The report has been approved by Inter-Parliamentary Assembly and adopted during the Working Meeting of B12 Coalition (Nakhabino, May 22-25, 1998).

To the Report contributed:

1. Ecological Club "Catena", Ashgabad, Turkmenistan
2. Kazakh Public Biodiversity Conservation Center, Almaty, Kazakhstan
3. Ecological Movement of Kyrgyzstan "Aleyne", Bishkek, Kyrgystan
4. Association "Beagle", Bishkek, Kyrgystan
5. Kiev Ecological and Cultural Center, Kiev, Ukraine
6. Belorussian Ecological Information Center on Biodiversity Conservation (BCC Belorussia), Berezinsky Zapovednik, Belorussia
7. Ecological Center "Dront", Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
8. "Nookhora", Institute of Biologi of Inland Water, Borok, Yaroslavl region, Russia
9. Siberian Interregional Center "Zapovedniki", Novosibirsk, Russia
10. Ecosystem Laboratory, Toljatti, Russia
11. The Center of the Support of Volgo-Ural Econet, Toljatti, Russia
12. KE-Association, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
13. Biodiversity Conservation Center, Moscow, Russia
14. Greenpeace-Russia, Moscow, Russia

Undisturbed natural areas are important to both humanity existence today and to its survival in the future. Drastically increasing extinction of plant and animal species and the destruction of ecosystems is weakening the stability of modern civilisation. The degree of biodiversity conservation can serve as an indicator of the entire biosphere's condition.
For some time, it has become obvious that it is not possible to speed up development at the expense of natural resources. It is necessary to find a sensible compromise between protecting nature and profiting from resource use. There are international Agreements that include many initiatives whose purpose is to limit irresponsible use of bioresources. The most important of these documents is the Convention on Biodiversity; its main goal is the protection of biodiversity at every level of development and sustainable nature resource use. Countries could join the United Nations Conference in Rio de Janeiro on Environment and Development (1992). There are also agreements such as: the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands; the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of wild flora and fauna (CITES); the Paris Convention on the protection of the world's natural and cultural heritage; the Bonn Convention on the preservation of migratory species of wild animals; the Bern Convention on the protection of wild flora and fauna and natural habitats in Europe, as well as the Agreements most pertinent to and future perspective of our territory — The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS).
The Strategy aims to: reduce threats to Europe's biological and landscape diversity; increase the resilience of Europe's biological and landscape diversity; strengthen the ecological coherence of Europe as a whole; ensure full public involvement in the conservation of biological and landscape diversity. At a national level, nations establish strategies and action plans for biodiversity conservation.
Since the Sofia Environmental Conference many NIS countries have been getting involved in Pan-European initiatives, including the implementation of the PEBLDS. Although, the PEBLDS is a completed document and covers all regions, it is felt that our priorities concerning the preservation of nature, and our countries' interests and experience, are not properly considered in this document. The PEBLDS is West European in nature.
The scale, peculiarities and diversity of the entire region were not properly taken into account in course of the first PEBLDS Action Plan development. As a result the problems and approaches relevant for a small western part of the region, Western Europe, have been extrapolated for the whole PEBLDS area. In order to make the work in the region effective such a misbalance needs to be corrected in the nearest future.
The scale of activities envisioned by PEBLDS has no precedent in nature conservation. The area under PEBLDS consideration is slightly less than 1/5 of the Earth's land surface. This is a real mechanism whose effect will be felt in full measure in Europe. However, its development further to the East is impossible by the simple introduction of the West-European nature protection approaches. Tremendous biogeographic diversity is illustrated by the fact that expansion of the European programs (such as the Emerald Network or Nature-2000) into NIS would require listing another 35 biogeographic categories in addition to the 12 already listed for Western and Central/Eastern Europe.
NIS countries cover 1/6 of the planet's land mass. This area of the world there are eight geographical zones. There are 22,000 species of vascular plants, 400 species of moss, 3,000 species of lichens, few thousands of invertebrate species, 380 species of mammals, more than 750 species of birds, 170 species of reptiles, about 37 species of amphibians (see References, # 4) and almost 300 species of freshwater fish.
