Publications on EU funds

The EU-backed Energy Community Treaty, signed in 2005 and comprising the western Balkan countries, Ukraine and Moldova, has been widely hailed as encouraging regional co-operation. It also sets a legislative framework for the signatories (also known as the contracting parties) that should contribute, along with the EU accession process, to addressing the environmental and social impacts of the energy sector. Indeed, examples of the Energy Community's added value are its adoption of renewable energy targets in October 2012, as well as a requirement for power plants to comply with EU emissions limits.

At the peak of EU funds’ programming, experiences from CEE countries reveal deficiencies in the application of the Code of Conduct and a flawed implementation of the partnership principle. This undermines the credibility of the programming process and leaves benefits of a comprehensive involvement of all stakeholders untapped. The sometimes even entertaining list of partnership shortcomings brings us to the conclusion that a purely voluntary partnership without common standards much too often continues to end up being a purely formal exercise, and that the promotion of best practices alone is not sufficient to ensure quality partnership.

At the moment from an NGO's point of view the Operational Programme of Latvia looks well defined and very promising in general. But the way how the OP is described at the moment is too general also for a SEA to assess the possible negative impacts on environment as well as for NGOs to consider that the implementation of OP could cause serious environmental problems, let alone the strategic direction Latvia chose to follow with support of ESI funds.

The Operational Programme Transport 2007-2013 is expected to provide EUR 5.8 billion for transport projects in the Czech Republic. Of this amount, up to EUR 1.3 billion should come from the EIB via the Structural and Cohesion Funds Transport Framework Facility for 2007-2013, with some 55 percent earmarked for investments in new motorway corridors and the rest for upgrades to existing rail corridors. An analysis of the OP project showed many cases of misuse of the public funding.