakhstan. Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission

for Europe.

UN ECE 2000b: Environmental Performance Review of Kyrgyz-

stan. Geneva:United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.

UN ECE 2001: Environmental Performance Review of Uzbe-

kistan. Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for

Europe.

UN FVDP 2000: United Nations Ferghana Valley Development

Programme homepage. Available at: http://www.ferghana.

elcat.kg/ [1 April 2003].

UNDP 1996: Tajikistan Human Development Report 1996.

United Nations Development Programme. Available at:

http:// undp.org/rbec/nhdr/1996tajikistan/

chapter 9.htm [5 April 2003].

UNDP 1999: Human Development Report 1999. New York,

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

UNDP 2000: Human Development Report 2000. Human rights

and human development. New York, Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

UNDP 2001: Human Development Report 2001. Making New

Technologies Work For Human Development. New York,

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

UNDP 2002: Human Development Report 2002. Deepening

Democracy in a Fragmented World. New York, Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

UNICEF 2000: Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2000. New

York: United Nations Children’s Fund.

UNICEF 2002: TransMONEE Database. Available at http://

www.unicef-icdc.org/ documentation/transmonee. html

[3 April 2003].

USAID 2003: Country Profile Kyrgyzstan. United States Agency

for International Development. Washington: US Agency for

International Development.

US DoE 2002: An Energy Overview of the Republic of Tajikistan.

US Department of Energy. Available at: http://www.fe.doe.

gov/international/tajkover.html [8 April 2003].

WCED 1987: Our Common Future. World Commission on

Environment and Development. Oxford/New York: Oxford

University Press.

Watters, Kate 1999: Environmental NGOs and the Develop-

ment of Civil Society in Central Asia. In: M. Holt Ruffin and

Daniel Waugh (eds.): Civil Society in Central Asia. Seattle and

London: Center for Civil Society International; pp. 85 –108.

World Bank 2001a: Kazakhstan Country Brief. Washington,

D.C.: World Bank.

World Bank 2001b: Kyrgyz Republic Country Brief.

Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

World Bank 2001c: Tajikistan Country Brief. Washington, D.C.:

World Bank.

World Bank 2001d: Turkmenistan Country Brief. Washington,

D.C.: World Bank.

World Bank 2001e: Uzbekistan Country Brief. Washington,

D.C.: World Bank.

UNDP’s Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (RBEC)

administers programmes in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent

States, playing an important role in the transition process through empowering people, organi-

zations and governments to promote sustainable human development. RBEC links and coordinates

regional and national efforts to reach the Millennium Development Goals.

There are UNDP local offices in 23 countries of the region (Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus,

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Yugoslavia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithua-

nia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation,

Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.) Each pursues its own priorities dictated by

the local situation but they all have in common the pursuit of excellence in the six practice areas:

democratic governance, poverty reduction, crisis prevention and recovery, energy and environment,

information and communications technology, and HIV/AIDS.

The RBEC Regional Support Centre (RSC) was established in 1997 in Bratislava, Slovakia, as a know-

ledge and management hub. It provides management support services for all programme countries

in the region and administers programmes also for countries where UNDP has no local presence

(Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta, Slovak Republic, Slovenia and St. Helena). In addition, RSC is also

home to a Sub-Regional Resource Facility that provides policy advice, knowledge and expertise to

the governments of the region as well as to civil society.

RSC regional activities focus on the three inter-linked governance themes and priorities: democratic

governance, economic governance, and environmental governance. Within this framework,

the regional programme addresses the following issues: protecting and promoting human rights;

ensuring transparency, accountability and anti-corruption policies; decentralising and deconcen-

trating power; addressing the complex intersections between conflict prevention and early warning

as well as conflict mitigation and post-conflict recovery; promoting equity in development;

combating HIV/AIDS; and integrating Information and Communication Technologies as an

instrument for development.

The environmental governance programme of the Bratislava Regional Support Centre promotes

sustainable environmental policies and practices in the RBEC region. It focuses on the following

thematic areas:

• Development and implementation of environmental policies and strategies, and strengthening

of the legal and institutional frameworks

• Integration of environmental concerns into regional and sectoral development plans

• Ecosystem resource management and

• Environmental security.

The environmental governance programme is key to RBEC’s pursuit of Millennium Development

Goal Number 7 (“Ensure environmental sustainability”), and particularly of targets related to

governance of water resources.

United Nations Development ProgrammeGrosslingova 35811 09 BratislavaSlovak RepublicPhone: +421-2 -59 337-111Fax: +421-2 -59 337- 450http://www.undp.sk

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)

United Nations Development ProgrammeGrosslingova 35811 09 BratislavaSlovak Republic

http://www.undp.sk Bra

tisl

ava

2003

Documents

Addressing Environmental Risks in Central Asia: … · Environmental degradation and scarcity or ... outcome of human-induced transformation ... Addressing Environmental Risks in