EU Enlargement and the Benefits of
    Environmental Legislation


 Oxford University MSc Brussels Study Tour
MSc Environm...
Presentation Overview


EU Enlargement and the accession challenge

Aim of the Benefits Studies (CC-13, Croatia, SEE & als...
EU Enlargement and the Accession Challenge
Enlargement - a short history
Big Bang: EU-15 goes to EU-25
1 May 2004 : Hungary, Poland, the Czech
Republic, the Slovak R...
Past EU Enlargements - Details
                                                                              1951 ECSC:
  ...
SEE Countries – in due course all are
                    expected to be part of the EU
   The SEE countries - the former ...
Future Members or special relationships ?
  What of European Neighbourhood Policy countries?

ENP countries – always simpl...
Conditions for Membership


      Treaty of the European Union (TEU)
      Article 49 of the TEU:
      Any European State...
Conditions for membership: Copenhagen, 1993

     1) Political criteria (enshrined in the TEU, article 6)
     The applica...
Accession Negotiations: the process
      •    Opening of chapters to the negotiations:
             – Screening
         ...
Accession negotiations: Chapters
        1.    Free movement of goods                                19.   Social policy a...
The Implementation Challenge

  Each country that wishes to join the EU needs to implement the body of EU
environmental la...
The Steps in the Development of Legislation

                              Review            Commission working proposals
...
The Steps in the Legislative Process

                White Paper                           Communication                 ...
Good regulation should be Practicable and Enforceable
   Yet problems can be seen in the Regulatory Cycle


              ...
The Financing challenge: estimated Financing Needs for
          compliance with the EU environmental acquis

Country     ...
Examples of environmental legislation – areas where
        there is a real challenge to most countries

•   The Urban Was...
Legislation and Common Pollutants
              EU Directives                                               Air




      ...
What issues are likely to be important
Air                Water                    Waste                         Nature
Ma...
Aim of the Benefits Studies
The Benefits Studies

The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate
countries (July 2001)
led...
Specific Aim of the Benefits Studies

 Explore and estimate the environmental, economic, and social benefits likely to
ari...
Use of the Benefits Studies

   For the European Commission – for dialogue, negotiations,
launching studies/cooperation

 ...
Methodological approaches
Background: Development Paths

Figure ES.1: Alternative Development Paths in the Accession Countries

Increased          S...
Basic Valuation Framework
   Understand state of environment ‘now’ - the reference point. This includes
and understanding ...
What are the improvements
            and what are useful targets / benchmarks?

                  Baseline pollution leve...
Methodology Overview
  Three steps to Analyse the Benefits of Implementing Env
Legislation

     Type of Benefits:
       ...
Benefits Studies
What can be said in what terms and what was explored?
                                                   ...
Basic Valuation Framework


     Damage Cost / Benefits
           Savings




                                           ...
Relation between pollution and impact

Exposure to pollution leads to a possibility for illness. This is measured as a
“pr...
Dose Response Functions – Some examples




Source: Elena Strukova, Alexander Golub, and Anil Markandya, Air Pollution Cos...
Transfer Value approach – An example
                   Important as countries have different levels of wealth




Source:...
Benefits of Action types - Air

    Health benefits                     Avoided respiratory illnesses and premature deaths...
Benefits - Water



 Health benefits                     Households benefiting from connection to (improved)
             ...
Waste: Qualitative Assessment

Health benefits              Lower pollution to groundwater and surface water
             ...
Benefits from Nature Directives
  • Environmental benefits
              Increased protected areas coverage
              ...
Approach: Nature benefits
Quality                                        Quality

                                        ...
Benefits from improving the environment
Key Findings: CC-13 Study
                              Extent of Benefits
   Air
         43.000 and 180.000 fewer cases ...
Key Findings: CC-13 Study
                                 Value of Benefits
 Air
      7 to 44 billion Euro / yr for full...
Key Findings: SEE study
   Air
         Approximately 6050 equivalent cases of chronic bronchitis / 4475 fewer
         ca...
Key Findings: SEE study (cont.)

