- Email: [email protected]
Finnish strategies for reduction and control of effluents to the marine environment––examples from agriculture, municipalities and industry
Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168 www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul
Finnish strategies for reduction and control of effluents to the marine environment––examples from agriculture, municipalities and industry J. Tapani Kohonen
*
Counsellor for International Affairs, Environmental Protection Department, Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, P.O. Box 35, Helsinki FIN-00023 Government, Finland
Abstract The most serious environmental problem encountered in the Baltic Sea is eutrophication. Finland finalised in spring 2002 its national Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea. The programme contains more than 30 measures for improving the state of the Baltic Sea and protecting the marine environment. Total national investments during the next 10–15 years will amount to EUR 300–370 million. The highest annual cost will be environmental support to agriculture. The bulk of the rest of the money will be used for nitrogen purification of municipal wastewater, improvement of water protection in dispersed settlement areas, and investments to improve maritime safety and decrease the risks of oil spills. Ó 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Pollution control; Eutrophication; Environmental protection; National strategy; Point and non-point source pollution; Baltic Sea
1. International co-operation for the protection of the Baltic marine environment Co-operation between the Baltic oceanographers has existed since the beginning of the 19th century. In 1968, the first intergovernmental co-operation for the protection of a part of the Baltic Sea, the Gulf of Finland, was established between the Soviet Union and Finland. Based on the good experiences gained from this joint environmental activity between two countries with different political and economic systems, Finland proposed, during the 1972 UN Environmental Conference in Stockholm, negotiations among the Baltic Sea countries for preparations of a comprehensive convention for protecting the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. The status of co-operation in the 1980s was described for the first time at the EMECS Conference in 1990 (Ferm, 1991; Kohonen, 1991; Krzyzanowski, 1991; Lepp€ akoski, 1991).
*
Tel.: +358-9-1603-9354; fax: +358-9-1603-9515. E-mail address: tapani.kohonen@ymparisto.fi (J. Tapani Kohonen).
2. The Baltic Sea The total area of the Baltic Sea is 415,266 km2 and the total water volume is approximately 22,000 km3 . From a drainage area of more than 1.7 million km2 , hundreds of rivers and watercourses discharge fresh water into the Baltic Sea. The annual fresh water run-off totals about 450 km3 (HELCOM, 2001a). The Baltic Sea is connected with the North Sea through narrow and shallow sounds that limit the water exchange. It is estimated that the retention time of the water of the Baltic Sea is 25– 30 years. In fact, the Baltic Sea consists of a series of basins separated by sills, which means that conditions vary considerably between different parts of the sea (Fig. 1). The Baltic Sea is one of the major enclosed brackish water basins in the world, and it is surrounded by more than 85 million people living in industrialised countries with intensive agriculture. The Baltic Sea has always been of great importance to the people living around it, providing a natural bond as well as navigation routes between the different land areas. Fisheries remain a valuable part of peopleÕs livelihood and the Baltic Sea is also a recreational resource of growing value.
0025-326X/03/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00476-9
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
163
3. Intergovernmental conventions on the protection of the Baltic Sea
4 5
SE
FI
3 7
N 7
6
2
EE
10 9
RU
LA
DK
1
8
LI BE
DE PL CZ
UKR SL
Fig. 1. Drainage basin of the Baltic Sea (shadowed). Numbering of the different sea areas: (1) the Baltic Proper; (2) the Gulf of Finland; (3) the Bothnian Sea; (4) the Bothnian Bay; (5) the Quark, 3–5 together land Sea; forms the Gulf of Bothnia; (6) the Archipelago Sea; (7) the A (8) the Belt Sea; (9) the Kattegat; (10) the North Sea. The countries locating in the drainage basin are Finland (FI), Sweden (SE), Norway (N), Denmark (DK), Germany (DE), Poland (PL), Czech Republic (CZ), Slovak Republic (SL), Ukraine (UKR), Belarus (BE), Lithuania (LI), Latvia (LA), Estonia (EE) and the Russian Federation (RU).
Its natural vulnerability, though, places the Baltic Sea at serious risk to anthropogenic impact. Municipalities, industry and agriculture in the catchment area have released pollutants directly to the Baltic Sea and to the through numerous rivers flowing into the Sea. In addition, many pollutants are transported to the Baltic Sea through the atmosphere (HELCOM, 1997a,b, 1998a; Jansson, 1998). As a result, the whole Baltic Sea is highly eutrophic and polluted. Among the different parts of the Baltic Sea, the Gulf of Finland is the most eutrophic and the most loaded with pollutants. Harmful substances, especially persistent chemicals and other pollutants, remain in the Baltic Sea for a long time (HELCOM, 1993a, 2001a,b). Because of the ecological conditions, the biota of the Baltic Sea is very sensitive to any changes in the marine environment (HELCOM, 1998b, 2001a,b).
The protection of the Baltic Sea is based on an internationally legally binding convention. In 1974, all seven riparian countries (Denmark, Finland, the German Democratic Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, Poland, Sweden and the USSR) bordering the Baltic Sea signed the Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, known as the Helsinki Convention (HELCOM, 1994; Kohonen, 1991, 1992, 1998). It entered into force in 1980 after ratification by all signatories. Under the Convention, the Baltic Sea countries established the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, also known as the Helsinki Commission or as HELCOM. The CommissionÕs annual meetings are held irregularly at ministerial level. The Commission consists today of six permanent subsidiary groups (Strategy, Monitoring and Assessment, Land-based Pollution, Maritime, Response, and Nature Conservation and Coastal Zone Management) and a Programme Implementation Task Force. The subsidiary groups are broken down into ad hoc working groups and projects. The work is supported by informal meetings, workshops, seminars and symposia on specific topics. The groupsÕ main task is to advise the Commission on matters related to their mandates. The International Secretariat, located in Helsinki, Finland, supports the work of the Commission. The fundamental principle and obligation of the revised 1992 Helsinki Convention is to prevent and eliminate all forms of land-based pollution in order to promote the ecological restoration of the Baltic Sea area and to preserve its ecological balance. Furthermore, the Convention covers, for example, discharges and spills from ships, combating of oil and other harmful chemicals and pollution caused by the exploration or exploitation of seabed resources. In comparison with the 1974 Helsinki Convention, the 1992 Convention contains new binding provisions concerning, among other things, the application of the precautionary principle, the polluter pays principle, best available technology (BAT), best environmental practice (BEP) and environmental impact assessment. Additionally, the scope of this legally binding instrument was broadened, for instance, through the inclusion of the internal waters of the Contracting Parties in the Convention Area, detailed priority groups of harmful substances and lists of substances restricted or totally banned from use, and a new article on nature conservation and biodiversity (Ehlers, 1993; HELCOM, 1994; Kohonen, 1998). The ban on the use of certain persistent toxic organic compounds, such as DDT and PCBs, has led to their significant decrease in the biota since 1974. In some
164
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
parts of the Baltic Sea the concentrations of toxic substances in the biota have decreased sharply because of remedial actions. The effects of toxic substances on the biological systems of the Baltic Sea are very serious. For many years, bird and seal populations in the Baltic Sea have been threatened by pollutants, such as heavy metals and organochlorines (HELCOM, 2001a,b). The white-tailed sea eagle was close to extinction, but, because of decreased pollutant discharges and other actions, the population is now recovering. As for the Baltic seals, the rapidly growing seal populations in some sea areas now cause conflicts with fishermen. For the moment, the stocks of wild salmon are close to extinction, not only due to overfishing but also due to a disease known as M74 syndrome. This syndrome is possibly related to the combined effects of pollutants as well as interactions with the 5.5 million hatchery-reared smolts released in rivers every year (Rappe, 1999).
