Sumario: April 19, 2004: Questions and Answers on enlargement and environment (Brussels)
1. What environmental legislation have the new Member States already transposed and implemented?
Nearly 100% of the environmental acquis has been transposed into national law in the new Member States. For horizontal legislation, such as air and water, transposition is nearing completion. There are still gaps in legislation on nature protection, waste and industrial pollution, but these will be transposed in the weeks prior to accession.
Important steps have also been taken when it comes to implementation, notably through reinforcing the administrative capacity in the new Member States. All the new countries are for the most part on track to implement the acquis, in particular as regards horizontal environmental legislation such as air quality, waste management, water quality, chemicals and genetically modified organisms, noise, and nuclear safety and radiation protection.
Six new Member States have also ratified the Aarhus Convention on access to environmental information. Regarding the access to information and justice, the EU's original "Access to Information Directive" was adopted at an early stage in all acceding countries and while implementation may have started slowly there has been progress.
In addition, the Commission has seen steady progress, for example on the issue of public consultation in relation to the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive for major infrastructure projects supported by EU funds.
2. What is left to be achieved?
Delays in the designation of Natura 2000 sites, as foreseen by the Habitats Directive, remain a main issue of concern in all new Member States as this must be completed in all countries by the date of accession.
For some countries, there is also significant work to be done in waste management and industrial pollution. In addition, problems exist in relation to the difficulties of environmental authorities in obtaining adequate funding and staffing as well as a persistent lack of co-ordination between policy sectors. These factors have hampered the progress made to date.
After the 1st of May, countries will also be required to:
Meet the commitments made during accession negotiations towards ensuring implementation of the directives for which transition periods have been granted.
Fulfil secondary obligations that derive from the entry into force for the new Member States of certain Directives on the date of accession. Examples of such secondary obligations that can be completed after accession include issuing IPPC (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) permits for existing installations, which must be done by 30 October 2007, and implementing Action plans to reduce water pollution from nitrates and dangerous substances
3. What transition periods do the 10 new member states have?
In order to allow sufficient time for compliance with certain EU requirements, in particular for investment-heavy sectors, transitional periods have been granted to all acceding countries for specific measures in the environmental field, mainly the water, waste and industrial pollution sectors. (For transition periods country by country, see Annex I.)
The transition measures include detailed, legally binding intermediate targets. This ensures controlled implementation throughout the entire transition period. The targets are recorded in the Act of Accession. The scope of transition measures is, wherever possible, specified as lists of individual installations.
Based on the general principle that transitional measures should be limited in time and scope, the EU has emphasised from the very beginning of the negotiations that transitional measures would not be granted on
4. What will happen if the new Member States ask for a new extension for the transposition of certain community legislation?
It is no longer possible for the new Member States to request extensions on older EU laws. They are bound by transitional arrangements that were agreed in the Treaty of Accession. At present, the EU is considering transitional measures and technical adaptations related to environmental legislation that has been adopted recently, since the close of negotiations.
5. How much does it cost for the new Member States to comply with the EU environmental legislation?
The cost of compliance with the investment-heavy environmental acquis for the ten acceding countries was estimated to amount to approximately €50-80 billion. The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive alone will require major investments of around €15 billion. To achieve full implementation, the new Member States will have to spend on average between 2% and 3% of GDP on the environment in the coming years. Current expenditure is generally well below this target.
6. How much financial support have the new Member States already received from the EU?
Since 2000 the central and eastern European acceding countries have received financial support under the pre-accession instruments ISPA, PHARE and SAPARD. Cyprus and Malta had unified national assistance programmes. These programmes all contributed to the improvement of environmental institutions and infrastructure, as described below.
ISPA has, since 1999, been the main Community financial pre-accession instrument for supporting big environmental infrastructure projects in Central and Eastern candidate countries. Half of the total ISPA budget of €1 billion per year for the 10 countries has been earmarked for environment projects, which have mostly involved large infrastructure in the water and waste sectors, amounting to about €500 million per year for all candidate countries in the Environment area. (Allocations per country for the acceding Central and Eastern countries see Annex II.)
