UN Action Plan on Chornobyl to 2016

Draft for presentation

to the UN Inter-Agency Task Force on Chornobyl

25 April 2008

 

The Chornobyl nuclear accident of 1986 had devastating consequences for people living in the vast territories touched by radioactive fallout. Hundreds of thousands of people were evacuated from the city of Pripyat and other surrounding areas, and millions of people still live in areas officially classified as “contaminated” by radiation. Those who were children at the time of the accident suffer elevated rates of thyroid cancer. The three countries most affected by the accident – Belarus, the Russian Federation, and Ukraine – have spent vast sums tending to the needs of local communities. Ukraine, in addition, has assumed the burden of ensuring that the damaged reactor poses no further threat.

Governments have shouldered the lion’s share of work aimed at overcoming the consequences of the accident. This has been a costly and demanding endeavor, and credit is due for the extent to which the population has been protected and the impact mitigated.

The United Nations (UN) has supported government efforts in a variety of ways. Many UN offices and agencies have been involved in Chornobyl initiatives, including the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations Office for the Coordinator of Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), the World Bank, and the World Health Organization (WHO).

Many civil society organizations, particularly the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), have also contributed to the Chornobyl response, both through emergency and charitable aid and through development-oriented activities.

 

Background: the development approach

 

In recent years a consensus has emerged among affected governments and UN agencies that, after two decades, a “development approach” is the proper way forward on Chornobyl. This approach builds on scientific studies – including the 2005 findings of the UN Chornobyl Forum,1 a joint undertaking by eight UN agencies and the three mostaffected countries – that have demonstrated that the nuclear accident was a “low-dose event” for the vast majority of people living in areas deemed to be contaminated. Most local residents thus face no risk of negative health effects from radiation exposure. Most people in the affected areas, in fact, can safely raise families where they are today.

Local communities still face obstacles, however. Owing in part to the disruption caused by the nuclear accident, many areas suffer social and economic hardship. Communities that had earlier depended on farming and forestry hindered by restrictions limiting commercial activity, and radiation stigma makes produce from the region difficult to market. Investment is scarce; infrastructure is often lacking or neglected. Skilled professionals tend to shun villages for more prosperous places with safer reputations.

Young people often leave the region to seek better opportunities elsewhere. All of these factors were exacerbated the upheaval that followed the break-up of the Soviet Union.

In addition, government provision of a wide range of benefits to millions of people who were deemed as having suffered from the Chornobyl accident had the unintended effect, over time, of creating a “dependency syndrome,” even when fiscal pressures left governments unable to deliver on their pledges. Combined with widespread (and often unfounded) fears about the health impact of radiation, many communities fell into a state of passivity and helplessness. Sociologists dubbed this “Chornobyl victim’s syndrome.”

In recognition of these challenges, the UN made a major shift in strategy. In the place of the emergency humanitarian assistance delivered in the 1990s, the UN opted to focus on social and economic development. What people living in Chornobyl-affected areas needed most, it was concluded, were better economic opportunities, a restored sense of community self-reliance, and the information necessary to overcome fears associated with radiation and to address health threats arising from causes unrelated to Chornobyl.

This shift was outlined in The Human Consequences of the Chornobyl Nuclear Accident:

A Strategy for Recovery, a study commissioned in 2002 by UNDP and UNICEF.

The organizational reflection of this shift in strategy was the transfer, in 2004, of responsibility for UN coordination of Chornobyl activities from UN-OCHA to UNDP.

In the years since this shift in strategy, the development approach has yielded promising results and has the support of the three most-affected governments. There is agreement that, while radiation monitoring and focused health care programs are needed for specific areas and high-risk groups, assistance to most affected people should focus on helping them to rejoin the social and economic mainstream. As UN Secretary-General Ban Kimoon noted in his 2007 report to the General Assembly, “after two decades, a return to normal life is a realistic prospect for most people living in Chornobyl-affected regions.”

 

UN action plan: the rationale

 

The UN General Assembly has endorsed this approach. In a resolution dated 20 November 2007, the General Assembly proclaimed 2006-2016, the third decade after the Chornobyl accident, as the Decade of Recovery and Sustainable Development of the Affected Regions. The resolution requested UNDP to coordinate the efforts of the UN system aimed at implementing the Decade and welcomed UNDP’s preparation of a UN-wide “action plan” for Chornobyl recovery to cover the period through April 2016.

The UN action plan is meant to provide a practical framework for implementation of Decade of Recovery and Sustainable Development for the Affected Regions.

Recognizing that funding for Chornobyl recovery efforts remains limited, it is designed, as the resolution states, “with the aim of maximizing limited resources, avoiding duplication of effort and building on recognized agency mandates and competencies.”