4. Baltic Sea joint comprehensive environmental action programme The Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental Action Programme was adopted also in 1992 and a task force was established within HELCOM to implement the Programme (HELCOM PITF). The Task Force members are representatives from all 10 Contracting Parties of the Helsinki Convention, and from Belarus, the Czech Republic, Norway, the Slovak Republic, Ukraine, five international financial institutions and the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission (HELCOM, 1993b,c, 1998c). This 20-year Programme includes, for instance, special environmental investments for 132 ‘‘hot spots’’, which are major sources of pollution, 47 of which have been classified as high priority. When fully implemented, it is expected to have a strong beneficial impact on the water quality of the rivers in the Baltic Sea drainage area. The quality of the coastal waters can also be expected to improve relatively rapidly. Reducing the nutrient and heavy metal loads will help to restore the ecological balance of the open sea and also of the coastal lagoons and wetlands. So far, 27 hot spot have been deleted from the list. Of the remaining hot spots, 80% have projects under implementation or are receiving technical assistance. This Programme also fulfills the regional obligations of UNEPÕs 1995 Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities.
5. Helcom activities for the reduction of pollution The Helsinki Convention sets certain obligations which the Contracting Parties are pledged to bring into
effect through adequate provisions in their national legislation. With particular regard to hazardous substances, that is, DDT and its derivatives, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polychlorinated terphenyls (PCTs) and mercury, the implementation of the Convention has resulted in lower concentrations in fish, birds and mammals, and the above-mentioned recovery of the Baltic seal and white-tailed eagle populations (HELCOM, 2001a,b). The Commission has adopted more than 100 recommendations (http://www.helcom.fi) concerning, for instance, substance-wise restrictions on oil discharges (municipal storm water systems, oil refineries and offshore installations), cadmium (industry, fertilisers and used batteries), mercury (chloralkali industry, dentistry and used batteries), lead (leaded petrol) and organotins (antifouling paints), as well as branch-wise recommendations concerning municipalities (nutrients and oxygen-consuming substances), the pulp and paper industry (organohalogens, nutrients and oxygen-consuming substances), agriculture (nutrients and pesticides), maritime (ship-generated wastes, air pollution and safety) and combating activities (co-operation and equipment). The 1988 Ministerial Declaration provided a strong impetus to the CommissionÕs work to reduce land-based pollution. The Declaration called for a 50% reduction of substances most harmful to the ecosystem by 1995 (e.g., nutrients, heavy metals, and toxic, persistent and bioaccumulating organic compounds) (HELCOM, 1994; L€a€ane et al., 2002). Based on the established follow-up and reporting procedure, pollution entering the Baltic Sea from land-based sources has decreased over the past 15 years by 30% (HELCOM, 1998d). Municipalities of over 100,000 inhabitants in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania will meet the Helsinki CommissionÕs recommendations for municipal wastewater treatment within a couple of years. Coastal water quality has improved, and beaches, where swimming has been prohibited for years, have re-opened for recreational purposes in those three countries (HELCOM, 1993a). In addition to the joint implementation of the Helsinki Convention, each Contracting Party must individually undertake national prevention measures according to national priorities and programmes.
6. Finlands new programme for the protection of the Baltic Sea In spite of huge efforts during the past decades the state of the Baltic Sea may still be considered alarming. Therefore, the programme of Prime Minister Paavo LipponenÕs second Government (April 15, 1999) stated that a programme would be drawn up with the aim of restoring the ecological balance of the Baltic Sea and curbing eutrophication in the Baltic Sea, and the Gulf of
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
Finland in particular, and in inland waters, as well as preventing the accumulation of toxic substances in the food chain. The programme was based on the Finnish GovernmentÕs Decision-in-Principle on the Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 (Ministry of the Environment, 1999), on the Water Protection Action Programme for the Year 2005, and on the Horizontal Rural Development Plan by 2006. The 1998 Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region was also taken into account (Baltic 21 Secretariat, 1998). This new programme was needed for better implementation of the 1992 Helsinki Convention, the 1988 HELCOM Ministerial Declaration on 50% reduction of nutrients, heavy metals and organic pollutants by 2005, UNEPÕs 1995 Global Programme of Action, and the appropriate European Union environmental legislation. In June 2001, the Baltic Sea Protection Working Group, appointed by the Ministry of the Environment, finalised its proposal for an ambitious programme for the protection of the Baltic Sea. The Working Group comprised representatives from various ministries, industry, agriculture, non-governmental environmental organisations, the Finnish Environment Institute and the Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities. Based on this proposal, the Finnish Government made on 26 June 2002 a decision-in-principle on actions to protect the Baltic, FinlandÕs Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea (Ministry of the Environment, 2002). More than 30 actions are proposed for implementing the programme. The six main sectors of action are combating eutrophication, reducing risks caused by hazardous substances, curbing damages resulting from the use of the Baltic Sea, preserving and increasing biological diversity, increasing environmental awareness, and research and follow-up. The most urgent concrete actions refer to the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea caused by the nutrient load, the risks caused by increased oil and chemical transports, and the threats to man and the environment from hazardous, bioaccumulating and persistent sub-
165
stances. The goals for reducing discharges from domestic sources in combating eutrophication are based on the Water Protection Programme for the Year 2005, which sets the goal of a 50% reduction in nutrient discharges as compared with the level in the early 1990s. This presentation focuses on reducing the nutrient load from agriculture, communities and dispersed settlements as well as from industry. It is estimated that implementing this Programme will halve the nutrient discharges from Finland and St. Petersburg that cause eutrophication (Tables 1 and 2). The first indications of such a decrease will be seen in coastal waters and near pollution sources. For example, the depth of the bladder wrack growth zone in the archipelago will increase, and the biomass of filamentous algae will decrease. The state of the open sea will also be considerably improved, but more slowly. The amount of nitrogen-fixing blue-green algae, the total mass of phytoplankton and water turbidity will decrease. The open sea will be largely influenced by decreased discharges from St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region. Each sector of the administration will need to take into account, with regard to purview and mainstreaming, the measures and objectives contained in this Programme. In order to implement the Programme, the Ministry of the Environment will need to draw up and approve an action plan in co-operation with the various other sectors by the end of 2002. 6.1. Agriculture An important factor influencing eutrophication is the nutrient load from agriculture. It is evident that the objectives of the national Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 will not be attained with current measures, although the use of phosphorus fertilisers has decreased by over 60% since 1990. In the longer time span, further nutrient reduction is possible in the southern and south-western coastal areas. New agreements with farmers are planned for wetlands covering 20,000 ha and buffer zones covering 34,000 ha. Other
Table 1 Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) loads from Finland entering the Baltic Sea and estimated reduction during the next 5–20 years as result of implementation of the Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea Source
Nowa t P/a
Nowa t P/a
Reduction t P/a
Agriculture Communities Dispersed settlements Industry Forestry Fish farming Total
1300 190 370 270 560 170 2860
19,000 11,000 3000 3000 1400 1000 38,400
500 60 150 130 – 40 890
Diffuse loads are not included. a Values based on data from 1991 to 1996 reported by Kauppila and B€ack (2001).
