Benefits of compliance with the acquis in the potential candidate countries

1. Benefits of compliance with the acquis in the potential candidate countries Summary Results from benefits study: On former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Albania, Serbia, incl. Kosovo, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Montenegro (Arcadis-Ecolas, IEEP, Metroeconomica and Enviro-L) Patrick ten Brink (IEEP), Ljupco Avramovski (Enviro-L), Stijn Vermoote (Arcadis Ecolas), Samuela Bassi (IEEP), Karen Callebaut (Arcadis Ecolas), Arnoud Lust (Arcadis Ecolas), Alistair Hunt (Metroeconomica) Patrick ten Brink Senior Fellow and Head of Brussels Office Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) www.ieep.eu Priority Environmental Investment Programme (PEIP) – CARDS Regional Regional Meeting for Senior Officials from SEE and Donors’ Community 26th November Brussels, Belgium

2. Aim of SEE Benefits Study • Explore and estimate the environmental, economic, and social benefits likely to arise from the full implementationof the EU env. legislation in the SEE countries - the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Albania, Serbia, incl. Kosovo, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Montenegro. • Get a full and better understanding of the real effects of their accession to the EU – covering benefits and not only costs. • And ensure that environmental concerns are given the attention, priority and funding that they deserve. Aim of this presentation – give an overview as to the results

3. The Implementation Challenge • Each country that wishes to join the EU needs to implement the body of EU environmental law, known as the ‘Acquis Communautaire’, • This comprises around 300 Environmental Directives and Regulations, including daughter Directives and amendments + environmental aspects of legislation in other sectors • Transposition : Legislative compliance • Getting administrative capacity in place • Implementing legislation – identifying (best/appropriate new) projects; covering investment costs; finding funding/finance, • Operation/maintenance (possible upgrade) of environmental infrastructure • Monitoring and enforcing legislation

4. SEE Benefits Studies What can be said in what terms and what was explored? How much would the reduced emissions and damages avoided by implementing EU directives be worth? Non-Specified Benefits Valuation and Quantification and Description of Benefits • Quantitative: • Level of emissions reduced • E.g. how many cases of respiratory diseases are avoided? Elements No No Monetary Value Yes yes yes Quantitative Review of Effects • Type of benefits – eg health impacts, cleaner water Yes Yes Yes Yes Qualitative Review Chemicals Nuclear Waste Nature Air Water Full Range of Effects • Need to be realistic about what can be said in what terms and to what audience.

5. Benefit Type Air Water Waste Nature Health Avoided respiratory illnesses and premature deaths Households access to and confidence in clean drinking water, clean bathing waters Reduced risk of poisoning and accidents due to methane leakage Access to nature positive for health; nature ‘green lungs’ Resources Avoided damage to buildings and crops Cleaner groundwater (aquifers) (less pre-treatment) and surface waters, bathing waters Reduced input of primary material, energy generation Local produce + ecosystem services (water purification) Eco-systems Avoided global warming from CO2 emissions Improved river water quality (+ biodiversity / eco-system stability / health) Avoided global warming from CH4 emissions Protected areas and species Social Improved access to cultural heritage (less damage to historic buildings) Angling and recreation in rivers, lakes and beaches Awareness of own responsibility and impacts on the environment Access to protected areas – individuals, communities, work Wider Economic Cultural tourism. Attracting investment. Employment from environmental goods Increased tourism to recognised clean beaches; reducing pre-treatment costs and attracting investment Reduced primary materials imports. Attracting investment given locational quality. Eco-tourism and general nature tourism Benefits of Action types

6. Air Pollution related benfitsQuantitative Assessment– Results(fewer cases of chronic bronchitis & early mortality)

7. Monetary Assessment- Results Remarks: • The gaseous pollutants (NMVOC, SO2, NOX, NH3) comprise almost 73% of the benefits; • PM10 comprise almost 27% of the total benefits; • Avoided early mortality is generally the largest source of benefit (ca. 64%); • Morbidity reduced benefits account generally for ca. 32% whilst reduced damage to materials and to crops account for 4% and 0,0001% respectively; *: total monetary benefits (linked to premature death) for the SEE countries (except Croatia) resulting from the summation of domestic efforts to comply with the EU acquis in the field of air.

