DG ENV-NGO Dialogue Group

Transcription

1 DG ENV-NGO Dialogue Group Summary of the Seventh Meeting THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER for Central and Eastern Europe

2 About the REC The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) is a non-partisan, non-advocacy, not-for-profit organisation with a mission to assist in solving environmental problems in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). The Center fulfils this mission by encouraging cooperation among non-governmental organisations, governments, businesses and other environmental stakeholders, by supporting the free exchange of information and by promoting public participation in environmental decision-making. The REC was established in 1990 by the United States, the European Commission and Hungary. Today, the REC is legally based on a Charter signed by the governments of 27 countries and the European Commission, and on an International Agreement with the Government of Hungary. The REC has its headquarters in Szentendre, Hungary, and local offices in each of its 15 beneficiary CEE countries which are: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, FYR Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia and Slovenia. Recent donors are the European Commission and the governments of Albania, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as other inter-governmental and private institutions. The entire contents of this publication are copyright 2003 The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe No part of this publication may be sold in any form or reproduced for sale without prior written permission of the copyright holder ISBN: Published by: The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe Ady Endre ut 9-11, 2000 Szentendre, Hungary Tel: (36-26) , Fax: (36-26) , info@rec.org, Website: Editing: Steven Graning, Design: Patricia Barna and Sylvia Magyar, Photography: Robert Atkinson Printed in Hungary by TypoNova This and all REC publications are printed on recycled paper or paper produced without the use of chlorine or chlorine-based chemicals.

3 DG ENV-NGO Dialogue Group Summary of the Seventh Meeting Brussels, Belgium NOVEMBER 17-19, 2002 Prepared by the NGO Support Programme, The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe Supported by the European Commission Directorate-General Environment THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER for Central and Eastern Europe

4

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 5 Summary of the Sessions Outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development 9 Environmental Enlargement Process and Cooperation in the Balkans 11 Speech by Commissioner Wallström 17 Natura 2000: State of Affairs and the Challenge of Enlargement 23 Structural and Cohesion Funds 25 European Commission s Response to the NGO Position Paper 33 Conclusion and Future of the Dialogue Process 43 Annexes Annex I: NGO Position Paper on Structural and Cohesion Funds 49 Annex II: Agenda 55 Annex III: List of Participants 59 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 3

6 A CRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS CAP CARDS CC CEE DG ELARG DG ENV DG REGIO EAP EC EIA EIB EU GMO IPPC ISPA NGO OLAF REC REReP SAA SAPARD SEA SEE SOP TA TAIEX Common Agricultural Policy Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Democratisation and Stabilisation Candidate Country Central and Eastern Europe European Commission Directorate-General Enlargement European Commission Directorate-General Environment European Commission Directorate-General Regional Policy Environmental Action Programme European Commission Environmental Impact Assessment European Investment Bank European Union Genetically modified organism Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession Non-governmental organisation European Commission European Anti-fraud Office The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe Stabilisation and Accession Agreement Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development Strategic Environmental Assessment South Eastern Europe Sectoral Operational Programme Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Information Exchange 4 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

7 INTRODUCTION Introduction The DG ENV-NGO Dialogue In 1999 a dialogue on the environmental enlargement process and the overall European Union environmental policy was initiated between DG Environment and environmental NGOs from candidate and Balkan countries and the EU. The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) has facilitated the Dialogue process from its beginning. Seven dialogue meetings and five preparatory NGO seminars have taken place in the three years since the DG ENV-NGO Dialogue started. More than 60 organisations from 13 accession countries and the Balkans as well as member states have been involved in the process and have brought in their input and experience. The main goals of this dialogue are to: provide current information and help NGOs from candidate and Balkan countries to improve their understanding of EU environmental policy and the enlargement process; enable a platform for discussion and exchange of opinions between Commission officials and NGOs; and foster cooperation among environmental NGOs and improve their position in front of their own country governments. The Dialogue represents one answer to the need for increased public debate and access to information about the accession process particularly EU environmental policy developments. It has allowed discussions and debates over these key issues, and NGOs have had unique opportunities to voice their opinions directly to policy developers. Among the specific key issues discussed have been the pre-accession funding instruments (Phare, ISPA and SAPARD), the 6 th Environmental Action Plan, ratification of the Aarhus Convention, the European Parliament s view on enlargement and environment, Structural and Cohesion Funds assistance, the Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe, etc. The NGOs have stated that through this process they had received answers to specific questions, understood better the priorities of the EU policy, and exercised pressure on and changed the attitude of the Commission towards them. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 5

8 INTRODUCTION Dialogue Meeting Seven This publication contains the main presentations and discussions from the seventh Dialogue meeting, held on November 17-19, 2002 in Brussels. The main feature of the session was a focus on the future of the Structural and Cohesion Funds in the accession countries. In early October the Dialogue NGOs had met in Szentendre, Hungary to prepare for the Dialogue meeting. At that preparatory seminar they prepared several discussion points in the form of a paper to be used and presented at the November meeting. In this publication the response from the Environment Commissioner to these points can be found along with other discussions and points on the planning of the Structural and Cohesion Funds. Other elements of the session looked at the outcomes of the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, Natura 2000 and the current status of the accession process. More information on this and other Dialogue Meetings can be found on the REC s NGO Support Programme webpages under Networking at < Cerasela Stancu Project Manager NGO Support Programme 6 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

9 Summary of the Sessions

10 8 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

11 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: OUTCOMES OF THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Summary of the Sessions Outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development The long awaited follow-up to the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the World Summit on Sustainable Development took place in Johannesburg, South Africa from August 26 to September 4, The (WSSD) European Commission invited the NGO Dialogue group to choose a representative for the European Civil Society and Private Sector Steering Group, which provided input for defining the EU position for the event. The NGO Dialogue group met at the REC s head office in Szentendre, Hungary on March 10, 2002, to prepare its input into the Steering Group as well as to decide who would represent them at its monthly meetings. Richard Filcak from Initiative-Development Alternatives Slovakia was chosen as the representative. The group s main messages to the Steering Group can be seen in Box 1. During the first meeting of the European Civil Society and Private Sector Steering Group, the following three sets of issues were identified as most relevant for the World Summit: tackling poverty community-based development, sensitive to the natural environment dependency of the local community; changing consumption and production patterns and sustainable management and conservation of natural resources; and strengthening governance good governance (at international, national, regional and local levels) is a pre-condition for sustainable development. JOS DELBEKE DG Environment During the Seventh Dialogue Meeting, Jos Delbeke, Head of DG-Environment s WSSD Task Force, related the main outcomes and achievements of the Summit to the Dialogue members: At the Summit, the EU worked hard for an ambitious, action-oriented outcome with clear and measurable objectives, directed at achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The Implementation Plan and the Political Declaration that were developed in Johannesburg, together with the Doha Development Agenda and the Monterey Consensus, have shaped a global partnership for sustainable development. This partnership includes commitments to increased development assistance and market access for DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 9

12 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: OUTCOMES OF THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT developing countries, good governance and better protection of the environment. Box 2 below gives some specific commitments and outcomes from the Summit. The EU is now focusing its attention on implementing the targets and actions set out in Johannesburg. It has pledged to continue to take the lead in the follow-up process by translating its political ambitions into concrete actions. Water and energy are two key areas for material action, with further progress on the EU initiatives, the promotion of the Coalition of Like-Minded counties on renewable energy, and the development of the 10-year programme framework on sustainable consumption and production. Other actions will be taken in the field of poverty eradication, agriculture and rural development, fisheries, forest management, chemicals, globalisation and trade. For more information on the EU and the World Summit on Sustainable Development, visit <europa.eu.int/comm/environment/wssd>. BOX 1 NGO Dialogue group s main messages to the Steering Group Clear environmental responsibilities must be set for the private sector. The EU should stress the use of environmental impact assessment as an educational tool. Adults need to be taught that they have a choice between the environment and profits. Unsustainable consumption patterns are emerging in Central and Eastern Europe that are clearly linked to economic growth. It should be a priority to decouple these factors. There has been an increasing disparity between rich and poor in candidate countries and the Balkan region in the past 10 years. It should not be forgotten that poverty issues are as important in transition countries as in developing nations. The Johannesburg summit should produce measurable, attainable and implementable targets. BOX 2 World Summit on Sustainable Development Commitments and Outcomes A number of new targets were set, including halving the number of people who lack access to basic sanitation by 2015, and minimising the harm to human health and the environment from the production and use of all chemicals by A commitment was made to reduce the loss of biodiversity significantly by There was a recommitment to begin the implementation of national strategies on sustainable development by A commitment was made to halt the decline of fish stocks and restore them to sustainable levels no later than There was an agreement to increase urgently and substantially the global share of renewable energy sources. In addition, the EU has launched a coalition of governments who are willing to set themselves targets and timeframes for the increase of renewables in the energy mix. There was an agreement, based on the EU proposal, for the development of a 10-year framework for programmes on sustainable consumption and production. Industrialised countries have agreed to take the lead in this global effort to correct current unsustainable patterns and help developing countries put in place policies and tools to this end. On globalisation, concrete actions were agreed upon to enhance the role of trade for sustainable development, for example by encouraging trade in environmentally friendly and organic products from developing countries and by strengthening international action for corporate responsibility. 10 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