There is a unique one-hundred-year-old history of preserved natural areas in the NIS countries (zapovedniks, national parks, refuges, nature parks, nature monuments, zones of traditional nature use). In statistic as of March 1, 1998: (see References, # 9).
There are more than 150 zapovedniks in NIS countries, in Russia alone there are 99 zapovedniks with a total area of 33,147,000 ha, of which 26,674,000 ha is a dry land; Kazakhstan has 9 zapovedniks with a total area of 906,932,000 ha, Turkmenistan - 7 (1,080,623 ha); Uzbekistan - 9 (213,732 ha). In total in Central Asia protected area is 2,576,473 ha (see References, # 5). Armenia has 2 zapovedniks with a total area of 61,000 ha.
The number of national parks in Russia is 34, with a total area of 6,787,000 ha; Kazakhstan has 4 NP (752,677 ha); Kirghizia -- 2 NP (30,600 ha); Tadjikistan -- 2 (1,800,000 ha); Uzbekistan (598,705 ha). The total area of national parks in Central Asia is 3,181,982 ha (see References, # 5). There is one national park in Armenia (150,100 ha).
Russia has over 4000 state nature refuges and more than 9,000 nature monuments. The overall estimate for Russia is more than 15,000 natural protected areas including 300 of federal importance (see References, # 6).
Belorussia has 1 zapovednik (81,000 ha), 3 national parks (243,400 ha), 83 republic nature refuges (598,000 ha), 684 local nature refuges (412,200 ha) 573 nature monuments (7,800 ha) including 238 monuments of the republic status. Total natural protected area is 1,342,400 ha (situation on 01.01.97). Polessky radio - ecological zapovednik has been created within Chernobyl nuclear station affected zone (see References, # 2).
Zones of traditional nature use exist in the northern part of European Russia, Yamal, Taimyr, the Krasnoyarsk region, and the Far East.
3,200,000 ha of virgin taiga forests in the Republic of Komi, the Pechoro-Ilychsky zapovednik, the national park «Yugyd Va», Lake Baikal, and the Kamchatka volcanoes (more than 3,000,000 ha ) are included in UNESCO World Heritage list.
Significant wetland areas, which are important for bird nesting, resting during the seasonal migration period, and hibernating, are concentrated in the NIS countries' territory. 35 Ramsar sites have been set aside in Russia; their total area is 10,700,000 ha (see References, # 1).
Within the NIS area there are institutions which coordinate nature protection on a regional level such as the Inter-Governmental Ecological Council, the Permanent Commission on Nature Protection and Resources of the NIS Inter-Parliament Assembly. The Russian NGO «Biodiversity Conservation Center» participates in the activity of this Commission as an official observer. The draft of the NIS model law «On public access to environmental information» discussed with a participation of NIS NGOs was approved by the Commission in February 1998. There is also successful cooperation on sub-regional level. For example in Central Asia 1998 was announced a Year of Environment Protection. In 1995 the Nukus Declaration of the Central Asian countries and International Organisations on Sustainable Development of Aral Sea region and in 1998, the Agreement between the Governments of Kazakhstan, Kirghizia and Uzbekistan on Cooperation in the field of environment protection and rational resource use were signed.
There have been number of intergovernmental agreements signed under the auspices of the Inter-Governmental Environmental Council (e.g. the Agreement on the protection and use of the migratory bird and mammal species and their habitats, and the Agreement on the list of the rare and endangered animal and plant species, so called Inter-Government Red Book).
A number of actions concerning the priorities of the NIS regions have been introduced into the Action Themes 5, 6, 8, 10 of the PEBLDS on initiative of the Central Asian countries.
Within NIS area there are many local, regional, national and international NGOs which main priority is biodiversity conservation. 2/3 of all publications on wild life conservation including practically all periodicals is being issued by the NGO community (information is taken from the References (3, 7, 8) and materials received through NGOs which contributed to the report preparation).

Association "Biotica", Kishinev, Moldova takes part in the designing of Protected Natural Areas (PNA), gives recommendations to the government on the Environment Legislation, carries the project on the protection of rare fish in Kuchurgansky reservoir, participated in the preparation of several draft laws on biodiversity conservation and rational nature use.

Group "Fauna", Kishinev, Moldova. The projects "Studying and protection of bats of the Central and Northern Moldova", "Looking for salamander" have been realised during the last years.
Nowadays the project "Breeding in snake Elaphe longissima" is being carried out. The Group protects predatory birds and plans to create the reserve for bats.

