Many of the proximate threats to biodiversity in Armenia are due to wider underlying causes. These factors affect Armenia as a whole, not only its biodiversity, and it is beyond the scope of this plan to address them fully here. These underlying factors increase the pressures on biodiversity, while also reducing the ability to react to biodiversity loss. Some of the key underlying causes of biodiversity loss in Armenia include:

· The current economic problems.
· Legacy of the Soviet period.
· Population changes.
· Social deprivation.
· Over-reliance on natural resources.
· Lack of alternative environmentally-sustainable sources of income.

An understanding of the context in which biodiversity conservation will take place is essential if realistic goals and activities are to be identified during the planning process. The information presented in the Country Study provides the basis from which the constraints on, and opportunities for, biodiversity conservation in the Republic of Armenia can be identified. These have been taken into account in the development of strategies and actions for the BSAP.

Constraints

A number of constraints currently restrict the extent and efficiency of biodiversity conservation activities in Armenia. Some of the main constraints include:

· Legacy of over 70 years of environmental problems.
· Low priority of the environment on the national agenda, given other social and economic priorities.
· Lack of finances as a result of the economic crisis.
· Lack of equipment and technical materials.
· Gaps in the legislative base, and a lack of ability to enforce existing regulations.
· Recent declines in vocational training.
· Lack of salaries and declining motivation of staff.
· Lack of co-ordination within and between institutions.
· Low public awareness of biodiversity issues.
· Increasing power of the private sector without increasing their environmental responsibilities.

The limited financial contribution to nature protection is currently a major hurdle in achieving effective biodiversity conservation. The finances provided are insufficient to address all the tasks required (including protected area management, monitoring, rehabilitation of Lake Sevan, forest protection, development of new technologies and biosafety). Effective conservation will require a much more substantial investment to solve the current problems. Furthermore the absence of funds for contemporary research into biodiversity, is undermining the ability to identify, and react to, threats to biodiversity. Lack of investment has resulted in the loss of technical expertise and capacity for training, particularly among protected area staff.

The lack of integrated information and management systems undermines biodiversity conservation activities, particularly for protected areas. The absence of effective information systems leads to difficulties in identifying rational and achievable aims. In general, the fragmentation of responsibilities, and lack of clear, in the roles of different management agencies, while the absence of integrated policies with regard to protected areas management result in ineffective management approaches.

The current level of ecological awareness in the general population is very low, and even decision-makers and relevant agencies are unaware of ecological limits and requirements. Although legislative reform has been initiated, more work is needed to ensure public awareness and participation in the planning and implementation of nature protection projects. If such projects are to be successful, they will require the involvement of the general public, NGOs and other institutions.

Opportunities

A number of factors support biodiversity conservation, and provide important opportunities that can be built upon in the future. Such positive factors include:

· A large number of well-trained and committed personnel.
· Considerable academic potential.
· A good basis of existing structures (e.g. protected areas).
· A strong and detailed legislative base.
· Government's commitment to biodiversity and meeting the obligations of the CBD.
· Positive appreciation of the environment by the Armenian people.
· History and culture of conservation over many centuries.
· Strong recognition of the importance of natural resources to the national economy.
· Extensive scientific research base.
· Large number of institutions involved in biodiversity conservation activities (both government and NGOs).
· Extent of existing environmental programmes and plans (e.g. National Environmental Action Plan, Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Lake Sevan Action Plan, Country Study on Climate Change etc.)

The genetic resources of the country themselves represent an important opportunity to promote biodiversity conservation, given their importance for economic, social and cultural development. Furthermore, the existing protected area system is extensive (representing almost 10% of the total area of the country), and over 60% of all species occur within protected areas. The effective in-situ conservation of species (both within and outside protected areas) is supported by recently revised legislation, which accord to international standards, and by the presence of a range of agencies with a remit for conservation within the state structure, as well as a range of supporting non-governmental organisations.

At a broader level, although public support for ecological activities is currently low, the literacy rate is very high, and interest in biodiversity conservation is increasing in the younger generation. Specialist training is promoted through higher education courses in ecology available in Armenia. General awareness of biodiversity issues is increasing, and NGOs are likely to have an increasing role in disseminating such information. Over 50 NGOs are now recognised in Armenia, and through collaboration with governmental management structures, they have the opportunity to make important contributions to biodiversity conservation in the country. Over recent years, collaboration with international institutions and donors has increased, and a number of governmental and non-governmental organisations have received grants to undertake important biodiversity conservation projects. This provides a good basis to promote further international collaboration in future.

A more detailed analysis of existing opportunities and constraints for biodiversity conservation in a number of general sectors is presented in Table 2.11.
Table 2.11 Specific existing opportunities and constraints for biodiversity
conservation activities

Extensive changes in the landscapes and biodiversity of Armenia have been clear over the last 500 years, particularly in the decline of forest cover and increase in the area of agricultural land. The loss of natural systems has increased dramatically over the last century in response to a growing human population and industrial development. A number of sectors of the economy have important impacts on biodiversity, including agriculture, forestry, industry, mining, energy, construction, transport, tourism and recreation, and harvesting of wild species. These sectors negatively affect biodiversity in a number of ways, including loss of habitats, over-use, pollution, impacts of introduced species and climate change. As a result, many plants and animals are facing extinction, and a number of ecosystems are suffering from erosion and increased desertification. These impacts ultimately occur as a result of the present economic and social climate of the country, which also provides the context for biodiversity conservation. In this context a range of constraints and opportunities have been identified, which need to be incorporated into the planning procedure for biodiversity conservation.

The Country Study presents a brief, but comprehensive, review of biodiversity in Armenia, along with analysis of threats, current activities affecting conservation and constraints and opportunities for future activities.

As a result of its geographical location, and altitudinal and climatic variation, Armenia contains a wide diversity of ecosystems and species. As a result of its position, Armenia has an important regional role, and affects climate and water supply throughout the Caucasus region.

Armenia supports biodiversity of global significance, and represents an important centre of origin for agrobiodiversity. Many of the species which occur in the country are of economic value, and are an important resources within the traditional economies of Armenian people.

Substantial changes to biodiversity in Armenia have been recorded over the last century, as a result of increased human impacts. Degradation of natural areas and resources has been particularly extreme over the last 20 years, resulting in the loss of both habitats and species. Of key concern has been the impact on deserts and semi-arid areas, declines in forests and degradation of mountain steppes. In addition, over 500 species of plants and animals are considered to be endangered.

Intensive industrial development over the last 70 years has also had a negative impact on biodiversity. Sectors such as mining, agriculture, energy and chemical industries have affected biodiversity both directly and indirectly, through habitat loss, over-use of resources and pollution.

The current state management system for biodiversity conservation includes legislation, a network of protected areas, forest conservation practices and to some extent an ex-situ conservation system of botanical and zoological gardens.

Armenia has a strong potential with regard to scientific and intellectual resources for conservation, including experience in staff training. The developing NGO movement provides a potential basis for increasing the effectiveness of conservation actions in future.

At present the under-financing of nature protection agencies, as well as an incomplete legislative base with low levels of enforcement, represent important constraints to the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use activities in Armenia. These problems are further reinforced by low public awareness of, or involvement in, nature conservation issues.

Biodiversity conservation needs to be integrated within approaches to socio-economic development in Armenia. Increasing investments in nature protection are likely to result in important development benefits linked to sustainable use and regeneration of natural resources. Such an approach would recognise that biodiversity conservation and sustainable use are key tools to ensure the improvement of living standards and sustainable development of the Armenian people.