WGEAs global audit on climate change, adaptation to Climate Change, are Governments prepared

Report ID: 12

This cooperative audit is based on eight individual national audit reports from Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia and Ukraine, and a factfinding study by the European Court of Auditors. Generally the national audits revealed that the countries assessed in this report are in an early stage in adapting to climate change. So far, adaptation activities are related to identifying risk and vulnerabilities and to some extent policy development. Actions identified in the national audits covered in this report are mainly a response to current challenges and not initiated due to anticipated medium-term and long-term climate change impacts.

The national audits revealed that most countries have prepared risk and vulnerability assessments of sufficient quality. Up to the time of concluding the national audits, only two of the eight countries had developed a comprehensive adaptation strategy.

In most countries, weaknesses in coordination of adaptation are identified. There is also a general lack of cost estimates of impacts of climate change or adaptation measures in policy documents. This increases the risk that climate change and adaptation issues are not being sufficiently addressed in decision-making processes

It is recommended that

• countries use adequate risk and vulnerability assessments for policy-making and consider the impacts of likely climate change scenarios with higher expected temperature increases than the 2-degrees scenario
• adaptation strategies and action plans should be developed and implemented at the government level
• the strategies should clearly specify the time-frame for implementation and the roles and responsibilities of all the parties involved
• governments should ensure coordinated adaptation policy and its implementation
• governments should provide knowledge, to the extent possible and meaningful, of the costs and benefits of climate change impacts and adaptation measures to ensure cost-effective implementation

Umweltschutz im Dreiländereck Ungarn-Österreich und Slowenien

Report ID: 351

Umwelt- und Naturschutz sind entscheidende Faktoren in der modernen Gesellschaft. Da Umweltprobleme nicht an nationalen Grenzen Halt machen, ist eine intensive internationale Zusammenarbeit notwendig, um Umweltverschmutzungen zu verhindern und zu reduzieren. Oberste Rechnungskontrollbehörden (ORKB) haben als unabhängige Organisationen eine besondere Funktion bei der Behandlung dieser Themen.

Mit dem Ziel, zu einem supranationalen Ansatz in Umweltfragen beizutragen, haben die Leiter der ORKB der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Slowenien und der Republik Österreich vereinbart, koordinierte Prüfungen zur Behandlung der häufig identischen Probleme des Umwelt- und Naturschutzes in der Region entlang der gemeinsamen Grenzen der drei Länder durchzuführen. Alle ORKBn hatten bereits Erfahrung mit erfolgreicher bilateraler Prüfungskooperation; diese trilaterale Prüfung stellt einen weiteren Schritt in der Zusammenarbeit und im Austausch von Know-how zwischen den ORKBn der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Slowenien und der Republik Österreich dar.

Angeregt wurde diese trilaterale Kooperation durch die Arbeitsgruppe für Umweltprüfung der Europäischen Organisation der ORKBn (EUROSAI). Die Leiter der drei ORKB sind überzeugt, dass die gewonnenen Erkenntnisse und Die Leiter der drei ORKB sind davon überzeugt, dass die gewonnenen Erkenntnisse und Erfahrungen zur technischen Zusammenarbeit zwischen den ORKB auf dem Gebiet der Umweltprüfung beitragen werden.
Die von den drei ORKBn durchgeführten Umweltprüfungen umfassten die Themen Wasser, Boden und Naturschutz. Das geprüfte Gebiet umfasste die Grenzregion der drei Länder mit Schwerpunkt auf der Region der Grenzflussgebiete Raab/Rába und Mur/Mura sowie Schutzgebiete. Die Audits deckten den Zeitraum 2000-2005 ab, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf den Trends und jüngsten Entwicklungen lag.

Die Hauptziele waren:
- die Qualität von Flüssen, Grundwasser, Boden und natürlichen Lebensräumen
- die Situation der Abwasserentsorgung,
- die Effektivität der behördlichen Maßnahmen zur Förderung des Umwelt- und Naturschutzes sowie der Einsatz der Mittel,
- Defizite und Bedarf an weiteren Maßnahmen.

Bei den Audits wurde besonderer Wert auf die grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit der zuständigen Behörden der drei Länder auf dem Gebiet des Umweltschutzes gelegt.
Die Prüfungen wurden im Sinne einer engen Zusammenarbeit der drei ORKBn durchgeführt. Über die eingehende Abstimmung der Prüfungsergebnisse untereinander hinaus führte jede der drei ORKBn die Prüfung in eigener Zuständigkeit und als Teil ihres jährlichen nationalen Prüfungsprogramms durch. Die Prüfungsergebnisse wurden in separaten nationalen Berichten veröffentlicht und zu dem gemeinsamen Bericht zusammengefasst, der den Anhang zu diesem Kommuniqué bildet und von den drei ORKBn erstellt wurde. 

