Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Communication from the Commission, to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the candidate countries in central and eastern Europe on accession strategies for environment: meeting the challenge of enlargement with the candidate countries in central and eastern Europe'
Date: 1998-11-19
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, accession to the European Union, cooperation policy, enlargement of the Union, environmental policy

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51/33

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission, to
the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee
of the Regions and the candidate countries in central and eastern Europe on accession
strategies for environment: meeting the challenge of enlargement with the candidate countries
in central and eastern Europe’

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

(1999/C 51/06)

having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the
candidate countries in central and eastern Europe on accession strategies for environment:
meeting the challenge of enlargement with the candidate countries in central and eastern
Europe (COM(98) 294 final);

having regard to the Commission’s decision of 20 May 1998 to consult it on this subject in
accordance with the first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European
Community;

having regard to the decision of its bureau on 15 July 1998 to instruct Commission 4 for
Spatial Planning, Urban Issues, Energy and the Environment to draw up the relevant opinion;

having regard to the Commission’s Opinions on the applications for accession of 15 July 1997
(Agenda 2000);

having regard to the COR opinion on the effects of enlargement on the Union’s policies (CdR
280/97 fin)(1);

having regard to the COR opinion on the CAP and eastward enlargement (CdR 239/96 fin) (2);

having regard to the COR opinion on the Communication form the Commission on
implementing Community environmental law (CdR 437/96 fin) (3);

having regard to the COR opinion on the Proposal for a Council Directive establishing a
framework for Community action in the field of water policy (CdR 171/97 fin) (4);

having regard to the COR opinion on environment policy in cities and towns (CdR 393/97
fin)(5);

having regard to the report by EDC consultants on compliance costing for approximation of
EU environmental legislation in the CEEC;

having regard to the Amsterdam Treaty;

having regard to the 1998 Dobris report (European Environment Agency) on Europe’s
environment;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 267/98 rev.) adopted by Commission 4 on 2 October
1998 (rapporteur: Mr Penttilä),

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 26th plenary session on 18 and 19 November
1998 (meeting of 19 November).

1.

Introduction

1.1. On 20 May 1998 the European Commission
adopted the communication to the Council, the Europe-

(1) OJ C 64, 27.2.1998, p. 48.
(2) OJ C 116, 14.4.1997, p. 39.
(3) OJ C 244, 11.8.1997, p. 43.
(4) OJ C 180, 11.6.1998, p. 38.
(5) OJ C 180, 11.6.1998, p. 22.

an Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the
Committee of the Regions and the candidate countries in
central and eastern Europe on environmental accession
strategies in connection with EU enlargement.

In the forthcoming enlargement of the Union the
1.2.
environmental dimension will present greater challenges
than in any previous accession. There are major environ-
mental problems in the candidate countries and there is
a large gap in the level of environmental protection in
relation to the situation in the EU. However, this does
not mean that environmental problems have been solved

C 51/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.2.1999

in the present Member States; rather, these countries
too must work for a better environment. On the other
hand, the candidate countries possess vast tracts of
virtually untouched nature which make an important
contribution to the biological diversity of the whole of
Europe. The challenge in the years ahead is to preserve
these assets and at the same time to develop and manage
an economically and environmentally sustainable frame-
work.

1.3.
The communication notes that, although efforts
have been made in all the candidate countries to
approximate environmental legislation, much remains
to be done before full compliance with the environmental
acquis is achieved. The Commission takes the view that
this additional work is of a legislative, administrative
and financial nature and will place heavy demands on
human resources.

1.4.
In addition to environmental investment there is
a need for reinforcement of environmental institutions
and careful strategic planning. Adequate attention must
be paid to preventive measures through integration of
environmental and sustainable development consider-
ations into policy sectors such as transport, energy
and agriculture. A comprehensive financial strategy is
required to coordinate action by the various institutions
involved.

