1. Executive Summary

Assessment Method:

Main Findings:

With respect to the human/built environment, the conflict has had a strong impact, in particular in Kosovo, as a result of Yugoslav Army activities. All over Yugoslavia, the infrastructure suffered heavy damage. Just because there have been no acute large-scale effects (e.g. visible impact on flora and fauna, health impacts) at the moment does not mean that there will be no long-term effects. Based on the given information, the following main types of environmental damage occurred or may occur:

• High levels of pollution around main military targets, in particular chemical industry.
• Ecosystems threatened, in particular river ecosystems.
• Food contamination resulting from soil pollution (also as a secondary effect of air pollution).
• Drinking water contamination.
• Human health (long term effects of toxic/carcinogenic substances, radiation).
• Environmental disturbances resulting from the refugee situation in Kosova, Albania and FYR Macedonia, but also from refugees coming home (e.g. use of wood for heating etc.) and refugees in Serbia and Montenegro.
• Institutional threats: At the same time, it can be estimated that the position of Yugoslav authorities who seek to deal with environmental issues is even weaker than it was prior to the conflict. This means that even existing environmental legislation can not be implemented or enforced. Additionally the position of NGOs and other civil society builders is weakened.
• Low priority of the environment in the reconstruction process: As the Bosnian experience has shown, environment tends to have a low priority in reconstruction processes. Especially under time pressures this can lead to decisions where the environmental impact of an activity is not taken into consideration.

Furthermore, to be able to define the dimensions of these long-term effects, it is necessary to conduct additional research. This should consist of two main elements:
1. A detailed assessment of the actual situation.
2. Long-term monitoring of the effects mentioned, in order to be able to determine the size of the problems and to be able to start remedial action.

For the neighbouring countries selected for this assessment, it can be stated that there is no evidence of an acute environmental impact from the conflict. Here it has been taken into consideration, that the monitoring of environmental parameters in particular in Macedonia, Albania and Romania has been very limited. The major impact in neighbouring countries has been caused by the refugee situation.

1.1. Summary of Environmental Effects

1.1.1. Water

• PCBs have been released from damaged transformer stations.
• Oil products have leaked into the Danube River from the Pancevo industrial centre and the refinery at Novi Sad.
• More than one hundred tonnes of ammonia leaked into the Danube.
• More than one thousand tonnes of ethylene dichloride spilled from the Pancevo petrochemical complex into the Danube.
• Over a thousand tonnes of natrium hydroxide were spilled from the Pancevo petrochemical complex.
• Nearly 1,000 tonnes of hydrogen chloride spilled from Pancevo into the Danube River. Stretched water supplies in Albania due to the huge numbers of refugees.
• Lack of sewage treatment in Albania’s refugee camps has resulted in uncontrolled discharges of sewage into water channels.
• In FYR Macedonia, there is a possible threat to underground water supplied through poor sewage management in refugee camps.
• Oil discovered in the Danube River in Romania (below the maximum allowed concentration).
• Heavy metals: copper, cadmium, chromium and lead, at rates double the maximum allowed concentration, have been registered in Romania’s Danube.

It has to be noted that, so far, the measurable impacts are limited. However, this does not guarantee that they are not present.

1.1.2. Air

• Radioactive pollution from depleted uranium weapons (claimed in Yugoslavia). Vinyl chloride monomers (VCMs): Yugoslav reports state that VCMs have reached concentrations of 10,600 times more than permitted levels near the Pancevo petrochemical plant. Polluted clouds carried the products of combusted VCMs: phosgene, chlorine, chlorine oxides and nitrogen oxides.
• Products from incomplete hydrocarbon combustion were released as a result of strikes on oil refineries.
• During the Pancevo and Novi Sad attacks, large oil depots were burned. This resulted in the production of soot and other particulates. Following the Pancevo incidents, a cloud of smoke some 15 kilometres in length lasted for 10 days. Concentrations of soot, SO2m and chlorocarbons increased by four-to-eight times the allowable limits. Nitrogen oxides have been released from jet aircraft and through burning industrial installations.
• Hydrofluoric acid was released when the chemical plant in Baric was destroyed. Destruction of metal industry plants released heavy metals into the atmosphere: mercury, cadmium, chromium, copper and zinc.
• Acid rain was measured in a number of areas, including Romania (Berliste, pH 5.4, May 12, 1999; Gradinari, pH 4.7, May 15, 1999; Timis County, pH 5.1, May 21 1999, Arad County pH 5.7, June 1, 1999) and Bulgaria (Rozhen, pH 4.23 from May 23-26, 1999). The Environmental Protection Agency in Oradea, Romania, reported an increased amount of acid rain in comparison to the same period before the conflict. The timing of much of this acid rain and the prevailing wind directions tends to link the acid rain with attacks on Yugoslavian industries.
• In Timis County, Romania (north east of Belgrade), from April 18-26, 1999, the maximum allowed concentration for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and ammonia was exceeded between 5-10 times.

