prop · H30334 · 2015-11-04 00:00:00 — It also emerges from the audit that the does not have an overview of its use of resources, although efforts are under way to develop a system to resolve this matter. In the opinion of the OAG, the of a permanent secretariat should ensure better administrative management of the . In further development of the , which will include increasing numbers of scientific subjects, there may in the OAG’s opinion be a need for an overall strategy for the Council which better steers the technical and financial resources towards long-term and specific goals. The work of the is primarily based on dialogue, cooperation and volunteerism. While the recommendations are not binding under international law on the member states, they are politically binding. is there an expectation in the Declaration and the ’s rules of procedure that member states must document the extent to which the recommendations are followed up. shows that extensive efforts are invested in generating the knowledge that underlies the Council’s recommendations. There is information on how member states follow up the key recommendations, and whether the work has an effect. have a major shared responsibility to ensure the sustainable development of the Arctic region. Without some form of follow-up work, it will be difficult in the OAG’s opinion for the to develop into an effective body with even greater scientific and political impact. has not adequately facilitated indigenous peoples’ participation in the Council’s work The importance of the participation of indigenous peoples in the broad cooperation in the is clearly expressed in the Declaration and reiterated in the ministerial declarations, and six indigenous organisations are Permanent Participants of the Council. They attend all Ministerial Meetings and are free to participate in the work of the working groups and other Council projects. The audit shows, however, that actual participation in projects varies, partly due to lack of resources – both financial and in terms of available expertise and personnel. has not established a funding mechanism that can ensure the participation of indigenous peoples in the work of the Council, and each country is responsible for funding the participation of indigenous peoples. The audit shows that participation is important because both changes and initiatives in the Arctic can greatly affect indigenous peoples’ way of life. There are weaknesses in the coordination and implementation of the Norwegian work related to the is an important body in ’s work on High North policy, and there is broad consensus that the should be the leading political body for Arctic issues. The audit shows that working with the and the technical issues that the council raises involve several ministries’ disciplines and responsibilities. Compared with the and , the other relevant ministries are not equally engaged in the work of the . The other ministries have placed emphasis on the information and knowledge provided by the because these ministries found to a greater extent it to be more expedient to emphasise other international processes and national knowledge. In the OAG’s opinion, the function and role of the various Norwegian expert authorities in work is therefore somewhat unclear. Because the is currently working on many more issues than before, it will, in the OAG’s view, become even more important to ensure good involvement and coordination of the work of Norwegian actors with the . This also applies to the use of the knowledge that the Norwegian government has in a number of areas that are of interest to the other Arctic states. The OAG therefore believes it is positive that the wants closer collaboration with relevant ministries and agencies in matters raised by the . The OAG also notes that the has not established a regular practice of track of the extent to which the responsible sector ministries follow up the relevant recommendations of the , or whether relevant recommendations are already incorporated in the Norwegian government. The audit shows that the lack of a monitoring system does not necessarily mean that the recommendations are not followed up, or whether the recommendations are already part of existing Norwegian policy. It is mainly international law obligations and national goals that govern the Norwegian administration’s work in the Arctic. This takes place independently of the . – vad kan göra för att möta rådets utmaningar The Office of the Auditor General’s recommendations The OAG recommends that the : facilitate even better coordination of the work of the with the relevant sector ministries initiate various measures so that all relevant ministries increasingly find work with the expedient both to utilise the work of the and to provide relevant expertise in areas of importance to the Arctic. reinforce efforts, including through the permanent secretariat, to make the a more efficient and effective body with emphasis on better management, organisation, funding and reporting A pdf of the report can be found at the following link in Norwegian: The report will also be available in English in spring : The Accounts Chamber of examined the implementation of national Arctic policy and execution of recommendations The audit report will be submitted to Parliament −the Duma when the Joint Memorandum is finalized and signed by all the participating SAIs Information of the Accounts Chamber of Methodology The Multilateral Audit of the Efficiency of the Implementation and Performance by the Member States of the Recommendations of the in the Field of Ensuring Protection of the Environment and Sustainable Development in Arctic (hereinafter referred to as the Multilateral Audit) was carried out at the national level with participation of control and accounting bodies of constituent entities of , located in the Arctic of : the and Regions, Nenets, Yamalo-Nenets and Chukotka Autonomous Areas, the Krasnoyarsk Territory and