Home » Projects » REB 2000

Results of the test of opinion concerning the proceedings of the Romanian Environmental Forum

A group of 787 persons was tested, representing 76,11% from the total number of participants to FORM'99.

It was received a number of 217 questionnaires valid filled in, representing 27,5% from the questioned group.

The organizations which had filled in the questionnaires cover all the fields of activities related to the environment: The Central Public Administration, The Local Public Administration, The Environmental Protection Agencies, Professional and Private Associations, Trade Agencies, Public Health Directorates, Institutes for Research and Engineering.

The questionnaire was structured in three parts, as follows:

The 1st part, (respectively questions 1 to 11) refers to the forum organizational issues: organization, themes of the conferences, distributed documentation, recommendations for the next edition.

The 2nd part, (questions 12 to 17) was concentrated on the relationship press-environment, the sensitivity of the press to the environmental issues, the accuracy of the environmental problems presentation in mass-media, the bodies which have to be involved in order to have a more active press concerning the environmental sector.

The 3rd part, (the questions 18 to 21) tries to determine which are the main environmental problems in Romania, In the opinion of the participants to the FORM'99, which needs an urgent solving, and which needs additional financing.

Part of the answers to the questions comprised into the questionnaires will be used especially internally, inside our institution, in order to improve the organisation of the next edition of the Forum (questions: 1,2,3,4,5,11).

Concerning the quality of the organisation (see question no. 7: "Enumerate the strong points and the week points of the Forum") it results the following:

Strong points:

1. The quality of the forum organization;

2. The level of representation and the possibilities to contact the personalities in the field and the ones who pays;

3. The various themes and the professionalism of the speakers;

4. The Exhibition of great interest.

The main week points, which constitute in fact the main part of recommendations made by participants to the organizers, are as follows:

1. The insufficient promotion of the forum and as a consequence the relatively small number of the mass-media representatives on the proceedings of the forum;

2. The necessity to organize thematic days, and the elimination of conference proceedings with the same themes in parallel;

3. The difficult access to the place of forum's proceeding due to the insufficient number of vehicles for transportation serving the Parliament Hall;

4. The necessity of more detailed documentation to be distributed by the organizers and the lecturers to participants and visitors. The documentation was considered too synthetic.

On the question: "What do you think about this event ?", from a total number of 217 questionnaires considered, the answers were as follows:

Concerning "the contribution of FORM'99 from the point of view of identifying some partners for discussions and some potential collaborators" (question number 10), an important percentage of participants, respectively 87% from the 217 which answered to this question considered a significant contribution, 11% as being insignificant, respectively 2% as being null.

Referring to the relationship between mass media and the environmental problems in Romania, a great number of the ones who answered to the questions consider that the effective involvement (through dialog, studies and interviews, TV or radio emission time) of actors which co-operates in the environmental sector in Romania will create a more sensitive mass media on the real problems related to this sector. See below few suggestive data and figures:

Question no.12: "Is mass-media enough receptive to the environmental problems?"

A number of 148 persons, respectively 68% from the total number of 217 questioned persons, consider that the press is not enough active, and 69 persons (32%), answered Yes.

Question no.13: "Which are the methods through out the structure that you are representing, that could influence the role of mass-media in promoting more intensively the sector of environment?"

Most of the received suggestions: 107 stipulate the necessity of direct involvement of the environmental responsible actors in the relationship with the press through "Direct dialog with the press; publishing articles, field-related studies and projects; TV and radio emission time, and interviews in mass media".

For "Organizing some special actions for journalists - respectively seminars, training at the source" it were pronounced a number of 83 persons.

The third numeric category of the ones who answered, 27 answers, considers that making sensitive mass media for presenting the environmental problems consists in "Ensuring the right informing process of mass-media through press conferences on environmental problems".

Question no.14: "Bodies which should be more active in making mass media more sensitive for promoting the environmental problems". Results to this question are presented below in chart no.2:

Question no.15: "How do you consider, in general, the accuracy degree of the environmental information presented by mass media?"