Kiev Ecological and Cultural Center, Kiev, Ukraine facilitates creation of new protected territories, which have natural and cultural values; carries out environmental propaganda, publishes the bulletin "Biodiversity conservation and protected areas management in Ukraine". During the last 3 year the Center published more than 30 environmental books. The project "Ecology of khaki colour", within the framework of which the influence of army activities on nature has been studied, is one of the most successful projects. Center organises PNAs in Central and Left-bank part of Ukraine, realises the project on black stork protection, reveals and attaches the status "protected" to sacred groves, trees, springs and burial-mounds. KECC is an affiliate-partner of the Biodiversity Conservation Center - Moscow.

Odessa Social Ecological Union, Odessa, Ukraine proposed a wide range of methods concerning the regulation of Dnestr water flow and the improvement of biodiversity conservation schemes. The projects on the investigation of the state of living organisms- inhabitants of rivers, estuary and coastal zone of the Black Sea have already been realised. Owing to the efforts of the Union delta of the Dnestr and the flood plains of other rivers in Ukraine received the Ramsar site status.

Ecological group "Pechenegi," Kharkov, Ukraine is working on the saving and restoration of endangered animal and plant species, takes part in the creation of 12 zapovedniks, some of which have already received the republic status; participates in inspecting zapovedniks; take an active part in the creation of the ecological network in Kharkov region. Among the most successful projects of the Group the following activities can be mentioned: forest tract "Iziumskaya izluchina" received the status of nature reserve; strengthening the control for the hunting, abolition of the fish-breeding farm in one of the eldest refuges in Kharkov region; "March for Parks," Russian-Ukraine project "Birds of river Vorskla area".

Belarus Ecology and Information Center of biodiversity conservation, Berezinsky Zapovednik sets the goal of preserving rare species and creating of ecological networks. Center takes an active part in the dissemination of information about PEBLDS among Belorus NGOs. This year the Center became an initiator of about 15 local "March for Parks." They took place in Berezinski nature reserve, in three national parks, at schools and ecological groups on Minsk, Polotsk, Grodno, Gomel, Postavy, Novogrudok, Vitebsk, and also in some settlements. Within the framework of "March for Parks'98" ecological clean-ups, day of birds, environmental competitions have been organised.

Ecological club "Tapan", Erevan, Armenia carries out the program on collecting information concerning forest cutting in the republic and Caucasus region. The Club organises nurseries for wild plants cultivation. In 1997-1998 it has been coordinating "March for Parks" in Armenia.

Center on the studying and protection of small animals, Tbilisi, Georgia works out investigation programs on the protection of rare animal species populations in Georgia; breeds in laboratories some endangered species of amphibians and reptiles; carries out the program on the reintroduction of Asian small triton; takes part in the creation of a national park in the south of Georgia.

Center NACRES, Tbilishi, Georgia investigates the wild life in Georgia, consults the official institutions on participation in CITES, takes part in a WWF program on the development of protected areas in Georgia; participates in the UNEP program on the protection of Mammals of the Black sea. The Center has elaborated the method of reintroduction of big mammals.

Central Asian social ecological movement has an uneven development. A greater part of all social ecological organisations is situated in Kirghizia (more that 140), practically the same number of such organisations is in Kazakhstan, and a considerably small percentage is in Tadzhikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan.

Kazakh public center of biodiversity conservation, Almaty, Kazakhstan, participates in the elaboration of GEF project "Biodiversity conservation in Western Tian-Shan"; takes an active part in the PEBLDS approximation to the Central Asia area.

Ecological group "Naurzum", settlement "Dokuchaevka." Kustanai region, Kazakhstan functions as a support group to Naurzum zapovednik; realises the program on wild tulips protection.

Kirghizian Ecoforum (more than 130 NGOs) determined biodiversity conservation as one of the most important directions, and formulated goals, objectives and responsibilities. The organisations of the country take part in the implementing the NEAP.

