Communications, information and monitoring

1. 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

2. Participating countries in the group discussion:
• Uzbekistan
• Kirgizstan
• Tajikistan
• Armenia
• Russia

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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