13 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND COOPERATION IN THE BALKANS Summary of the Sessions Environmental Enlargement Process and Cooperation in the Balkans The following is a summary of the speech delivered by Deputy Director General Jean- Francois Verstrynge, who addressed a number of current items including the state of EU enlargement, progress in environmental legislation, administrative capacity, accession priorities, the process of Stabilisation and Association, and the prospects for future cooperation between the EU and regional NGOs. Enlargement Progress in Negotiations November 2002 As far as the 10 accession countries are concerned nearly all negotiation issues on the environment chapter have been settled. The only significant outstanding matter is the new (2001) Large Combustion Plants directive, where negotiations are still ongoing with Poland, the Czech Republic and Lithuania. This directive requires important investments to upgrade a large number of power plants to meet air pollution targets. Limited transition periods can therefore be negotiated. Negotiations are still ongoing with Bulgaria and Romania, both of which need to prepare detailed justifications and implementation plans for the transition periods that they have requested. Technical consultations are planned over the next year. An updated roadmap, and a revised and enhanced pre-accession strategy should be adopted at the forthcoming Copenhagen summit in December for these countries. The Commission considers that as of the date of the first accessions, the financial assistance to Bulgaria and Romania should increase according to their progress in implementing the roadmaps and their absorption capacity. Progress in Legislation The regular reports have generally been positive for the environment: important progress in nearly all countries has been made in adopting legislation. For the 12 negotiating countries, more than 70 percent of the environmental acquis have been adopted. The percentage is even higher if only the 10 front-runners are considered. By the end of 2002, nearly all should be on the statute books for these countries. Romania and Bulgaria have also been busy adopting a lot of legislation. Turkey has made some progress on the legislative side environmental impact assessment (EIA) and nature protection and also strengthened its administration for inspection and provincial government. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 11

14 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND COOPERATION IN THE BALKANS Ten candidate countries have ratified the Kyoto protocol: Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Lithuania has not ratified it yet. Poland has completed the internal process but has not deposited the instruments of ratification in New York. Turkey is only an observer to the protocol. Peer Review Assessments of Administrative Capacity Peer reviews have been conducted in all 10 accession countries. Similar visits are planned to Bulgaria and Romania in the coming year. Several main weaknesses have been identified, mainly related to integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) and waste management, but there have also been encouraging developments. IPPC permitting Nearly all countries are behind schedule and have lower levels of administration that are generally ill equipped for the tasks they have been given. Integrated permitting is often a new concept requiring close cooperation between departments. Waste Again, regional and local authorities often have a key role to play, but both they and the central authorities are understaffed. It has also been identified that hazardous waste problems are underestimated. Also, some countries have delays in preparing waste plans. In conclusion, waste management needs to be given higher political priority. Encouraging progress Several positive developments have also been noted. For example, improvements have been seen in air quality management, where most countries have allocated significant resources over a relatively long period of time. Progress has also been made in strengthening administrative capacity, particularly in the 10 accession countries. Increases in staff in environment ministries have been made or are planned in all countries. Responsibilities of environment ministries are generally better defined. However, there is still a long way to go in this area, as shown in the results of the peer reviews carried out this spring and summer. Conclusion Significant reinforcement is necessary in the fields of industrial pollution control and waste management, particularly for local and regional administrations. The Commission has acknowledged this fact in its recently published strategy paper by including the environment among the limited number of policy areas (six in total) 1 to be given priority by the envisaged Transition Facility on Institution Building. Priorities up to Accession Technical assistance for administrative strengthening will continue until accession and beyond through the new transitional, institution-building instrument that the Commission has proposed, which includes the environment. 12 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

15 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND COOPERATION IN THE BALKANS In addition, the Commission will continue to monitor commitments closely. Any delays will be pointed out to the countries at an early stage. A comprehensive monitoring report looking at the progress made in implementing the commitments will be issued six months before accession. In 2003, preparations for the implementation of the Structural and Cohesion Funds following accession will be stepped up. The assistance available for environmental investments in the new member states is likely to increase substantially (possibly a threefold increase) compared to the pre-accession period (currently EUR 500 million from the Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession [ISPA] and around EUR million from Phare and the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development [SAPARD] combined). Absorption of these funds is a matter of concern due to weak programming and project preparation capacity in the field of environment. Stabilisation and Association Process in the Balkans Political framework The European Union s policy towards the countries of South Eastern Europe is the Stabilisation and Association process, which covers: Albania; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Croatia; Yugoslavia; and FYR Macedonia. JEAN-FRANCOIS VERSTRYNGE Deputy Director General DG Enironment The cornerstone of the policy is the Stabilisation and Association Agreements (SAAs), which form the legal basis for dealings with each individual country. These agreements oblige each country to cooperate on a regional basis. The Stabilisation and Association process is the EU s contribution to the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe that involves a wide range of countries and international financial institutions. The Stability Pact and the Stabilisation and Association process are often confused. It is important to understand that the two are different. Finance from the EU to support the Stabilisation and Association process is provided through the Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Democratisation and Stabilisation (CARDS) financial regulation. From this source, the Commission will finance the main reconstruction efforts in the region. Political developments Stabilisation and Association agreements have been negotiated with FYR Macedonia and Croatia. In October 2002 the External Affairs Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations for an SAA with Albania. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 13

16 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND COOPERATION IN THE BALKANS More than EUR 100 million in technical assistance for the Balkans has been secured for the period This decision recognises the progress that Albania has made over recent years in implementing reforms. Albania will be required to take measures concurrently to build up its capacity to implement the agreement. Therefore, further progress depends on the Albanian government continuing the process of reform. The environment is a key component of this process. This is reflected in the SAAs that have already been signed. More than EUR 100 million in technical assistance for the Balkans has been secured for the period , which includes a regional component of EUR 8 million. The details still need to be finalised. The assistance will be used to build administrative capacity, to support the reinforcement of civil society and to reduce or remove many of the current environmental threats to health. Assistance is also used to promote regional cooperation. The first two years of the Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe (REReP) have been financed. Funding has been secured for the next two years, but will depend on successful output from the first two years. The network of environmental enforcement agencies that was set up under REReP will be continued, which will bring it closer to its EU equivalent, the European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of Environmental Law (IMPEL). Supporting the aim of bringing the countries of South Eastern Europe closer to the structures of the EU, it continues to support the participation of these countries in the activities of the European Environment Agency. Although membership may be some way off, the aim is to develop closer ties between the Agency and the Balkans. Regional environmental support Three other ways of supporting environmental protection in the region have been identified. First, there is an action programme supporting European environmental NGOs. Second, on a much smaller level, but under the umbrella of REReP, there is a project to support the South Eastern European NGO network from the DG Environment budget. The aim of the initiative is to link a number of national NGOs across the region to help address their common problems by adopting a common front. Third, regional environmental support is provided through the LIFE-Third Countries programme. Although only Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia are eligible, this programme nevertheless provides a useful source of assistance. As an example, in the 2002 exercise, five of the 16 projects selected are from the Balkan region, and this will provide an extra EUR 2 million of assistance in the field of environment a small but valuable contribution to environmental protection. Future of the Dialogue and Cooperation with NGOs As in previous years, the NGO group will be invited to the Green Week event in Brussels on June 2-6, Apart from this event, there will be a final meeting for the group before the first wave of enlargement takes place in This meeting is planned for the end of However, this will not be the end of DG Environment s cooperation with the NGO group. Rather it will evolve and take on different forms. At previous meetings we have discussed the NGOs wish to receive assistance for capacity building and to be able to participate in twinning projects, such as activities with NGOs from the member states. DG Environment is currently investigating the possibility of sup- 14 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