The following projects are being realised:
• "Forest" (supported by Swiss Government);
• "Land" (supported by Eurasian Bank of Development);
• "Cross-border program on biodiversity conservation in the Western Tian-Shan" (supported by GEF, TACIS among other).
• "National Report on biodiversity conservation" has already been prepared
• "National Strategy and Action Plan on Biodiversity Conservation" is being preparing (this stage of the project is financed by GEF and the World Bank)

1. Problems of nature management, related to Biodiversity Conservation
   • Biodiversity considerations are not considered in spatial planning, construction and functioning of processing plants, terminals, linear structures, as well as mining of mineral resources, planning and implementation of forestry and agriculture projects and other forms of economic activity. Until now the experience on building the Ecological Network in Western and Central Europe as well as in some NIS regions has not been properly taken into account.
   • Regional ecological and social aspects are not taken into account when prioritising actions for biodiversity conservation;
   • Cross-border problems of biodiversity conservation have become especially critical recently as a result of the collapse of the USSR and the on-going subdivision of the RF. Such subdivision means that information received in one region or department, as a rule, does not reach other interested parties and makes difficult the use of the biogeographical and watershed approach to management of biodiversity conservation and bioresource use. It is especially relevant for the large natural areas usually intact at the borders of the administrative units;
   • Refusing to use Russian language as a common language within NIS area and poor knowledge of European languages, as well as poor technical characteristics of the information base lead to the insufficient access to the great world's experience;
   • The absence of common biodiversity conservation methodology and terminology hampers the ability of NIS countries and Western and Central European countries to co-operatively manage biodiversity conservation and bioresource use. Most of the NIS countries, including Russia, are not prepared to ratify a whole series of Pan-European conventions and agreements (such as the Bonn or Bern Conventions) or execute a unified strategy because of a difference in priorities and the difference in the degree of preservation of some rare species identified by the Conventions. Simple assumption of the lists of endangered species from the Conventions will not be effective as many species rare in Western Europe (bear, lynx, otter etc.) are large in number and are hunting species (e.g. in Russia and Kazakhstan). The list of species and other nature objects to be protected should be created for each biogeographical region according to general rules.
   • NIS countries have huge reserves of undisturbed areas but have no regulation about reserving lands for the prospective protected areas. The reserves are of such a size that it is impossible to give these lands status of protected areas based on traditionally used for Europe international criteria. Many countries and provinces of NIS ( for instance Ukraine and Southern Russia) have the same level of ecosystem degradation as in France or in the Netherlands. However, the huge areas of wild nature in the North or East of the subcontinent remain untouched by human activity. The objectives of their conservation have different scales and effective solutions, and therefore strategy of biodiversity conservation in the most valuable areas of the region should be different from the strategy of the strongly fragmented areas;
   • The financial and economic mechanisms required for the conservation of biodiversity are undeveloped and quite often non-existent. Viewing the whole subcontinent as an unified environmental space, it is necessary to establish an economic mechanism of attracting both Russian and West-European producers to nature conservation activity to provide economical and social well-being of Europe. Having lived more than 70 years without the market economy NIS countries do not have the skills and strength of the consumer influence on environmental unfriendly industries. In such a situation West-European businesses are tempted to utilise the competitive advantages they have over Eastern European businesses. Joint effort of European Governments, the experience of European consumer organisations and the authority of the International Agreements are necessary to ensure economic cooperation. There should be shared responsibility for nature and each country should be able to influence their own and foreign businesses to rehabilitate disturbed ecosystems or compensate costs of their protection;
   • There is a principal difference in the scale of nature protection management and nature resource use in Western Europe and NIS countries. In large countries in the east local administrations are required to solve the conservation tasks of such scale and complexity which in West Europe would usually be solved the national Governments or by International Agreements. The organisation, financial and personnel resources of environmental protection in the east are hundreds times weaker than in Western and Central Europe;
   • The opportunities for nature protection in the context of the cultural heritage and traditional land and resource use are still insufficiently utilised in NIS countries. Cultural landscapes are much more abundant in Western Europe than in the east. More intensive human impact has resulted in the western tradition of protecting wildlife along with cultural landscapes. In the east cultural landscapes are practically not protected as such, although in Northern Eurasia there are vast areas with traditional land use: hunting and bee-keeping, nomadic pastoralism (including deer breeding) and areas where elements of natural cults or the old traditional religions remain (such as Shamanism, Animism and Buddhism).
   
   
2. Problems of nature ecosystem degradation resulted from the nature management problems
   Fragmentation as a result of urban construction, building linear objects (pipelines, power lines, railroads and highways, irrigation channels etc.) is characteristic feature of the NIS area. Such a situation principally requires a different protection strategy. Territorial protection approach should be supplemented by the control on the linear objects. It means control of all transport lines especially at the first stages of their construction. Development of a conservation infrastructure should accompany each new developing linear object.
   The actual PEBLDS Action Plan not in the best way combines large and different biomes as tundra, deserts, steppes, and meadows in one section «grassland ecosystems». Real tundra and deserts do not occur within previous Pan-European programs, which is why such large ecosystems are barely not considered within a scope of the PEBLDS target area. Within the NIS region each of these biomes occupies a large area.
   
