NATURA 2000 European network
Report ID: 6

Umsetzung des Natura 2000–Netzwerks in Österreich

Die Errichtung des Natura 2000–Netzwerks in Österreich war noch nicht abgeschlossen. Wesentliche Mängel betrafen die rechtliche Umsetzung sowie die Bereiche Gebietsmanagement und Monitoring.

Durch die Ausdehnung des Schutzes von Lebensräumen auch auf Flächen, die keine Schutzgebiete im klassischen Sinne waren, stellt das EU–weit einzurichtende Natura 2000–Netzwerk eine neue Dimension des Naturschutzes dar. Für rd. 6.900 km2 der Natura 2000–

Gebiete bedeutete Natura 2000 eine Verbesserung des Schutzes.

Der RH überprüfte die Umsetzung des Natura 2000–Netzwerks in Österreich. Ziele der Überprüfung waren der Stand der rechtlichen Umsetzung zweier EU–Richtlinien und die Nominierung der Gebiete.

Weiters wurde die Qualität der Schutzmaßnahmen, des Gebietsmanagements und vorhandener Monitoring–Systeme bewertet.

Natura 2000 geht weit über den traditionellen Naturschutz hinaus. Im Mittelpunkt der geplanten Maßnahmen steht das Ziel, eine Verschlechterung der Lebensbedingungen der Arten zu verhindern. Darüber hinaus bewirkt der generelle Schutz der Lebensräume deren Erhaltung und allenfalls Verbesserung auch außerhalb der unter Schutz gestellten Flächen.

Anfang 2007 waren in Österreich 215 Gebiete mit einer Gesamtfl äche von rd. 12.300 km2 nominiert. Sie umfassten rd. 14,7 % der Gesamtfl äche Österreichs.

In den sechs vom RH überprüften Ländern — in diesen befinden sich rd. 90 % der Natura 2000–Flächen Österreichs — standen etwa 40 % der als Natura 2000–Gebiet nominierten Flächen schon vor ihrer Nominierung unter hochwertigem Schutz. Durch die Nominierung gewannen rd. 60 % der Natura 2000–Flächen — das sind rd. 6.900 km2 — an Schutz.

Anfang 2007 war erst ein Teil der notwendigen Schutzgebietsverordnungen erlassen. Ein vorläufi ger Schutz der Gebiete war allerdings durchwegs gewährleistet.

Eine nähere Konkretisierung des Schutzzwecks erfolgte nur in Niederösterreich und Salzburg; ansonsten war der entsprechende Handlungsrahmen (Gebote und Verbote) kaum festgelegt.

Managementpläne waren in unterschiedlichem Ausmaß vorhanden bzw. in Bearbeitung. Sie waren in Umfang, Inhalt und Qualität sehr unterschiedlich; die Erstellung erfolgte zumeist ohne klare

Prioritätenreihung. Durch ihren Charakter als Leitlinien waren die Managementpläne rechtlich nicht verbindlich.

In den überprüften Ländern waren in unterschiedlichem Ausmaß Gebietsbetreuer eingesetzt. Deren konkrete Aufgaben waren — wenn überhaupt — in jedem Land anders festgelegt.

Ein fl ächendeckendes Monitoring–System zur Überwachung des Erhaltungszustands der geschützten Gebiete und Arten war in keinem der Länder eingerichtet. Zur Zeit der Gebarungsüberprüfung arbeitete die Länderarbeitsgruppe für internationale Naturschutzangelegenheiten an den Grundlagen für ein bundesweit einheitliches Monitoringkonzept.

Die Länder fi nanzierten das Natura 2000–Netzwerk nicht nur aus den Naturschutzbudgets, sondern zu einem großen Teil auch durch Mittel aus anderen Bereichen (z.B. Wasserbau, Landwirtschaft einschließlich ländlicher Entwicklung, Raumplanung). Bezogen auf die einzelnen Länder reichte der EU–Mittelanteil von knapp 27 % bis über 60 %.

Eine weitere Feststellung betraf die Verbesserung der bundesländerübergreifenden Zusammenarbeit hinsichtlich des Natura 2000– Netzwerks.

On the Results of the Parallel Audit Examining Activity of the State Institutions of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Latvia in the Field of Import Regulation of Latvian Food Products into the Russian Federation
Report ID: 97

On  June 30th 2009   the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation and the State Audit Office of the Republic of Latvia decided to conduct a parallel audit.

The objectives of the audit were:

2.1. To determine effectiveness of international agreement documents on external trade of food products, legal enactments of the Russian Federation with respect to the State regulatory framework, importing Latvian food products into the Russian Federation and legal enactments of the Republic of Latvia with respect to the State regulatory framework on export of Latvian food products to the Russian Federation.

2.2. To clarify problematic issues within legal framework and application thereof with regard to import of Latvian food products into the Russian Federation, and to draw up proposals for improvement of legal framework.

2.3. To identify factors, which have negative impact on import of Latvian food products into the Russian Federation, and to draw up respective proposals.