Actual impacts on the environment and public from these sources have yet to be ascertained.

1.1.3. Soil

• Locally damaged soil structure from bombing and shelling.
• Degraded agricultural land in Albania and FYR Macedonia from the siting of refugee camps.

1.1.4. Biodiversity/Nature

The direct consequences on biodiversity and nature can be summarised as follows:
• Locally the physical destruction of habitats and plant and animal populations by air and land attacks.
• Degradation of habitats and plant and animal populations from chemical contaminants (borne in air, water and in soil).
• Disturbance of fauna in their habitats and along migration routes. In FYR Macedonia, there has been a measurable increase in the presence of some species, presumably from Kosovo.

Protected areas have been directly affected by the conflict:

• In Yugoslavia, these include: Kopaonik Mt. National Park, Fruška Gora Mt. National Park, Tara Mt. National Park, Sarplanina Mts. National Park, Vrsacke Planine Mts. Natural Reserve.
• In Albania a number of protected areas either had refugee camps built within them (Rrushkull, Divjaka), or refugees are impacting on nearby areas by felling trees or polluting water sources.

1.1.5. Human Environment/Health

Negative health impacts are expected from damaged infrastructure (water and sewage systems) in Yugoslavia and from the poor conditions that prevail in some refugee camps.

1.1.6. Transboundary

1.1.7. Other

1.2. Summary of Future Threats and Risks

1.2.1. Environmental

The greatest chronic risk to the environment is to the water, which is threatened by considerable amounts of chemicals. The bio-accumulation of these pollutants in rivers and groundwater resources (well, springs and aquifers) is considered a likely risk. The build up of pollutants in the Danube River reservoirs (Iron Gates) are a likely consequent of the conflict. For Albania and FYR Macedonia the danger to precious water resources is a continuing concern.

The impact of air pollution has decreased with the cessation of hostilities. However, the use of depleted uranium is another issue, the full dimensions of which will be revealed with time. This material’s possible effects will surely be a topic of controversy and research. This controversy in itself represents a risk, because resources might be unevenly distributed between measurements of the future environmental risks emanating from the conflict.

There is a risk of long-term health effects from pollutants. This will require research and monitoring of "at risk" populations. The possible contamination of food stuffs is a considerable threat. This is especially pertinent in those countries that have shown an inability or unwillingness to present results of general pollution. Therefore there is reason to be concerned about how they will be able to monitor the toxins in foodstuffs as well.

The slow reconstruction of infrastructure (particularly sewers and water treatment) represents a further risk to health – notably in Kosovo itself. Additionally, their are health dangers from the large numbers of people living in tented refugee camps with inadequate sanitation. In Yugoslavia itself the breakdown of the power system could leave tens of thousands without adequate power and water throughout the winter.

1.2.2. Institutional

The current crisis has revealed that, in most of the countries, there are very inadequate monitoring facilities and resources (Albania, FYR Macedonia and Romania). The threat revealed is that these countries cannot adequately measure the environmental consequences of the war and so cannot adequately prepare plans and provisions to address them.

NGOs constitute a vital component in bringing the wider community to the environmental debate. This is necessary to allow adequate public involvement in environmental decision-making and planning (public participation). Additionally, NGOs can help solve and manage environmental problems where the official authorities cannot reach. The threat is that the conflict has reduced both of these functions.

NGOs in Yugoslavia have had their activities curtailed, due to a lack of resources and political realities. NGOs in transboundary countries had their cross-border activities halted by the conflict. As is known environmental problems do not stop at national boundaries. Additionally in those countries where the largest proportion of refugees were housed there is a risk that aid priorities will concentrate solely on humanitarian or development issues, at the expense of the environmental dimension. International donors should consider this in developing their list of priorities.

The involvement of local knowledge is crucial at both the governmental and public level. Too often, previous aid programmes have been rushed and unfocused, and have relied too heavily on foreign "expertise" without involving informed local specialists. If mishandled in this way, the remedial measures can become as much a threat as a solution.