1.5.
The Commission intends to provide the candi-
date countries with more information, guidance and
technical assistance in the implementation of the environ-
mental acquis, for example through networking mechan-
isms. Implementation of scientific research through joint
projects or concerted action is a key objective since it
can yield knowledge on sustainable management of
natural resources. The enlargement process should be
managed in such a way as to bring the whole of
the European Union closer towards the objective of
genuinely sustainable development.

2. General comments

2.1.
The COR considers the communication on
enlargement and the environment to be timely and most
necessary.

2.2.
In the COR’s view, environmental issues are
among the most important questions in the enlargement
negotiations. This should also be reflected in the
actual negotiations. Membership is conditional on the
transposition of the entire EU environmental acquis into
national law in the candidate countries. The candidate
countries are required to draw up a detailed legislative
programme,
together with a programme on its
implementation and a financial strategy. It is vital for
the implementation and enforcement of the acquis
to create and strengthen bodies for environmental
administration at local and regional level and to ensure
that they can function effectively.

2.3.
The candidate countries will need major environ-
mental investment in both technology and adminis-
tration. Resources will also be needed for upgrading
data management and monitoring systems, education
and training of staff and acquisition of land. In Agenda
2000 the Commission promises to make support avail-
able to the candidate countries to enable them to meet
the obligations of membership. It must be ensured that
all environmental investments in the applicant countries
comply with the criteria of the Community’s environ-
mental acquis. Approximation of environmental legis-
lation will require funding from private, national and
international sources. Many candidate countries have
bilateral arrangements with Member States for financing
environmental projects.

The accession process also offers an opportunity
2.4.
for stepping up cooperation between Europe’s regions.
Non-governmental organizations, business organ-
izations and firms must be involved in this process. For
some time now many candidate countries have been
working in active partnership with Member States in
the field of environmental administration. There is a
need to foster networking and exchange of know-how
between local and regional authorities.

2.5.
The accession process should be seen as a major
opportunity for improving the state of the environment
in Europe and the world as a whole. Implementation of
the Community’s existing environmental acquis cannot
be the final goal of environmental policy even in the
candidate countries. The aim of EU environmental
policy is sustainable development, as defined in the 1997
Amsterdam Treaty. The environmental dimension must
be integrated into all industrial sectors, transport, energy
production and agriculture. These remarks apply equally
to current Member States.

3. Specific comments

3.1. State of the environment in the candidate countries

The applicant countries face major environmental prob-
lems. On the other hand, they have developed their
environmental legislation and improved their purifi-
cation systems throughout the 1990s. It is particularly
worth noting that some pollutants are carried across
borders, with potentially major significance for the state
of the environment over a wide area.

3.2. Air

3.2.1.
Sulphur dioxide and particulate emissions were
a problem in many industrial areas particularly in the
late 1980s. In particular, the burning of brown coal in
the Black Triangle formed by East Germany, northern
Czechoslovakia and southern Poland caused forest

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51/35

damage and acidification. Although there has been a
clear reduction in emission levels in the 1990s, critical
loads are still being exceeded in many areas and
acidification continues. Emissions are carried long dis-
tances, causing problems in areas which are far away
from their pollution sources. Air protection issues are
linked to developments in industry, energy production
and transport. Decision-making in these areas must take
due account of the environment and the long-term
interest.

At the beginning of the 1990s about half of the
3.2.2.
major cities in eastern and central Europe exceeded the
air quality limit values set by the WHO. Whilst the
situation has improved significantly in recent years, air
quality in cities in central and eastern Europe is still
poorer than in cities in western Europe. It is estimated
that air protection will account for 40 % of the environ-
ment-related investment necessary for accession to the
EU. Although the most serious air protection problems
are encountered in Bulgaria and Romania, there are also
considerable problems in Estonia (use of polluting oil
shale in energy production), Poland (coal-fired power
stations), the Czech Republic (air pollution caused by
industry) and Slovakia. Some countries have drawn up
action programmes for the most heavily polluted areas
but the closure of polluting plants and factories will be
difficult.

Several of the candidate countries face financial
3.2.3.
difficulties in adapting their refineries to present and
future EU fuel quality standards. Transport is already
beginning to be a major polluter in Latvia, Lithuania,
Slovakia and Hungary; it is already the main source of
pollution in EU Member States. Possible problems
caused by transport must be anticipated. Investment in
the transport sector will have to focus on modernizing
public transport and developing rail networks rather
than building motorways.

3.3. Water

3.3.1.
In many of the candidate countries, such
as Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Hungary, water
pollution is the most serious environmental problem.
Untreated or inadequately treated urban waste water is
lowering the quality of river water and continuing to
cause the eutrophication of seas such as the Baltic and
the North Sea. While phosphorus levels in rivers in
western Europe have been falling since the 1980s, they
have been rising in central and eastern Europe. A major
challenge will be the establishment and implementation
of an integrated river basin management approach by
the riparian states of international rivers, such as the
Danube and Oder.

3.3.2.
A Europe-wide problem is the rise in the nitrate
levels of water bodies over the past 20 to 40 years. None
of the candidate countries appear to have made much

progress in implementing the nitrates directive but the
decline in agricultural production due to economic
recession has led to reduced use of fertilizers.

3.3.3.
It is important for the candidate countries to
establish the management infrastructure necessary for
limiting diffuse source pollution of water bodies.
Improvements are necessary in the current Member
States as well. Revised legislation enabling the limitation
of diffuse source pollution must be introduced during
the integration process in all Member States. The way
in which agriculture develops in the future has important
implications for water protection and biodiversity.
Enlargement should be seen as an opportunity to
reorganize agriculture throughout the EU in accordance
with the principles of sustainable development.

3.3.4.
Bringing waste water management and drink-
ing water supply up to EU standards will account for
about a third of the total environmental investment
required for accession. The poor quality of drinking
water is a problem in, for example, Bulgaria, Slovenia,
Romania, Hungary and Estonia. There are concerns
that pesticides pose a threat to the quality of drinking
water in Lithuania. The quality of ground water is
endangered in many EU countries, especially in central
and western Europe, partly because of the widespread
use of fertilizers. Major investment programmes to
improve waste water management and the quality of
drinking water are underway or being planned in the
Baltic States and other candidate countries.

3.4. Waste

3.4.1.
The increasing amount of municipal waste is a
problem common to the whole of Europe. At present,
per capita waste levels in central and eastern European
countries are slightly lower than those in EU countries,
but levels are likely to increase as standards of living
rise. Packaging waste levels, in particular, are higher in
Member States than in the candidate countries. Waste
treatment is centred largely on landfill sites, with
uncontrolled landfill of waste in many candidate
countries. Waste incinerators in Bulgaria and Lithuania
do not meet EU standards.

3.4.2. Hazardous wastes, ground pollution and the
seepage of hazardous substances into the soil and ground
water are problems in nearly all of the candidate
countries. Poland generates large quantities of industrial
waste and the old industrial regions of the Czech
Republic are particular environmental blackspots.
Bringing waste management installations up to EU
standards is likely to account for about 20 % of the total
investment. Even the current
cost of environmental

C 51/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.2.1999

Member States will be hard pressed to achieve the key
objective of the EU’s waste management policy, i.e. a
reduction in the quantity of waste. Much remains to be
done in the candidate countries, if they are to achieve
compliance with the Seveso directive.

3.5. Nuclear safety and radiation protection

3.5.1.
All the countries have recently adopted a basic
law on nuclear safety and radiation protection. Bulgaria
(1993) and Lithuania (1994) have undertaken to close
down inherently unsafe nuclear reactors, in accordance
with the Nuclear Safety Account Agreement with the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
and these commitments must be respected. Although
Slovakia has not entered into any international commit-
ments, it faces a similar challenge with regard to the
closure of two reactors. In Estonia there have been
shortcomings in the management of radiation protec-
tion. Further legislation is needed, and it is important to
note that the most of this legislation must be adopted
even if there is no nuclear sector in the country concerned.