17 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND COOPERATION IN THE BALKANS porting such projects involving all candidate countries through the pre-accession instruments, in particular Phare. If we are successful this project will be launched in late The objective of this project would be to increase NGOs administrative capacity by having organisations from member states share their experiences with them. This will help the NGOs in many ways. First, it will help the NGOs access a wider range of financial sources. It will improve their capacity to manage projects and, therefore, allow them to participate in other European Community programmes, such as LIFE and Activity Funding for NGOs. Second, it will help them to improve communication with the public and industry, and to collaborate better with environmental authorities. Third, it will help NGOs make effective contributions to the implementation of EU environmental acquis. Those NGOs coming from countries joining the EU in 2004 will be helped into the loop of activities for member state NGOs. After accession, there will be new possibilities for NGOs from the new member states. NGOs can participate in a number of different expert groups and advisory committees organised by DG Environment. DG Environment is organising these meetings to provide NGOs with experience and to allow stakeholders to participate in the policyshaping process. MAGDA STOCZKIEWICZ, CEE Bankwatch Network and Friends of the Earth, Netherlands DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 15

18 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ENLARGEMENT PROCESS AND COOPERATION IN THE BALKANS 2003 will again be a very busy year on the enlargement front, as well as for environmental cooperation with the wider Europe. NGOs from member states also participate in ad hoc meetings with DG Environment to find opportunities for synergistic cooperation in, for example, planned information and awareness campaigns. There is no reason why future meetings of this kind could not also involve participants from NGOs in candidate and Balkan countries even before accession! For example, all members of the NGO group are already invited to participate in preparations for the Green Week. This could be done by proposing seminars, events or actions for the Green Week conference or exhibition here in Brussels, or through launching a European Green Day locally. For those organisations that are selected for funding under the NGO Action Programme, multilateral meetings are held with Commissioner Wallstrom. The ambition is to hold such sessions twice a year. The meetings could touch upon anything from EU policies, programmes and initiatives, to NGO relations and funding. As with the NGO Dialogue, NGOs propose the agenda for these meetings. Conclusion 2003 will again be a very busy year on the enlargement front, as well as for environmental cooperation with the wider Europe. NGOs can all make a contribution to ensure success: Accession countries must show that they are making progress in implementing the commitments to which they have agreed. Preparations for the Structural Funds must be given very serious attention. A new impetus has been given to cooperation with the remaining candidate countries including increased financial assistance for the environment. The future of pan-european environmental cooperation will be decided in Kiev in May. This will also influence the Balkan cooperation agenda. It is also necessary to begin reflecting on how to pursue NGO cooperation after the 2004 wave of accession. I have presented the outline of a few ideas, which we could also discuss. Thank you for your attention. 16 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

19 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: SPEECH BY THE COMMISSIONER Summary of the Sessions Speech by Commissioner Margot Wallström EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström is an active participant in and proponent of the DG ENV-NGO Dialogue meetings. In 2002 she spoke about sustainable development, climate change and enlargement, along with other relevant environmental matters. She also reminded NGOs of the possibilities for funding under the Commission s NGO programme. The following is the text of that speech. Ladies and Gentlemen, First of all a warm welcome to Brussels for the seventh NGO Dialogue meeting. You have a full programme and will have the opportunity to discuss both European and global issues in detail today and tomorrow. I would like to take this opportunity to share my views with you on some of the key environmental issues and events which have taken place since the last time we met. First, I would like to share my views on the outcome of the World Summit in Johannesburg. And then I want to take some time and reflect on what we have achieved so far in the current enlargement process and what we can expect, post-accession. I understand that you are particularly interested in the use of Structural and Cohesion Funds. NGOs play an important role in this context and I am interested to hear your views. MARGOT WALLSTRÖM, Commissioner for Environment, ANDRAS KROLOPP, CEEWEB, Hungary PAVLA JINDROVA, Centre for Community Organising, Czech Republic (right to left) Johannesburg/Sustainable Development I believe that we can be satisfied with the result of Johannesburg. We renewed our global commitment to sustainable development. The results of the World Summit, together with the Doha Development Agenda (trade) and the Monterrey Consensus (financing for development), have shaped a global partnership. This is a partnership that commits us to increase aid and facilitate trade for developing countries, to improve governance and to work towards better protection of the environment. Our challenge now is to convert all the positive energy generated at Johannesburg into concrete, results- DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 17

20 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: SPEECH BY THE COMMISSIONER Key areas for EU action are water and energy and the development of the 10-year framework of programmes on sustainable consumption and production. oriented action. The European Union intends to continue taking the lead in the followup. The Spring European Council next March will look at how we have started to implement commitments made at the Summit. Key areas for EU action are water and energy and the development of the 10-year framework of programmes on sustainable consumption and production. Other actions will be taken in the field of poverty eradication, agriculture and rural development, fisheries, forest management, chemicals, globalisation and trade. Climate Change The World Summit in Johannesburg gave a push to efforts on climate change and the Kyoto protocol. I was very pleased that parties to the protocol once again committed themselves to its ratification and entry into force at the earliest possible date and urged others to join as soon as possible. We have to act quickly. The rise in average temperatures accompanied by extreme weather events desertification and soil degradation on the one hand, storms and heavy rainfalls accompanied by flooding on the other has now become a more frequent feature of our lives. The recent floods in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Germany have shown that we cannot continue to pretend that these are single, unrelated events that we remedy and then forget about. Flooding in the Czech Republic I went to the Czech Republic together with Romano Prodi during the flooding. The damage we saw in Prague was disastrous and the costs will be substantial. Luckily the impact on the environment has been limited, with no significant toxic impacts on the Elbe River. We need to be better placed to respond to this type of disaster in the future. Every day we are confronted with an increasing number of natural disasters with a higher number of victims and economic losses. At a proposal of the Commission, the Council has adopted a Solidarity Fund of EUR 1 billion to benefit member states and candidate countries facing natural disasters. But we need to do more to prevent such disasters in the future. The new water framework directive will be an important tool. In addition, the Commission has started to work on an integrated strategy on prevention, preparedness and response to natural and technological risks. We want to better protect citizens and the environment by identifying risks, raising public awareness and adopting preventive measures. This will build on national efforts, and we will coordinate our efforts with the resources that member states can provide to prevent disasters. In this context, we are launching an extensive debate that will involve experts from member states and candidate countries, as well as representatives of civil society. A first meeting with experts from the member states, European Economic Area (EEA) countries and the candidate countries will be convened in December. Only with the contribution of all the partners is it possible to achieve better results to protect the European citizens and the environment. Again, we have to look at the global picture. Six months ago the EU ratified the Kyoto protocol, the only multilateral instrument to effectively tackle climate change. The 18 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

21 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: SPEECH BY THE COMMISSIONER JON PARKER, DG Environment, MARGOT WALLSTRÖM, Commissioner for Environment, ANDRAS KROLOPP, CEEWEB, Hungary PAVLA JINDROVA, Centre for Community Organising, Czech Republic (right to left) European Commission, together with the member states, is now in the process of implementing it, which requires us to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 8 percent by 2012 (from 1990 levels). So far ten candidate countries have ratified the Kyoto protocol and have all worked closely together with the EU during its negotiations. Our recent assessment, however, shows that without additional measures we will fail to reach our target. Therefore, the European Commission has set up the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP). It provides the basis for policy measures that the Commission has already put forward and will continue to do so in the future. And last but not least we need to look at measures that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-effective way. A proposal for an EU-wide emissions trading scheme is now under discussion in the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. The adoption of such an instrument could reduce the costs of implementing the Kyoto protocol in the European Union by more than 30 percent. Enlargement Let us now turn to the recent happenings at the European level. As you probably have followed in the press, the way is now open for 10 candidate countries to join the Union in At the Brussels EU Council, the financing issues related to enlargement have also been agreed upon. The next step will be at the European Summit in Copenhagen on December 12-13, 2002, when negotiations should be concluded. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 19

