Minister of Environment Guro Fjellanger

The Government's environmental policy and the environmental state of the nation

Launch of Stortingsmelding (White Paper) 29 October 1999

The report presents developments in the state of the environment, how the various factors that influence the environment have changed, and the main points in the government's efforts to combat environmental problems in all eight environmental policy areas.

Environmental status and new targets

Using basic symbols, the illustration shows the state of the environment in Norway today, and the evolving influences on the environment. The representation is rather crude, but it does give a reasonable picture of the situation. In many ways the state of the environment today is less than satisfactory, and prospects for the future, on present form, are less than encouraging.

We see an accelerating loss of biodiversity in Norway, even if the situation is not as serious as in some other countries. Areas of natural wilderness and threatened habitats are diminishing, and steadily more species are ending up on the Red List. Cultural heritage is disappearing at an increasing rate, a trend that can only continue, failing an all-out effort on the part both of the public authorities and property owners. Increasing use of chemicals poses a serious threat to health and environment. In climate, we may already have started to see the natural effects of the rise in man-made emissions. Here too, an all-out effort is required, globally and nationally, to reverse the trend.

The Kyoto agreement is only a first step. We must expect more and more stringent obligations.

In other areas, developments are more positive, but there is still a need to intensify our efforts. Air quality in the larger cities has improved, but poor air quality still causes considerable damage to health. There is much that is positive in international cooperation on protecting the polar regions, but increasing encroachment on these vulnerable habitats, and the transport of environmental pollutants, demand stronger measures. Waste recycling has increased substantially in recent years, but at the same time quantities of waste have also grown.

Emissions of ozone-depleting substances, acidifying compounds and nutrient salts have been reduced considerably, developments which in due course will improve the state of the environment.

As you see, we have announced new national targets in most policy areas. These targets focus on the most crucial environmental challenges, making explicit the various policy guidelines and objectives. In my view, it is important to show people where we want to go and what we want to achieve in environmental policy, even if we do not yet have all the answers as to how we shall get there.

The targets will lay the groundwork for environmental action nationally, locally and in the various sectors of society. With positive contributions from all concerned, we shall be able to meet these ambitious targets and so correct the negative trends I describe in this introduction. I would like to mention three areas in particular where we have set new, ambitious targets, namely noise, waste and cultural heritage.

Noise

Noise is one of the environmental problems that affect most people in Norway. About 1.5 million people are exposed to noise in their homes, and of these about 500,000 endure noise levels over 6o decibels. In a survey by Statistics Norway, five per cent of the population state that they have problems sleeping because of noise. The noise burden varies with social status: the young, single and lone providers with low incomes in the cities are the most often afflicted. As the illustration shows, road traffic is by far the major source of noise nuisance. Industry, air traffic and railways are other important sources.

The government will intensify its efforts to reduce noise problems in Norway, and has set a new national target accordingly: noise nuisance is to be reduced by 25 per cent by 2010 in relation to 1999 levels. This is shown by the dotted line in the illustration.

The new target will reduce the noise levels to which people are exposed, and so improve the quality of life for large parts of the population. Noise reduction makes it possible to develop more pleasant environments in which to live and raise children. Less noise means fewer disturbances, lower levels of stress, improved powers of concentration, more peaceful sleep.

If we are to reach our target for noise, it must be reduced at source - cars and trains must make less noise. Among other things, we must concentrate more on noise research. Two million kroner have been allocated for this purpose in the budget for 2000. We shall also take an active role in the EU's work on noise issues.

Waste and recycling

Parliament has asked for a White Paper on waste and recycling. This has now been issued as an integral part of the report. The government will continue to pursue an ambitious waste policy. In the report we set out national targets for waste, something that has not been done before.

The most important target is that the proportion of waste dealt with by disposal should not be higher than 25 per cent by 2010. By disposal is meant landfill or burning without conversion to energy. As the illustration shows, 43 per cent of all waste goes for disposal today. The remaining 57 per cent is recycled for materials or energy. This is not enough. As the arrow shows, recycling must increase to at least 75 per cent of the total by 2010. To reach this target, utilization of waste as a whole must increase - as materials where appropriate or, under the right conditions, as energy.

Developments have been positive in the field of waste. Local authorities, businesses and households have made worked hard. Material recycling of household waste has risen from nine per cent in 1992 to 34 per cent in 1998. This increase is so great that disposal of household wase has been reduced during the same period.

Prevention is equally important. One of our targets is therefore to limit the growth in the volume of waste generated to a rate below that of economic growth. In the long-term, the government will work to reduce the volume of wastes that lead to environmental problems.

Proposals for new measures emphasize that these shall augment and complement existing regulations. Economic measures are still important. The local authorities are given increased powers in some important areas, e.g. construction and demolition. Businesses are also to be given greater freedom of action, with corresponding responsibilities, in dealing with their own waste.

Cultural heritage

Each year about one per cent of our cultural monuments and cultural environments disappear through removal, destruction or neglect. This applies to individual buildings -- old town houses, farms and industrial buildings, for example -- and archaeological monuments such as burial mounds, rock carvings and tofts. This brings about great changes in our cultural environments, in the towns and cities and in the countryside, a very serious development which we must reverse. When cultural monuments and cultural environments disappear, they are lost forever. It is impossible to recover a burial mound which has been removed, or re-create a building exactly as it was constructed in the seventeenth century.

At present rates we are losing great cultural, historic and experiential treasures. We are also forfeiting historical source material. There is increasing awareness that cultural-historical values are important for developing attractive and salubrious towns, villages and neighbourhoods, and for our sense of identity.

The government therefore aims to halve the annual loss of cultural monuments and cultural environments by the year 2008. This is an ambitious undertaking. We must sharpen our scrutiny of the reasons that cultural monuments and cultural environments disappear. As the illustration shows, agricultural activities, house-building and physical encroachment in the form of roads, excavations, etc., are the most important causes of the loss of cultural heritage.

There are grounds for praising a good many private initiatives and enterprises aimed at protecting cultural monuments. We will continue to be totally dependent on this work. There is also a need to strengthen our use of regulatory measures. For this reason we have appointed a commission to examine the whole question of cultural heritage policy. The panel will publish its findings in spring 2001.

Managing wild salmon stocks

The situation for wild salmon populations is very serious, and salmon are extinct, threatened or vulnerable in about a third of their watercourses. The Wild Salmon Commission((*?)) - which was appointed to advise on the situation - issued its report in March this year. We have made every effort to follow up the panel's recommendations quickly. This report therefore details further measures for managing wild salmon stocks.

The government is preparing to intensify its efforts in all sectors, and support for cooperation among all interested parties, to reverse this negative trend in the salmon population. There will be an emphasis on providing improved protection for the most important salmon populations and their habitats. In that regard, the commission's proposals for designating 50 "national salmon watercourses" and nine "national salmon fjords" will be looked at closely.

We are also preparing to step up measures against the most important threats, primarily the salmon louse (Gyrodactylus salaris), renegade farmed fish, and damaging encroachment on watercourses. Protective measures already in place - for example, liming, gene banks for wild salmon, restoration of salmon habitats comprehencive surveys of salmon populations will be expanded. We shall also adapt fisheries regulations to take more account of specific stocks, e.g. through increased use of regulated quotas. In years to come we shall also place great emphasis on improving the scientific basis for management of salmon.

We have set high goals for management of salmon, and it will be a demanding task to implement the policies we have now drawn up. As a start, we have increased allocations for wild salmon projects by seven million kroner in the national budget for 2000.

If our environmental policy is to succeed, everyone must participate. Information on the state of the environment is necessary in order to involve individuals, organizations, local government and the authorities at national level in environmental projects. Access to information, especially in the field of environment, which concerns all of us, is a basic democratic principle. The report which we have published today is an important safeguard in this respect. I want this information circulated even if we do not yet have all the answers to solving our environmental problems.