Spatial and environmental planning and waste management (some thoughts on the case of Attica) M. Haidarlis Department of Planning and Regional Development, University of Thessaly, Greece Abstract Facing the problem of the waste management in a specific area is without doubt a complicated issue. The difficulties of this mission increase exponentially when it comes to big urban entities with territorial and environmental peculiarities. Taking into consideration that the legislation related to the environmental and territorial planning constitutes one of the most significant tools that play a significant role in waste management, understanding this approach is of particular interest. As is known, the norms that stem from the need to protect the environment lay their emphasis on preventing the construction of infrastructure projects that are considered intrusive or harmful to the natural environment. On the other hand, regulations connected to urban and town-planning focus their interest on the compromise between everlasting conflicting interests and land uses, without losing focus on the primary aim of development. It is obvious that the concurrent application of provisions of different legal gravity for the area of Attica, namely regarding whether they are provisions of normative character as is the case with the environmental regulations or of directive character as the case of town-planning norms, renders not only the soundness but also the legality of the various choices of sites of waste disposal dubious. This paper argues that an antidote to the general uncertainty that characterises the selected sites of disposal of Attica s waste could be: a) the compatibility with the environmental requirements planning of land-use, b) the previous participation and consultation with the interested stakeholders and c) the non-strict coping with waste management within the borders of the standard administrative divisions. Keywords: spatial planning, land use planning, waste management, environmental policy, citizen participation.
542 Waste Management and the Environment II 1 Introduction The new example of a viable development, in the years following, the Brundtland report (1987), is leading all developed countries today to adopt a complete approach with the integration of regional environmental policies with the corresponding developing and natural spatial policies. Under these circumstances the efforts to solve every environmental problem should be realized within a round prism, taking into consideration also all of the possible spatial and developing interventions necessary for a successful result. Waste management is today one of the most important environmental problems, especially in economically developed societies. The term waste management comprises of the technical processes and methods relating to the collection, temporary keeping, the extracting of useful material and finally their disposal in suitably chosen landfill areas [1]. On the other hand spatial planning in general refers to the methods mainly used in the public sector in order to influence the future distribution of activities in space. It comprises elements of national and transnational planning, regional policy and regional planning and detailed land use planning. The latter operates at the municipal level, which regulates the changes of spatial and construction uses with the a long term view of a logical and spatial planning and utilization and connecting them in such a way that the demand for development will balance with the demands and need to protect the environment, as well as reaching social and economic targets [2], [3]. During the last few years in our country the selection of areas for the disposal of waste tends to become a major problem of spatial and environmental planning, with, on one hand the selection of areas not compatible with the planning of territorial uses resulting in strong confrontations, and on the other hand with the selection of areas which do not correspond to the appropriate environmental required legislation for the selection of areas for waste disposal. The solution, is of course, not so easily reached but it could be said that the basic cause of all those problems is the lack of will and determination to apply a complete plan, the incorporation of all possible influences in the decision making process for the selection of the most appropriate areas for waste disposal. In the highest level, legislation is playing an important role as being the basic tool for the application of every plan of waste management, whether it is for a given territorial unit or on a national level as a whole. Our country has developed complex legal articles on waste management. Nevertheless, the application of those legal instructions in some cases, as in the case of Attica, creates many problems caused mainly by the imperfections of the already mentioned planning in combination with the areas specific characteristics. Further, in this present study we examine the specific problems that arise when attempting to apply a system appropriate for the waste management of Attica. 2 The problem of Attica and its peculiarities In general, the locating of waste management installations in the district of Attica continues to present problems to administrative bodies. The largest landfill today