22 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: SPEECH BY THE COMMISSIONER MARGOT WALLSTRÖM, Commissioner for Environment, ANDRAS KROLOPP, CEEWEB, Hungary PAULA JINDROVA, Centre for Community Organising, Czech Republic (right to left) The journey has at times been rocky, but looking back, a lot has been achieved since the accession negotiations on environment were launched. At the start of the negotiations, many feared that the environment would be one of the most difficult areas for many reasons the sheer amount of legislation (around 270 laws), the costs and the time factor. In a relatively short period the candidate countries have had to pass hundreds of laws through their national legislatures and foresee necessary investments not only in infrastructure but in their administrations to guarantee the implementation of laws. All of the 10 accession countries have now provisionally closed the environment chapter. We have granted some transitional periods, mainly for the directives requiring heavy investment, such as wastewater, water and industrial pollution. But in doing so, we have made sure that there are implementation plans with timetables, intermediate milestones and financing plans in place to ensure that the laws are indeed implemented. Negotiations on new legislation are settled with most countries, except for the new 2001 Large Combustion Plants Directive with the Czech Republic, Poland and Lithuania. This directive requires important investments to upgrade a large number of power plants to meet air pollution targets. Limited transition periods can, therefore, be negotiated. With Bulgaria and Romania, negotiations on environment are ongoing. The recently published Regular Reports reflect the important progress in nearly all 20 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

23 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: SPEECH BY THE COMMISSIONER countries on legislation adopted. For the 12 negotiating countries more than 70 percent of all environmental laws have been adopted. By the end of 2002 nearly all should be on the statute books in the accession countries. However, the Regular Reports also emphasise the need to strengthen administrative capacity to overcome bottlenecks in effective implementation. As we all know a legal act is only as good as its implementation. Visit to Hungary In order to get a picture myself on what is going on in the countries, I recently went to Hungary. From what I saw, I can confirm the positive findings of the Regular Report. Some challenges remain, however, including further strengthening of the administration, modernising the waste management system, meeting water standards and improving air quality. As in Hungary, the main focus in all candidate countries should be on implementation and strengthening administrative capacity. There is still a long way to go and significant reinforcement is necessary in the fields of industrial pollution control and waste management, particularly regarding the local and regional administrations. This is why the Commission will continue to support institutional building on environment in the new member states even after accession through a special transition facility. Role of NGOs Your role as environmental watchdogs can help raise capacity by pointing out shortcomings and stimulating debates on solutions. We want to help you and strengthen your role in this respect through our NGO programme for the candidate countries and the Balkans. So far, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia have signed a memorandum of understanding which fixes the detailed rules for participation in the programme. Some Balkan countries Croatia, FYR Macedonia and Yugoslavia have done the same. Only a few NGOs applied for the programme in But for the 2003 call for proposals, the situation looks much brighter. A number of countries have already signed the necessary agreements for participation, and more are in the pipeline. It is also really encouraging to see how many NGOs have demonstrated interest. Structural Funds Now let us look forward to the financial resources available for environmental investments after accession. The good news is that there will possibly be a threefold increase for the environment under the Cohesion and Structural Funds for new member countries for The Structural and Cohesion Funds are essential instruments for promoting environmental protection and sustainable development across the European territory. By financing a sustainable regional development, we can ensure that environmental protection goes hand in hand with economic growth and job creation. The benefits of improving the environment in the new member states are enormous. Better air quality as a result of the requirement of EU directives could reduce the number of premature deaths due to air pollution by 15,000 cases, with 7,000 cases in DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 21

24 Poland alone. The cases of chronic bronchitis could fall by 43,000. Households in the new member states will also have access to cleaner drinking water, and the level of treatment of wastewater will increase, in some cases by as much as 70 percent. Over 20 years, there could be a 50 percent reduction in waste volumes deposited in landfills, to a large extent due to more recycling. However, in order to achieve these goals I think it is essential to focus the Structural and Cohesion Fund investments in urban wastewater, waste management and integrated pollution prevention and control. We need to assist the new member states in implementing the environmental legislation in these particular areas, which are cost intensive, and for which most of the transition periods have been granted. These funds will therefore become an essential instrument in helping new member states to honour the commitments made during the negotiations. You have an important role to play in ensuring that the environment remains central in the use of these funds. And now I look forward to listening to your ideas and concerns on the Structural and Cohesion Funds and to a lively discussion. Thank you for your attention. 22 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

25 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: IMPLEMENTATION OF NATURA Summary of the Sessions Natura 2000: State of Affairs and the Challenge of Enlargement The following text is a summary of the presentation given by DG Environment s Nicholas Hanley (Head of Unit B.2 [Nature and Biodiversity]). The Natura 2000 network is a chief objective of the EU s Habitats Directive. More information can be found at <europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/natura>. Progress of the Natura 2000 Network Setting up the network, which will cover about 15 percent of the EU s territory, has been delayed. The Commission is currently about to finalise the Alpine biogeographic list, and others will follow during 2003 and The focus is already shifting from the site selection exercise to site management. Many examples of good management have been financed through the LIFE-Nature programme. What is Special about the Natura 2000 Network? It has clear objectives. By taking a pan-european approach to its objectives, the protection of natural areas, biodiversity and specific species does not stop at national boundaries. Annexes specify what is to be protected (e.g. habitats). It is based on the best available scientific research. It is focused on management and integration through human activities. Results are obligatory. Although the network imposes legal obligations, it does not replace national or regional conservation objectives. Enlargement a window of opportunity Natural values in the candidate countries are in general better preserved than in the member states. However, pressures will increase with further economic development, and therefore a quick and complete implementation of Natura 2000 from the very beginning can contribute to the protection of this natural richness. Enlargement is an excellent opportunity for nature conservation. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 23

26 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: REGIONAL UPDATE What will be in the Accession treaty about Nature conservation? No transition periods will be awarded for Natura 2000 because: nature conservation directives are horizontal legislation and therefore need immediate attention; capacity building and scientific research are needed, but not heavy investments; and legal clarity is important. There is no doubt that there are challenges ahead. Preparatory efforts are under way in all candidate countries, some of which are far along. Annexes of the Habitats and Birds Directive To be effective in an enlarged EU, the targets of conservation must be amended. A transparent, scientific evaluation of proposals has recently taken place, and 20 new habitat types and about 160 new species including 13 new bird species will join the Annexes of Birds and Habitats Directive once the first 10 countries join the Union. Three new biogeographic regions (Pannonia, Steppic and Black Sea) have been established. The integration of candidate countries into the work of the Commission member state committees and working groups has begun. From now to enlargement As a general principle, all new investment in the candidate countries must comply with the aquis communautaire. Regarding ISPA and Phare funding: in the absence of Natura 2000 sites, important bird areas, Ramsar sites, Emerald sites and nationally protected sites shall be treated as if they were Natura 2000 sites. This approach will help ensure that areas with important species and habitats are not destroyed by new development in the lead-up to accession. In addition, the LIFE-Nature funding programme is open to candidate countries and five are already participating. 24 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

27 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS Summary of the Sessions Structural and Cohesion Funds The main focus of the seventh Dialogue meeting was the developments of EU Structural and Cohesion Funds in the accession countries. During the first and second days of the Dialogue a number of presentations were made by DG-ENV and DG-REGIO staff on the subject of the transition from pre-accession funding to the Structural and Cohesion Funds (see agenda in Annex II). The main points presented are summarised below. Pre-accession Assistance Three instruments were established specifically to assist the applicant countries in their preparations for joining the European Union: Phare, the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (SAPARD) and the Instruments for Structural Programmes for Pre-accession (ISPA). Summary of Phare Originally created to assist Poland and Hungary in 1989, the Phare programme soon came to encompass the 10 candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe: Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Romania, helping them through a period of massive economic restructuring and political change. In 1993, Phare support was reoriented, including a marked expansion of support to infrastructure investment. Phare funds now focus entirely on the pre-accession priorities highlighted in each country s accession partnership. In 1999, Phare s focus shifted with the emergence of the SAPARD and ISPA programmes. The liberated Phare funds were redirected towards issues of economic and social cohesion. More information about the Phare programme can be found at <europa.eu.int/ comm/enlargement/pas/phare/intro.htm> Summary of ISPA The ISPA programme was established to finance large investment projects in the sectors of environment and transport. The various ISPA national programmes have been remarkably successful. For both the environment and transport sectors, the grant rate has been 65 percent, with an absorption rate of 73 percent (82 percent for transport and 63 percent for environment). Figure 1 indicates the percentage of the total number of ISPA grants that were signed in for each country. For the total committed during per country, see Figure 2. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 25