3.6. Nature

3.6.1.
The candidate countries possess vast areas of
untouched nature which contribute significantly to the
bio-diversity of Europe as a whole. All the countries
have important natural assets: examples include the
Carpathian Mountains and Danube Delta in Romania;
an extremely rich biodiversity in Slovenia; extensive
protected areas in Bulgaria; marshes, forests, meadows
and coastal areas in the Baltic States and Poland. While
the Commission report states that to date nature
protection has been managed well in all the candidate
countries, it is important to note that this situation must
be sustained in the future too. As the definition of
protected areas varies from one country to another, the
real value of these areas only becomes apparent when
one considers their purpose, how they are managed and
the restrictions they impose. The Committee calls upon
the Commission to promote the alignment of the laws
of the Member States and the candidate countries
regarding this definition.

3.6.2.
Protected areas alone will not be enough to
maintain biodiversity at current levels in individual
states, let alone in Europe as a whole. Preservation of
biodiversity must be taken into account as far as possible
in all economic activity. To some extent the undeveloped
nature of agriculture and forestry has been a factor
preserving biodiversity in the candidate countries. The
natural assets of many regions are now threatened by
the introduction of more intensive methods of farming
and forestry, on the one hand, and by e.g. the conse-
quences of road construction, on the other. The EU
already finances numerous projects where in the majority
of cases there is no assessment of their effects on
biodiversity. Funding should always be conditional on
extensive environmental impact assessments in which
biodiversity is accorded the same importance as other
environmental considerations.

3.6.3.
In many candidate countries a privatization
process is under way which could jeopardize the preser-
vation of conservation sites. Countries should see to it
that clear rules are established beforehand on the areas
to be protected and compensation. It should also been
borne in mind that the present protected areas will not
necessarily guarantee implementation of the Habitats
and Birds Directives. Many Member States have encoun-
tered serious difficulties in implementing Natura 2000
precisely because of uncertainties surrounding compen-
sation. Nature conservation legislation in the candidate
countries must be brought up to date and the Habitats
and Birds Directives must be incorporated as part of
national environmental legislation, as has been done in
Lithuania.

3.6.4. With regard to nature protection, there is a
need in the candidate countries to strengthen research
and administrative structures and to establish data and
monitoring systems so that species and habitats of great
value are not lost unwittingly. Proper data systems are
also lacking in some of the present Member States. In
general, European countries have a good knowledge of
the species present within their territory, depending of
course on the body of species concerned. By contrast,
knowledge of natural habitats is less systematic. The
Czech Republic stands out among the candidate
countries in this respect in that it has compiled a ‘red
book’ on habitats.

The protection of many natural habitats
3.6.5.
requires management and ongoing monitoring, all of
which must be funded on annual basis. The candidate
countries have also been able to draw on e.g. LIFE-
Nature funding to help build the infrastructure necessary
to provide people with access to nature conservation
sites.

3.6.6.
The candidate countries should focus on
strengthening nature protection legislation and ensuring
that biodiversity is taken into account in the activities
of different policy sectors. Highlighting nature conser-
vation issues as an area where the candidate countries
have a particular strength and serve as a model for the
rest of Europe opens the way to development of mutual
benefit to both existing EU Member States and the
candidate countries.

3.7. Environmental legislation: current situation and

development needs

3.7.1.
Although each candidate country has some
kind of general environmental law, its contents vary
greatly form country to country. All the countries have
begun the transposition of the Community environmen-
tal acquis into their national legislation. This process is
fairly well advanced in some countries e.g. Poland,
Lithuania, Latvia and Hungary. By contrast, much
remains to be done in Bulgaria, Romania, Slovenia
and the Czech Republic. The Directive on Integrated
Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) is an example
of a piece of legislation which no candidate country has
yet managed to transpose into its own legislation.