the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). In the frame of the national audit, priorities and mechanisms of implementation of the national policy of in Arctic were analysed, and the performance of the recommendations was assessed. In order to ensure a unified methodological approach to the Multilateral Audit based on the Strategic Plan and the “question tree”, the Accounts Chamber developed a unified programme of the control activity. The Accounts Chamber and control and accounting bodies of constituent entities of collected, analyzed and assessed the data based on a standard list of questions (including statistical key figures), using, in a number of cases, the method of interviewing representatives of governmental bodies involved in the activities of the and organizations representing the interests of indigenous peoples. The national report was prepared on the basis of materials provided by 13 federal ministries, agencies and their subordinate research and development institutions, as well as executive bodies of constituent entities of and nonprofit organizations of indigenous peoples. During the audit, special attention was paid to the analysis of international treaties, documents of national strategic planning and regulatory legal acts of , ministerial declarations and other documents of the . – vad kan göra för att möta rådets utmaningar Findings of the National Audit The national policy of in Arctic is implemented in accordance with strategic planning documents (Basics of the State Policy of in the Arctic for the Period till 2020 and for a Further Perspective and the Development Strategy of the Arctic of and for the Period till 2020) and is aimed at the socio-economic development of the Arctic (including raising the degree of knowledge of natural resources and expanding their exploration, developing information, communication and transport infrastructure, the system of timely warning about hazards, preserving culture and traditions of indigenous peoples), ensuring environmental safety and international cooperation in the Region. The priority problems in this sphere are solved through improving national legislation on the basis of rules of international law and international obligations of , as well as the development and implementation of state programmes financed from budgetary and extra-budgetary sources. The interaction with Arctic States in the frame of the is one of the priorities for in the field of international cooperation in the Region. is an international forum and interaction within its frameworks contributes to the development of the multilateral cooperation in the field of environment protection and exploration of Arctic. The format of the , which involves implementation of research projects and development of recommendations based on these projects at the level of responsible representing the Council Member States contribute of scientific and expert community and government agencies regarding the issues of sustainable development in Arctic, as well as allows pursuing constructive policy in strengthening multiformat cooperation while respecting the sovereignty and jurisdiction of the Arctic States. The Accounts Chamber of points out that has adopted regulatory legal acts of strategic and programmatic nature, aimed at the development of the Arctic economic capacity taking into account approaches of sustainable development and minimizing man-induced burden, preservation of the natural environment of the Region, traditional natural resource management and culture of indigenous peoples. The analysis of regulatory legal acts adopted proves that their provisions generally take into account recommendations of the regarding the prevention of the spread of pollutants and climate change, protection of sea environment and prevention of emergencies, preservation of flora and fauna, development of the , integration of traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples. The measures to develop the Arctic of are implemented in the framework of the State Programme of “Social and Economic Development of the Arctic of until the year 2020”, adopted on , which contributes to effective coordination of interaction of the federal executive authorities, ensuring the systematic nature of budgetary planning and comprehensiveness in accomplishing the tasks assigned. In order to ensure a comprehensive approach to the implementation of measures on sustainable development and environment protection in Arctic, it is reasonable to combine them within the frame of a single state programme, which would also make it possible to optimize the recourse provision for the said measures and improve the quality of interaction of government bodies in their implementation. Conclusions and recommendations on specific themes (fields) 1.The determination of priorities for the development of the Arctic of made it possible, to a certain extent, to consolidate state resources on the basis of the Management by Objective method of state administration, including financial resources, which provided a positive impact on the socio-economic development of the Region. For the past five years, the growth rate of the gross domestic product per person and the amount of investments into fixed assets per person in subarctic constituent entities of have exceeded the average Russian figures. The increase by in the total population size of indigenous peoples living in the Arctic of has been registered for the past 10 years. The adoption of the State Programme of “Social and Economic Development of the Arctic of until the year 2020” enabled to define the territory of the Arctic of the Russian Federatin, to ensure a unified approach to the development of measures in the Arctic of and control over the implementation thereof, as well as to ensure the formation of the state statistical reporting. One of the development priorities in the Arctic of is the socio-economic support of indigenous peoples of the North, which is carried out, in