28 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS FIGURE 1 Total ISPA Allocation: Projects Signed Percentage per country (total ISPA grant for projects signed in ) Slovakia 4.38% Romania 25.76% Slovenia 1.14% Bulgaria 8.88% Czech Republic 4.35% Estonia 2.09% Poland 35.6% Hungary 8.56% Latvia 5.58% Lithuania 3.65% FIGURE 2 ISPA Projects Country Committed in Committed in Committed in % % Bulgaria 210,840, ,570, ,411, Czech Republic 136,895,725 80,534, ,429,761 6,76 Estonia 58,141,384 30,362, ,503, Hungary 178,766,703 94,133, ,899, Latvia 94,806,437 46,549, ,355, Lithuania 102,707,045 61,180, ,887, Poland 713,524, ,785, ,076,309, Romania 484,856, ,553, ,410, Slovakia 90,517,420 54,135, ,652, Slovenia 35,654,575 16,645, ,299, Total 2,106,711,569 1,107,449,262 3,214,160, DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

29 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS FIGURE 3 ISPA Sector Distribution 2002 Committed in 2002 Country Decentralisation Environment Transport Bulgaria Czech Republic 29.97* Estonia Hungary Latvia Lithuania Poland Romania Slovakia Slovenia Average * Czech flood relief In an effort to balance transport development with environmental concerns, ISPA funds the two evenly, as seen in Figure 3. Within the environmental sector, the largest share of funding goes toward developing sewage networks and treatment plants, while transport funding goes almost entirely to the separate development of railways and roads. See Figures 4 and 5 for the precise percentages. For more information on ISPA, visit <europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/applicants/index_en.htm>. Financing Post-2004 All beneficiary countries will receive more funds after the anticipated accession of 10 of the candidate countries in The Cohesion Fund will likely have eight beneficiary countries in 2004, and the European Council agreed to EUR 23 billion for structural operations. According to the ISPA Regulation, funding should also increase for those countries not in the first wave of enlargement. Successful spending under ISPA and the Cohesion Fund from 2004 to 2006 will be crucial to a strong negotiating position for regional assistance after See Figure 6 for more details on what to expect from the Structural and Cohesion Funds in the next few years. Figure 7 lists some critical and strategic issues regarding Structural Fund programming. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 27

30 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS FIGURE 4 Environment : Percentage per subsector Based on total ISPA grant for projects signed in Drinking Drinking and Drinking Sewage Solid waste water pipes/ sewage water and sewage network collection plants water and treatment solid waste plant FIGURE 5 Transport : Percentage per susbsector Based on total ISPA grant for projects signed in Airport Rail Rail and road Road DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

31 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS FIGURE 6 Timing for Structural and Cohesion Funds What does the future hold for the Structural and Cohesion Funds? EUR 23 billion for ; Enlargement in 2004 (probably in May); Extremely short programming period; Legal basis exists upon accession only; Negotiation of programming documents during 2003; Formal adoption only after accession. FIGURE 7 Critical and Strategic Issues in Structural Fund Programming Programming periods will likely only be up to 2.5 years. In many cases there is no (or virtually no) experience in programmes like the Structural Funds. Lack of absorption may have repercussions on subsequent programming periods. Administrative capacity needs to be built up in many cases. Financial management and control mechanisms must be developed. Formal adoption only after accession. Objectives of the Structural Funds The first objective of the Structural Funds helping underdeveloped areas is the main priority of the EU s cohesion policy. In an effort to promote harmonious development and narrow the gap between the development levels of the various regions, more than two-thirds of the current appropriations of the Structural Funds (more than EUR 135 billion) are allocated to areas where the gross domestic product is below 75 percent of the Community average. Some 50 regions nearly 22 percent of Europe s population are covered in the period The second objective is to revitalise areas facing structural difficulties, whether industrial, rural, urban, or stemming from a dependence on fisheries. Though situated in regions whose development level is close to the Community average, such areas are faced with different types of socio-economic difficulties that are often the source of high unemployment. Partnership Principle in Structural Funds The legal basis for the partnership principle is contained in Council Regulation (EC No 1260/1999 of June 21, 1999), which lays down the general provisions of the Structural Funds, notably that: DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 29

32 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS FIGURE 8 Key Provisions for the Partnership Principle of Article 8 of Regulation 1260/99 Community actions shall complement or contribute to corresponding national operations. They shall be drawn up in close consultation, hereinafter referred to as the "partnership, between the Commission and the Member State, together with the authorities and bodies designated by the Member State within the framework of its national rules and current practices, namely: the regional and local authorities and other competent public authorities; the economic and social partners; and any other relevant competent bodies within this framework. In designating the most representative partnership at national, regional, local or other level, the Member State shall create a wide and effective association of all the relevant bodies, according to national rules and practice, taking account of the need to promote equality between men and women and sustainable development through the integration of environmental protection and improvement requirements. Partnership shall cover the preparation, financing, monitoring and evaluation of assistance. Member States shall ensure the association of the relevant partners at the different stages of programming, taking account of the time limit for each stage. In application of the principle of subsidiarity, the implementation of assistance shall be the responsibility of the Member States... Each year, the Commission shall consult the European-level organisations representing the social partners about the structural policy of the Community. FIGURE 9 Other Important Provisions from Regulation 1260/99 From Article 15: 2. The plans shall be submitted by the Member State to the Commission after consultation with the partners, who shall express their views within a period of time consistent with the deadline set in the second subparagraph. From Article 16: The plans submitted under Objectives 1, 2 and 3... shall include: (d) an account of arrangements made to consult partners. From Article 17: Each Community support framework shall include arrangements for involving the partners in the Monitoring Committees described in Article 35. From Article 35: Monitoring Committees shall be set up by the Member State, in agreement with the managing authority after consultation with the partners. The partners shall promote the balanced participation of women and men. 30 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

33 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS Whereas the action of the Community should be complementary to, or intended to contribute to, the action of Member States; whereas, in order to ensure significant added value, partnership should be strengthened; whereas this concerns the regional and local authorities, the other competent authorities, including those responsible for the environment and for the promotion of equality between men and women, the economic and social partners and other competent bodies; whereas the relevant partners shall be associated in the preparation, monitoring and evaluation of assistance. Of particular importance is Article 8 of Regulation 1260/99. Figure 8 lists the most important provisions as related to the partnership principle, and Figure 9 lists relevant provisions from other articles of the same regulation. Decentralising programme management to the member states increases the need to involve actors other than the national authorities, especially in the monitoring committees (which now have an expanded role). At an operational level, the partners practical knowledge is drawn upon, both in relation to the local region and to the socioeconomic problems that need to be addressed. It is crucial to the success of any involvement to ensure that the partners add sufficient value to the endeavour to merit their participation. It therefore becomes extremely important that: members of the monitoring committee are chosen by their organisation on the basis of their specific competence and real understanding of the issues at stake and the area concerned; participation in the work of the monitoring committees is planned in a pro-active working spirit of partnership, which includes helping to select those investments that offer the greatest value-added for the region s development; the Committee members liase regularly with their organisations so that transparency is increased and they can benefit from the widest possible range of skills and experience; and a genuine understanding of the issues and the local area and a pro-active and practical approach will be especially necessary during the mid-term evaluation and when allocating the performance reserve. ANDRAS TOTH, Clean Air Action Group, Hungary GUENTER RAAD, DG Environment (left to right) Lessons from Early Stages of Programming for The definition of partnership is not uniform. It sometimes differs even between programmes in the same country. This is one consequence of the subsidiarity principle. The rights accorded to the partners in the monitoring committee are similarly varied. Despite their participation, they often have a different status vis-à-vis the other committee members, either because they are not entitled to vote or have restricted voting rights, or because their role is defined as consultative or informative. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 31

