Environment and Security: Transforming risks into cooperation

First page Previous page 49 Next page Last page

Eastern Caspian

Environment and Security

Local authorities have also received in- creased financial means that should allow them to respond more effectively to en- vironmental degradation. For example in 2005 the local budgets of Atyrau and Man- gystau received US$30 million (3.65 billion KZT) and US$7 million (0.76 billion KZT) re- spectively in compensation for environmen- tal damage 53 . However, questions remain on how effectively local environmental funds are spent since only 10–20% of all the funds were allocated to environmental remedia- tion, monitoring and/or preventive activities. In the same year environmental expenditure by industry amounted to 29.4 billion KZT and 13.1 billion KZT in Atyrau and Man- gystau respectively (NESSD 2006). At the same time expenditures on project activi- ties under the Caspian Environmental Pro-

gramme amounted to almost US$30 million by 2007.

Despite the fact that these and other measures should help minimize pollution risks and remediate the consequences in the case of historical pollution, there are still areas in which international experience may be of use to states in the Caspian Sea region. These areas include the assess- ment and mapping of ecologically sensi- tive areas on the sea and in coastal zones, continuous monitoring of oil pollution, transfer of experience and best practice in the remediation of historical land-based oil pollution and development of action plans to reduce contamination of transboundary waters, such as the Ural river or Turkmen- bashy gulf.

��

�

��

�

��

�

��

and Tishukuduk villages will occur unless ad- equate action is taken. Kazakhstan’s Institute of Geography, funded by the Mangystau local

authorities, is implementing a pilot project to stabilize the sand dune at Senek (NESSD 2006; Akianova 2006; ENVSEC 2006a).

Made with FlippingBook