particular, at the expense of the federal budget funds and consolidated budgets of constituent entities of . In order to ensure the rights and interests of indigenous peoples, a number of regulatory legal acts have been adopted, which are aimed at the development of traditional industries and provision of modern social services. – vad kan göra för att möta rådets utmaningar Besides, the audit findings confirm the conclusion of the experts regarding the influence of climate changes and man-induced impact on the traditional lifestyle of indigenous peoples of the Arctic . Improving the regulatory framework of rights of indigenous peoples of Arctic would contribute to the preservation of traditional culture, environment and traditional natural resource management, as well as to the promotion of traditional way of life. 3.In accordance with the Strategy of Development of the Arctic of , measures have been taken to develop the transport system focused on year-round operation, including the North Sea Route, which made it possible to almost double the volume of cargo traffic along the North Sea Route for the past five years. In order to ensure the safety of , a comprehensive system of navigation and hydrographic support along the Northern Sea Route is being created; in its framework, it is suggested to ensure the disposal of radioactive thermoelectric generators (hereinafter referred to as RTGs) and install alternative power sources. Within the period from 2008 to 2012, the total of 257 RTGs were disposed of and 201 units of navigation equipment were installed. At the same time, the existing network of railroads and motor ways are not able to fully provide the growing needs of the developing Arctic . It is necessary to take additional measures to increase the capacity of existing roads and build new lines. 4.In order to raise the mobility of search-and-rescue units in the Arctic of , duty shifts of emergency response service have been organized; new forward deployment stations of professional rescue teams have been established; multipurpose salvage with unlimited navigation area provided with equipment for oil spills liquidation are being constructed. Measures to ensure the search and rescue preparedness allowed reducing the number of sea accidents with sea from 13 (in 2008) to 3 (in 2012). 5.The implementation of the recommendations regarding the Arctic monitoring and assessment development is based on the environment condition and pollution monitoring system. The existing monitoring system, as well as the methods of calculation and forecast, ensure a sufficient level of general and specialized hydro meteorological support. At the same time, certain subsystems of state environmental monitoring in the Arctic of require further development, in particular, the monitoring of fauna. The findings of the state environmental monitoring in Arctic are indicative of an insignificant change in the level of its contamination; the state of the ozone layer over the Arctic is within the range of natural variability. 6.Russia pursues a consistent policy within the frameworks of the , aimed at expanding mutually beneficial cooperation of the Arctic States in the Region and strengthening the sovereignty of . In particular, the first legally binding document was signed upon the initiative of : the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Search and Rescue in the Arctic (Nuuk, 12, 2011). progress in the implementation by national action programme on sea environment protection and the projects aimed at preventing the contaminants spread was noted in the declarations adopted by the Fifth (, October 26, 2006) and Fourth (, , 2004) Ministerial Sessions, accordingly. At the national level, the Accounts Chamber of emphasized the need to raise the level of awareness of the chambers of the Federal Assembly of about the activities. – vad kan göra för att möta rådets utmaningar Audit Office has examined whether receives an effective return from its membership of the The Swedish report was submitted to Parliament on 28th 2013. has been a member of the since it was formed in 1996. The Government has stated that the is the foremost multilateral forum for issues concerning the Arctic. The Government has also stated that it will work to strengthen the . The climate and the environment is one of three main priorities in ’s strategy for the Arctic region, as well as in the programme for ’s Chairmanship. The purpose was to examine whether receives an effective return from its membership of the . The audit is included in the Audit Office’s audit strategy Sustainable development – climate. The audit primarily concerns the Government, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of the Environment and the . The most important material for the audit was the Government’s strategy documents for the Arctic region, the Government’s programme for the Chairmanship of the , ministerial declarations and other documents from the , as well as interviews with representatives of ministries and government agencies. Audit Office notes that the is an important forum for issues concerning the Arctic and for initiating central research projects on environmental and climate change in the Arctic. However, the Swedish National Audit Office considers that after almost 20 years of Swedish membership of the Arctic Council it is reasonable to also expect an effective process in for assessing and, where relevant, implementing recommendations. This is particularly applicable as decisions in the are made in consensus and are, if not legally, then politically binding. It is also reasonable that ’s work in the Council proceeds from transparent priorities for the Arctic. Audit Office’s overall conclusion is that does not receive an effective return in all respects from its membership of the . In the opinion of the Audit Office there is insufficient transparency in the Government’s priorities for the work of the . It is therefore difficult to assess whether ’s work in the proceeds from stated priorities. The Government has not ensured that recommendations from the are assessed, ranked in priority and, where relevant, implemented in . has the Government assigned responsibility for such a process. It is not clear whether the ’s recommendations have been implemented in . Lack of transparency in the Government’s priorities for work on climate change in the The assessment of the Audit Office is that the Government’s priorities in the strategy documents and Chairmanship programme do not give a clear picture of the direction of the Government’s work on climate change in the . Reduced emissions of long-lived greenhouse gases have priority in the Government’s documents and the is presented as the foremost body for issues concerning the Arctic. However, the Government has not put the issue of longlived greenhouse gases on the agenda. The Government works for reduced emissions of greenhouse gases by obtaining and spreading knowledge about the effects of climate change, but has above all decided to focus work on climate change on short-lived climate forcers. Audit Office makes no assessment of the contents of the Government’s priorities, but considers that the priorities should be made clearly apparent by relevant documents. In the opinion of the Audit Office there is insufficient transparency in the Government’s priorities for the work of the . It is therefore difficult to assess whether ’s work in the Council proceeds from stated priorities. The Government has not created the conditions for implementing relevant recommendations from the . Audit Office notes that the Government has strengthened the processes in the during ’s Chairmanship. Corresponding efforts have not, however, been put into ensuring an effective process for implementation in . The Government has not ensured that recommendations from the are assessed, ranked in priority and, where relevant, implemented in . has the Government assigned responsibility for such a process. Audit Office notes that it is not clear which measures have been taken in response to the recommendations. There is currently no monitoring of the Council’s recommendations at national level. Consequently there is no process to ensure that the knowledge produced in the is utilised. – vad kan göra för att möta rådets utmaningar recommendations are generally framed and in nature. Consequently it is even more important to clearly assign responsibility for interpreting the recommendations and putting them into practice, where deemed relevant. The Riksdag has not received regular information during the Chairmanship The Riksdag has requested regular information from the Government on the developments in the Arctic area and the Swedish Chairmanship of the . The audit shows, however, that the Riksdag has been formally informed of developments on only one occasion, at the end of , i.e. only weeks before the end of the Chairmanship. Agreements from the are described by the Government as legally binding, but do not oblige the member states to provide help The agreements drawn up within the framework of and air rescue are presented by the Government as legally binding. However, the Audit Office notes that member states are not obliged to provide resources if an accident should occur. Consequently, the agreement does not make the demands on resources that the Government has indicated. does the agreement entail any major legal change compared with previously existing search and rescue agreements. Audit Office notes that the Government has not been transparent in its presentation of the type and implication of the agreement. Audit Office’s recommendations are aimed to give a more effective return on its membership of the . Audit Office makes the following recommendations to the Government: The Government should ensure that the priorities for the work of the are transparent. The Government should ensure that recommendations from the are assessed, ranked in priority and, where relevant, implemented in . The Government should clarify for government agencies where the responsibility for such a process lies. The Government should give the Riksdag regular information on activities in the , as requested by the Riksdag. A pdf of the report can be found at the following link: Start/publications/Reports/EFF/2013/Sweden-in-the-Arctic-Council---effective-return- from-membership-/ Government Accountability Office’s National Audit: Better Direction and Management of Voluntary Recommendations Could Enhance U.S. Participation, GAO-14-435 (16, 2014) Recent environmental changes in the Arctic from a climate, such as decreased sea ice coverage making areas more accessible, have increased global attention to the region’s economic opportunities. these changes, many indigenous people of the Arctic struggle to maintain their traditional way of life that relies on the ecosystem for subsistence resources. In 1996, the eight Arctic States − , , , , , , , and the − formed the (Council) to promote cooperation on various Arctic issues with input from indigenous groups. Arctic policy highlights the importance of the Council to pursue U.S. Arctic interests, including those of the State of − the only U.S. state located in the Arctic − and the indigenous people, or Natives, living there.18 These interests include protecting the Arctic environment, managing natural resources, involving indigenous communities and the state of , and supporting scientific research. Congress asked the Government Accountability Office () to examine matters related to U.S. participation in the Council, led by the U.S. (State)—the federal agency responsible for managing the ’ foreign relations. reported on (1) the Council’s organization and how it addresses environmental and economic development issues; (2) key U.S. agencies’ participation in the Council and any challenges; and (3) agencies’ actions to implement and manage voluntary Council recommendations adopted within the and any challenges.