The answers are as follows:

Question no.15: "How do you consider, in general, the accuracy degree of the information presented by mass-media?" has the following answers: High: 174, Satisfactory: 25, Low: 15, no answer: 3.

Which are the reasons for the above mentioned results, we tried to find out from the question no.16: "Give one positive, and one negative example of co-working between your institution and mass-media".

As positive examples the most frequently are the co-working with the local press and its availability to present the local and county's environmental problems, and the co-working with some specialized publications, which unfortunately, have a small area of circulation.

The negative examples, or examples of "unfavourable co-working", refers to the press rush for sensational, not checking the sources of information and the bad documentation or the distorted presentation, sometimes tendentious of the facts.

Question no.17: "Do you consider as opportune a weekly TV or radio emission time for education on ecology, and the presentation of environmental problems on a national television channel?"

The answers were in majority Yes, 201 from 217. The answer "No" has 0 votes, and the other 3 have no answer. This situation reflects the aspect noticed by the participants in the forum to the 18th question concerning the necessity of education and awareness of population on the environmental problems, and the fact that an environmental problem is indeed the lack of education in this field.

Given a large variety of activities in which are involved the subjects responding to the questionnaire, in the 3rd part of the questionnaire which wants to establish the participants' opinions referring to the environmental problems in Romania, the opinions are very diverse, including almost all environmental issues.

Thus, on the Question no.18: "Which do you consider to be the main 5 environmental problems in Romania, needing an immediate approach?" there were expressed over 30 different opinions. In this situation we have had to select 8 out from the problems having a big number of votes and not only 5. The presentation of these is made in Chart 3.

1. Collection, final disposal of waste, treatment, incineration, recycling  (Waste Management)

2. Waste water discharge, with insufficient or no treatment (water quality) Waste Water Management

3. Air pollution, reduction of emissions in the atmosphere

4. Monitoring of environment, and of accidental pollution, risk management

5. Education and awareness regarding the environmental problems

6. Soil protection, soil degradation, soil rehabilitation, and ecological rehabilitation

7. Decreasing the burden on environment caused by industrial pollution, upgrading the industry

8. Deforestation, restoration works

Other opinions expressed to this question were: a too small number of green areas in the urban area, the lack of specific regulations to implement the Environmental Law and for completing the environmental legislation, water supply system in the rural area, promoting the cleaner public transport - urban and regional, the ecosystems' degradation, and the conservation of biodiversity inclusively by creating natural protected areas; the lack of a national environmental fund, the lack of pollution taxes and of measures against the polluters.

Question no.19: "The environmental sectors in Romania needing of additional financial support to the existing one?" The opinions are various in this area, too. We have selected the first 6 in order of the importance accorded by the participants in the forum:

1. Waste water management

2. Waste Management

3. Air Pollution

4. Upgrading the industrial technologies

5. Ecological reconstruction of urban areas affected by the excessive industrialization

6. The institutional development of Environmental Protection Agencies

Question no.20: "Specify in which environmental sectors and for which activities your structure needs additional financial support?"

Most of the answers have underlined the necessity of allocating funds for:

Avoiding and removing the effects of water, air and soil pollution, the transport infrastructure, urban pollution due to transport activities, the institutional development of Environmental Protection Agencies in order to develop activities like: monitoring of environmental parameters, dispersion modelling, intervention in case of ecological accidents; construction of waste water treatment facilities, improvement of air quality.

Studying the answers to the question no. 21: "Which are the financial sources (Romanian and foreign) accessible for your organization (the first part of the question) and on which you request more information" you could have the next conclusions:

1. Most of the questioned subjects may apply for state-budget financing sources or use self-financing sources, and a small part of them use the financial aid granted by both, national or international financing institutions.

2. The lack, or the insufficient information on financing programmes as: ISPA, PHARE, Ecolinks, BERD, SAPARD, USAID, World Bank, sources of NGOs as well as the absence of the know-how in the applying procedures.