Reduction t P/a 7500 4500 300 1500 – 400 14,200
166
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
Table 2 Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) loads from Finland, St Petersburg region and Estonia entering the Gulf of Finland and estimated reduction during the next 5–20 years as result of implementation of the Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea Source Agriculture Communities Dispersed settlements Industry Forestry Fish farming Total from Finland St. Petersburg Leningrad region, direct discharges Estonia Via atmosphere Total
Nowa t P/a
Nowa t P/a
Reduction t P/a
Reduction t P/a
240 90 90 100 20 30 570
4200 5800 920 810 220 170 12,120
100 30 40 50 – 10 230
1700 3000 90 400 – 70 5260
2200
17,000
260
1200
270b 1230c 130
1800b 4800c 600
360 – 3390
7 900 12,000 50,220
– 630–1590
1100 8760–11,860
a
Values based on data from 1991 to 1996 reported by Kauppila and B€ack (2001). Values for St. Petersburg and Estonia for 1995 from the report of Pitk€ anen et al. (1997) and for Leningrad region from the report of L€a€ane et al. (2002). Airborne pollution for 1997 from the report of Bartnicki et al. (2000). b Reduction caused only by the finalisation south-western wastewater treatment plant of St. Petersburg. c Reduction after biological treatment and intensified phosphorous removal of all wastewaters of St. Petersburg.
planned new agreements concern regulated subsurface drainage and the enhanced use of manure in the coastal areas of the Gulf of Bothnia. These measures will be ensured by means of effective and properly channelled special national and EU funding to agriculture. The Programme proposes an additional extra budgetary appropriation of EUR 30 million. This will be implemented evenly from 2003 onwards over four years so that it will be EUR 30.3 million in 2006. The continuation of agricultural water protection measures after 2006 will be safeguarded by cost-efficient targeted measures in coastal areas. 6.2. Communities and dispersed settlements The implementation of the Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 requires high-quality phosphorus removal facilities from all wastewater treatment plants and nitrogen removal in areas where nitrogen is the limiting nutrient for algal growth. The goal set for phosphorus removal is over 96% for those plants serving over 10,000 inhabitants and over 92% for those serving fewer than 10,000 inhabitants. Enhanced nitrogen removal for community wastewater will be implemented in plants having an impact on nitrogen-sensitive sea areas, mainly to the south of the Quark and the eastern end of the Gulf of Finland. Nitrogen discharges from communities are to be cut so that a reduction of 70% in the nitrogen load entering the sea will be reached. This requires investments of EUR 135 million in municipal wastewater treatment during the next 10–15 years. The load from dispersed settlements is to be decreased by better siting of settlements, water management plans,
land use plan conditions, extended sewerage networks and use of the best available technology on properties and the best environmental practices. Connecting dispersed settlements to sewer networks needs promotion by land use and water supply design. A rough estimate of the required financing is EUR 118–168 million. The Government has just adopted a new act on this matter. In the combating of eutrophication in the Baltic Sea and especially in the Gulf of Finland, the emphasis is on Russia and more efficient wastewater treatment in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region. The aim is to support the building of the south-western treatment plant, which will ensure proper treatment of 85% of the wastewater from the five million inhabitants. Moreover, in connection with the northern treatment plant, additional sewage pipes are needed, as well as wastewater treatment and improved phosphorus removal. The Programme proposes additional budgetary appropriations of altogether EUR 10 million in the 2002–2004 Finnish state budget for support of these measures. 6.3. Industry The industrial load on the Baltic Sea originates from the wood processing industry and the metal industry. The main recipient areas are the coast of the Bothnian Bay and the eastern coastal area of the Gulf of Finland. The Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 require about a 50% reduction in phosphorus and nitrogen discharges from industry. For phosphorus, this goal has been reached, but for nitrogen, efficient reduction measures are still needed in the near future. The Programme requires nutrient reductions in various sea areas when reviewing environmental permits.