34 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS Monitoring committees will play a more important role in than in the preceding period. In particular, the committees must approve the criteria for selecting projects, one area in which all the partners will undoubtedly make their presence felt, whatever their status on the committee. This assumption will be verified during the interim evaluation for which standard specifications have been prepared with the member states and in which partnership is one of the elements whose impact must be evaluated. Role of DG ENV in the Structural and Cohesion Funds In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the Commission delegates control over the Structural and Cohesion Funds as much as possible to the member states. It is therefore up to the countries to decide how to administer the funds and how much to involve NGOs in the process. Nevertheless, DG Environment encourages practices and policies that ensure that attention is paid to environmental considerations. Ex-ante environmental evaluations are a key component of the preparations of programming documents for the current round of the Structural Funds for DG Environment will encourage the use of its Handbook on Environmental Assessment of Regional Development Plans and EU Structural Funds for the period. DG Environment will also continue to ensure that the recommendations resulting from the evaluations, especially those that refer to Community legislation and policy, are duly taken into consideration in the final programming documents. Although the member states draft their own programming documents, they are only approved after an intensive negotiation phase based on a mandate approved by all Commission services including DG Environment with the necessary modifications subsequently made by the member states. The involvement of regional and national environmental authorities in the proposed implementation of the Structural Funds has been a central plank in DG Environment s strategy in the negotiations for the period of for the current member states, and DG Environment intends to continue this cooperation. NGOs should encourage their respective countries to establish national structures for the Structural Funds, such as environmental networks or specific working groups, which are eligible for support from the technical assistance budgets. In developing Agenda 2000, the Commission stressed that the implementation of the Structural Funds can successfully promote the process of environmental integration and provide transparent information. The most prominent mechanisms for achieving these goals include: high quality strategic assessments and evaluations at all relevant stages of programme design and implementation; a partnership as wide-ranging as possible that involves environmental authorities, crosses sectors and operates at all relevant geographic levels; a greater share of Community co-funding for environmentally friendly operations; decentralised management of global grants close to the beneficiaries; and the application of the polluter-pays principle. 32 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

35 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE NGO POSITION PAPER Summary of the Sessions European Commission s Response to the NGO Position Paper During a preparatory seminar on October 5-6, 2002 at the REC in Szentendre, Hungary, the NGO Dialogue group composed a position paper entitled, Promoting Sustainability in Structural Funds Assistance in Future Member States, and presented an abstract of the paper to Commissioner Wallstrom. The following the Commissioner s response. The NGO position paper can be found in its entirety in Annex I. Dear Members of the NGO Dialogue Group, During our last meeting of the NGO Dialogue, on November 18, 2002 in Brussels, you presented to me an abstract of your group's position paper on the EU's Structural and Cohesion Funds, which will become available to the countries after accession in Because of the limited time available at the meeting, we agreed that I would come back to the paper in writing. One request you have addressed to the Commission is that it should provide strict rules on how the Structural Funds are programmed and implemented. As already discussed during the meeting, the general Structural Funds Regulation for the period provides for the sharing of responsibility between the member states and the Commission. It is not possible to give a role to the Commission that is not conferred by the existing Structural Funds Regulation. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, all member states are treated equally by the Commission. Secondly, following the principle of subsidiarity, the Structural Funds are administered by the beneficiary member states in a decentralised way. Therefore, it is largely up to the member states to organise the management of Structural Funds programmes and to determine the extent to which environmental NGOs are involved. However, all countries have to follow the partnership provisions laid down in Article 8 of the Structural Funds General Regulation, requiring that the designated partners be involved in all stages of preparation and implementation. I would, therefore, strongly recommend that you also address your concerns to your national authorities. I will certainly support your concerns and address them to your governments during highlevel meetings and my country visits whenever possible. MARGOT WALLSTRÖM, Commissioner for Environment DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 33

36 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE NGO POSITION PAPER In addition, I would like to make you aware of a new legal instrument which will in due course strengthen the role of environmental NGOs in the preparation and adoption of plans and programmes. The objective of the new Directive on Strategic Environmental Assessment is to provide for a high level of protection of the environment and to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations in the preparation and adoption of plans and programmes. In the Commission's view, these include the national development plans required for the programming of Structural Funds. This Directive provides a framework in which to carry out consultation with the public, including environmental NGOs. The application of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive to the Structural Funds is only mandatory for the next programming period after The Directive explicitly excludes plans and programmes co-financed under the current programming period because by the time it has to be transposed (July 21, 2004) plans for the current programming period will have already been settled. However, this does not exclude the new member states from voluntarily carrying out a strategic environmental assessment on their national development plans and Structural Funds programmes, should they so desire. Furthermore, Article 41 of the Structural Funds Regulation requiring an ex-ante environmental evaluation of operation includes many of the elements of a strategic assessment. I would also like to thank you for the paper on Public Participation in Regional Development in Central Europe, reflecting your view on the Aarhus Convention and regional development planning, concluding with some suggested guidelines. This document will provide some useful ideas and inputs for the Commission's work on the ratification of the Aarhus Convention and the implications for regional policy, amongst other policies. The following pages contain my reply to each of the points you raise. I would like to thank you once again for taking the time and initiative to prepare such an extensive paper, and working towards a better environment in an enlarged Europe. Yours sincerely, Margot Wallström 34 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

37 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE NGO POSITION PAPER Part I: Integration of Environmental Aspects into Structural Funds Assistance Environmental Ex-ante Evaluations NGO position: Proper environmental ex-ante evaluations of national development plans and other programming documents for EU Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds in accession countries should be undertaken to guarantee full horizontal integration of environmental aspects. To ensure the maximum quality of environmental ex-ante evaluations, the European Commission should immediately advise accession countries to: use the Handbook on Environmental Assessment of Regional Development Plans and EU Structural Funds (DG XI, 1998) as their main reference for undertaking environmental ex-ante evaluation; inform the wider public and environmental NGOs through the Internet and other electronic tools on the results of draft environmental ex-ante evaluations and allow for comments before the evaluations are finalised; and consult environmental committees of national parliaments on environmental ex-ante evaluations before the programming documents are finalised and sent to the European Commission. Commissioner s remarks: The environmental ex-ante evaluation is a key component in the preparation of programming documents for the current round of the Structural Funds I am particularly pleased that you intend to use the Handbook produced by my Department in 1998 as guidance for forthcoming programming of the period However, I must underline that the ex-ante environmental evaluation is carried out under the responsibility of the member state. In principle, the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive will apply to all the new Structural Funds programmes after 2006 for the 25 member states, and will provide the legal obligation for member states to consult the public with the results of the environmental assessment. The participation of environmental partners together with the other socio-economic partners in the process of programming and evaluation should be as effective as possible within the time available. This implies that such consultations should take place as early as possible to give the partners a fair chance to voice their opinion before documents are finalised. How this effectiveness can be ensured depends on the specific conditions in the member states. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 35

38 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE NGO POSITION PAPER NGO position: When the European Commission reviews the ex-ante evaluations during preparation of its negotiating mandate for provision of community structural assistance to future member states, it should: ensure that all outcomes of environmental ex-ante evaluations were used for modification of programming documents; ask environmental NGOs of accession countries for their suggestions on the final proposed system for integration of environmental aspects in structural assistance; and provide the opportunity, within an appropriate timeframe, for accession countries to modify their national development plans and other programming documents in line with the results of the national and EC reviews of environmental ex-ante evaluations. Commissioner s remarks: On your first point, DG ENV has done so in the past and will continue to ensure that the recommendations, especially those that refer to the respect of Community legislation and policy, are duly taken into consideration for the final programming documents. Experience has shown that the quality of these environmental ex-ante evaluations is an important factor for the applicability of its findings for improved programming documents. The NGOs are free to undertake their own assessment and to publicly express their opinion about the draft programming documents. Such an exercise took place for certain current Structural Funds programmes in the EU-15 in However, the NGO's views should, in the first instance, be expressed to those responsible for these programmes and in the frame of national and regional consultation and partnership. As you know, the timing for the Structural Funds programming is very tight. In any case programming documents are only approved after an intensive negotiation phase based on a mandate approved by all Commission services including DG ENV and the necessary modifications subsequently being made by the member states. Role of Environmental Authorities NGO position: The European Commission should check whether the proposed implementation structure for Structural Funds provides sufficient opportunities for participation for national and regional environmental authorities at all stages of implementation (e.g. overall management, project selection and monitoring). The sectoral operational programmes for environmental investments should be managed by the national environmental authorities. 36 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