Rather than an exhaustive presentation of a detailed list of projects, the UN action plan is designed to present a concise outline of general principles of engagement by the UN in Chornobyl recovery efforts, along with agency-specific priorities. This in part owing to the fact that agency planning horizons are shorter than the decade, and that the long-term design of specific projects will depend on fresh funding. The action plan is meant to assist in resource mobilization by demonstrating UN-wide consistency and coherence.

The UN action plan in many ways reflects activities already initiated. Indeed, the Decade of Recovery begins in 2006 because the 20th anniversary of the Chornobyl accident showcased the UN-wide consensus surrounding the development approach to recovery.

This draft of the action plan will be reviewed by all UN agencies active in Chornobyl recovery efforts, as well as by the three most-affected governments. An editorial subgroup of the UN Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF) on Chornobyl, composed of representatives of IAEA, UNDP, UNICEF, the World Bank, and WHO, will review comments finalize the plan. The final version will be approved by the next IATF.

 

UN action plan: the vision for 2016

 

Where does the UN see the Chornobyl-affected areas in 2016? In his 2007 report to the General Assembly, the Secretary-General defined the shared goal foreseen in any UN action plan as ensuring that by 2016 “the area fully overcomes the stigma it now suffers, communities take full control of their lives, and normalcy becomes a realistic prospect.” UN assumptions about prevailing conditions include:

· The size of the contaminated territory continues to shrink;

· The radiation safety of members of the public is ensured through compliance with national legislation and international safety standards;

· More than half of the population of affected regions is born after the Chornobyl accident, or has migrated from other regions;

· The migration of young people from rural areas to cities continues and the demography of contaminated areas remains skewed;

National budgetary support for contaminated regions is substantially reduced;

· Restrictions on consumption of certain foods remain in force in regions where the content of radionuclides in some local foodstuffs (e.g., mushrooms, wild berries, and fish) may exceed the national permissible levels;

· Limited radiological monitoring (of foodstuffs and public exposure) is continued in contaminated areas of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine.

Specific UN objectives include that:

· The radiological remediation of populated areas is completed.

· The classification of zones is revisited in accordance with consistent international standards.

· Government programs are differentiated depending on radiation level.

· A substantial part of contaminated land outside the Exclusion Zone is returned to economic activities and infrastructure improvement is permitted.

· The scientific community and environmental organizations achieve a broad consensus in their interpretation of available scientific data.

· The general public and decision makers are adequately informed about the radiological consequences of the Chornobyl accident, the factual levels of exposure, and the contribution of Chornobyl-related doses to the total dose due to natural radiation.

· The affected population regains confidence and trust in scientific information (data and interpretation), delivered through trustworthy local sources.

· Hygienic information, such as precautions in collecting and consumption of potentially contaminated foodstuffs (e.g. mushrooms), is widely disseminated among the population living on contaminated territories.

· The mass media uses factual information for reporting on Chornobyl-related issues.

· The promotion of healthy lifestyles and risk communication (both nonradiological and radiological) are included in the school curriculum and are pursued through a wide range of community-based initiatives.

· The climate for business, investment, and private-sector development (including conditions for small and medium enterprises) is improved in affected areas.

Continued economic growth at the national level and increased investment at the local level stimulates the creation of new jobs and higher incomes.

· The negative “branding” of products originating in Chornobyl-affected areas is gradually overcome through better information and more credible monitoring.

· Communities in affected areas independently define and meet small-scale infrastructure needs, reducing the level of apathy and dependence.

 

UN action plan: principles of UN engagement

To be effective and make maximum use of scarce resources, UN agencies need to agree on a set of shared principles as guidelines for their work on Chornobyl:

· UN efforts support national strategies and follow government priorities. The affected governments have primary responsibility for recovery programs; given their modest resources, UN agencies are at their best when enacting innovative pilot projects that can point the way to government-driven activities on a larger scale; providing expertise and advice when requested; and undertaking advocacy efforts that give a global voice to the development approach to Chornobyl.

· UN agencies need to keep each other informed about their Chornobyl activities. The UN Inter-Agency Task Force on Chornobyl provides a forum for regular updates. Good coordination is essential to avoid duplication and promote synergies. Sub-regional cooperation can help to share success stories.

· The UN Inter-Agency Task Force takes an inclusive approach, extending observer status to other multilateral organizations involved in Chornobyl recovery efforts.

· UN agencies work to deliver a consistent message on the impact of the Chornobyl accident, drawing wherever possible on the findings of the UN Chornobyl Forum. Alarmist communications about radiation are in particular to be avoided.

· Building on their mandates, UN agencies support the “development approach” to recovery and promote a “return to normal life” for affected communities.

 

 

UN Chornobyl Action Plan to 2016 (full document)