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
The nitrogen load ought to be reduced particularly along the nitrogen-sensitive coasts of the Gulf of Finland and the Bothnian Sea. Combined treatment of industrial and community wastewater will be increased in locations where it is feasible. The task force stresses the need for reducing nitrogen discharges from industry in accordance with the timetable set in the national water protection programme. 6.4. Other sectors Fish farming has a regional and local impact on eutrophication in the Baltic Sea. Adverse effects have been most visible in Finland and Sweden. In Finland most of the fish farms are located in the Archipelago Sea and the land Sea. To improve the state of these sea areas it is A necessary to implement external and internal measures. By demanding better feed and more careful feeding, improved technical solutions and better siting of fish farms in permit procedures, the pollution load can be reduced. The Programme stresses that Finland will continue to improve maritime safety in the Gulf of Finland in line with international conventions, that is, the 1992 Helsinki Convention and MARPOL 73/78. An annual appropriation of EUR 6.3 million is proposed for the 2003 state budget to improve the combating of oil and chemical accidents by providing a new oil and chemical combating vessel. To reduce hazardous substances use, the Programme proposes an urgent inventory of hazardous substances and chemicals. In Finland, some 5000 different chemicals are used, and for the bulk of them, their effects on water quality, the marine environment and overall health are poorly known. The use of hazardous substances has already been curbed, and in some cases, banned (PCBs, DDT, HCH, organic tin compounds and certain pesticides). Additionally, limitations can be set on certain heavy metals, fire-combating bromides, chlorinated paraffin and some phenols. Hazardous substances originating in incineration or manufacturing, such as dioxins and furans, will also be restricted in order to protect the Baltic Sea, although these substances are very difficult to trace. The diminished use and discharges of hazardous substances will be in line with the EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60) and the Directive on discharges of dangerous substances into the aquatic environment (76/464). To protect biological diversity in the Baltic Sea and its coastal areas, the Programme proposes that the protection should be extended to underwater areas as well. The inventory of habitats and species has to be improved so as to make it possible to reach the favourable level called for in the EU habitats directive (92/43). To improve the present situation (HELCOM, 1996, 1998b; HELCOM, 2001a,b), seal protection areas need to be set
167
up, and compensations paid for seal damages to fish and fishing implements. To preserve the wild salmon, the Salmon Action Plan prepared by the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission is to be put into practice. 6.5. Financing The total national investment for implementation of the Baltic Sea Programme during the next 10–15 years will be EUR 300–370 million. The bulk of the money will be used for nitrogen removal from municipal wastewater (EUR 135 million), improvement of water protection in dispersed settlement areas (EUR 118-170 million), improvement of maritime safety, decreasing the risks of oil spills (EUR 34–50), and measures in fish farming, forestry and maritime traffic (EUR 12 million). The appropriations proposed in the Programme for inclusion in the State budget for 2003–2006 are EUR 6.7 million for the south-western wastewater treatment plant in St. Petersburg, EUR 75.7 million as extra funding for special aid for agriculture, and EUR 6.3 million for equipping an oil combating vessel for the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
7. Conclusion Through their international co-operation in implementing the 1974 and 1992 Helsinki Conventions and the 1992 Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental Action Programme, the Baltic Sea riparian countries have achieved certain positive results for the protection of the Baltic Sea. However, because pollutant loads are still too high, more specific targets and actions are needed. Preparations of national action plans and programmes for different sectors and a comprehensive approach have been very instructive and result-oriented, especially when the economic implications have been estimated and the financing of the implementation safeguarded. FinlandÕs newly adopted Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea, which is the national implementation of UNEPÕs 1995 Global Programme of Action, will ensure that protection targets set for coastal areas will be achieved, and national actions for restoring open sea areas will be taken.
References Baltic 21 Secretariat, 1998. An Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region–– Baltic 21. Baltic 21 Series No 1/98. Bartnicki, J., Gusev, A., Pavlova, N., Ilyin, I., Lukeville, A., 2000. Atmospheric supply of nitrogen, lead, cadmium, mercury and lindane to the Baltic Sea. EMEP/MSC-W, Research Report No. 97, Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-West. Norwegian Meteorological Institute.
168
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
Ehlers, P., 1993. The Helsinki Convention, 1992. Improving the Baltic Sea environment. International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 8 (2), 191–214. Ferm, R., 1991. Integrated management of the Baltic Sea. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 533–540. Jansson, B-O., 1998. The Baltic Sea. In: Proceedings of Stockholm Water Symposium/EMECS on Rivers to the Sea––Interaction of Land Activities, Fresh Water and Enclosed Coastal Seas. Report 2, pp. 47–55. HELCOM, 1993a. First assessment of the state of the coastal waters of the Baltic Sea. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 54. HELCOM, 1993b. Summaries of the pre-feasibility studies. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 46. HELCOM, 1993c. The Baltic Sea joint comprehensive environmental action programme. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 48. HELCOM, 1994. Intergovernmental activities in the framework of the Helsinki Convention 1974–1994. Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 56. HELCOM, 1996. Coastal and marine protected areas in the Baltic Sea region. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 63. HELCOM, 1997a. The evaluation of the relation of atmospheric deposition to riverine input of nitrogen to the Baltic Sea. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 68. HELCOM, 1997b. Airborne pollution load to the Baltic Sea in 1995. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 69. HELCOM, 1998a. The third Baltic Sea pollution load compilation. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 70. HELCOM, 1998b. Red list of marine and coastal biotopes and biotope complexes of the Baltic Sea, Belt and Kattegat. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 75. HELCOM, 1998c. The Baltic Sea joint comprehensive environmental action programme: Recommendations for updating and strengthening. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 72. HELCOM, 1998d. The final report on the implementation of the 1988 ministerial declaration. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 71. HELCOM, 2001a. Fourth periodic assessment of the state of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea, 1994–1998; Executive summary. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 82A. HELCOM, 2001b. Fourth periodic assessment of the state of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea, 1994–1998; Background document. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceeding No. 82B.
Kauppila, P., B€ack, S. (Eds.), 2001. The state of Finnish Coastal waters in the 1990s. The Finnish Environment No. 472. Kohonen, J.T., 1991. Protection of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea––an example on multilateral co-operation. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 541–544. Kohonen, J.T., 1992. Multilateral co-operation for preservation of the Baltic Sea. In: Proceedings of Õ92 Seoul Symposium on UNCED and Prospect on the Environmental Regime in the 21st Century, pp. 521–551. Kohonen, J.T., 1998. Baltic Sea Marine Environment Protection Commission––Helsinki Commission. In: Proceedings of Stockholm Water Symposium/EMECS on Rivers to the Sea––Interaction of Land Activities, Fresh Water and Enclosed Coastal Seas. Report 2, pp. 119–128. Krzyzanowski, P., 1991. Rules of protection of gulf sea waters in Poland in the light of international co-operation within HELCOM. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 545–549. L€a€ane, A., Pitk€anen, H., Arheimer, B., Behrendt, H., Jarosinski, W., Lucane, S., Pachel, K., R€aike, A., Shekhovtsov, A., Svensen, L.M., Valatka S., 2002. Evaluation of the implementation of the 1988 Ministerial Declaration regarding nutrient load reductions in the Baltic Sea catchment area. The Finnish Environment No. 524. Lepp€akoski, E.J., 1991. Introduced species––resource or threat in brackish-water seas? Examples from the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 219–223. Ministry of the Environment, 2002. FinlandÕs Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea––The Finnish GovernmentÕs decisionin-principle. The Finnish Environment No. 570. Ministry of the Environment, 1999. Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005. The Finnish Environment No. 340. Pitk€anen, H., Kondratyev, S., L€a€ane, A., Gran, V., Kauppila, P., Loigu, E., Markovets, I., Pachel, K., Rumyantsev, V. 1997. Pollution load on the Gulf of Finland from Estonia, Finland and Russia 1985–95. Summary report of the Working Group on Loading. In: Sarkkula, J. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Final Seminar of Gulf of Finland Year 1996. The Finnish Environment Institute, Suomen ymp€arist€ okeskuksen monistesarja No. 105, 9-18. Rappe, C. (Ed.) 1999. Baltic Salmon Rivers––status in the late 1990s as reported by the countries in the Baltic Region, p. 69.