   Waste
         Reduction of methane emissions from landfills: 70 - 191 ktonnes/year
  ...
Key Findings: Ukraine
           from reduced exposure to air pollution


 Air
       22,000-27,000 cases of early mortali...
Some country details
               Annual Value of Benefits for Full Compliance: Lower Estimate

       4500
       4000
...
Annual Benefits of Full Compliance - Share of GDP
 CZ                                                                     ...
Transboundary Benefits

  Domestic action also benefits to other candidate countries and the
EU- notably from implementing...
Total Candidate Country Benefits – Benefits from Domestic Action
      and Benefits from action by other Candidate Countri...
Conclusions
Overall Conclusions

   Implementing the EU environmental directives can help improve the
health and quality of life for c...
Where is benefits assessment going?

 Benefits have to be assessed within the Impact Assessments that now
need to be done ...
EU Enlargement and the Benefits of
           Environmental Legislation

  IEEP is an independent not for profit institute...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Benefits Of Environmental Leglsiation Patrick Ten Brink Presentation To Oxford University Masters Students 7 March 2008 Final

1,874

Published on

Benefits Of Environmental Leglsiation Patrick ten Brink Presentation to Oxford University Masters Students presenting the key issues, results and methods behind the evaluation of benefits of EU enlargement

Published in: Economy & Finance
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,874
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
99
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Benefits Of Environmental Leglsiation Patrick Ten Brink Presentation To Oxford University Masters Students 7 March 2008 Final

