Third Briefing of Billions for Sustainability? Project Launched Today

BRUSSELS, April 17, 2002 - On the occasion of Green Week and the discussion of EU enlargement, CEE Bankwatch Network and Friends of the Earth Europe launched today the third briefing on the monitoring of pre-accession funds: Sustainable Theory – Unsustainable Practice? The NGOs point out several issues related to EU aid and they ask a controversial question – is the ultimate goal of the pre-accession funds merely to spend money?

The EU financial mechanisms for pre-accession aid, ISPA, SAPARD and PHARE, should help candidate countries catch up with EU legislation and standards, as well as teach the national and local authorities to deal with such funds. “Even though pre-accession funds were intended to be a learning process for candidate countries for the future utilisation of structural and cohesion funds, it seems that the investment themselves have become the most important aspect of the whole process,” says Magda Stoczkiewicz coordinating the Billions for Sustainability? Project of CEE Bankwatch Network and Friends of the Earth Europe.

Studies in this report, written by environmental NGOs in the candidate countries, point to major deficiencies in the implementation of pre-accession funds.  The main issues covered in the briefing are: public participation and access to information, the quality and capacity aspect and the role of Western consultancies, as well as the potential negative environmental impacts of  EU financed projects.

“Generally we have observed a lack of public participation,” says Peep Mardiste from Friends of the Earth Estonia. “It happens that the responsible agencies treat public involvement as an obstacle for the smooth and expeditious preparation of plans and projects. One must doubt the genuine intention of consulting NGOs if the deadlines given for the NGOs’ reactions are 3 weeks (including the Christmas and New Year holidays) as in Estonia, or 3 days (from Friday to Monday) as in Latvia.”

Anelia Stefanova from Za Zemiata in Bulgaria mentions problems with Western consulting companies helping to prepare strategies and projects in candidate countries. “There was no project submitted by the Bulgarian Government for ISPA financing that was accepted by the EC without problems. The low capacity of the Ministry of Environment to develop a good project is one thing.  However, for the development of projects, Bulgaria usually takes money from the PHARE program and foreign consultants are hired for conducting feasibility studies and EIA reports. In this case one should consider that the responsibility for the low project quality should be shared with the consulting firm and the EC, as the funder of the projects.”

Another very important issue is the conflict with natural protected areas and the overall environmental impact of pre-accession funded projects. “From the environmental point of view, it is important that the pre-accession funds are in line with the EU Sustainable Development Strategy and promote sustainable development and environmentally friendly solutions without endangering the environment,” says Stoczkiewicz. “However, the reality is often different. Projects such as Kresna gorge in Bulgaria or the Czech D8 motorway are clear examples of promoting infrastructure at all costs.”

The report contains a set of general, as well as more detailed, recommendations on the pre-accession funds and what should be changed to make sustainable development, learning and democracy building a main goal of these funds. 

The report Sustainable Theory – Unsustainable Practice? Billions for Sustainability? Third Briefing can be downloaded from www.bankwatch.org or www.foeeurope.org/activities/Enlargement/index.htm

For further information contact:
Magda Stoczkiewicz, 02/542 01 80, magdas@foeeurope.org
Peep Mardiste: mobile: +372-50-78 111
Authors of the report from Estonia and Bulgaria are available for interviews during Green Week.

Back