   The main threats are:
   • High rate of desertification - one of the most significant problems for the Central Asia region embracing 5 NIS countries, the Trans-Caucasus region, a large part of Ukraine, Moldova, and approximately 1/3 part of Russia (the southern part). Due to human activity the first European desert in Kalmykia has appeared and is developing;
   • Destruction of the tundra and forest-tundra ecosystems as a result of mining, chemical pollution and activities in military zones. These are the most vulnerable ecosystems and are practically beyond restoration;
   • Soil erosion in steppe and forest-steppe regions resulting from the ploughing mismanagement, overgrazing, gulley formation, bad melioration techniques and followed by soil depletion and soil degradation;
   • Destruction of marine and coastal ecosystems as a result of oil extraction from the coastal shelf, the sinking of military radioactive waste, uncontrolled fishing, etc. The consequences of such impact are practically irreversible;
   • Artificial regulation, pollution and thoughtless exploitation of rivers (Volga, Don, Dnepr, Southern Bug, the rivers of Central Asia) that places doubt in the future existence of many unique aquatic and semi-aquatic ecosystems and species (sturgeon fish species of Caspian Sea, Aral, Azov and Black sea regions);
     One of the greatest problems in NIS countries is the role of large corporations. Thus, Gasprom is not only a Russian company but also an owner of a large part of Russia area. RF Ministry of Defence manages large areas in Russia and in other NIS countries (such as «Baikonur» launch area in Kazakhstan). Europe can introduce its experience in motivating of large corporations and private companies into NIS conservation practice.
     In general many common regional problems are the result of the exploitation of the bioresources in one part of the subcontinent for their consumption in another.
     As Examples of this are the environmental problems of oil and gas mining, which export raw materials to Western countries and the over (especially in the Western Europe) hunting of aquatic birds which nest in the north of Eurasia during their migration and winter.

1. Support the establishment of the Pan-European ecological network to prevent further fragmentation of ecosystems. This implies a broadening of the system of protected natural areas and more environment - friendly and differentiated nature resource management; This principle should be emphasised as the basis for the general European conservation ideology.
2. Establish biogeographic approach for conservation management and bioresource use as the basic principle for resolving problems connected with new boundaries and sustaining the environment;
   Promote the development of joint cross-border projects between countries, including projects with those Asian countries that border on the Central Asian region, in the area of Black, Azov, Baltic Seas, in Karpathian mountains, in Karelian isthmus, Caucasus, Altai-Sayan mountains and Far East region. Particular emphasis should be on the creation of joint Protected Areas.
3. Promote development in NIS countries the mechanisms of the PEBLDS implementation on regional level;
4. Launch during 1998-2003 the basis for changes in the legal system of NIS countries enabling a change from resource-divided management system to the comprehensive territorial system of nature management and conservation;
5. Use the Action Theme 2 of PEBLDS «Integration of biodiversity consideration into sectors» to motivate large companies working in the NIS area to invest in environmental protection, and if the reaction is positive and constructive - to a specially designed investment support program;
6. Support the development of CBA methods for wildlife as elements of the national heritage, promote introduction of these into National Accountancy system, promote establishment of international economic mutual payments;
7. Support and develop international cross-sectoral projects to preserve old-growth forests in the NIS, and to attract the interest of the Forest Stewardship Council to the current problem. Pay special attention to the region of Northern Eurasia in the text of the PEBLDS (Action Theme 9 «Forest Ecosystems»). Promote the realisation of activities proposed in the Action Plan on conservation and development of the biological and landscape biodiversity of forest ecosystems.
8. Support the initiative to create a Pan-European marine ecological network and the adoption of a European Coastal Code. Introduce to the text of the PEBLDS (Action Theme 5 «Coastal and Marine Ecosystems») an addendum connected with the protection of the Arctic seas (Barents Sea, Kara Sea, Laptev Sea, East-Siberian Sea, Chuckchee Sea) and the seas of the Pacific Ocean (Bering Sea, Sea of Okhotsk, and Sea of Japan).
9. Include the following as Action Themes in the text of the PEBLDS: «Arid and semi-arid ecosystems», «Polar ecosystems, including tundra and forest tundra», «Steppe and meadow ecosystems», «Conservation of soil diversity»
10. Include in the list of priority sectors (Action Theme 2 «Integration of biodiversity conservation into sectors») oil and gas mining, the construction of pipelines and power lines, energy production, chemical industry (in particular - decommissioning of chemical and nuclear weapon) on a level with agriculture, forestry, tourism and transport;
    • in the sector of energy production, support the switching to more environmentally sound varieties of fuel and technologies to obtain energy. To express concern over expanding oil and gas mining in the NIS area ( in particular on the coastal shelf). To promote independent environmental impact assessment for mining projects, processing and transportation of energy resources. To encourage inclusion of the costs of defragmentation of the landscape, land rehabilitation within mining and secondary impact areas into fuel costs. To support the introduction of an ecological audit process;
    • in the transport sector the problem of ecosystem fragmentation should be emphasised as well as disturbance of natural habitats due to construction of multi-modal corridors. To use economic estimation methods of damaging landscape and biological diversity when selecting optimal paths for transport corridors. To estimate the secondary impact of the transport development to ecosystems (through the growth of employment and production, polarisation of the urban zones and other areas);
    • in industry - to support the development of the Pan-European document in the field of the ecological audit and ecological certification. Carefully apply mechanisms of the «carbon credit»;
    • in agriculture special attention should be paid to the effectiveness of taking into account biodiversity considerations and traditional (extensive) agriculture as an economic alternative to intensive agriculture, based on the specific resilience of arctic, semiarid and arid ecosystems to develop sub-regional models of sustainable agriculture for Arctic, Central Asia, and Caucasus regions;
    • in the fishing industry - to pay an attention to the role of artificial lakes in formation and destruction of fresh-water (resident and mitigating) fish species;
    • in forestry - to develop a certification system of sustainable forestry on a subregional level with the broad participation of NIS NGOs. It is necessary to create the sub-regional standards of dynamic sustainability of forestry based not only on current biodiversity considerations but dynamic sustainability into the 21 century;
    • to unite efforts to include former military areas into the ecological network and to provide for their conservation.
    
