Floor and Panel Reaction
Following chair presentations, the session chair invited reaction from the floor. Early discussion concentrated on the most pressing issues facing local government (as potential IST users), namely the need to prioritise environmental issues, and solicit funds for financing IST investments. Frank Price of the ENWAP Expert Group and Sheffield City Council, UK elaborated on problems associated with prioritising environmental issues at the local government level in EU countries, which is often tied to voter support. In spite of European environment policy, related issues within EU states often receive low priority because this can not always be considered a vote winner, while the provision of employment, often to the detriment of the environment can.
In addressing the issue of financing IST activities, Siegfried Rupprecht, an independent Germany-based consultant active in the field of local authority technology co-operation suggested that environment telematics implementation should be considered in the wider context of regional innovation, and local actors should adopt a modular approach by combining different sources of funding and co-operating with actors in other areas of technology use. Examples might be, insurance companies financing flood control devices to prevent costly damages, or software and hardware companies donating equipment for use in public information systems. He continued, it is essential to develop a vision of regional environmental change across institutions and to work co-operatively towards it. In discussions about funding, the cost of NOT using new technology should also be considered.
In tackling the issue of high level IST applications and their relevance to the local user and EU policy, Horst Kremers of a Berlin-based research institute proposed a peer mechanism might be institutionalised for independent expert criticism and evaluation of funded applications. In this way, funds would only be invested in the most relevant and most useful applications of benefit to local players. The Session Chair responded by mentioning that all funded projects are already subject to annual project review with contracts terminated in the case of poor performance. Other panelists also noted that as a tool for environmental management, state-of-the-art technology is not always the most appropriate solution. It tends to be expensive to implement and maintain, while grass-roots or freeware solutions might be more cost effective in some situations and additionally can allow for better employment opportunities for local experts.
Summarising the above solutions and challenges in the form of a Frequently Asked Questions document might become a valuable tool in the future prioritisation of national and pan-European IST environment issues. It could also help answer questions as to how support might be solicited and the right environment applications implemented at the local IST user-level, the rapporteur suggests. The "solutions" proposed could be further discussed and refined at national level by those responsible for IST and environment policy, or as part of an upcoming Information Society Forum meeting. Expert forums or workshops could provide the most suitable vehicle. Based on the outcomes of those discussions, national position papers and policy initiatives concerning the information society could be launched.
A number of other potential actions were also outlined during the course of the discussions which might support the implementation of ISTs. Although time for discussion was limited, the main speaker and floor considerations are captured in the table below by the rapporteur.
| (added value, usefulness, obstacles, relevance, applicable sectors or env. areas, other issues) |
|
| Technology transfer of "ready-for- market" solutions | Both sessions indicated a need for transfer and support activities, facilitated through... |
| Preliminary surveys, needs/sectoral assessments | The Data Collection seminar revealed a need for the surveying of technical issues pertaining to data ownership, responsibility, access, and formats. Such a survey could be undertaken at the national level and be used to identify and streamline IST policies in preparation for EU accession and in terms of improving the quality, and availability of environmental information. |
| Expert groups/virtual forums, partnerships | Expert forums and networks was considered one way to achieve the exchange of know-how and information when deciding which of a variety of technological solutions is the best. Such forums could be in the form of seminars, virtual electronic forums, or even a national hotline information desk was proposed during the data collection session. |
| Training and Technical Workshops and on-site technical visits | User and Expert education for IST applications was considered a valuable solution in overcoming the institutional obstacle of low level IT expertise at the local government level. Workshops can also serve as valuable opportunities to discuss which technology is the best for a particular job. Improved data management through better institutional cooperation might also be facilitated through the hosting of workshops for key players at the local and national level. |
| Good-practice guides and databases, hardcopy or Internet | Hardcopy information exchange through guides and catalogues was also considered useful in clarifying which "high-level" applications to select when considering implementing an IT solution at the local level. The ENWAP guide is already one example. |
| Others, including awareness raising events | One means for overcoming the shortage of funds for implementing ISTs at the local level was inferred to be VFP awareness raising events. By encouraging participation, valuable funds that could offset the costs of implementation of an innovative technology could be found. |
Clearly, any of these support actions would prove valuable in assisting in the transfer of IT solutions and in facilitating their implementation. Their realisation could be a matter for national governments local government and European Commission consideration, suggests the Rapporteur.
Summarising the discussion and workshop, the Chair recapped that the session had shown a number of proven low-cost IT solutions exist for dealing with and managing environmental problems. In spite of the many challenges discussed, and experiences shared, their implementation is not unattainable. The lessons learned from many of these projects, the rapporteur adds, can be of benefit to potential users in overcoming the above challenges, while the applications themselves, now ready for transfer, could also help serve as a potential short-cut. Good-practice guides are already available, summarising the main characteristics and benefits of these projects.
Reiterating the value of IT applications, the Session Chair cited their importance in the decisionmaking process and in facilitating the EU integration of the EU accession countries. He encouraged local environmental experts to concentrate on lobbying their superiors for the availability of funds and for the prioritisation of environmental issues.
One mechanism that can be tapped into for funding the development and implementation of innovative local level applications is the EUs Fifth Framework Research and Development Programme. Although funding is small (up to 50 percent only), it does provide a vehicle and baseline for implementation. Trans-boundary partnerships are central to the success of any funded project, and events like this provide such an opportunity to establish those relationships. Local players might also think of implementing smaller applications initially, before aiming for more sophisticated and integrated tools, the Chair concluded.
The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe