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51/37

3.7.2.
The candidate countries are required to draw
up a strategy and realistic timetable for the approxi-
mation of legislation. The national
legislative pro-
grammes should take account of environmental prioriti-
es, identified on the basis of a detailed assessment of the
environmental situation in each country, and legislative
and administrative gaps which have to be filled in order
to meet the acquis. Guidance can be obtained from the
EU’s ‘Guide to the Approximation of the European
Union Environmental Legislation’. In addition to frame-
work legislation on the environment, the candidate
countries must have the basic procedures necessary for
efficient environmental administration. In many cases
implementation of legislation requires major investment
and new institutional arrangements or the reorgan-
ization of existing ones.

3.7.3.
The 1995 Commission White Paper on ‘Prep-
aration of the Associated Countries of Central and
Eastern Europe for Integration into the Internal Market
of the Union’ contains the environmental legislation
which has a direct impact on the functioning of the single
market (i.e. product-related environmental legislation).
To date, Hungary is the only candidate country to have
incorporated all this legislation into national
law.
Transposition is also well advanced in Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania and the Czech Republic.

3.7.4.
The DISAE facility (Development of Implemen-
tation Strategies for Approximation in Environment)
and TAIEX (Technical Assistance
Information
Exchange Office) were established to help the candidate
countries transpose the EU acquis into national legis-
lation. In addition, investment-related technical assist-
ance for project preparation is available through the
LSI (Large Scale Infrastructure) facility of the Phare
programme.

3.8. Environmental

administration:

development

needs and prospects

According to the Commission opinions, the
3.8.1.
administrative structure necessary for environmental
management needs to be strengthened in all ten candidate
countries, although the scale of the task varies from
country to country. Strengthening is necessary at all
levels of administration. Drafting and implementing
environmental legislation, monitoring the state of the
environment and fostering sustainable development are
also key tasks for environmental administrations in the
candidate countries.

3.8.2.
The ministries responsible for the environment
draft the necessary legislation and provide for all
measures to implement this legislation. Enforcement of
environmental
legislation is often in the hands of
local and regional authorities, who are responsible for
monitoring, issuing permits and inspection. In many
cases, new legislation requires the total reorganization
of institutions and additional staff training. In addition,
financial resources must be earmarked for the establish-

ment and strengthening of environmental administrative
structures in the same way as for more conventional
investment. Special attention needs to be paid to the
development of local and regional administration in the
environmental field in all the candidate countries.

3.8.3.
Cooperation and exchanges of experience
between the present 15 Member States’ local and regional
authorities, with their longstanding experience and
expertise in environmental administration, and their
opposite numbers in the candidate countries, which are
building up their knowhow in such matters, makes a
valuable contribution to this process.

3.8.4.
As local authorities are assuming increased
responsibilities in implementing EU environmental legis-
lation, the Commission intends to help towns and cities
in the candidate countries to participate in the European
Sustainable Cities and Towns Campaign. Thanks to
this network towns and cities will be better equipped to
develop integrated and least-cost plans for implementing
the new legislation. Sustainable development consider-
ations should be incorporated into the legislation and
practices of various sectors, such as trade and industry.
Similarly, they should be taken into account in sectoral
administration. This will require training of workers,
information and increased public participation.

3.8.5. With a view to the growing involvement of the
local authorities of central and eastern Europe in the
European Sustainable Cities and Towns Campaign,
the Committee calls upon the Commission to ensure
long-term financial support for activities under this
campaign and, to this end, proposes that a ‘Sustainable
Cities and Towns Fund’ be set up.

Environmental assistance and institution-
3.8.6.
building measures will be reinforced through Phare
national programmes. The Commission also intends to
assist authorities in the candidate countries by publishing
further guidance documents. The EU’s informal network
for the implementation and enforcement of environmen-
tal law (IMPEL) was set up in 1992 to promote more
effective application of environmental legislation in the
Community. The Commission has begun the construc-
tion of a parallel network for the candidate countries
which will be closely linked to IMPEL and will use the
experience gained from IMPEL to address implemen-
tation and enforcement issues related to application of
the Community environmental acquis.