8. Benefits - Water

9. Water: Monetary assessment

10. Waste: Qualitative Assessment • In general the region faces large problems with: • wild waste dumps and non-compliant landfills, • the lack of a well organised waste collection system and lack of separate collection of waste streams • lack of regional sanitary landfills and • lack of decent hazardous waste management • The need for the establishment of a well functioning waste stream data system and investments in public awareness raising events is a priority for all of the countries under investigation.

11. Waste: Qualitative Assessment

12. Waste: Quantitative Assessment

13. Benefits from Nature Directives in SEE • Environmental benefits • Increased protected areas coverage: from 6 to 13% on average • Increase in the level of protection: eg of relict lakes ecosystems in Albania, FYROM and Kosovo • Increased connectivity between protected areas: eg reduced fragmentation in FYROM due to infrastructures, overuse of resources etc • Reduced threats/risks to species and habitats: eg wetlands destruction, intensive agriculture etc threatening birds in Kosovo • Eco-system benefits: eg reduced soil erosion from deforestation in Albania • Improved environmental data – especially in Kosovo and B-H

14. Quality 1950 2000 Quantity Quantity Approach: Nature benefits Quality 1000 Further potential possible 1900 Pollution starts to have major effect on quality Transformation of Europe to Agricultural economy With EU Acquis Reduced threats, improved mgt Now Designation of new areas as Natura 2000 • Qualitative benefits: environmental – social - economic • Quantitative benefits: expected increase in protected areas size • Monetary benefits: n/a

15. Quantification: size of protected areas • Current level of protected areas: from 0.5% (B-H) to 9% (Albania) • Planned coverage: from 10% (Kosovo/Serbia) to 16% (B-H) • Planned growth of 1.3 million ha new forests in Serbia • Potential further increase of protected areas – eg towards EU average: 15-30%

16. Overall conclusions of the study • Approximately 6050 equivalent cases of chronic bronchitis /4475 fewer cases of premature death arising from lung cancer could be avoided per year • Air benefits : annual benefit 631 to 1.115 million EUR, • 55% to 94% of population benefiting from quality improvements of drinking water / 6.3 million households • Drinking water quality benefits : around 654 million EUR/year • Benefits of an improved surface water quality : 114 to 389 million EUR/year • Total Water Benefits: 750 - 893 million EUR/year • Total benefits air and water:1,4 - 2 billion EUR/year • Reduction ofmethane emissions from landfills: 70 - 191 ktonnes/year • decrease in landfill disposal levels to around 64 to 54% of the non-implementation levels. • Level of nature protected areas increases from 0.5% - 8% of the territory to about 10% - 16% • Level of management and protection expected to improve. The SEE countries will add to the wealth of EU biodiversity and ecosystems.

17. Overall conclusions of the study • Implementation of the EU environmental acquis leads to very important environmental, economic and social benefits for the SEE countries • When comparing these benefits with the associated costs, careful interpretation is needed, taking into account qualitative, quantified and monetised benefits and the uncertainty margins • Understanding of Benefits should help confirm priority for action. • Results hopefully useful for: • National ministries of environment • National ministries of health, labour and consumer protection • Regional authorities • For municipalities • For inspectorates/enforcement agencies • For the European commission - for a basis for dialogue • Good for the environment – with economic and social benefits • Supporting move to EU accession

18. Benefits of compliance with the acquis in the potential candidate countries IEEP is an independent not for profit institute dedicated to advancing an environmentally sustainable Europe through policy analysis, development and dissemination. Thank you Patrick ten Brink Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) www.ieep.eu Building on work by the team: Arcadis-Ecolas, IEEP, Metroeconomica & Enviro-L Priority Environmental Investment Programme (PEIP) – CARDS Regional Regional Meeting for Senior Officials from SEE and Donors’ Community 26th November Brussels, Belgium