  1. 1. EU Enlargement and the Benefits of Environmental Legislation Oxford University MSc Brussels Study Tour MSc Environmental Change and Management Brussels 7 March 2008 Patrick ten Brink / Samuela Bassi IEEP Ptenbrink@ieep.eu www.ieep.eu
  2. 2. Presentation Overview EU Enlargement and the accession challenge Aim of the Benefits Studies (CC-13, Croatia, SEE & also ENP) Methodological approaches Benefits of improving environmental legislation Conclusions Building on work by the team: Study on 13 Candidate Countries: Ecotec, IEEP, Eftec, Metroeconomica and experts SEE Benefits study: Arcadis-Ecolas, IEEP, Metroeconomica & Enviro-L ENP Methodology work: IEEP
  3. 3. EU Enlargement and the Accession Challenge
  4. 4. Enlargement - a short history Big Bang: EU-15 goes to EU-25 1 May 2004 : Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, plus the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and the Mediterranean islands of The 2001 Benefits Study focus Malta and Cyprus. The choice of these All 12 of the new Member States and countries for EU accession in 2004 was the Turkey` culmination of a long process of preparation and negotiation. The 2007 Sequel 1 May 2007 : Bulgaria, Romania Now: 27 countries and 493 million people European reconciliation after 50 years The Future? Balkans? Turkey? Iceland? ENP countries? Source: European Commission
  5. 5. Past EU Enlargements - Details 1951 ECSC: France,Italy, Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxembourg 1973: Denmark, Ireland, and UK 1981: Greece 1986: Spain and Portugal 1995: Austria, Finland and Sweden 2004: Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia. 2007 Romania and Bulgaria Source: http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/data/current/EUenlargement2007.ppt#376,3,Previous enlargements
  6. 6. SEE Countries – in due course all are expected to be part of the EU The SEE countries - the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Montenegro are either formal EU-candidates or expected to become EU candidates. The EU has repeatedly reaffirmed at the highest level its commitment for eventual EU membership of the Western Balkan countries, provided they fulfil the accession criteria. Croatia and Turkey are formally recognised as candidate countries. They started accession negotiations on 3 October 2005. Source: www.albic.net In December 2005, the European Council granted the former Yugoslav Republic of Croatia Benefits Study focus (2005) Macedonia the status of a candidate country. The SEE Benefits Study focus (2006-7)
  7. 7. Future Members or special relationships ? What of European Neighbourhood Policy countries? ENP countries – always simply neighbours? Some early debate – eg on Ukraine, Moldova Others – from Morocco to Syria – seen as special neighbours. Personal expectation that some will become members (eg Moldova, Ukraine), others will remain outside (Maghreb to Syria) Still Benefits of implementing environmental legislation Source: European Commission ` Some may build on EU example, others may ENP Benefits studies yet to be done – build on other examples or build on only a methodological guidelines and domestic vision for what is appropriate partial test case on the Ukraine
  8. 8. Conditions for Membership Treaty of the European Union (TEU) Article 49 of the TEU: Any European State which respects the principles set out in Article 6(1) may apply to become a member of the Union. Article 6 of the TEU: The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States. http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/data/current/EUenlargement2007.ppt#264,5,Conditions for Membership
  9. 9. Conditions for membership: Copenhagen, 1993 1) Political criteria (enshrined in the TEU, article 6) The applicant country must have achieved stability of its institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. 2) Economic criteria – Functioning market economy – Capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the EU. 3) Acquis adoption and implementation criteria Ability to take on the obligations related to membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union, and to implement them efficiently and effectively. The EU’s capacity to absorb new members. http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/data/current/EUenlargement2007.ppt#265,6,Conditions for membership Copenhagen - June, 1993
  10. 10. Accession Negotiations: the process • Opening of chapters to the negotiations: – Screening – If negative: fulfillment of contractual obligations – EU-27 unanimous decision (Intergovernmental conference) • For each chapter to be opened: – Negotiating position by candidate country – Draft Common Position by Commission to the Member States – EU common position adopted by MS unanimously ---- Next step • Acquis, if not negotiable? – Transitional measures may be negotiated : limited in time and scope. Ex: free movement of workers environment http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/data/current/EUenlargement2007.ppt#389,14,Accession Negotiations: the process