Community technical assistance to strengthen institutions and prepare implementation of the EU acquis was provided in the pre-accession period through the PHARE programme for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The total PHARE budget was over €1.5 billion per year, including the national assistance programmes, cross-border programmes, and multi-country thematic programmes. Although there was no ear-marking of funds for the environment, nor were projects ever specifically classified by sector, a significant number of national and Cross-Border-Cooperation projects were either specifically related to the environmental acquis or included components related to environmental integration (such as in the context of development projects). Although this problem of definition makes it difficult to give a precise figure for the amount of money spent on "environment", as a typical example, out of the €108.8 million allocated to the Hungarian PHARE 2001 national programme, the following three projects worth a total of €12.7 million were specifically related to environmental
These programmes were designed to provide training and exchange of experience in areas such as enforcement and inspections and environmental investment planning through, as well as support to, pilot projects at the local and regional level.
The SAPARD programme provided assistance related to agriculture and rural development, at the rate of €500 million per year for the 10 central and eastern European countries. Although not specifically conceived for the environment, under this programme countries also have had the opportunity to finance small scale rural environmental infrastructure (such as small waste water treatment plants) and agri-environmental schemes. Unlike the PHARE and ISPA programmes, SAPARD was directly administered by the beneficiary countries, thus further developing their skills in project management.
Several countries (Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Slovenia and Slovakia) joined the LIFE programme during the pre-accession period. As members of the programme, actors in these countries were eligible to submit applications to the LIFE-Environment and LIFE-Nature programmes in return for fixed contributions to the LIFE budget. Under the LIFE programmes Estonia, for example, implemented a project on Introduction and Implementation of Life Cycle Assessment Methodology: Effects of Oil Shale Electricity on the Environmental Performance of Products (2003). Latvia implemented a project on Treatment of Biodegradable Organic Municipal Waste Using Composting Technologies in 2003. In total, so far under the LIFE III Regulation (2001-2003), the 5 acceding countries mentioned received funding amounting to about €11 million for 26 LIFE-Environment projects, as well as another €17 million for LIFE-Nature projects. Cyprus and Malta were eligible for financing of projects under the LIFE-Third Countries programme, for which no national contribution is required. During this same period 8 projects received an EU contribution totalling about €2.7 million Euro.
During the past several years the new MS have received other support, and have increasingly participated with the current Member States in co-operative efforts to improve implementation. One example is the progressive inclusion since 1997 of the new member states in the activities of the IMPEL network, an informal network of environmental inspectorates and enforcement authorities designed to exchange information on best practice in implementation and enforcement of environmental legislation. The new Member States have also participated in the Water Directors network which supports the implementation of EU water legislation, most particularly the Water Framework directive.
7. Will the new Member States receive any further financial support for environmental projects when they become members?
After accession, assistance in the environment field will almost treble. Until the end of the current budgetary period in 2006, the new Member States will receive some €8 billion, which is more than 10% of the total investment requirements.
In particular, EU assistance through Structural and Cohesion funds will increase threefold after accession to a total of €21.7 billion for 2004-2006, of which around 1/3 (€6 billion) will be for the Cohesion Fund, with €3 billion specifically earmarked for environment. Environmental actions are also included in all of the future structural fund programmes, each as separate earmarked sections, or as cross-cutting themes.
The total budget of €21.7 billion will be divided as follows:
| Country | Total funding - Cohesion Funds and Structural Funds - for 2004-6 (€million) | Cohesion Fund environment allocation (€million) | Estimated overall proportion of total funding specifically allocated to environment projects (%) |
| Cyprus | 101 | 27 | 25.0 |
| Czech Republic | 2328 | 472.6 | 25.0 |
| Estonia | 618 | 154 | 23.8 |
| Hungary | 2847 | 616.7 | 24.6 |
| Poland | 11,369 | 210.9 | 19.3 |
| Slovenia | 405 | 84 | 19.7 |
| Lithuania | 1,366 | 304 | 20.5 |
| Latvia | 1,036 | 257 | 22.8 |
| Slovakia | 1,560 | 254.9 | 21.8 |
| Malta | 79 | 13.3 | 40.9 |
Through these funds, the new Member States will receive financial support for the implementation of the investment heavy directives for which transition periods have been granted. It is important to ensure sufficient funding at EU level after the end of the current programming period (2006) and also at national level as new Member States should then find their own financial resources in order to meet their obligations. The binding nature of the transition period targets and clear final deadlines for directives for which transition periods were awarded justify reserving adequate financial and human resources for implementation at national level. During the negotiations for transition periods concerning investment-heavy directives, the new Member States were required to consider the sources of the financing that they would use to meet their obligations under these directives. Anticipated financing includes EU programmes, loans from International Financial institutions, national budgets and private sector investment.