3.8.7.
The EU’s Research, Technological Develop-
ment and Demonstration (RTD) Programmes are
becoming increasingly important as efforts are made to

C 51/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.2.1999

include operators from central and eastern European
countries in Community programmes. Collaboration
through networking of partners in RTD activities in the
candidate countries will act as a spur to cross-border
and intersectoral cooperation in the environmental field.
In addition, the environmental activities foreseen in the
Information Society Research programme (of the Fifth
cooperation
Framework Programme) will
between national and local authorities, research organ-
izations and industry in the EU and the CEEC. This will
be supplemented by the inclusion of the candidate
countries in the work of the European Environmental
Agency, with a special focus on reports on the state of
Europe’s environment and implementation of the EU’s
environmental legislation.

foster

3.9. Meeting the financial challenge

3.9.1.
The total cost of the investment required to
achieve compliance with the environmental acquis in
the ten candidate countries could amount to some ECU
120 billion. The bulk of the investment is likely to be
needed for infrastructure in air pollution abatement,
water and waste water management and waste manage-
ment. Substantial resources will also be needed to
establish and reinforce environmental administrative
structures for efficient implementation, monitoring and
enforcement.

Unfortunately, no funds have been earmarked
3.9.2.
in the Commission report for nature protection in the
candidate countries. The Commission should revise the
investment plans to take account of nature protection.
In Ireland, the costs arising from implementation of the
Habitats Directive and its monitoring were estimated at
approximately IEP 100 million, which is 10 % of
the total environmental costs incurred by Ireland in
connection with accession, i.e. a very substantial pro-
portion.

3.9.3.
Environmental and general economic and com-
petitive improvements can be achieved at the same time
only by fully incorporating environmental consider-
ations into sectoral policies and investment decisions.
This can be achieved in practice by introducing compre-
hensive environmental impact appraisal procedures, by
strict adherence to the precautionary principle and the
polluter pays principle and by carrying out sound
scientific assessments for all
investment and policy
decisions. Merely meeting the legislative requirements
for accession is not enough; rather, a forward-looking
approach is needed which is responsive to energy
efficiency, cleaner technologies, waste minimization,
public transport and environmental and natural resource
constraints. The candidate countries should examine
how the environmental gains resulting from economic
recession during the first years of transition can be
maintained as their economies grow.

3.9.4.
The EU is offering the candidate countries
financial assistance (ECU 1,5 billion/year) under the
Phare programme for use in their pre-accession prep-
arations. More assistance should be granted under this
programme for infrastructure investment necessary to
achieve compliance with the environmental acquis, for
regional cooperation projects (for example, to establish
objectives for implementing key framework directives
for water and air and for meeting their obligations under
international agreements) and for development projects
related to administration. The candidate countries are
already able to participate in the LIFE programme and
obtain financing from it. With particular reference to
the development of environmental administration, the
opportunities contained in the pre-accession financial
instruments, e.g. the ‘Institution Building’ component
of the Phare programme, should be exploited in a
wide-ranging partnership which draws on expertise and
experience at a decentralized level.

Investment in water protection is important,
3.9.5.
but there is a particular need to further develop local
waste water treatment technologies rather than just
build large treatment plants, although the latter are
undoubtedly needed to solve the waste water problems
of big cities. Here too the aim should be to apply
technology which to an increasing extent is based on
the principles of sustainable development; for example,
the use of sewage sludge must be planned in such a way
that it is does not go straight to a landfill site. In
the construction sector new systems based on water
circulation and the dual water system should be installed
in new buildings.