  11. 11. Accession negotiations: Chapters 1. Free movement of goods 19. Social policy and employment 2. Freedom of movement for workers 20. Enterprise and industrial policy 3. Right of establishment and freedom 21. Trans-European Networks to provide services 22. Regional policy and coordination 4. Free movement of capital of structural instruments 5. Public procurement 23. Judiciary and fundamental rights 6. Company law 24. Justice, freedom and security 7. Intellectual property law 25. Science and research 8. Competition policy 26. Education and culture 9. Financial services 27. Environment 10. Information society and media 28. Consumers and health protection 11. Agriculture 29. Customs union 12. Food safety, veterinary and 30. External relations phytosanitary policy 31. Foreign security and defence policy 13. Fisheries 32. Financial control 14. Transport policy 33. Financial and budgetary provisions 15. Energy 34. Institutions 16. Taxation 35. Other issues 17. Economic and monetary policy 18. Statistics http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/data/current/EUenlargement2007.ppt#266,17,Accession negotiations: Chapters
  12. 12. 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 (the financing challenge), Operation/maintenance (possible upgrade) of environmental infrastructure Monitoring and enforcing legislation There is the additional challenge of also respecting EU, international and domestic commitments which go beyond implementing EU legislation, which adds to the scale and complexity of the task (but not explored here)
  13. 13. The Steps in the Development of Legislation Review Commission working proposals Impact Assessment consultation Proposed Regulation Directive Council/Parliament Adopted Regulation Directive Complementary legislation Transposition legislation Implementation Inspection/Enforcement Insights on implementation Source: IMPEL Workshop: Issues of Practicability and Enforcement and the Policy Cycle, Project Workshop 11-13 October 2006, Golden Tulip Rotterdam-Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
  14. 14. The Steps in the Legislative Process White Paper Communication Green Paper Commissioned work Consultation Commission Internal working proposals Impact Assessment (IA) Proposed Regulation Proposed Directive Council/Parliament Adopted Regulation Adopted Directive IA Transposition: Proposed National Legislation Consultation Complementary legislation National legislation Guidance Consultation – eg for permits Implementation IA Monitoring, Enforcement & Reporting Review Consultation Propose Amendment IA Regulation Directive
  15. 15. Good regulation should be Practicable and Enforceable Yet problems can be seen in the Regulatory Cycle requirements Policies EU prove to be Transposition Legislation unclear, conflicting Impact Assessment Consultation requirements can not reasonably be Revision Implementation complied with compliance with Monitoring Evaluation requirements Inspection can not reasonably Review Enforcement be checked policy aims of legislation are not met by compliance with requirements; requirements can requirements prove to be not be enforced inappropriate Source: IMPEL Workshop: Issues of Practicability and Enforcement and the Policy Cycle, Project Workshop 11-13 October 2006, Golden Tulip Rotterdam-Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
  16. 16. The Financing challenge: estimated Financing Needs for compliance with the EU environmental acquis Country BG CY CZ EE H LV Total Cost 1997 15000 1118- 13400 1500 13700 1710 Estimate MEUR 1264 2001 update 8610 1086 6600- 4406 4118-10000 1480- Total Cost MEUR 9400 2360 Country LT MT PL RO SK SI Total Total Cost 1997 2380 NA 35200 22000 5400 1840 122618- Estimate MEUR 122764 2001 update 1600 130 22100- 22000 4809 2430 79260- Total Cost: MEUR 42800 110001 Source: CEC (2001) Communication from the Commission - The Challenge of Environmental Financing in the Candidate Countries
  17. 17. Examples of environmental legislation – areas where there is a real challenge to most countries • The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD) – given that the costs will need to be spread over time and the smaller municipalities in particular will have problems raising needed investments. • The Landfill Directive – eg for oil shale in Estonia (2009) given particular resource there; for certain liquid wastes in Bulgaria (2014); also in place in Poland given implementation capacity issues at the level of Gminas (2012). • Volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from storage and distribution of petrol – given difficulties facing smaller sites. • Sulphur content of certain liquid fuels – investment needs for certain refineries. • Drinking water – given infrastructure costs. • Discharges of dangerous substances into the aquatic environment. • Packaging and packaging waste – given technology availability. • Shipments of waste – giving time to develop national recycling infrastructure. • Integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) for existing installations – given costs and need to link to investment cycles. • Large combustion plant Directive (LCPD) – given costs. • Hazardous waste incineration Directive.