39 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE NGO POSITION PAPER Commissioner s remarks: The involvement of regional and national environmental authorities during the implementation phase of the Structural Funds has been a central plank in our strategy in the negotiations for the period for the EU-15, and I have every intention of ensuring that it continues in the future. The suitability of the management arrangements shall be assessed by the ex-ante evaluation. The Member State is responsible for designating the authorities responsible for the management of the programmes. In order to strengthen the role of environmental authorities and other partners you may wish to encourage and initiate the establishment of national Structural Funds structures such as environmental networks or specific working groups. They can get support for this from the Structural Funds programmes' Technical Assistance budgets as is the case already in a series of EU-15 member states. Cohesion Fund NGO position: The experiences of recent member states and accession countries show that smallscale environmental investments can be implemented in a more sustainable way than large-scale ones. To improve sustainability, Cohesion Fund assistance should not exceed 10 percent of all structural assistance the level received by new member states. The European Commission also should decrease the minimum project scale eligible for Cohesion Fund assistance to EUR 5 million in future member states. The Commission should check that the allocation of co-financing to Cohesion Funds does not divert funding from existing national environmental programmes. Commissioner s remarks: As you probably know, the European Council has recently agreed at the Brussels European Summit that one third of the overall allocation for structural operations will be devoted to the Cohesion Fund for the period for environment and transport projects. This is very good news, because this means a threefold increase for environment under the Cohesion Fund for new member countries for compared to present assistance from ISPA. In the past the Cohesion Fund has been split 50:50 between environment and transport projects, and it is my conviction that environment should not receive any less in the future. Unlike the situation with the Structural Funds, in the Cohesion Fund there is a clear earmark for environment, which ensures that, under no circumstances, can the money be spent in other sectors. In the current four countries receiving EU Cohesion aid (Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland) environmental projects have ranged from large urban wastewater projects for major cities such as Dublin to small waste recycling schemes. I am also happy to say that by and large the support for transport infrastructure has also focused on sustainable modes of transport. As far as environment is concerned, the main purpose for the Cohesion and Structural Funds in the new member states after 2004 should be to ensure the implementation of the environmental legislation for which the transition periods have been granted and this will require both large and small investment projects. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 37

40 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE NGO POSITION PAPER The Cohesion Fund focuses on larger projects and the Structural Funds on smaller projects. Current Cohesion Fund beneficiary countries have demonstrated that proper and flexible financial engineering and project management such as grouping of a series of smaller projects supporting common environmental objectives is an appropriate way to comply with minimum funding thresholds. As conformity with environmental legislation is an obligation, it is not in the interest of member states to divert funds away from existing national environmental programmes. However, it is not the Commission's role to check the funding of national funding programmes. Again, here you as "environmental watchdogs" have the responsibility to apply pressure in your countries. Changing the Approach to Development NGO position: For the promotion of sustainable development, the European Commission should help future member states to change their approach in development policy from heavy investments to softer measures, such as community development, environmental awareness raising, research and development in the field of sustainable development, establishment of transparent and participatory decision-making systems in public administration and prevention of environmental, health and social problems. Commissioner s remarks: Point taken. However, for me one of the main priorities is to ensure the implementation of environmental legislation within the negotiated transition periods. This could concern, for example, investments that can indeed reach large amounts of money such as urban wastewater installations or the closing down of illegal landfills. However, programmes shall also comply with the wider and horizontal objective of sustainable development across different economic sectors. Therefore, there is much scope and need in the programmes for softer measures and in particular those inspired by the Sustainable Development Strategy such as decoupling transport demand from economic growth, increasing energy efficiency, creating of green jobs and so on. Part II: Partnership Principle Improving Access to Information on Structural Fund Operations NGO position: The European Commission should ensure that all necessary information on Structural Fund operations in accession countries is publicly available. In order to achieve this, the Commission should: provide information on Structural Fund operations in specific accession countries to existing independent NGO information centres (at least one per country) and help establish such centres where they do not exist; and provide guidelines on what information should be publicly accessible and require that such information be published on websites and in printed format. 38 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

41 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE POSITION PAPER Commissioner s remarks: All relevant information on the Structural Funds in the EU-15 is publicly available in different forms. Firstly, the relevant information is available on the Europa website < Secondly, there are obligations to set aside funds to implement an information strategy for each programme as well as to allow for public access to important documents such as the environmental ex-ante evaluation. This will also be the case with the Structural Funds programmes in the new member states. Regarding accessibility to documents, the Commission has adopted rules for its own transparency and accessibility to documents and is even working on its improvement by ratifying the Aarhus Convention. All of the accession countries, except Slovakia, have signed the Aarhus Convention and, therefore, taken a commitment towards improved access to information. So far Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta and Poland have ratified the Convention. Implementation of Partnership NGO position: The European Commission should ensure that the partnership principle (Council Regulations No 1260/1999 General provisions on the Structural Funds Art. 8) for operations of regional policy is properly applied. In order to achieve this, the Commission should: design binding guidelines for implementation of the partnership principle in operations of regional policy. Partnership should cover the preparation, financing, monitoring and evaluation of Structural Funds assistance. The NGO Dialogue group offers existing NGO guidelines based on the Aarhus Convention as a basis for discussion and is prepared to participate in its further elaboration. Existing examples for incorporation of the partnership principle into national laws, such as in Slovakia, should be promoted; send letters to governments of accession countries suggesting the involvement of NGOs in programming and implementation of Structural Funds assistance. NGOs should be involved in management, project selection and monitoring committees of each operative programme; strongly advise second-wave countries, where the process of national development planning is at an earlier stage, to ensure that NGOs are invited to be involved in national development plan elaboration through NGO participation in working groups and that drafts are made available to the public and discussed at public hearings; and require national governments of accession countries to report about how the partnership principle was implemented in the area of regional development EC should require this issue to be addressed in regular reports of accession countries. Commissioner s remarks: Again the existing Structural Funds Regulation provides for an as large and as efficient as possible participation of all relevant partners including those from the environmental side. I certainly would expect that the governments in the accession countries comply with the stipulations of the Structural Funds General Regulation by associating as widely as possible the most relevant partners such as NGOs and other stakeholders in DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 39

42 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE POSITION PAPER the programming and implementation of Structural Funds assistance, and indeed in relevant programme committees and working groups. However, I do not see a role for binding guidelines on the implementation of the partnership principle as the cultures in one Member State can vary with those in another. Again you should apply pressure to do so in your countries, as good and effective partnership by definition cannot be imposed from outside but has to be developed and improved progressively by practising it in a concrete context such as the Structural Funds programmes. Sharing experiences with the partners in the current EU-15 will certainly provide valuable and constructive assistance. Increasing NGO Capacities NGO position: The European Commission should help NGOs from accession countries to increase their capacities to participate properly in operations of regional policy. In order to do that, the Commission should: develop a system of NGO financing which should cover core funding, expenses for NGO participation in the consultation process, financing for representatives in committees and training for NGO representatives in committees; make sure that each pre-accession fund and national development plan and each operational programme in each accession country contain specific measures for building NGOs capacity to: a) be involved in planning, decision-making and monitoring of pre-accession funds, national development plans and new legislation (i.e. for networking, training, information exchange among NGOs, etc.). b) prepare and implement projects for Structural Funds, including those that build administrative capacities, language skills, financial stability, partnerships with other domestic institutions and the transfer of experiences from NGOs in EU member states; make sure that assistance for NGOs is a part of the technical assistance for implementation of Structural Funds in each accession country; and make sure that NGOs are one of the beneficiaries of technical assistance and training provided by the EU to accession countries (twinning programmes, TAIEX, etc.). Commissioner s remarks: You have pointed here to the need for financing NGOs involvement in the Structural Funds: Firstly, the pre-accession funds such as ISPA and the programmes, once they have been negotiated, contain a budget for technical assistance. There is a high degree of competition for these limited resources. However, there is no reason why NGOs cannot apply. 40 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