Finnish strategies for reduction and control of effluents to the marine environment––examples from agriculture, municipalities and industry J. Tapani Kohonen
*
Counsellor for International Affairs, Environmental Protection Department, Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, P.O. Box 35, Helsinki FIN-00023 Government, Finland
Abstract The most serious environmental problem encountered in the Baltic Sea is eutrophication. Finland finalised in spring 2002 its national Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea. The programme contains more than 30 measures for improving the state of the Baltic Sea and protecting the marine environment. Total national investments during the next 10–15 years will amount to EUR 300–370 million. The highest annual cost will be environmental support to agriculture. The bulk of the rest of the money will be used for nitrogen purification of municipal wastewater, improvement of water protection in dispersed settlement areas, and investments to improve maritime safety and decrease the risks of oil spills. Ó 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Pollution control; Eutrophication; Environmental protection; National strategy; Point and non-point source pollution; Baltic Sea
1. International co-operation for the protection of the Baltic marine environment Co-operation between the Baltic oceanographers has existed since the beginning of the 19th century. In 1968, the first intergovernmental co-operation for the protection of a part of the Baltic Sea, the Gulf of Finland, was established between the Soviet Union and Finland. Based on the good experiences gained from this joint environmental activity between two countries with different political and economic systems, Finland proposed, during the 1972 UN Environmental Conference in Stockholm, negotiations among the Baltic Sea countries for preparations of a comprehensive convention for protecting the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. The status of co-operation in the 1980s was described for the first time at the EMECS Conference in 1990 (Ferm, 1991; Kohonen, 1991; Krzyzanowski, 1991; Lepp€ akoski, 1991).
*
Tel.: +358-9-1603-9354; fax: +358-9-1603-9515. E-mail address: tapani.kohonen@ymparisto.fi (J. Tapani Kohonen).
2. The Baltic Sea The total area of the Baltic Sea is 415,266 km2 and the total water volume is approximately 22,000 km3 . From a drainage area of more than 1.7 million km2 , hundreds of rivers and watercourses discharge fresh water into the Baltic Sea. The annual fresh water run-off totals about 450 km3 (HELCOM, 2001a). The Baltic Sea is connected with the North Sea through narrow and shallow sounds that limit the water exchange. It is estimated that the retention time of the water of the Baltic Sea is 25– 30 years. In fact, the Baltic Sea consists of a series of basins separated by sills, which means that conditions vary considerably between different parts of the sea (Fig. 1). The Baltic Sea is one of the major enclosed brackish water basins in the world, and it is surrounded by more than 85 million people living in industrialised countries with intensive agriculture. The Baltic Sea has always been of great importance to the people living around it, providing a natural bond as well as navigation routes between the different land areas. Fisheries remain a valuable part of peopleÕs livelihood and the Baltic Sea is also a recreational resource of growing value.
0025-326X/03/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00476-9
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
163
3. Intergovernmental conventions on the protection of the Baltic Sea
4 5
SE
FI
3 7
N 7
6
2
EE
10 9
RU
LA
DK
1
8
LI BE
DE PL CZ
UKR SL
Fig. 1. Drainage basin of the Baltic Sea (shadowed). Numbering of the different sea areas: (1) the Baltic Proper; (2) the Gulf of Finland; (3) the Bothnian Sea; (4) the Bothnian Bay; (5) the Quark, 3–5 together land Sea; forms the Gulf of Bothnia; (6) the Archipelago Sea; (7) the A (8) the Belt Sea; (9) the Kattegat; (10) the North Sea. The countries locating in the drainage basin are Finland (FI), Sweden (SE), Norway (N), Denmark (DK), Germany (DE), Poland (PL), Czech Republic (CZ), Slovak Republic (SL), Ukraine (UKR), Belarus (BE), Lithuania (LI), Latvia (LA), Estonia (EE) and the Russian Federation (RU).
Its natural vulnerability, though, places the Baltic Sea at serious risk to anthropogenic impact. Municipalities, industry and agriculture in the catchment area have released pollutants directly to the Baltic Sea and to the through numerous rivers flowing into the Sea. In addition, many pollutants are transported to the Baltic Sea through the atmosphere (HELCOM, 1997a,b, 1998a; Jansson, 1998). As a result, the whole Baltic Sea is highly eutrophic and polluted. Among the different parts of the Baltic Sea, the Gulf of Finland is the most eutrophic and the most loaded with pollutants. Harmful substances, especially persistent chemicals and other pollutants, remain in the Baltic Sea for a long time (HELCOM, 1993a, 2001a,b). Because of the ecological conditions, the biota of the Baltic Sea is very sensitive to any changes in the marine environment (HELCOM, 1998b, 2001a,b).
The protection of the Baltic Sea is based on an internationally legally binding convention. In 1974, all seven riparian countries (Denmark, Finland, the German Democratic Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, Poland, Sweden and the USSR) bordering the Baltic Sea signed the Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, known as the Helsinki Convention (HELCOM, 1994; Kohonen, 1991, 1992, 1998). It entered into force in 1980 after ratification by all signatories. Under the Convention, the Baltic Sea countries established the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, also known as the Helsinki Commission or as HELCOM. The CommissionÕs annual meetings are held irregularly at ministerial level. The Commission consists today of six permanent subsidiary groups (Strategy, Monitoring and Assessment, Land-based Pollution, Maritime, Response, and Nature Conservation and Coastal Zone Management) and a Programme Implementation Task Force. The subsidiary groups are broken down into ad hoc working groups and projects. The work is supported by informal meetings, workshops, seminars and symposia on specific topics. The groupsÕ main task is to advise the Commission on matters related to their mandates. The International Secretariat, located in Helsinki, Finland, supports the work of the Commission. The fundamental principle and obligation of the revised 1992 Helsinki Convention is to prevent and eliminate all forms of land-based pollution in order to promote the ecological restoration of the Baltic Sea area and to preserve its ecological balance. Furthermore, the Convention covers, for example, discharges and spills from ships, combating of oil and other harmful chemicals and pollution caused by the exploration or exploitation of seabed resources. In comparison with the 1974 Helsinki Convention, the 1992 Convention contains new binding provisions concerning, among other things, the application of the precautionary principle, the polluter pays principle, best available technology (BAT), best environmental practice (BEP) and environmental impact assessment. Additionally, the scope of this legally binding instrument was broadened, for instance, through the inclusion of the internal waters of the Contracting Parties in the Convention Area, detailed priority groups of harmful substances and lists of substances restricted or totally banned from use, and a new article on nature conservation and biodiversity (Ehlers, 1993; HELCOM, 1994; Kohonen, 1998). The ban on the use of certain persistent toxic organic compounds, such as DDT and PCBs, has led to their significant decrease in the biota since 1974. In some
164
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
parts of the Baltic Sea the concentrations of toxic substances in the biota have decreased sharply because of remedial actions. The effects of toxic substances on the biological systems of the Baltic Sea are very serious. For many years, bird and seal populations in the Baltic Sea have been threatened by pollutants, such as heavy metals and organochlorines (HELCOM, 2001a,b). The white-tailed sea eagle was close to extinction, but, because of decreased pollutant discharges and other actions, the population is now recovering. As for the Baltic seals, the rapidly growing seal populations in some sea areas now cause conflicts with fishermen. For the moment, the stocks of wild salmon are close to extinction, not only due to overfishing but also due to a disease known as M74 syndrome. This syndrome is possibly related to the combined effects of pollutants as well as interactions with the 5.5 million hatchery-reared smolts released in rivers every year (Rappe, 1999).