  18. 18. Legislation and Common Pollutants EU Directives Air Heavy metals Particulate Ammonia Halogens Dioxins Ozone VOCs NOx CO2 SO2 CH4 CO s Air Quality Large Combustion Plants x x x IPPC Directive x x x x x x x National Emissions Ceilings Directive x x x x x Emissions from Mobile Sources x x x x x x x Ambient Air Quality Directves - SO2 x x x x x and Partic ulates, Nitrogen Oxides, Lead, Benzene et al VOC Emissions from Storage and x Transport of Petrol VOC-Solvents Directive x Waste Incineration Directive x x x x x x x Hazardous Waste Incineration Directive x x x x x x x x
  19. 19. What issues are likely to be important Air Water Waste Nature Main pollutants: Main pollutants: Main pollutants: Main data: SO2 BOD and COD CH4 Ha and % of NOx pH Main data: protected areas Particulates Nitrogen & Tonnes of Domestic, No. of species and (PM10, PM 2.5) Phosphorus Industrial and Inert waste level of risk VOCs Heavy metals Population served by Ecosystem the collection system services CO2 Dioxins CO Fluoride No. of existing and planned facilities Heavy metals E. coli (landfills, incineration Dioxins Main data: plants, recycling) and Furans Connection to water collected material Halogens supply and waste water No. of illegal dump systems and level of sites and quantity of waste Ozone waste water treatment. CH4 Quality of rivers (classification x km) Number of aquifers polluters (nitrates or pesticides)
  20. 20. Aim of the Benefits Studies
  21. 21. The Benefits Studies The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts. Benefits for Croatia of compliance with the environmental acquis (08/2004 - 05/2005, carried out by Ecolas and IEEP with a range of national experts) Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates P ten Brink and S Bassi (2008) A Methodology for Assessing the Benefits of the Environment in ENP Countries - Executive Summary Working Document for DGENV of the European Communities.
  22. 22. Specific Aim of the Benefits Studies Explore and estimate the environmental, economic, and social benefits likely to arise from the full implementation of the EU environmental legislation for EU candidates For other countries not expected to become EU candidates explore the same type of benefits from the implementation of ambitious but realistic environmental legislation (eg on the basis of protocols, benchmarking practice, or link to legislation of others) For EU Candidates: obtain a full and better understanding of the real effects of their accession to the EU – covering benefits & not only costs. And ensure that environmental concerns are given the attention, priority and funding that they deserve.
  23. 23. Use of the Benefits Studies For the European Commission – for dialogue, negotiations, launching studies/cooperation National ministries of environment National ministries of health, labour and consumer protection Regional authorities For municipalities For inspectorates/enforcement agencies - eg to clarify and help argue for greater priority/resources/funding Good for the environment – with economic and social benefits Supporting move to EU accession
  24. 24. Methodological approaches
  25. 25. Background: Development Paths Figure ES.1: Alternative Development Paths in the Accession Countries Increased Sustainable Development economic growth path activity quot;Minimisationquot; growth path, employing best available technologies and waste minimisation quot;Traditional Business-as- Usualquot; growth path EU Environmental Legislation Current position of region economy Increased Environmental Impact
  26. 26. Basic Valuation Framework Understand state of environment ‘now’ - the reference point. This includes and understanding of the relationship between pollution and impact Understand the existing policies and policy instruments that will affect the state of environment as well as external issues (economic growth, changes in likely exposure levels etc) - estimate the baseline (business as usual, BaU) Useful also to know the cost of policy inaction (COPI) – the cost of not changing business as usual. Understand the possible policy targets and timescales – eg from EU legislation Estimate the state of environment ensuing from the policy targets – the policy scenario Compare the policy scenario with the baseline and the differences are the benefits. Important to look at results in qualitative, quantitative and monetary terms
  27. 27. What are the improvements and what are useful targets / benchmarks? Baseline pollution levels Level of Reference year pollution pollution level = static baseline Current COPI: 100% EU acquis Policy Target: eg 50% reduction Situation reduction benchmark OECD
  28. 28. Methodology Overview Three steps to Analyse the Benefits of Implementing Env Legislation Type of Benefits: E.g. e.g. health impacts, impacts on agriculture, buildings. Extent of Benefits: E.g. level of emissions reduced E.g. how many cases of respiratory diseases are avoided? Value of Benefits: E.g. how much would the reduced emissions and damages avoided by implementing EU directives be worth? Need to be realistic about what can be said in what terms and to what audience.
