1. Connecting People for Better Coastal Water Management in Europe Gulf of Riga Case Study AWARE is funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme.

2. Case Study Characteristics Shallow sub-basin of Baltic Sea, influenced by Baltic Sea proper Gulf drainage basin covers 5 countries, 40% of which is agricultural land (cause of major inputs of nitrogen) Economic depression, unemployment Ineffective sewage treatment, 4.6 million inhabitants Eutrophication since 1960s

3. Case Study Characteristics Current water quality status is “moderate” Good water quality would require investment in sewage treatment in Baltic states, including non-EU countries with no Gulf access, and would lead to shrinking fish stocks, but is the most cost-effective way to reach goal

4. The AWARE Local Process Recruitment of 10 citizens (Latvia & Estonia) Online survey of local stakeholders Invitation of key stakeholders to workshop Local Workshop and Conference Interviews of local decision- makers Gulf of Riga Citizen Declaration “Top-down” approached to participation prevailed Complemented by local NGO-lead initiatives (also on WFD) Ministry of Environment (Latvia & Estonia) established work groups / coordinating committees for RBMPs Public hearings (and online information) but no citizens …… “The approach is both local and international, which contributes to increase awareness on a wider scope, showing that the problems also exist in other parts of Europe.”

5. Goal of 100 applicants was achieved Established regional NGO – good networks and experience in mobilizing the public 53% from Latvia and 18% from Estonia Recruitment: online announcement, press releases, emails, announcement on the biggest portal for job search and vacancies in Latvia and Estonia Citizen Recruitment

6. Actors Involved Latvian Ministry of Environment Latvian Ministry of Agriculture (Fishery Department) Bioforsk Uppsala University Latvian Institute of Aquatic Ecology adelphi Decision- makers Scientists 10 Citizens Stake- holders 8 from Latvia 2 from Estonia Latvian Farmer’s Union Latvian Rural Advisory and Training Centre Latvian Tourism Development Agency Latvian Environmental Investment Fund Baltic Environment Forum Missing? Industry & business (e.g. harbour authorities, fishery processors, tourism associations) Coastal municipalities (e.g. city councils) Urban waste water treatment facilities Health authorities NGOs

7. Local Workshop - Structure Scope: achieving a sustainable ecosystem in the Gulf of Riga Sessions organized around social and environmental problems highlighted by citizens (e.g. various pollutants) Day 1: State of Gulf of Riga, ecology and policy introduction to the main themes the present situation the perspective situation - scenarios Working groups on certainties and uncertainties of pollution loads and impacts state of policy (including international cooperation)

8. Local Workshop - Structure Day 2: Sustainable development and better water quality in the Gulf Urban waste water treatment Agricultural activities Fisheries Tourism Day 2 final session: Citizen recommendations for connectivity between science-policy makers-citizens Consultation (1 hr) based on framework prepared by evaluator throughout the 2 days

9. Citizen Declaration Highlights “Changing things now is actually cheaper than trying to fix things later” Choose the “golden middle road”, “balance ambitious ecological goals with social needs and acceptable costs” Increase efficiency of urban waste water treatment Common interpretation of water quality classifications Improved public information about policy changes to consumer products, about impacts of policies, and about different ecological alternatives Better inclusion of human health aspects Scientific ambassadors to interpret results to policy and public Increase range of communication tools for public

10. From Workshop to Conference One day break between workshop (Jurmala) and conference (Riga) Scientific scenarios based on workshop discussions Citizen declaration based only on workshop discussions Panel planned with 2 citizens, 2 policy makers, 2 scientists 

11. Declaration and Conference Most of the citizens were ‘very’ satisfied of the drafting of the Declaration Location conducive to participation of policy-makers Policy presentations had varying impact depending on clarity of message Giving a regional context perspective was very important Scheduling the interdisciplinary panel before lunch may have helped more participants to remain

12. Feedback & Observations (1) Conversation (not just lecture) between citizens and scientists Stakeholders came with knowledge and perceptions Policy makers came with policy commitments Cooperation among these groups to be continued after the end of the process? Facilitated cooperation between Estonian and Latvian participants

13. Feedback & Observations (2) Workshop able to respond to specific wishes of citizen panel (e.g. oil spills) through consultation about structure Moderation is crucial Asking and facilitating clarifying and guiding questions Maneuvering breaks in communication, summarizing, creating links Presentation already “vetted” by previous workshops made clear impacts imparting knowledge Scientist-citizen link visible (bringing up issues, tying loose ends) Low ownership of citizen declaration

14. Key Findings Practicing Participation. Better involvement of citizens in drafting the Declaration was needed, even though time was short. Suggestion: citizens rotate in taking notes. All Stakeholders. Some important actors were missing from the table (e.g. ports, harbours, and the industry) and sometimes questions pertaining to these actors remained unanswered. Timing. Loss of participation in spite of / or due to the short time between workshop and conference. Key: no time for citizen panel to meet and develop together the Declaration.