Scroll Down

 

 

Article 20 Financial resources

273. What is the relative priority afforded to implementation of this Article and the associated decisions by your country?
a) High
+
b) Medium   c) Low  
274. To what extent are the resources available adequate for meeting the obligations and recommendations made?
a) Good   b) Adequate   c) Limiting   d) Severely limiting
+
Further comments on relative priority and on availability of resources

 

 

 

275. Has your country provided financial support and incentives in respect of those national activities which are intended to achieve the objectives of the Convention (20(1))?
a) no
+
b) yes - incentives only  
c) yes - financial support only - protected areas support? art  
d) yes - financial support and incentives  
276. Has your country provided new and additional financial resources to enable developing country Parties to meet the agreed incremental costs to them of implementing measures which fulfil the obligations of the Convention, as agreed between you and the interim financial mechanism (20(2))?
a) no  
b) yes
+
If a developing country Party or Party with economy in transition -
277. Has your country received new and additional financial resources to enable you to meet the agreed full incremental costs of implementing measures which fulfil the obligations of the Convention (20(2))?
a) no  
b) yes
+
If a developed country Party -
278. Has your country provided financial resources related to implementation of the Convention through bilateral, regional and other multilateral channels (20(3))?
If a developing country Party or Party with economy in transition -
279. Has your country used financial resources related to implementation of the Convention from bilateral, regional and other multilateral channels (20(3))?
a) no  
b) yes
+

Decision III/6. Additional financial resources

280. Is your country working to ensure that all funding institutions (including bilateral assistance agencies) are striving to make their activities more supportive of the Convention?
a) no  
b) yes - limited extent
+
c) yes - significant extent  
281. Is your country cooperating in any efforts to develop standardized information on financial support for the objectives of the Convention?
a) no
+
b) yes (please attach information)  

Decision V/11. Additional financial resources

282. Has your country established a process to monitor financial support to biodiversity?
a) no  
b) procedures being established
+
c) yes (please provide details)  
283. Are details available of your country's financial support to national biodiversity activities?
a) no  
b) not in a standardized format
+
c) yes (please provide details)  
284. Are details available of your country's financial support to biodiversity activities in other countries?
a) not applicable
+
b) no  
c) not in a standardized format  
d) yes (please provide details)  
Developed country Parties -
285. Does your country promote support for the implementation of the objectives of the Convention in the funding policy of its bilateral funding institutions and those of regional and multilateral funding institutions?
a) no  
b) yes  
Developing country Parties -
286. Does your country discuss ways and means to support implementation of the objectives of the Convention in its dialogue with funding institutions?
a) no  
b) yes
+
287. Has your country compiled information on the additional financial support provided by the private sector?
a) no
+
b) yes (please provide details)  
288. Has your country considered tax exemptions in national taxation systems for biodiversity-related donations?
a) no
+
b) not appropriate to national conditions  
c) exemptions under development  
d) exemptions in place  

Further comments on implementation of this Article

The Republic of Armenia suffered severe economic hardships at the beginning of the 1990s. Economic recovery has now started, aided by a reasonably low level of international debt. The financing of biodiversity conservation programs is supported by a number of mechanisms, including the State budget and foreign contributions to projects. While environmental problems are recognised, the environment is not considered as a national priority for public expenditure.

Limited State resources, and the low priority placed on environmental issues, have meant that public expenditure in this sector has to date been minimal.

The current State budget meets less than 35% of the basic needs of biodiversity conservation, and the existing expenditure is primarily for payment of staff salaries. Almost no investment is made into equipment or other capital costs, and there is inadequate support for scientific research on biodiversity.

Environmental spending is focused on three principal areas: (1) Fisheries; (2) Forestry; and (3) Protected areas. Additional activities covered include the funding of the Environmental Inspectorate, which is responsible for the enforcement of relevant legislation and regulations and for the collection of payments for natural resource use.

Fisheries. For the year 2000 the Government had planned to allocate AMD 10,500,000 from the State budget for the protection and regeneration of fish stocks, but actually allocated nothing. Thus it is currently impossible to make an effective assessment of fish stocks, and to set sustainable levels of fishing so as to ensure the recovery of stocks.

Forest protection activities are financed from the State budget (AMD 108,700,000 in 2000). However, the costs of sustainable forest protection are estimated to be 4-5 times greater than current expenditures, and are likely to grow substantially.

Protected areas. The State budgets for the various protected areas operated under the Ministry for Nature Protection are shown in the table below.

Protected Area Expenditure in 2000 (in AMD)

Lake Sevan National Park 20,840,000
Reserve-park complex (including Sevlich State Reserve) 2,257,200
Dilijan State Reserve 853,200
Khosrov State Reserve 24,122,900
Shikahogh State Reserve 341,200
Department of Protected Areas 5,000,000

TOTAL US$ 326,000

Current State budgets are insufficient for the needs of biodiversity conservation in Armenia. At present government budgets are supplemented by funds from international donors. The biological diversity of Armenia represents an important economic asset, although the true values of biological resources are rarely considered in economic policy and pricing structures. Armenia is clearly on the way to developing a market economy and, sooner or later, the pricing of biological resources is likely to be determined by market forces.

275. The annual volume of financial support allocated from the State Budget for forest protection activities and protected areas has not changed as a result of Armenia's ratification of the CBD.

279 Armenia has received funds from various international organisations including the World Bank, UN FAO, GEF, Ramsar Small Grants Fund, SIDA, UNEP and the McArthur Foundation.

In 1997 Armenia received GEF assistance amounting to USD $174,800 in order to implement the project "First National Report, Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan to the CBD". In 1999, the combined work of eight groups of specialists resulted in the "First National Report on Biodiversity of Armenia" and the "Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan" (BSAP), which were prepared in line with CBD guidelines and the priority development goals of Armenia (See Article 6).

The World Bank financed the project, "Improvement of the Lake Sevan Ecological Balance". Within the framework of this project, an action plan and appropriate recommendations on the conservation of valuable and endemic fish species in the Lake were developed. Further financing for the realisation of the recommended measures was not available or was too late (see Article 9 question 136).

The ex-situ conservation of micro-organisms is undertaken by the Republican Centre for Deposition of Micro-organisms. The activities of the Centre are sponsored by the Russian institution A-M Holding and by a grant from the INTAS Association of the European Community (see Article 9 question 136).

There are a number of projects under development on the management of water ecosystems of the neighbouring countries of Southern Caucasus, financed by USAID and TACIS (see question 309).

With the financial support of SIDA in 1997-1999 the Forest Research and Experimental Centre implemented the Forest Resources Assessment Project (see question 361).

288. According to the "Law on Value Added Tax", benevolent payments for environment protection are exempted from VAT.

 
 
Scroll Up
 
| Armenia | National Report | Strategy | Convention | Other International Projects |
| Flora | Fauna | Genetic Fund | Maps | Red Book |
| About Us | Contact Us | Downloads | Useful Links |

(C) © Copyright 1997-2002. All Rights Reserved.
Send your notes and suggestions to