  29. 29. Benefits Studies What can be said in what terms and what was explored? How much would the reduced Non-Specified emissions and damages avoided by Valuation implementing EU directives be worth? Benefits and Quantitative: Quantification Elements No Level of emissions reduced Monetary Value E.g. how many cases of and respiratory diseases are avoided? Description Yes yes yes of Quantitative Review of Effects Type of benefits Benefits – eg health impacts, cleaner Yes Yes Yes Yes water Qualitative Review Chemicals Air Water Waste Nature Nuclear Full Range of Effects of All Directives Need to be realistic about what can be said in what terms and to what audience.
  30. 30. Basic Valuation Framework Damage Cost / Benefits Savings Business as Usual If difficult to define use the reference year Reference Full End Time Year (eg 2004) Implementation Year (2020) (2030)
  31. 31. Relation between pollution and impact Exposure to pollution leads to a possibility for illness. This is measured as a “probability function”, known as a Dose Response Function Quantitative results Likely number of impacts = number of people exposed * Dose Response Function * ambient air quality (pollution levels). Results given in probable number of cases of bronchitis, probable number of early mortality etc Monetary results For health impacts - use value of statistical life (VSL) + use of transfer values for early mortality & Cost of Illness (COI) / discomfort estimates (eg for bronchitis), based on WTP. For other benefits – eg benefits from improvements in quality of access to drinking water – used willingness to Pay (WTP) estimates
  32. 32. Dose Response Functions – Some examples Source: Elena Strukova, Alexander Golub, and Anil Markandya, Air Pollution Costs in Ukraine
  33. 33. Transfer Value approach – An example Important as countries have different levels of wealth Source: Elena Strukova, Alexander Golub, and Anil Markandya, Air Pollution Costs in Ukraine
  34. 34. Benefits of Action types - Air Health benefits Avoided respiratory illnesses and premature deaths Resource benefits Avoided damage to buildings and crops Ecosystem Avoided global warming from CO2 emissions benefits Avoided damage to lake & forest ecosystems from acidic rains Social benefits Improved access to cultural heritage (less damage to historic buildings) Lesser social inequality by poor being more exposed to air pollution Wider economic Cultural tourism. benefits Attracting investment. Employment from environmental goods From: Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates
  35. 35. Benefits - Water Health benefits Households benefiting from connection to (improved) quality water Resource benefits Reduction of contaminants in surface water Ecosystem Likely changes in river and lake water quality benefits Social benefits Confidence in drinking water Wider economic Employment via tourism related to water recreation benefits From: Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates
  36. 36. Waste: Qualitative Assessment Health benefits Lower pollution to groundwater and surface water Reduced health and explosions risks as well as lower impact on global warming as methane emissions from landfills are captured and made to generate energy. Reduced health risks by improved treatment and disposal of hazardous waste Resource Increased efficiency in the use of material and reduced production benefits of primary material as a result of higher levels of recycling. The recovery of energy is increased through the Incineration Directive. Ecosystem Benefits to eco-systems and other environmental resources as benefits emissions from waste activities into air, water and soil are reduced (avoided leachate, methane emissions) – reduced pressure Social benefits Reduced discrimination by fewer low income households living close to unprotected landfills, etc. Wider economic Lower costs for waste collection, treatment and disposal, as less benefits waste will be produced. From: Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates
  37. 37. Benefits from Nature Directives • Environmental benefits Increased protected areas coverage Increase in the level of protection 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 From: Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates
  38. 38. Approach: Nature benefits Quality Quality 1000 1900 Further potential possible Pollution starts Transformation to have major With EU Acquis of Europe to effect on quality Agricultural Reduced threats, 1950 economy improved mgt 2000 Now Designation of new areas as Natura 2000 Quantity Quantity Qualitative benefits: environmental – social - economic Quantitative benefits: expected increase in protected areas size Monetary benefits: n/a
  39. 39. Benefits from improving the environment
  40. 40. Key Findings: CC-13 Study Extent of Benefits Air 43.000 and 180.000 fewer cases of chronic bronchitis; 15.000 and 34.000 fewer cases of premature death; Waste Recycling: increase by around 3.7 million tonnes (22 kg per capita) due to Packaging Waste Directive; Reduction in waste disposed in landfill from between 59 million tonnes (1998) to 20-35 million tonnes in 2020. From: The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts.
  41. 41. Key Findings: CC-13 Study Value of Benefits Air 7 to 44 billion Euro / yr for full compliance Water 5 to 14 billion Euro a year Waste 1 to 12 billion Euro a year Total 12.5 to 69 billion Euro / year for full compliance 134 to 680 billion Euro for period to 2020 Given uncertainties: important to show range important to use lower estimate for drawing insights important to underline what is covered and what not From: The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts.
