Examples of using Belgrade process in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Ii. novelties of the belgrade process.
Belgrade Process: objectives of international environmental governance.
Examples of other new databases which have been discovered during Belgrade process.
The recommendation was followed by the Belgrade Process and accepted in the Nairobi-Helsinki Outcome.
The Belgrade Process was undertaken from February 2009 to July 2010 under the aegis of the Governing Council of UNEP.
They are important for improving international environmental governance in the short term, but, to achieve the objectives andfunctions identified by the Belgrade Process, they will be insufficient.
The Belgrade Process options were based on the following, which were identified as the objectives of a system of international environmental governance.
Assessment and messages underpinned mostly by case studies orfindings from research projects; these were identified via the networks used during the Belgrade process and via literature research.
One of the most successful novelties of the Belgrade process was the open internet-based consultation with national experts and other interested communities across the pan-European region.
Having identified the potential system-wide responses above, the Consultative Group considered institutional forms that would best serve to implement those responses and achieve the objectives andfunctions identified during the Belgrade Process.
The Trial of Draža Mihailović et al., or the Belgrade Process, was the 1946 trial of Draža Mihailović and a number of other prominent alleged collaborators for high treason and war crimes committed during WWII.
Decision SS. XI/1 requested the Consultative Group"to consider the broader reform of the international environmental governance system,building on the set of options developed during the Belgrade Process, but remaining open to new ideas.
The Belgrade Process was guided by the principle that form should follow function and produced the objectives and corresponding functions for an international environmental governance system in the context of environmental sustainability and sustainable development.
Having identified the potential system-wide responses above, the Consultative Group considered institutional forms that would best serve to implement those responses and achieve the objectives andfunctions identified during the Belgrade Process.
During the Belgrade Process and in the CoChairs' document on elaboration of ideas for broader reform of international environmental governance(UNEP/CGIEG.2/2/2), various options for broader institutional reforms were put forward, including the following five options.
It aims to provide a deeper analysis of the two options by describing how, or to what extent, they would address the gaps in the current system of international environmental governance, andachieve the objectives identified during the Belgrade Process and by analysing their benefits and disadvantages.
The work of that group, which has come to be known as the"Belgrade Process" in reference to the site of its first meeting, resulted in the identification of some objectives and functions of an international environmental governance system and the elaboration of a"set of options for improving international environmental governance", which were presented to the Governing Council at its eleventh special session.
It contributed to the engagement of in-depth debate within UNEP and the environmental community to identify ways of strengthening the functioning of environmental governance,in particular through the Belgrade Process, referred to in detail below, which provided a substantive basis for the agreement on IEG at the Rio+20 Conference in 2012.
The outcome of the consultative group's meetings came to be known as the Belgrade Process set of options, which identified six key objectives of the international environmental governance system(see box below) and their underlying functions, which were presented to the Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum at its eleventh special session, in February 2010.
First, they could take a decision on the appropriate institutional arrangements for improving international environmental governance based on the broader institutional reform options identified in the Belgrade Process and the Nairobi-Helsinki Outcome as a contribution to the strengthening of the institutional framework for sustainable development.
The Belgrade Process options, the Nairobi-Helsinki Outcome and the preparatory process for the Conference have been important stepping stones along the way, but the Conference itself represents an exceptional opportunity to adopt transformative decisions on the future of environmental governance in the broader context of the institutional framework for sustainable development.
The Consultative Group's work builds upon that of an earlier consultative group of ministers or their high-level representatives(established by Governing Council decision 25/4),known as the"Belgrade Process", which resulted in the identification of some objectives and functions of an international environmental governance system and the development of a set of options for improving international environmental governance, which was presented to the Governing Council at its eleventh special session.
Having considered the objectives andfunctions of an international environmental governance system identified during the Belgrade Process, and after reviewing gaps and options discussed in the cochairs' document on elaboration of ideas on broader international environmental governance reform(UNEP/CGIEG.2/2/2), the Consultative Group identified a number of potential system-wide responses to the challenges in the current system of international environmental governance, including.
Meanwhile, Gashi also chaired the WG on Return within the Direct Dialogue process with Belgrade.
Currently underway is also the implementation of the Regional Housing Programme-- the Sarajevo Process/Belgrade Initiative for Displaced and Internally Displaced Persons.
This progress will be crucial for the broader normalization process between Belgrade and Pristina and their respective European Union integration processes. .
The ministers in Belgrade agreed that the EfE process should.
During the process, Belgrade was represented by President Boris Tadić, Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica, Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremić and Minister for Kosovo Slobodan Samardzić.
The ministers in Belgrade agreed that the EfE process should.
The question of the future of the"Environment for Europe" process after Belgrade was also identified as a crucial one to be addressed.