Among others, a common conclusion, regarding the assessment of the Regulatory framework of the Russian Federation with regard to import of Latvian products and the activity of institutions responsible for export promotion of Latvian products to the Russian Federation, It was concluded that measures conducted in 2007-2008 overall comply with the legal framework of both countries; at the same time during the audit opportunities for improvement of cooperation were identified, in order to improve trade relations between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Latvia.

Source: https://www.lrvk.gov.lv/en/audit-summaries/audit-summaries/on-the-results-of-the-parallel-audit-examining-activity-of-the-state-institutions-of-the-russian-federation-and-the-republic-of-latvia-in-the-field-of-import-regulation-of-latvian-food-products-into-the-russian-federation

Estimating the efficiency of the state bodies activities on the border control check points between the Russian Federation, Belarus, Lithuania, and Poland for the control of the movement of goods and vehicles
Report ID: 116

In october 2008, the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, the  Audit Office of Lithuania, the Committee of State Control of the Republic of Belarus and  the Supreme Chamber of Control of the Republic of Poland signed a Cooperation Agreement in order to conduct a parallel audit  on estimating the efficiency of the state bodies (services) activities on the border control check points between their respective countries in the course of the goods and vehicles movement within the period from September to October of 2008.

The Parties proceeded from the assumption that the parallel audit, performed in the frames of their national law will help carrying out the following tasks: to improve efficiency of the state authorities (services), which take charge of control over the movement of goods and vehicles on the border control check points between the Russian Federation, Republic of Belarus, Republic of Lithuania, and Republic of Poland, and to create conditions, which contribute to the optimization of cargo traffic.

Source: https://www.vkontrole.lt/en/docs/Memorandum_with_supplement_eng.pdf

Parallel Audit of the Preparation for the organisation of the final tournament of the UEFA EURO 2012 European Football Championship - (2007-2008)
Report ID: 312

The European Football Championship is the third largest sporting event after the Olympics and the World Cup. On 18 April 2007 Poland and Ukraine were granted the right to organize EURO 2012, with the Polish Football Association and the Ukrainian Football Federation jointly accepting the offer. 

On 2 May 2007 an agreement on the organisation of the Final Tournament of the UEFA European Football Championship 2010/12 was signed between UEFA and the EURO 2012 organisers, valid until 30 June 2013.  This agreement sets out the requirements for the organisation of EURO 2012 in accordance with UEFA regulations, obligations and guarantees of state authorities and local governments, among others, and contains annexes in the form of: stadium contracts, contracts with EURO 2012 host cities and agreements with ports.

A paralle audit to  "Preparation of Poland for the organisation of the final tournament of the UEFA EURO 2012 European Football Championship" was undertaken on the initiative of the SAIs of Poland and Ukraine. The audit was carried out in the period from September 2008 to January 2009, and covered the period 2007-2008.

The aim of the audit was to assess the implementation, coordination and monitoring and financing tasks related to the preparations of Poland and Ukraine for the organisation of EURO 2012 by the competent authorities, public administration and other entities, including:

1) The organizational activities carried out by the Council of Ministers and the relevant Ministers and the EURO 2012 host cities;
2) Construction or modernisation of stadia and infrastructure: aviation, road, rail, hotel and communication in the EURO 2012 host cities
3) Development of security and order projects, public and medical security, and promotion of Poland and Ukraine and the EURO 2012 host cities.

* The report is available in Polish and Ukranianource.

** The audit for the period 2009-2010 is also available in the catalogue: https://intosai-cooperativeaudits.org/catalog/report/parallel-audit-of-the-preparation-of-poland-and-ukraine-for-the-organization-of-the-european-football-championship-euro-2012-tournament

 

 

The results of inspection of utilization effectiveness of state funds allocated for consequences elimination of emergencies
Report ID: 394

The tendency towards the increase of number of emergencies and events, which injure people, damage territories and yield losses to economies, has predetermined the urgency of the issue of providing anthropogenic and ecological safety for societies and territories. Underestimation of harmful factors, as well ass absence of timely compulsory measures is the reason for disastrous consequences, which could have been avoided. This means that health and lives of millions of humans depend on the way functioning of the state general system for prevention and response to disasters and catastrophes is ensured.

During the XIX INTOSAI Congress in Mexico City, the heads of the SAIs of Ukraine and Kazakhstan signed an agreement in order to continue bilateral collaboration that comprised an activity plan for 2008 – 2009. The plan stipulated that both SAIs shall conduct parallel inspections of planning, disbursement and utilization effectiveness of state budget funds, allocated for consequences elimination of emergencies, including anthropogenic disasters.

Among other, the results of inspection showed the inadequacy of communications, warning and information systems of authorized agencies in the area of prevention and consequences elimination of disasters and catastrophes, civil defense, being and important strategic objects of people protection.

Source: https://rp.gov.ua/upload-files/IntCooperation/IntAudits/RI_2008-2009.pdf