The new Member States will also have the opportunity to complete gaps in institution-building in the environment field after accession, especially with twinning and exchange programmes. The so-called 'Transition Facility' (€420 million 2004-2006) provides such support to the new Member States. The countries should propose to the Commission the list of priority fields and the projects that they intend to include in this facility, environment being one of the policy areas envisaged by the EU.
After 2006, the EU will need to ensure a new financial instrument for the environment of the enlarged Europe. This should be carefully aligned with emerging environmental objectives and would replace current environmental funding programmes and encompass a future LIFE Programme.
8. What is the environmental situation like in the 10 new Member States today?
The majority of new Member States now allocate increasing human resources to the implementation of environmental legislation. In addition, exchange programmes and twinning activities with current Member States' administrations set up under bilateral and EU-funded programmes have provided intensive hands-on capacity building for staff in the new Member States. In parallel, inspection offices have been strengthened, environmental agencies established and monitoring systems for air and water quality extended.
As a result of these legislative and institutional improvements, significant progress in environmental protection has been made by all countries. The state of environment has improved in particular with regard to air and water pollution reduction: the main air pollutants have declined by 60-80% and toxic metals by 50%, while organic matter pollution of water has decreased by as much as 80%. The percentage of homes and other installations whose effluent is sent to waste water treatment plants doubled in the 1990s.
Below are some specific examples of the improvements in the environment in these countries as a result of the accession process:
Poland used a combination of legislation and financial instruments to cut sulphur emissions by 50% during the 1990s.
Poland and Slovakia managed to reduce per capita carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions between 1996 and 1999. Poland from 9.7 tonnes to 8.3 and Slovakia from 8.7 to 7.6tonnes. (EU average is 8.4)
Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta and Poland increased the percentage of residential population connected to waste water treatment between 1996 and 2001. Czech Republic from 58 to 65%, Hungary from 22 to 32%, Malta from 8 to 13%, and Poland from 43 to 55%.
The Czech Republic has traditionally been a highly industrial country. During the communist regime the emphasis was on heavy industry, coal mining, steel, heavy machinery and bulk chemicals. Since the start of the accession process, great emphasis has been placed on the implementation of environmental management systems under the ISO 14000 and the EMAS (Eco-Management and Audit Schemes) programme, in which the Czech Republic has been the most active Candidate Country. It benefited as the only country from the EMAS programme set up by DG Environment aiming to transfer know-how from the Member State to the Czech Republic.
More generally, the former 'Black Triangle' area is an example of dramatic improvements. The area situated on the borders of Poland, the Czech Republic and the former East Germany changed from one of Europe's most polluted industrial regions into an environmental success. Salmon has returned to the previously polluted rivers, forests earlier destroyed by acid rain are growing once again, and air quality levels are now similar to those within the EU's existing Member States. Poland and Czech Republic now jointly manage a nature reserve in the region, and the air quality monitoring systems designed for the project are in permanent use.
With the help of the Phare and SAPARD programs of the EU (and WWF International), a trans-national cooperation programme has been established between Poland and Slovakia, in the region of Mount Babia Gora, in the framework of a nature conservation programme to protect the exceptionally rich flora and fauna of the area (more than 100 species of birds, hundreds of bears, wolves and lynxes).
In the programme "City towards compliance Awards", there are numerous cities which have implemented all the EU legislation concerning water treatment and achieved encouraging results in the management of air quality and waste management; there is an active Local Agenda 21, and efficient environmental education is being arranged. Examples of these cities are Gyongyos in Hungary, Valmiera in Lithuania, Rimavska Sobota in Slovakia, and Domzale et Maribor in Slovenia.
In Poland, air pollution emissions fell significantly in the 1990s (dust 57%, sulphur compounds 48%, nitrogen compounds 28%). In the water sector, the volume of untreated effluents was reduced by almost 70% in the 1990s, with treated effluents up 22%.
In Slovenia, the water quality monitoring results show that the situation has improved in recent years in terms of pesticide and nitrate content. Transposition of the new water framework directive is advanced. Approximately 95% of the Directive's provisions have been fully transposed.
Slovenian forests are in a better condition than those of other European countries (including the present EU Member States), with a more diverse natural structure. Evolution and population of wild animals is monitored, and data is entered into a specific database.
Cyprus has done a good job on preparing its EIA legislation - in particular they have specifically opened the door to NGO participation. Cyprus has also completed the thorough and precise mapping of Natura 2000 sites - with assistance from the LIFE programme.