43 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE POSITION PAPER Secondly, you could also apply for support through the Community action programme promoting non-governmental organisations primarily active in the field of environmental protection, which was adopted by the Parliament and Council in March 2002 and which is now also open to the accession countries. Further information can be found at <europa.eu.int/comm/environment/funding/finansup.htm>. Thirdly, I would strongly suggest that environmental NGOs get involved with next year s Green Week on June 2-6, This year I am also proposing national Green Days, and this could be a way of drawing attention to integrating environment into other sectoral policies. Additional Remarks by the NGO Group Transfer of Experiences and Lessons to Second-Wave Countries NGO position: Experience with integration of environmental conditions and implementation of partnerships within the programming and the implementation of Structural Funds assistance in the first-wave accession countries should be evaluated and the experiences and lessons learned should be transferred to second wave accession countries, such as Romania, Bulgaria and possibly also Turkey. Effectiveness of programmes such as twinning should be evaluated, as measures may be necessary to make improvements. Commissioner s remarks: This is a sensible and prudent approach to look at the experience the accession countries gain from the programming and implementation of Structural Funds, and to transfer good practice to the remaining candidate countries after accession. In terms of policy developments, Bulgaria and Romania have just finalised the transposition of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, which is one of the main policy instruments aiming at integrating environment into decision-making at a project level. For the moment I feel that there is still room for improvement in all candidate countries. Therefore, DG ENV is hoping to establish a Phare Multi-Country Environmental Enlargement Programme, including a capacity-building facility for the implementation of the environmental acquis at the local and regional levels focusing among others on environmental impact assessment. Regular Meetings with DG REGIO NGO position: NGOs participating in the DG ENV-NGO Dialogue appreciate the openness of DG Environment and they welcome DG REGIO participation in this meeting. In order to establish the regular exchange of information in the area of EU regional policy it is important that DG REGIO participates in all further Dialogue meetings. The REC should expand the scope of the NGO Dialogue for systematic consultations with DG REGIO on the environmental dimension in Structural Funds in the new member states. DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 41

44 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: EUROPEAN COMMISSION`S RESPONSE TO THE POSITION PAPER Commissioner s remarks: I am very pleased to hear that you appreciate the openness of my services, and I very much support your wish to strengthen your cooperation with the Commission services, since it is a single organisation and all the departments work together towards common goals. However, at the same time, I would also like to use the next NGO Dialogue meeting to discuss and consult you as representatives of civil society on policy developments in the area of environment. A lot of things are currently in the pipeline, following the White Paper on Chemicals, the adoption of the sixth Environmental Action Programme, Our Future, Our Choice, for which thematic strategies are under preparation as well as others. For me an open policy-making process is a key priority, and that is why I would like to learn about your opinions. Only by a wide participation through the policy chain can the quality, relevance and effectiveness of EU policies be ensured and the NGO Dialogue is one means to achieve these aims. 42 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

45 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE OF THE DIALOGUE PROCESS Summary of the Sessions Conclusion and Future of the Dialogue Process Future of the DG ENV-NGO Dialogue During the wrap-up session of the Dialogue, Soledad Blanco, head of the Enlargement Unit at DG Environment, highlighted the future of the Dialogue process. Anne Burrill added various points on possibilities for future support for NGOs from the multi-country Phare programme on Environment and Enlargement. The Next Dialogue Session The next meeting will be during Green Week, June 2-6, 2003, where there will be several opportunities to participate in policy shaping. The key focus will be on changing behaviour, touching on such topics as sustainable consumption and production, renewable energy and water. A great deal of attention was given during the seventh Dialogue meeting to the Structural Funds. The next sessions should look at the need for NGOs to form their position on policies relevant for their countries once they become members of the Union. There are many proposals presently under discussion for developments in EU environmental policy which will have to be implemented also by the new member states and will have major implications for them. Following the White Paper on Chemicals, a major revision of EU policy in this sector is under way. In the area of waste, the directive for packaging and packaging waste is under revision, and a new directive on electronic waste is in the pipeline. Lastly, thematic strategies announced in the sixth Environmental Action Programme, Our Future, Our Choice, are under preparation. Consistent with the agreed objectives for the NGO Dialogue, and as has occurred in the past (e.g. on the sixth Environmental Action Programme), one focus of the coming meetings should be on consultations. The Commission feels it is important that NGOs, as experts in their respective countries, participate actively in the formulation of future EU policy. There will be a final meeting of the NGO Dialogue group before the first wave of enlargement in 2004, most likely at the end of DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 43

46 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE OF THE DIALOGUE PROCESS ROXANNE KOUDOUNARY, Federation of Ecological and Environmental Organisations of Cyprus Cooperation with NGOs after 2004 This final NGO Dialogue meeting will not be the end of DG Environment s cooperation with NGOs. Rather the cooperation will evolve and take on different forms. DG Environment is currently investigating the possibility of supporting capacitybuilding projects for NGOs in response to their requests for such assistance and the possibility to participate in twinning activities. A draft proposal has been prepared for a Phare 2003 multi-country programme on Environment and Enlargement, which would include a project designed to increase NGOs administrative capacity. If this project is approved, proposals could be submitted to allow organisations from member states to share their experiences to help NGOs in the Phare countries to: improve their organisations capacity to manage projects from different donors and to gain access to wider financial sources (LIFE, the DG ENV NGO Action Programme; national programmes, etc.); improve cooperation with environmental authorities and communication with the public and industry; 44 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

47 SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE OF THE DIALOGUE PROCESS make effective contributions to the implementation of EU environmental acquis; and play an active role in the preparation and implementation of Structural and Cohesion Funds. It should be noted that this exercise would only cover the 10 Phare countries, although it may be extended to the other candidate countries through separate financing. DG Environment is also attempting to identify complementary financing for NGO twinning activities in the Newly Independent States and the Balkans. DG Environment noted that the proposed Phare 2003 multi-country programme would also include a project to support continued participation of the Phare countries in the IMPEL network, as well as a project to assist local and regional authorities in the implementation of the EIA and IPPC directives. DG Environment will provide an update on the status of the proposed programme at the next NGO Dialogue meeting in June ENGIN URAL, Environmental Fondation of Turkey (left) RUDOLF RAGONESI, Friends of the Earth, Malta (right) DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 45

48 46 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP

49 Annexes

50

51 ANNEX I: NGO POSITION PAPER ON STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS Annex I: NGO Position Paper on Structural and Cohesion Funds Promoting Sustainability in Structural Funds Assistance in Future Member States Position Paper of DG ENV-NGO Dialogue Group We, the environmental NGOs of the 13 accession countries and two other Central and Eastern European states who participated in the preparatory meeting of the DG ENV- NGO Dialogue, are committed to help ensure that the EU accession process contributes to the sustainable development of our countries and the whole European continent. As a part of the accession process several of us have been involved with Structural Funds assistance at the national and regional levels for several years. We realised that Structural and Cohesion Funds assistance can either strengthen or seriously threaten the possibilities of sustainable development in our countries. The impact of the structural instruments very much depends on how environmental aspects and the partnership principle are integrated into planning and implementation structures. We fear that this year confused and rapid national development planning endangers the integration of these important factors into the implementation of the regional policy of the European Commission (EC) in the future member states. To promote the maximum positive impact of Structural and Cohesion Funds assistance in our countries we suggest to the European Commission the following actions: Integration of Environmental Aspects into Structural Funds Assistance Environmental ex-ante evaluations Proper environmental ex-ante evaluations of national development plans and other programming documents for EU Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds in accession countries should be undertaken to guarantee full horizontal integration of environmental aspects. To ensure the maximum quality of environmental ex-ante evaluations, the European Commission should immediately advise accession countries to: use the Handbook on Environmental Assessment of Regional Development Plans and EU Structural Funds (DG XI, 1998) as their main reference for undertaking environmental ex-ante evaluation; inform the wider public and environmental NGOs through the Internet and other electronic tools on the results of draft environmental ex-ante evaluations and allow for comments before the evaluations are finalised; and DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP 49

52 ANNEX I: NGO POSITION PAPER ON STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS ANDRAS KROLOP, CEEWEB, Hungary IVAN GYULAI, The Ecological Institute for Sustainable Development, Hungary (left to right) consult environmental committees of national parliaments on environmental ex-ante evaluations before the programming documents are finalised and sent to the European Commission. When the European Commission reviews the ex-ante evaluations during preparation of its negotiating mandate for provision of community structural assistance to future member states, it should: ensure that all outcomes of environmental ex-ante evaluations were used for modification of programming documents; ask environmental NGOs of accession countries for their suggestions on the final proposed system for integration of environmental aspects in structural assistance; and provide the opportunity, within an appropriate timeframe, for accession countries to modify their national development plans and other programming documents in line with the results of the national and EC reviews of environmental ex-ante evaluations. 50 DG ENV-NGO DIALOGUE GROUP