IES Policy Forum

Mr. Marco Onida gave an introduction of the alpine convention. He pointed out the rare feature of the convention is that is made specifically for one territory, rather than based on an issue or a problem, as for example the Desertification Convention. This important feature characterizes how the convention is made and how it is implemented.
Mr. Onida went on to explain the 8 Alpine states that signed the treaty in 1991, in addition to the European Community, and the 8 related protocols that followed a few years later. The Organs linked with the convention include the conference of Ministers, the Permanent Committee, the Compliance Committee, the Permanent Secretariat, the Working Groups and Platforms. The ministers meet every 2 years, at the end of each presidency with the executive body, permanent body and ad hoc groups. The role of the permanent secretariat is in part established to reduce power of the presidency, and it should be independent to ensure continuity of the convention.
The 8 thematic protocols are: Land planning and sustainable development, Mountain agriculture, Nature protection and landscape tending, Mountain forests, Tourism, Soil protection, Energy, Transport. Regulatory measures are based mainly on soft law, although there are some hard law provisions in place.  For example for transport, no more large roads can be built through the Alps. Air, waste, water, population and culture have also been discussed, but to date, no agreement has been reached on any measures.

Some of the protocols have not been ratified by Switzerland and Italy, for different reasons.  Mr. Onida explained that current focus is on implementing the existing protocols, rather than making new ones. However, there are two new focus points, Climate and population and culture, which are politically important despite their non-binding nature.  Today there are 5 working groups conducting studies and scientific reports: working group on transport, Working group on UNESCO world heritage, working group on natural hazards, working group on natural ecological diversity, and working group on water management. Additionally, there are many networks and partners as the convention is dependent on cooperation.

Mr Onida gave several examples on the different issues that have come up with regards to the convention. For example the relationship between the Alpine Convention and the European Community. When it comes to climate change, the Alps are highly vulnerable to temperature changes, yet there is not much heavy industry in the area, as the Alps tend to be a natural barrier. Thus, the population may be inclined to refuse to commit to a climate policy, when their contribution is much lower than in other regions. Nonetheless, there are several examples of sustainable energy developments.
Also, Mr. Onida explained, Switzerland, not being a member of the EU, can and did make stricter transport regulations on its territory than the EU Member States. Austria, on the other hand, has made a sectoral distinction in its transport regulations, banning all waste transport for instance. The Commission has attacked this regulation.

When it comes to the use of Genetically modified organisms (GMO's) in agriculture, there seems also to be a conflict between EC regulations and the Alpine Convention, resulting in Austria not being able to stop use of GMO's even though according to the Alpine Convention, typical and native species should be promoted.  Finally, Mr. Onida mentioned the existing compliance committee, that monitors compliance and receives complaint, but it is not very strong, as it is not independent.

Following the presentation, the discussion raised many issues surrounding the compliance committee and means of making it more effective. Additionally, learning from the Alpine Convention and applying similar instruments in other mountain regions was brought up, where Mr. Onida told that this is indeed a part of his focus.

More information can be found on http://www.alpconv.org and in the power point presentation of Mr. Marco Onida