  42. 42. Key Findings: SEE study Air 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, Water 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 From: Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates
  43. 43. Key Findings: SEE study (cont.) Waste Reduction of methane emissions from landfills: 70 - 191 ktonnes/year decrease in landfill disposal levels to around 64 to 54% of the non- implementation levels. Nature 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. From: Benefits for fYRoM and other countries of SEE of compliance with the environmental acquis by Arcadis-Ecolas and the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) with input from experts from across the SEE countries – Enviro-L and associates
  44. 44. Key Findings: Ukraine from reduced exposure to air pollution Air 22,000-27,000 cases of early mortality and 13,000-90,000 cases of morbidity could potentially be avoided if city ambient air quality were to meet WHO standards. The avoided cost for improved city air quality could be of about 13 billion grivynas (US$2.6 billion), ie 4 percent of GDP. Source: Strukova E., Golub, A. and Markandya, A. (2006): Air Pollution Costs in Ukraine
  45. 45. Some country details Annual Value of Benefits for Full Compliance: Lower Estimate 4500 4000 3500 Waste 3000 MEUR 2500 Water 2000 1500 Air 1000 500 0 PL TU CR RO HU SK BU LI SL LV EE CY MA From: The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts.
  46. 46. Annual Benefits of Full Compliance - Share of GDP CZ 4.80% RO 3.99% SZ 3.89% LI 2.92% PO 2.91% ALL 2.58% BU 2.52% HU 2.17% TU 1.72% EE 1.67% LV 1.65% SL 1.32% CY 0.76% MA 0.71% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% (percentage of GDP) From: The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts.
  47. 47. Transboundary Benefits Domestic action also benefits to other candidate countries and the EU- notably from implementing the EU air legislation: Half of the total benefits in Hungary derived from action in other candidate countries; Polish initiatives will lead to between 0.6 to 3.3 billion Euro benefits other candidate countries; The EU would benefit from lower emissions in the candidate countries (around 6 billion Euro/year - lower estimate). Third countries (Russia, Ukraine…) will also benefit from compliance: Total benefits to third countries: around 10 billion Euros per year. From: The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts.
  48. 48. Total Candidate Country Benefits – Benefits from Domestic Action and Benefits from action by other Candidate Countries (MEUR/year upon full compliance in 2010) Poland Turkey Romania Dom Other Czech. Rep. Hungary Slovakia Lithuania Bulgaria Slovenia Latvia Estonia Cyprus Malta 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 MEUR From: The benefits of compliance with the environmental acquis for the candidate countries (July 2001) led by Ecotec and supported by the Institute for Environmental Policy (IEEP), Metroeconomica, EFTEC and national experts.
  49. 49. Conclusions
  50. 50. Overall Conclusions Implementing the EU environmental directives can help improve the health and quality of life for citizens across the Candidate Countries, and to a certain extent, to citizens of the EU Co-operation across candidate countries is crucial to maximise the transboundary benefits from reducing air pollution In narrow monetary terms, the assessed benefits are likely to be of the same order of magnitude if not larger than the costs of implementation EU directives. The results to help communicate the importance of the environmental issues to the political level. quantification of the health and environmental benefits from action valuable economic message from the monetisation aspect – reaching some new audiences
  51. 51. Where is benefits assessment going? Benefits have to be assessed within the Impact Assessments that now need to be done for all major policies/legislation, programmes etc. Benefits assessments for new candidates is arguably becoming ‘good practice’ – it was done for Croatia, also for FYROM and other SEE countries, and some scoping work for ENP. Future detailed studies can be expected. It is a tool that can help the Commission, and help Ministries of Environment in the countries themselves. Benefits assessments are being done in an increasingly wide range of areas – eg eco-system services losses; socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000 – major input for COP9 of the CBD and beyond. Being increasingly complemented by cost of policy inaction (COPI) studies to help present the scale of the need for action.
  52. 52. EU Enlargement and the Benefits of Environmental Legislation 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 Senior Fellow and Head of Brussels Office Samuela Bassi Policy Analyst Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) ptenbrink@ieep.eu www.ieep.eu Building on work by the team: 13 Candidate Countries: Ecotec, IEEP, Eftec, Metroeconomica and experts SEE Benefits: Arcadis-Ecolas, IEEP, Metroeconomica & Enviro-L ENP Methodology work: IEEP
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×