Second Environmental Performance Review of Albania

xxivEven though the scope of inspected activities is increasing and the work of the enforcement authorities hasimproved, the environmental inspection system is only partly aligned with international good practices. Manyinstallations still operate without environmental permits or do not exercise their activity in compliance with therequirements.The environmental permitting legislation is complex. On the one hand, the technical aspects of the permit suchas air protection, waste management, wastewater treatment and biodiversity protection are regulated in separatelegislative acts. On the other hand, most permits need to integrate relevant legislative requirements andthresholds. These conditions make it necessary that competent and careful screening be conducted byadequately qualified and trained staff.Actual environmental permitting is based on the country’s only assessment system, the environmental impactassessment (EIA). However, the final EIA document does not contain all necessary conditions and is inpractice not fulfilling its purpose, i.e. full environmental protection. A gap is also evident in the absence ofpublic access to EIA documentation and public hearings for all EIA procedures. Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment (SEA), and Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) exist in the law, but flaws in thenational legislation hinder their implementation. No environmental audits exist in the country, and neither doesrelevant legislation on the subject.Environmental quality standards are not clearly defined and major pollutants are not identified. Air qualitystandards are under preparation but not yet operational, and emissions from vehicles and the quality of fuel arenot a priority. The process of elaboration and adoption of water standards is ongoing, and there are draftdecisions on urban wastewater treatment, on priority substances in water and for water quality standards.Monitoring, information, public participation and educationThe engagement of Albania in many EU and international activities implies a substantial increase inreporting obligations, including those related to monitoring. However, environmental monitoring activitieshave not demonstrated great improvement in recent years in spite of a number of dedicated assistance projects,supply of modern equipment and specialized capacity-building for national experts.The development of environmental indicators is progressing, especially within various internationalframeworks such as cooperation with the European Environment Agency (EEA) and under the UNECEJoint Task Force on Environmental Indicators. However, the regular updating and use of such indicators fornational needs, or further development of indicators to serve national policy needs, are still in the early stages.The current monitoring process is fragmented and the related data flows are unstable because monitoringactivities are carried out by governmental bodies and institutions on the basis of annual contracts. Thesituation is even more critical at the local level where monitoring capacities are scarce and where there are signsof institutional tensions. Nevertheless, an integrated environmental monitoring system (IEMS) is graduallybeing developed.Some progress has been made in establishing a shared environmental information system (SEIS). This is dueto long-lasting cooperation with EEA, the standardization of data reporting procedures, capacity-building andinvolvement in the development of the European Environment Information and Observation Network(EIONET) encompassing several national reference centres.Although annually prepared, the national State of Environment Report (SER) presents a rather traditionalstructure and approach. The SER is mainly a description of the current situation rather than an analysis of theentire Driving force–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) chain. Consequently, the SER has limitedrelevance and input to the policymaking process.Progress was registered in engaging the public in environmental issues at both national and local levels, inparticular through consultations on draft legislation. However, the involvement of NGOs and of the public atlarge during the practical implementation of legislation remains weak. That is why improving publicparticipation in the decision-making process will continue to be a key challenge and priority in the comingperiod.