GD4. Communications, information and monitoring

ENPI East and Central Asian Countries Regional Conference:

Update on the 2005 Saint Petersburg (ENA FLEG) Ministerial Declaration

July 09, 2014

Group discussions on regional cooperation

Topic 4 – Communications, information and monitoring

Participating countries in the group discussion:

• Uzbekistan

• Kirgizstan

• Tajikistan

• Armenia

• Russia

Question 1: What have the main achievements related to communications and publicity on FLEG within countries and regions been since 2005?

• Uzbekistan – an ecological group in the Parliament

• Kirgizstan and Tajikistan – no main achievements

• Russia – no special campaign but media was

participating, forest sector was aware of project

• Armenia – media training, journalist award for the best

FLEG/forest related article, www.antarner.net forest

forum

Question 2: Which are the main audiences for information concerning activities related to FLEG? What reactions by these audiences to information would be helpful in promoting FLEG? What types of information is needed to promote those reactions?

• Kirgizstan – need to do awareness raisin with local communities

• Tajikistan - need to do awareness raisin with local communities –

illegal logging, poaching

• Armenia – need to work with state authorities – two channels of

communication for state authorities of all relevant fields and local

communities accordingly

• Russia – need to work with state authorities – two channels of

communication for state authorities of all relevant fields and local

communities accordingly

Question 3: What current information channels are currently available to ensure useful information concerning FLEG reaches the intended audiences in the regions? How can these be improved? What additional approaches to communications are needed?

• All participants – all existing information channels (TV - face to face ) depending on the audience; face to face acknowledge to be most effective with need to develop tools and capacity

Question 4: What progress with transparency of information relevant to FLEG has been made since 2005?

• All participants – information on illegal and legal forest use is open for public but sometimes there is disagreement on data of illegal forest use

Question 5: How can stakeholders in participant countries cooperate to improve access to information relevant for FLEG?

• All participants – the cooperation should be organized among participant counties as well as among different stakeholders within the countries

Question 6: How should progress with implementing the Declaration be monitored, reported and assessed?

• All participants – There is no established mechanism on monitoring, reporting – designated state authorities need to manage this

• All participants – Availability of open shared database would facilitate the process