The Commission has allocated financing
3.9.6.
(approx. ECU 0,5 billion/year) under the pre-EAGGF
facility for the development of agriculture and rural
areas in the period 2000-2006. Attention should be
focused on adapting agriculture in a sustainable way so
as to prevent a transition in the candidate countries
towards the kind of intensive farming practised in the
EU. Agriculture in the candidate countries is still
relatively extensive and makes little use of chemicals.
Ideally, agriculture should evolve in such a way that
the stage of intensive farming and heavy reliance on
chemicals can be skipped altogether.

The Instrument

for Structural Policies for
3.9.7.
Pre-accession Assistance (ISPA) provides financing (ECU
1 billion/year) for upgrading transport infrastructure
and environmental investment (in the period 2000-2006).
The candidate countries are required to promote sus-
tainable transport and energy policies. As far as transport
is concerned, this implies the development of environ-
mentally sustainable modes of transport and transport
services such as rail, waterborne and public transport
and the integration of several modes of transport
(intermodality). The EU’s development banks (EIB,
EBRD) should also provide financing for these purposes.
A project has recently been launched within the Phare
transport programme which is designed to mitigate the
effects of transport-related environmental problems
through regional cooperation. Coordination of the

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51/39

Interreg and Phare programmes will have to be improved
in the future.

3.9.8.
The COR feels that it is important for local
and regional authorities in the candidate countries to
be given the opportunity to play an active role in
implementing ISPA measures (a) through taking part,
or setting in motion, practical projects and (b) in the
form of ongoing representation on the committees that
are to monitor and evaluate intervention.

The candidate countries are required to draw
3.9.9.
up a comprehensive financial strategy and detailed
operational arrangements. Community funding has a
catalytic effect in that it helps to mobilize other resources.
It must always be supplemented by national resources
and preferably also by financing from other sources, e.g.
international financial institutions.

4. Conclusions

4.1.
In the COR ’s view environmental issues are
among the most important questions in the enlargement
negotiations. The accession process offers an excellent
opportunity to improve the environmental situation
in Europe. The aim must be to achieve sustainable
development by seeking to implement environmental
legislation and integrating environmental considerations
into all industrial sectors, transport, energy production
and agriculture. The transposition of the environmental
acquis into national legislation should not therefore be
seen as the ultimate objective, but an intermediate stage
on the road towards sustainable development in Europe.

4.2.
The COR considers it to be of the utmost
importance to strengthen environmental administration
in the candidate countries and to disseminate know-how
on environmental issues and sustainable development.

4.3.
The COR would emphasize the overriding
importance of monitoring the environmental situation
and publicizing the results. It can serve as a basis for
raising public awareness of environmental affairs and
highlighting the concept of sustainable development
throughout society.

4.4.
The COR concurs with the Commission’s view
that special attention needs to be paid to the development
of local and regional administration in the environmental
field in all the candidate countries. The accession
strategies are of great significance at local and regional
level. For while environmental
legislation is drawn
up at national
level, enforcement is frequently the
responsibility of local and regional authorities, who
carry out monitoring, issue permits and perform inspec-
tions. In many cases the new legislation will require
major reorganization of administrative bodies and staff
training. Financial resources must also be earmarked
for establishing and reinforcing environmental adminis-
trative structures as well as for conventional investment.

4.5.
The COR therefore calls for special action to
reinforce cooperation and exchanges of experience
between the decentralized authorities in the candidate
countries and the EU-15 respectively, with a view to
boosting administrative capacity in the implementation
and deployment of environmental legislation. Further,
the COR urges the Commission to ensure that the
decentralized authorities in the candidate countries are,
early on, assigned an active role at all stages in the
framing and implementation of the accession strategies
for environment.

4.6.
The COR feels that improving air quality is one
of the key environmental issues in the candidate countries
and that it must be addressed by appropriate action in
industry, energy production and the transport sector.
Implementation of the IPPC Directive is essential.

4.7.
The COR takes the view that bringing waste
water and drinking water management up to EU
standards will require investment on a very large scale.
The COR nevertheless feels that in constructing new
installations the candidate countries should try to find
sustainable solutions.

