Progress under the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution Twenty-ninth meeting of the Task Force on Integrated Assessment Modelling May 2004 Amiens, France Albena Karadjova Secretariat of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (for information on the Convention) (for EMEP)

EE LV LT BY PL UA RO HU BG TR GR AZ GE AM KG FI CY SENO DK DE NL IE ES PT IT CH AT GB HR BA AL MK FR BE CZ MD SK SI YU LU. KZ RU TM UZ TJ Artic Ocean Atlantic Ocean Pacific Ocean CA US 41 Parties to the EMEP Protocol and 49 Parties to the Convention RU MT

Intergovernmental bodies, expert groups and scientific centres under the Convention Programme Coordinating Centre Programme Centre Coordination Centre for Effects Main Research Centre Programme Centre Programme Centre Implementation Committee WHO Bonn ICP Forests Task Force ICP Integrated Monitoring Task Force ICP Modelling and Mapping Task Force ICP Materials Task Force ICP Vegetation Task Force ICP Waters Task Force Health Working Group on Effects Task Force Emission Inventories and Projections Task Force Measurement and Modelling Chemical Coordinating Centre Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-West Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-East Task Force Integrated Assessment Modelling Centre Integrated Assessment Modelling EMEP Steering Body Expert group on ammonia Task Force on POPs Network of Experts on Benefits and Economic Instruments Expert group on techno-economic issues Expert group on Heavy Metals Working Group on Strategies and Review Executive Body

Recent entry into force  Protocol on POPs: 23 October Parties EB Decision 2003/10: Task Force on POPs  Protocol on Heavy Metals: 29 December Parties

Status of ratification of the Gothenburg Protocol  9 ratifications: Denmark Finland Lithuania Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Romania Sweden European Community

Gothenburg Protocol review  The Executive Body: Expressed satisfaction with progress in preparing for the review and called upon Parties to support the scientific activities by providing the necessary data (emissions, modelling, critical loads, etc.) Noted with appreciation the work of CIAM while recognizing shortfalls in emission projection data and urged all countries that had not done so to hold bilateral discussion with CIAM to agree on the data used for modelling Recognized progress in work of EGTEI in the development of ECODAT and in providing the necessary data to CIAM Welcomed the important contribution by WHO

The Executive Body (following the EMEP Steering Body):  Recognized the importance of the work on the baseline scenario and called upon Parties to cooperate with CIAM and provide the necessary data  Took note of the results of the workshop on linkages and synergies of regional and global emission control and requested EMEP to continue work on this topic  Approved the budget of CIAM for 2004 and 2005 as proposed and agreed to keep the 2006 budget at the same level

The Executive Body, in December 2003 also:  Noted progress in the development of the Unified Eulerian model and the conclusions of the workshop on its review  Recognized the importance of PM emissions reporting  Noted the progress in modelling particulates and stressed that priorities should focus on important sources and where uncertainties are the highest (e.g. organic carbon)  Strongly encouraged further work on the improvement and validation of emission data

EMEP Workshop on PM Measurement and Modelling  Held on April 2004, in New Orleans  Objectives:  Main conclusions:  Report to the EMEP Steering Body and works