4. Baltic Sea joint comprehensive environmental action programme The Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental Action Programme was adopted also in 1992 and a task force was established within HELCOM to implement the Programme (HELCOM PITF). The Task Force members are representatives from all 10 Contracting Parties of the Helsinki Convention, and from Belarus, the Czech Republic, Norway, the Slovak Republic, Ukraine, five international financial institutions and the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission (HELCOM, 1993b,c, 1998c). This 20-year Programme includes, for instance, special environmental investments for 132 ‘‘hot spots’’, which are major sources of pollution, 47 of which have been classified as high priority. When fully implemented, it is expected to have a strong beneficial impact on the water quality of the rivers in the Baltic Sea drainage area. The quality of the coastal waters can also be expected to improve relatively rapidly. Reducing the nutrient and heavy metal loads will help to restore the ecological balance of the open sea and also of the coastal lagoons and wetlands. So far, 27 hot spot have been deleted from the list. Of the remaining hot spots, 80% have projects under implementation or are receiving technical assistance. This Programme also fulfills the regional obligations of UNEPÕs 1995 Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities.
5. Helcom activities for the reduction of pollution The Helsinki Convention sets certain obligations which the Contracting Parties are pledged to bring into
effect through adequate provisions in their national legislation. With particular regard to hazardous substances, that is, DDT and its derivatives, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polychlorinated terphenyls (PCTs) and mercury, the implementation of the Convention has resulted in lower concentrations in fish, birds and mammals, and the above-mentioned recovery of the Baltic seal and white-tailed eagle populations (HELCOM, 2001a,b). The Commission has adopted more than 100 recommendations (http://www.helcom.fi) concerning, for instance, substance-wise restrictions on oil discharges (municipal storm water systems, oil refineries and offshore installations), cadmium (industry, fertilisers and used batteries), mercury (chloralkali industry, dentistry and used batteries), lead (leaded petrol) and organotins (antifouling paints), as well as branch-wise recommendations concerning municipalities (nutrients and oxygen-consuming substances), the pulp and paper industry (organohalogens, nutrients and oxygen-consuming substances), agriculture (nutrients and pesticides), maritime (ship-generated wastes, air pollution and safety) and combating activities (co-operation and equipment). The 1988 Ministerial Declaration provided a strong impetus to the CommissionÕs work to reduce land-based pollution. The Declaration called for a 50% reduction of substances most harmful to the ecosystem by 1995 (e.g., nutrients, heavy metals, and toxic, persistent and bioaccumulating organic compounds) (HELCOM, 1994; L€a€ane et al., 2002). Based on the established follow-up and reporting procedure, pollution entering the Baltic Sea from land-based sources has decreased over the past 15 years by 30% (HELCOM, 1998d). Municipalities of over 100,000 inhabitants in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania will meet the Helsinki CommissionÕs recommendations for municipal wastewater treatment within a couple of years. Coastal water quality has improved, and beaches, where swimming has been prohibited for years, have re-opened for recreational purposes in those three countries (HELCOM, 1993a). In addition to the joint implementation of the Helsinki Convention, each Contracting Party must individually undertake national prevention measures according to national priorities and programmes.
6. Finlands new programme for the protection of the Baltic Sea In spite of huge efforts during the past decades the state of the Baltic Sea may still be considered alarming. Therefore, the programme of Prime Minister Paavo LipponenÕs second Government (April 15, 1999) stated that a programme would be drawn up with the aim of restoring the ecological balance of the Baltic Sea and curbing eutrophication in the Baltic Sea, and the Gulf of
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
Finland in particular, and in inland waters, as well as preventing the accumulation of toxic substances in the food chain. The programme was based on the Finnish GovernmentÕs Decision-in-Principle on the Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 (Ministry of the Environment, 1999), on the Water Protection Action Programme for the Year 2005, and on the Horizontal Rural Development Plan by 2006. The 1998 Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region was also taken into account (Baltic 21 Secretariat, 1998). This new programme was needed for better implementation of the 1992 Helsinki Convention, the 1988 HELCOM Ministerial Declaration on 50% reduction of nutrients, heavy metals and organic pollutants by 2005, UNEPÕs 1995 Global Programme of Action, and the appropriate European Union environmental legislation. In June 2001, the Baltic Sea Protection Working Group, appointed by the Ministry of the Environment, finalised its proposal for an ambitious programme for the protection of the Baltic Sea. The Working Group comprised representatives from various ministries, industry, agriculture, non-governmental environmental organisations, the Finnish Environment Institute and the Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities. Based on this proposal, the Finnish Government made on 26 June 2002 a decision-in-principle on actions to protect the Baltic, FinlandÕs Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea (Ministry of the Environment, 2002). More than 30 actions are proposed for implementing the programme. The six main sectors of action are combating eutrophication, reducing risks caused by hazardous substances, curbing damages resulting from the use of the Baltic Sea, preserving and increasing biological diversity, increasing environmental awareness, and research and follow-up. The most urgent concrete actions refer to the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea caused by the nutrient load, the risks caused by increased oil and chemical transports, and the threats to man and the environment from hazardous, bioaccumulating and persistent sub-
165
stances. The goals for reducing discharges from domestic sources in combating eutrophication are based on the Water Protection Programme for the Year 2005, which sets the goal of a 50% reduction in nutrient discharges as compared with the level in the early 1990s. This presentation focuses on reducing the nutrient load from agriculture, communities and dispersed settlements as well as from industry. It is estimated that implementing this Programme will halve the nutrient discharges from Finland and St. Petersburg that cause eutrophication (Tables 1 and 2). The first indications of such a decrease will be seen in coastal waters and near pollution sources. For example, the depth of the bladder wrack growth zone in the archipelago will increase, and the biomass of filamentous algae will decrease. The state of the open sea will also be considerably improved, but more slowly. The amount of nitrogen-fixing blue-green algae, the total mass of phytoplankton and water turbidity will decrease. The open sea will be largely influenced by decreased discharges from St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region. Each sector of the administration will need to take into account, with regard to purview and mainstreaming, the measures and objectives contained in this Programme. In order to implement the Programme, the Ministry of the Environment will need to draw up and approve an action plan in co-operation with the various other sectors by the end of 2002. 6.1. Agriculture An important factor influencing eutrophication is the nutrient load from agriculture. It is evident that the objectives of the national Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 will not be attained with current measures, although the use of phosphorus fertilisers has decreased by over 60% since 1990. In the longer time span, further nutrient reduction is possible in the southern and south-western coastal areas. New agreements with farmers are planned for wetlands covering 20,000 ha and buffer zones covering 34,000 ha. Other
Table 1 Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) loads from Finland entering the Baltic Sea and estimated reduction during the next 5–20 years as result of implementation of the Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea Source
Nowa t P/a
Nowa t P/a
Reduction t P/a
Agriculture Communities Dispersed settlements Industry Forestry Fish farming Total
1300 190 370 270 560 170 2860
19,000 11,000 3000 3000 1400 1000 38,400
500 60 150 130 – 40 890
Diffuse loads are not included. a Values based on data from 1991 to 1996 reported by Kauppila and B€ack (2001).