Quelle: https://www.rechnungshof.gv.at/rh/home/home/Umweltsituation_im_Dreilaendereck_Oesterreich-Ungarn-Slowenien

Pacific regional report on the cooperative performance audit into solid waste management

Report ID: 235

This report provides a regional overview of the process and outcomes of the cooperative performance audit in the Pacific region on solid waste management. The report records the achievements against Pacific Regional Audit Initiative (PRAI) objectives, including building performance auditing capacity within the member audit offices of the Pacific Association of Supreme Audit Institutions (PASAI), and the lessons learned from the first cooperative audit. In addition, the high level findings about solid waste management in the Pacific countries that were part of the audit, are presented.

Ten member audit offices from PASAI participated in the region’s first cooperative performance audit. The audit reports of seven of the ten SAIs – Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Guam, Marshall Islands, Page 8 the Republic of Palau, Papua New Guinea (PNG), and Tuvalu – are now in the public domain. The remaining three SAIs participated in the cooperative audit but have not yet released their individual country reports. Because of confidentiality issues, these country reports cannot be identified in this regional report. As a result, when cross-country comparisons are made in this report, they will be referred to as PICT 1, PICT 2 and PICT 3.

Pacific Regional Report of Access to Safe Drinking Water Report of the Cooperative Perform Audit: Access to Safe Drinking Water

Report ID: 236

This report provides a regional overview of the process and outcomes of the Cooperative Performance Audit in the Pacific region on access to safe drinking water. The report records the achievements against Pacific Regional Audit Initiative (PRAI) objectives, including building performance auditing capacity within PASAI (see Appendix A), and the lessons learned from the second cooperative audit. In addition the high level findings, about access to safe drinking water in the Pacific island countries/states that were the focus of the audit, are presented.

Ten PASAI member audit offices took part in the audit: Cook Islands, the states of Kosrae and Yap of the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Fiji, Kiribati, Palau, PICT 1, Samoa, PICT 2 and Tuvalu. Of the SAIs participating in the second cooperative audit, seven had participated in the first cooperative audit and three were new to the cooperative performance audit approach, the states of Kosrae and Yap of FSM and Kiribati.

The audit reports of the following SAIs are now in the public domain: Cook Islands, Fiji, the states of Kosrae and Yap of FSM, Kiribati, Palau, Samoa, and Tuvalu. Two additional SAIs participated in the cooperative audit. However, their reports have not yet been released and because of confidentiality issues the individual country reports cannot be identified in this regional report. As a result, when cross-country comparisons are made in this report, these Pacific island countries will be referred to as PICT 1 and PICT 2.

Key Findings

The main findings from each of the three lines of enquiry are noted below.

• The overall finding on the first line of enquiry is that most of the ten PICTs have legal and policy frameworks in place but not a single, overarching framework.
• The overall finding on the second line of enquiry is that legal and policy frameworks have not been effectively implemented in most of the ten audited countries/states.
• The overall finding on the third line of enquiry is that there are weaknesses in monitoring systems and performance management frameworks.

Pacific Regional Report of the Cooperative Performance Audit: Managing Sustainable Fisheries

Report ID: 237

This report provides a regional overview of the process and outcomes of the third Cooperative Performance Audit in the Pacific region. At the aggregate level, it reports the significant findings about managing sustainable fisheries (in particular the tuna fishery) in the nine Pacific island countries, which were the focus of the audit. The report also records the achievements against Pacific Regional Audit Initiative (PRAI) objectives, including building performance auditing capacity within PASAI.

Nine PASAI member audit offices took part in the audit: PICT 1, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Fiji, PICT 2, Palau, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga and Tuvalu. Owing to confidentiality reasons, the reports of two SAIs are not identified in this regional report, as they have not yet been made public within their jurisdictions. As a result, these Pacific island states are referred to as Pacific Island Country and Territory (PICT) - PICT 1 and 2. Of the SAIs participating in the third cooperative audit, the majority had participated in either the first or the second cooperative audit. The Solomon Islands SAI was new to the cooperative performance audit approach.

Key Findings

The main findings from each of the three lines of enquiry are presented below:

1. The overall finding for the first line of enquiry is that, while government objectives are set out in legislation, these objectives need to be reflected in sector planning arrangements.
2. The overall finding for the second line of enquiry is that, while there have been important sub-regional developments, it is difficult to provide assurance that economic returns to the Pacific island states involved in this audit, are uniformly fair and reasonable.
3. The overall finding for the third line of enquiry is that the accuracy of fishery data collection and analysis procedures as the basis for good decision making are less than optimal.