Waste Management and the Environment II 543 in Attica is the one in Ano Liosia, which is already becoming overloaded, while large amounts of waste are being dumped in landfills, which are only partially, if at all inspected, thus causing considerable pollution problems. In the case of Attica, it is without doubt a residential area which encounters huge problems in dealing with its waste, if one takes into account, on the one hand the mass habitation in such a limited space (about 4 million people in an area of 3,800 kilometers squared.), on the other hand, the demands of protecting the natural and social environment [4]. It is easy to see how finding a suitable landfill and processing area, is fraught with obstacles, because such areas, that come under the suitable environmental and planning criteria do not appear to exist. The uncontrolled construction and the urbanization of the countryside are two of the main reasons for this. This limits to a minimum the areas where waste can be disposed. However, this lack of space may have unpleasant effects because some of the areas, which will be finally chosen, on the basis of their distance from inhabited areas, do not uphold the suitable environmental criteria (being protected areas etc.) To make matters even trickier, in this specific case, it should be noted that Attica is characterized by its environmental and social riches. On top of the reasons just mentioned, which make dealing with waste management so difficult, there is the legal issue. The laws in place protecting Attica s natural and social environment are by no means few. For example the Structure Plan of Athens, (Law 1515, 18.2.85) states in clause 3, as a general aim, the improving the quality of life for all the inhabitants of the district, as well as protecting the natural environment, and more specifically, amongst others, the recognition and protection of historical elements and landscapes of natural beauty [5]. Indeed, it recommends the regulation for specific areas of protection in a large area of Attica. However, this demand in combination with the above mentioned, undoubtedly lead to the conclusion, that in most cases, when a place has been chosen for the creation of a landfill for waste, this choice is in direct conflict with the provisions of legislation. As a result in most cases, the lawfulness of most landfills are brought into question. 3 The basic existing legal framework The waste management legislation consists of a considerable number of legal articles of national and community law. At the top level are the provisions of article 24 of the Constitution that recognizes the right of citizens to live in a healthy and balanced environment. On the other hand, article 174 of the founding convention of the European Community recognizes the basic legal principles for the protection and management of that environment (Principles of prevention protection and the polluter bears the costs). Now, at the level of community law, we refer mainly to Directives 91/156 on waste and 1999/31 on the landfill of waste. The former founded the basic managerial, as well as legal principles that fellow member countries are obliged to follow, concerning waste management [6], whilst the latter defined the more specific environmental and technical specifications to which the specific areas
544 Waste Management and the Environment II and landfills for solid waste must comply [7]. One should note also the Directive 96/61 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control given that the best available techniques must be used, in the created units for the processing of waste before its final deposition, as well as the large range of available landfills [8]. On a national level, the joint ministerial decisions 50910/2727/2003 should be noted measures and terms for the handling of solid waste, national and regional management planning and 29407/3508/2002 measures and terms on the landfill of waste, which make up part of the national law on waste management. The first deals with the scheduling and permission status, to be strictly followed for the creation of the necessary infrastructure for the processing and disposal of waste [9], whilst the second defines mainly the technical specifications for the functioning of the infrastructure and the landfills, as the environmental targets to which they should comply [10]. It is worth noting at this point, that according to 29407/350/2002 (article 4), it is a national strategy to decrease the volume of waste sent to the landfill, to 35% of the total quantity, gradually by 2020 [9]. In order to achieve the specific target it is necessary to construct, in the areas used for waste disposal, suitable units of processing, (recycling, composting), thus aiming to reduce the volume of the disposable waste. Consequently, we are not only talking about the landfill of waste, but about landfills of waste remnants or otherwise for integrated installations of waste management. As far as the joint ministerial decision 509110/2727/2003 is concerned, the two basically positive elements are, on the one hand, the defined limits of the planning levels, being nowadays the national and regional planning with a simultaneous analytical description of characteristics and elements of each, and on the other hand, the clarification of responsibilities of the different administration executives, not only in the stage of planning, but also for the individual permits. 4 Attempts of a legal solution of the problem In the attempts to solve the problem of Attica s waste management, as developed above, the administration created A framework of solid waste management in the district of Attica, which anticipates specific actions to deal with this. The first priority in those proceedings is of course the option of final choice of landfills where the new installations for the processing and disposal of waste are established. More specifically in applying the existing legal framework, the administration issued the 48442/28.9.2001 decision of the committee of the municipality of Attica, which approved phase A of the planning of its waste s management. Accordingly phase B of planning, where the pre-choice of landfills was approved, was carried out by voting a special amendment and not following a decision of the General Secretary of the municipality, as was foreseen by the existing acts. Specifically article 33 of the Law 3164/2003 researcher s registries, assignment and project designing...;. (Official Gazette, 176-A).