Reduction t P/a 7500 4500 300 1500 – 400 14,200
166
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
Table 2 Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) loads from Finland, St Petersburg region and Estonia entering the Gulf of Finland and estimated reduction during the next 5–20 years as result of implementation of the Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea Source Agriculture Communities Dispersed settlements Industry Forestry Fish farming Total from Finland St. Petersburg Leningrad region, direct discharges Estonia Via atmosphere Total
Nowa t P/a
Nowa t P/a
Reduction t P/a
Reduction t P/a
240 90 90 100 20 30 570
4200 5800 920 810 220 170 12,120
100 30 40 50 – 10 230
1700 3000 90 400 – 70 5260
2200
17,000
260
1200
270b 1230c 130
1800b 4800c 600
360 – 3390
7 900 12,000 50,220
– 630–1590
1100 8760–11,860
a
Values based on data from 1991 to 1996 reported by Kauppila and B€ack (2001). Values for St. Petersburg and Estonia for 1995 from the report of Pitk€ anen et al. (1997) and for Leningrad region from the report of L€a€ane et al. (2002). Airborne pollution for 1997 from the report of Bartnicki et al. (2000). b Reduction caused only by the finalisation south-western wastewater treatment plant of St. Petersburg. c Reduction after biological treatment and intensified phosphorous removal of all wastewaters of St. Petersburg.
planned new agreements concern regulated subsurface drainage and the enhanced use of manure in the coastal areas of the Gulf of Bothnia. These measures will be ensured by means of effective and properly channelled special national and EU funding to agriculture. The Programme proposes an additional extra budgetary appropriation of EUR 30 million. This will be implemented evenly from 2003 onwards over four years so that it will be EUR 30.3 million in 2006. The continuation of agricultural water protection measures after 2006 will be safeguarded by cost-efficient targeted measures in coastal areas. 6.2. Communities and dispersed settlements The implementation of the Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 requires high-quality phosphorus removal facilities from all wastewater treatment plants and nitrogen removal in areas where nitrogen is the limiting nutrient for algal growth. The goal set for phosphorus removal is over 96% for those plants serving over 10,000 inhabitants and over 92% for those serving fewer than 10,000 inhabitants. Enhanced nitrogen removal for community wastewater will be implemented in plants having an impact on nitrogen-sensitive sea areas, mainly to the south of the Quark and the eastern end of the Gulf of Finland. Nitrogen discharges from communities are to be cut so that a reduction of 70% in the nitrogen load entering the sea will be reached. This requires investments of EUR 135 million in municipal wastewater treatment during the next 10–15 years. The load from dispersed settlements is to be decreased by better siting of settlements, water management plans,
land use plan conditions, extended sewerage networks and use of the best available technology on properties and the best environmental practices. Connecting dispersed settlements to sewer networks needs promotion by land use and water supply design. A rough estimate of the required financing is EUR 118–168 million. The Government has just adopted a new act on this matter. In the combating of eutrophication in the Baltic Sea and especially in the Gulf of Finland, the emphasis is on Russia and more efficient wastewater treatment in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region. The aim is to support the building of the south-western treatment plant, which will ensure proper treatment of 85% of the wastewater from the five million inhabitants. Moreover, in connection with the northern treatment plant, additional sewage pipes are needed, as well as wastewater treatment and improved phosphorus removal. The Programme proposes additional budgetary appropriations of altogether EUR 10 million in the 2002–2004 Finnish state budget for support of these measures. 6.3. Industry The industrial load on the Baltic Sea originates from the wood processing industry and the metal industry. The main recipient areas are the coast of the Bothnian Bay and the eastern coastal area of the Gulf of Finland. The Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005 require about a 50% reduction in phosphorus and nitrogen discharges from industry. For phosphorus, this goal has been reached, but for nitrogen, efficient reduction measures are still needed in the near future. The Programme requires nutrient reductions in various sea areas when reviewing environmental permits.