4.8.
The COR believes that enlargement offers an
excellent opportunity to upgrade the quality of surface
and ground water throughout Europe. This can be
achieved, on the one hand, by tightening legislation, for
example by implementing the Nitrates Directive, river
basin management plans andlegislation on diffuse source
pollution, and, on the other hand, by implementing new
innovative projects.

4.9.
The COR is concerned about the large quantities
of waste in Europe. Every effort must be made to ensure
that waste levels do not increase in the candidate
countries as a result of accession and, moreover, that
levels decrease in existing Member States. More active
use must be made of economic incentives to resolve this
problem. The Committee would also stress the need to
ensure that free competition and free movement of
goods do not lead to distortions in the area of environ-
mental policy during the candidate countries’ process of
adaptation.

4.10.
The COR feels that radiation and nuclear safety
issues are critical. Dangerous plants in the candidate
countries must definitely be closed down.

4.11.
The COR takes the view that more emphasis
must be placed on nature protection and the preservation
of biodiversity. Although the candidate countries may
now have a fairly good network of protected areas, this
does not automatically imply that the situation will
remain good in the future. Possible changes in land
ownership must be anticipated. Similarly, the preser-
vation of biodiversity must be taken into account in all
economic activity to the greatest possible extent. Efforts

C 51/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.2.1999

must be made to ensure a good level of protection of
natural habitats and species in the candidate countries.
The protection of many habitats requires management.
In addition, there is a need for continuous monitoring.
This all requires funding on a regular annual basis.
Adequate financing must be earmarked for investment
in nature protection (about 10 % on average of the total
cost of environmental investment).

4.12.
The COR feels that a more detailed analysis
should be made of the economic effects of accession and
the investment needs it entails by drawing on local
knowledge and expertise and basing investment plans
on a choice of options which are compatible with
sustainable development. Investment plans must take
account of options whose employment effects are com-
patible with sustainable development. In addition, the
investment devoted to planning and
share of total
development must be increased so that projects are not
implemented without knowing beforehand whether they
are sensible or not. Expenditure on investment should
also include allocations for the evaluation and monitor-
ing of the effects of projects. A system must be set up so
that mistakes can be avoided and lessons can be learned
from past mistakes.

The COR feels that the starting point for
4.13.
examining the environmental impact of enlargement
must be sustainable development. The candidate
countries should not seek rigidly to follow in the
footsteps of the present Member States in terms of
development and management of environmental affairs.
Instead, they should explore the possibilities of moving
one step ahead of them. In many cases this could be
done with the same human and financial resource inputs
that would be required to emulate the present Member

Brussels, 19 November 1998.

States. It should be remembered that EU countries
face serious environmental problems, some of which
legislation seems to be quite powerless to resolve.

4.14.
The candidate countries typically have good
public transport systems, which the COR feels should
be preserved and developed further. This would help to
prevent a massive increase in the number of cars, which
unfortunately has already begun to rise sharply in many
of the candidate countries. A balanced mix of all modes
of transport (rail, waterborne, air and road) will help to
establish a durable transport strategy in all the countries
which have applied for EU membership.

4.15.
The COR feels that the candidate countries
should focus attention on the sustainable adaptation of
agriculture so that they can avoid the mistakes of
intensive farming which have afflicted the EU.

4.16.
The COR would underline the need to support
the networking of Europe’s regions and localities.
Collaboration must be developed within and between
the various policy sectors.

4.17.
In the view of the COR, the environmental
accession strategies should be based on an integrated
approach. The communication stresses the importance
of legislation and financing. There is a particular need
to put in place the necessary legislation. In financing,
decisions should be guided by the principle of sustainable
development.

4.18.
The COR feels that education and training have
a key role to play in improving the environmental
situation in the candidate countries and raising citizens’
environmental awareness.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Manfred DAMMEYER