Waste Management and the Environment II 545 Finally the administration issued main deeds, specifically for the approval of environmental conditions for the final choice of areas for management installations. However, turning to bills of individual laws to deal with environmental problems, such as that of waste, cannot be considered the best way of approaching the problem, given that parliament becomes in essence an administrative tool, which is deemed the most appropriate to take decisions on individual cases. As it is known, waste management legislation provides strict measures the so-called measures of elimination/suitability -, the compliance of which is a necessary condition for the choice of an area for the creation of the necessary infrastructure and disposal of waste. These are necessary planning, environmental, economic and social functioning criteria. On the other hand, in the municipality of Attica, there are applied definite multiple spatial regulations complicating further the legal framework, within which the administration is moving in the case of Attica. As a natural consequence of this condition, in combination with the idea often held by people concerned that the choices have already been made and the various researches do nothing but confirm those choices, is leading to a continuous, never ending, dispute on the legal validity of the decisions taken. In light of the above, questions arise as to, not only how objective but also how viable all these choices taken about the areas of waste disposal in the municipality of Attica are. 5 New approaches to waste management Based on the above, a viable managerial approach concerning the waste of large urban districts, such as that of Attica, is as follows: a) The appointing of commonly accepted areas compatible with environmental requirements with the intent of protecting the environment combined with development and satisfaction of economical and social targets. The instruments of land use planning are expressed in a variety of forms, from the general framework for large areas to more detailed ones that determines the exact form of development in a given spatial unit [2], [3]. The specific approach, apart from anything else, has the advantage that it decisively participates in totally smoothing out opposing positions led by the simultaneous application of existing regulations of environmental and spatial character which, as has been mentioned, are different in regulating value and range. b) The encouragement of citizens to be informed and participate, not only before the issuing of the different individual management decisions, but also during the formation of the regulating framework of waste management. This position is in line, not only with the precise letter of the law, of the international Aarhous convention, but also with the intention of the Law, as in article 8, on citizens participation in environmental issues during the formation of regulating rules [11]. Therefore, this participating approach enables the canceling out of, or
546 Waste Management and the Environment II the considerably minimizing the local communities opposition to waste management installations in their area. c) The lenient approach to waste management within municipalities, as a position accepted by the new regulating framework with the possibility of interdistrict planning. Dealing with the problem of waste management, at least during the planning stage, is not only a municipality issue but also a national one. Especially, as far as the Municipality of Attica is concerned, one should seriously consider the above mentioned possibility given that it concerns the largest metropolitan center of the country, the viability of which presents without a doubt characteristics of a national issue. Also the lenient approach of refuse management within the limits of standard municipalities is in accordance with the growing need in the last years, to relate environmental and land planning policy with its relative choices [12]. In closing, one should particularly stress the lack of a specialized law, dealing specifically with the complete waste management at both national and municipality level, an issue which is dealt with in the national legislation, mainly through regulations set exclusively by the legislatory body. In order to have a viable legislative and practical approach, and of course a solution to the problem of waste management at a national level, one should definitely take into consideration this parameter too. 6 Conclusions Taking a quick look at what has been mentioned, it is easily understood that the effort to solve the problem of waste disposal in a district such as Attica faces serious problems, while in most cases serious questions are raised as to the legality of the different choices made. In general it appears that a viable solution would be one, if possible, of total mutual planning combined possibly with legislation of a metropolitan self administration for the municipality of Attica [3]. A prime position in this new planning has to be compatible with the environment detailed planning for the use of land with the aim of its complete and viable development. Also the establishment of citizen s participation in decision-making procedure for the waste disposal as well as the lenient approach of its management within the standard administrative divisions, are elements that should be definitely taken into consideration. In our opinion these three parameters compose, for the case of Attica, with its peculiarities already mentioned (metropolitan character, spatial and environmental), the element of a modern but also necessary legal environmental policy for a metropolitan center s waste management. References [1] Beriatos E., Aravosis K., Kungolos A., Karagiannidis A., Perkoulidis G., Koltsidas E. Legal framework and solid waste management policy developments and prospects Environment and Law, vol 2/2003, pp. 306-323, 2003 (in Greek).
Waste Management and the Environment II 547 [2] European Commission The European compendium of spatial planning systems and policies, Luxembourg, 1997. [3] Economou D. Town planning III, Notes, University of Thessaly Publishing, 2002 (in Greek). [4] Ministry of Environment, Spatial Planning and Public Works Strategic framework for spatial development for Athens Attica B phase, National Metsobion Polytechnic, Architecture Department, Athens, 2001 (in Greek). [5] Law 1515/1985 Structure plan and program for environmental protection of the greater Athens area O.J. A 18 18.2.1985 (in Greek). [6] Directive 91/156/E.U. Amending Directive 75/442/E.U. on waste, L 78/26.3.1991. [7] Directive 1999/31/E.U. On the landfill of waste, L 182/16.7.1999. [8] Directive 96/61/E.U. Concerning integrated pollution prevention and control, L 257/10.10.1996. [9] Joint Ministerial Decision 50910/2727/2003 Terms and conditions for the management of solid waste, national and regional management planning, Official Gazette 1909 B, 2003 (in Greek). [10] Joint Ministerial Decision 29407/3508/2002 Terms and conditions for the land fill of waste, Official Gazette 1572 B, 16/12/2002 (in Greek). [11] Economic Commission for Europe Convention on access information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters, United Nations, New York Geneva, 1999. [12] Ortiz L., - Gouguet J., La territorialisation des politiques environmentales, Université de Limoges (programme de recherche INTER REG II C), pp. 15-67.