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
The nitrogen load ought to be reduced particularly along the nitrogen-sensitive coasts of the Gulf of Finland and the Bothnian Sea. Combined treatment of industrial and community wastewater will be increased in locations where it is feasible. The task force stresses the need for reducing nitrogen discharges from industry in accordance with the timetable set in the national water protection programme. 6.4. Other sectors Fish farming has a regional and local impact on eutrophication in the Baltic Sea. Adverse effects have been most visible in Finland and Sweden. In Finland most of the fish farms are located in the Archipelago Sea and the land Sea. To improve the state of these sea areas it is A necessary to implement external and internal measures. By demanding better feed and more careful feeding, improved technical solutions and better siting of fish farms in permit procedures, the pollution load can be reduced. The Programme stresses that Finland will continue to improve maritime safety in the Gulf of Finland in line with international conventions, that is, the 1992 Helsinki Convention and MARPOL 73/78. An annual appropriation of EUR 6.3 million is proposed for the 2003 state budget to improve the combating of oil and chemical accidents by providing a new oil and chemical combating vessel. To reduce hazardous substances use, the Programme proposes an urgent inventory of hazardous substances and chemicals. In Finland, some 5000 different chemicals are used, and for the bulk of them, their effects on water quality, the marine environment and overall health are poorly known. The use of hazardous substances has already been curbed, and in some cases, banned (PCBs, DDT, HCH, organic tin compounds and certain pesticides). Additionally, limitations can be set on certain heavy metals, fire-combating bromides, chlorinated paraffin and some phenols. Hazardous substances originating in incineration or manufacturing, such as dioxins and furans, will also be restricted in order to protect the Baltic Sea, although these substances are very difficult to trace. The diminished use and discharges of hazardous substances will be in line with the EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60) and the Directive on discharges of dangerous substances into the aquatic environment (76/464). To protect biological diversity in the Baltic Sea and its coastal areas, the Programme proposes that the protection should be extended to underwater areas as well. The inventory of habitats and species has to be improved so as to make it possible to reach the favourable level called for in the EU habitats directive (92/43). To improve the present situation (HELCOM, 1996, 1998b; HELCOM, 2001a,b), seal protection areas need to be set
167
up, and compensations paid for seal damages to fish and fishing implements. To preserve the wild salmon, the Salmon Action Plan prepared by the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission is to be put into practice. 6.5. Financing The total national investment for implementation of the Baltic Sea Programme during the next 10–15 years will be EUR 300–370 million. The bulk of the money will be used for nitrogen removal from municipal wastewater (EUR 135 million), improvement of water protection in dispersed settlement areas (EUR 118-170 million), improvement of maritime safety, decreasing the risks of oil spills (EUR 34–50), and measures in fish farming, forestry and maritime traffic (EUR 12 million). The appropriations proposed in the Programme for inclusion in the State budget for 2003–2006 are EUR 6.7 million for the south-western wastewater treatment plant in St. Petersburg, EUR 75.7 million as extra funding for special aid for agriculture, and EUR 6.3 million for equipping an oil combating vessel for the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
7. Conclusion Through their international co-operation in implementing the 1974 and 1992 Helsinki Conventions and the 1992 Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental Action Programme, the Baltic Sea riparian countries have achieved certain positive results for the protection of the Baltic Sea. However, because pollutant loads are still too high, more specific targets and actions are needed. Preparations of national action plans and programmes for different sectors and a comprehensive approach have been very instructive and result-oriented, especially when the economic implications have been estimated and the financing of the implementation safeguarded. FinlandÕs newly adopted Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea, which is the national implementation of UNEPÕs 1995 Global Programme of Action, will ensure that protection targets set for coastal areas will be achieved, and national actions for restoring open sea areas will be taken.
References Baltic 21 Secretariat, 1998. An Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region–– Baltic 21. Baltic 21 Series No 1/98. Bartnicki, J., Gusev, A., Pavlova, N., Ilyin, I., Lukeville, A., 2000. Atmospheric supply of nitrogen, lead, cadmium, mercury and lindane to the Baltic Sea. EMEP/MSC-W, Research Report No. 97, Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-West. Norwegian Meteorological Institute.
168
J. Tapani Kohonen / Marine Pollution Bulletin 47 (2003) 162–168
Ehlers, P., 1993. The Helsinki Convention, 1992. Improving the Baltic Sea environment. International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 8 (2), 191–214. Ferm, R., 1991. Integrated management of the Baltic Sea. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 533–540. Jansson, B-O., 1998. The Baltic Sea. In: Proceedings of Stockholm Water Symposium/EMECS on Rivers to the Sea––Interaction of Land Activities, Fresh Water and Enclosed Coastal Seas. Report 2, pp. 47–55. HELCOM, 1993a. First assessment of the state of the coastal waters of the Baltic Sea. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 54. HELCOM, 1993b. Summaries of the pre-feasibility studies. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 46. HELCOM, 1993c. The Baltic Sea joint comprehensive environmental action programme. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 48. HELCOM, 1994. Intergovernmental activities in the framework of the Helsinki Convention 1974–1994. Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 56. HELCOM, 1996. Coastal and marine protected areas in the Baltic Sea region. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 63. HELCOM, 1997a. The evaluation of the relation of atmospheric deposition to riverine input of nitrogen to the Baltic Sea. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 68. HELCOM, 1997b. Airborne pollution load to the Baltic Sea in 1995. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 69. HELCOM, 1998a. The third Baltic Sea pollution load compilation. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 70. HELCOM, 1998b. Red list of marine and coastal biotopes and biotope complexes of the Baltic Sea, Belt and Kattegat. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 75. HELCOM, 1998c. The Baltic Sea joint comprehensive environmental action programme: Recommendations for updating and strengthening. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 72. HELCOM, 1998d. The final report on the implementation of the 1988 ministerial declaration. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 71. HELCOM, 2001a. Fourth periodic assessment of the state of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea, 1994–1998; Executive summary. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 82A. HELCOM, 2001b. Fourth periodic assessment of the state of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea, 1994–1998; Background document. In: Baltic Sea Environment Proceeding No. 82B.
Kauppila, P., B€ack, S. (Eds.), 2001. The state of Finnish Coastal waters in the 1990s. The Finnish Environment No. 472. Kohonen, J.T., 1991. Protection of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea––an example on multilateral co-operation. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 541–544. Kohonen, J.T., 1992. Multilateral co-operation for preservation of the Baltic Sea. In: Proceedings of Õ92 Seoul Symposium on UNCED and Prospect on the Environmental Regime in the 21st Century, pp. 521–551. Kohonen, J.T., 1998. Baltic Sea Marine Environment Protection Commission––Helsinki Commission. In: Proceedings of Stockholm Water Symposium/EMECS on Rivers to the Sea––Interaction of Land Activities, Fresh Water and Enclosed Coastal Seas. Report 2, pp. 119–128. Krzyzanowski, P., 1991. Rules of protection of gulf sea waters in Poland in the light of international co-operation within HELCOM. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 545–549. L€a€ane, A., Pitk€anen, H., Arheimer, B., Behrendt, H., Jarosinski, W., Lucane, S., Pachel, K., R€aike, A., Shekhovtsov, A., Svensen, L.M., Valatka S., 2002. Evaluation of the implementation of the 1988 Ministerial Declaration regarding nutrient load reductions in the Baltic Sea catchment area. The Finnish Environment No. 524. Lepp€akoski, E.J., 1991. Introduced species––resource or threat in brackish-water seas? Examples from the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas Õ90Marine Pollution Bulletin 23, 219–223. Ministry of the Environment, 2002. FinlandÕs Programme for the Protection of the Baltic Sea––The Finnish GovernmentÕs decisionin-principle. The Finnish Environment No. 570. Ministry of the Environment, 1999. Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005. The Finnish Environment No. 340. Pitk€anen, H., Kondratyev, S., L€a€ane, A., Gran, V., Kauppila, P., Loigu, E., Markovets, I., Pachel, K., Rumyantsev, V. 1997. Pollution load on the Gulf of Finland from Estonia, Finland and Russia 1985–95. Summary report of the Working Group on Loading. In: Sarkkula, J. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Final Seminar of Gulf of Finland Year 1996. The Finnish Environment Institute, Suomen ymp€arist€ okeskuksen monistesarja No. 105, 9-18. Rappe, C. (Ed.) 1999. Baltic Salmon Rivers––status in the late 1990s as reported by the countries in the Baltic Region, p. 69.