Latvia has made rapid progress in implementing the IPPC directive
Lithuania transposed all EU legislation in the air sector
9. What happens if a country has not implemented all the directives on 1 May? Will the Commission start legal procedures on 2 May?
The Commission has the legal right and responsibility to start assessing compliance from the date of accession and to start legal procedures where indicated. In practice, it will take time for the Commission to review the compliance status of the new Member States and it is highly unlikely that any procedures will actually be launched on 2 May. It is important to emphasize that the new Member States will not be given any special treatment, except in those areas for which transitional periods were agreed in the Treaty of Accession. The Commission will apply a principle of equal treatment of all the Member States, old and new, in handling complaints and possible infringement proceedings.
10. Post-accession period: What needs to be done in order to enhance environmental integration in an enlarged Europe?
The Commission is taking every step to respond to the post-accession environmental challenges, giving priority to capacity-building and financing where further progress is required.
Accession will bring increased and challenging requirements to environmental administration in the acceding countries, and additional tasks in relation to monitoring, inspections, permits and reporting
Particular attention should be given to the following areas:
Supporting Institutions: mainly those which implement environmental legislation at either local or national levels.
Climate change: Economic growth prospects in acceding countries over the coming years will generate steady increases in transport and electricity demand which could jeopardise the performance of some of these countries. Relevant emissions into the air in acceding countries declined by 32% between 1990 and 1999, due to economic decline and restructuring in the first half of the 1990s. However, as economic growth rebounds in these countries, to ensure that this growth will not be coupled with increases in greenhouse gas emissions, long-term infrastructure investments in the acceding countries will have to be sustainable. Further integration of climate change policies in the Structural Funds, under which many transport and energy investments will be funded, should therefore be seen as a priority in a long term post-Kyoto perspective. In addition, particular focus needs to be placed on transport and energy integration.
Transport: Acceding countries continue to perform substantially better than current EU Members in terms of modal split or energy consumption for transport and Nox emissions. However, indicators are worrying, with declines in rail transport for freight, a 62% increase in motorway lengths and a 73% increase in car ownership. Community financial assistance should therefore prioritise sustainable transport projects, with special emphasis on the renovation of urban public transport systems where acceding countries are lagging behind.
Energy: Energy efficiency has improved in the acceding countries due to positive measures undertaken, but also due to economic restructuring. Nevertheless, it remains well below the EU 15 average and the intensity of energy consumption per unit of production is still much higher than in the EU 15.
The existing potential for win-win solutions in energy saving needs to be fully exploited in the context of investments made for power generation and business sectors. Any Community support in those sectors should include whenever appropriate an in-built energy saving component.
As regards renewable energy, acceding countries have adopted targets in the framework of the Directive on electricity from renewable energy sources. The total EU25 target for renewable electricity for the year 2010 has now become 21% instead of 22% for the EU15.
11. How will the new Member States influence future EU environmental policy-making?
After accession the Commission does not anticipate any dramatic changes in environment policy-making. New policy approaches are already agreed and will not change with the entry of the new Member States. The main features anticipated for environment policy in the future are:
More focus on implementation of existing legislation than the development of new policies;
More attention on links between policy areas and the integration of environmental considerations in other policies, such as transport and energy, but also the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy. An important development here is that since last year Extended Impact Assessments have been done with regard to all major policy initiatives by the Commission. They examine the economic, social and environmental impacts in an integrated way, to ensure that each is properly accounted for;
A holistic approach to environmental problems. This means a shift from single pollutants to environmental problems. One example is the Environment and Health Strategy on which we are currently working and which is aimed at reducing the impact of environmental factors on human health.
Increased emphasis on marketbased solutions, such as the emissions trading scheme, which will become operational next year.
Of course, the new Member States will now participate fully in decision making in both the Council and the Parliament, as well as in the relevant Comitology bodies. In view of their divergent history (including the legacy of pollution, their economic situation and their rich biodiversity), these new Member States may have new perspectives in comparison with the present Member States.
ANNEX I:
Transitional arrangements by new Member State:
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Hungary
Latvia
Lithuania
Malta
Poland
Slovakia
Slovenia
ANNEX II
ISPA financing for approved environment projects from 2000 to 2002 (in €)
Lithuania: 15 projects
Poland: 33 projects
Czech Republic: 9 projects
Estonia: 13 projects
Hungary: 19 projects
Latvia: 10 projects
Slovakia: 12 projects
Slovenia: 8 projects
| Arriba |
Estados Miembros de la Union Europea
Alertas por e-mail
Enviar por e-mail
Imprimir esta página