    
11. Unify biodiversity conservation terminology on a Pan-European scale within the PEBLDS framework, work out and approve a normative document that fixes the meanings of the most important terms.
12. Strive for recognition, signing and ratification of the existing all-European Conventions and Treaties including the Inter - Government Agreement on protection of migrating Afro-Asian aquatic birds in NIS countries. To use the mechanisms of NIS countries joining Bonn and Bern Conventions to prepare additional protocols for them which contain national and regional lists of rare or endangered species and habitats;
    Use the PEBLDS international status to develop NIS laws for reservation of the undisturbed lands for protected natural areas. An alternative is the introduction into the national legislation standards which would allow such reserving. To recommend to the Inter-Parliament Assembly of NIS countries to develop and approve the framework Law on Ecological Backbone.
13. Develop a realistic action plan to involve regional experts in the implementation and approximation of PEBLDS, as well as other international and Pan-European Conventions and Treaties. Support projects that develop means of communication.
14. Support the development of Local Agenda 21. Information and training actions and programs are indispensable in this context for the local governments and private sector (designed for the particular sub-regions). It is of crucial importance to maintain interest at the local level through certification of the Local Agenda 21 in sectors which reflect the sectors expectations.
    Support the initiative of the Baltic countries to develop the first in the world Local Agenda 21 - Baltic Local Agenda 21. Recommend to strengthen the interaction of the countries involved to implement it on a local level and raise public awareness using local languages.
    Support the countries involved in the «Environment for Europe» process to participate in the development of new regional Agenda 21 - for the Central Asian (Russia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, China, Korea, Japan), Barents sea (Russia, Norway Finland), Black Sea (Turkey, Romania, Russia, Georgia, Ukraine), Trans-Caucasian-Caspian (Azerbaijan, Turkey, Armenia, Iran, Georgia, Russia, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan) and Arctic (Norway, Russia, USA, Canada, Island, Finland, Denmark) regions.
15. Supplement existing high and secondary school nature disciplines - curricula to reflect the goals, objectives, principals and priorities of the PEBLDS and specific features of its implementation in different regions.
16. Support the development of conservation NGOs in the NIS as an information and organisational environment to establish the Pan-European Ecological Network. To promote an international public campaign «March for Parks» as an action in support of the Pan-European Ecological Network.