operational programme environment 2007 2013 · ministry of environmental and nature protection...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Republic of Croatia
Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection
OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME ENVIRONMENT
2007 – 2013
2
Table of Contents
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 6
Section 1: Analysis ............................................................................................................ 8 1.1 Baseline Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 8
1.1.1 Socio-economic situation ............................................................................................................................... 8 1.1.2 Waste sector .......................................................................................................................................................11 1.1.3 Water sector .......................................................................................................................................................17 1.1.4 Other environmental protection factors ...............................................................................................23
1.2 Requirements of environmental acquis (negotiation process) ................................................... 24 1.3 Lessons Learned from Previously Implemented Interventions .................................................. 25 1.4 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis ..................................... 29
Section 2: Strategy .......................................................................................................... 31 2.1 Overall Objective of the OP .......................................................................................................................... 31 2.2 Consistency of the OP Objective with the priorities identified in national and EU policies documents and strategies ............................................................................................................................................ 32 2.3 Specific Objectives .......................................................................................................................................... 36 2.4 Priority Axes ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 2.5 Ex-ante Evaluation .......................................................................................................................................... 39 2.6 Strategic Environmental Assessment ..................................................................................................... 40 2.7 Partnership Process ....................................................................................................................................... 41 2.8 Horizontal Issues ............................................................................................................................................. 44
Section 3: Priority Axes ................................................................................................... 48
3.1 Priority Axis 1 – Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management system in Croatia ............................................................................................. 48 3.2 Priority Axis 2 – Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improved water supplies and integrated wastewater management systems ........................................................................................... 51 3.3 Priority Axis 3 – Technical Assistance .................................................................................................... 55 3.4 Demarcation with similar interventions under other OPs and EU Funded Projects .......... 57 3.5 Complementarity with other sources of investment ........................................................................ 59
Section 4: Implementation .............................................................................................. 61 4.1 Management ...................................................................................................................................................... 61 4.2 Monitoring and Evaluation.......................................................................................................................... 64 4.3 Certification of Expenditure ....................................................................................................................... 65 4.4 Audit ..................................................................................................................................................................... 66 4.5 Financial flows .................................................................................................................................................. 66 4.6 Information and Publicity ............................................................................................................................ 67 4.7 Management and Information System (MIS)....................................................................................... 68
Section 5: Financial Tables .............................................................................................. 70 5.1 Annual commitments .................................................................................................................................... 70 5.2 Total Financial Allocation ............................................................................................................................ 70 5.3 Indicative Breakdown of the Community Contribution per Category ...................................... 71 Annex 1: Sector Analysis Supplementary Information and Statistics ....................................................... 72 Annex 2: Ex ante Evaluation report ......................................................................................................................... 78 Annex 3: Strategic Environmental Assessment Report .................................................................................. 79 Annex 4: State Aid Guidelines for the OPE 2007 – 2013 ................................................................................ 80 Annex 5: Financial Flows ............................................................................................................................................ 81
3
List of Figures
Figure 1 General Map of Croatia……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 Figure 2 Use of water from public supply system for public and industrial use (without hydropower sector), 1997 – 2007……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
20
Figure 3: Size of settlements and respective connection to sewerage…………………………………………………….. 21 Figure 4: Landfilling of municipal waste by countries……………………………………………………………………………… 75 Figure 5: Municipal waste generation and treatment, by type of treatment method (kg per capita)……... 76 Figure 6: The overview of the percentage of population connected to public water supply in EU and other countries……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
76
Figure 7: Overview of the percentage of population connected to urban waste water collecting system in EU and other countries……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
77
List of Tables
Table 1: Croatia – GDP (Gross Domestic Product)…………………………………………………………………………………… 9 Table 2 Share of biodegradable waste 1997 – 2010……………………………………………………………………………….. 12 Table 3: Municipal waste - discrepancies between Croatia and the EU average……………………………………. 13 Table 4: Collected municipal waste and sent for disposal in the landfills in years 2007 and 2010………….. 13 Table 5: Overview of quantities of separately collected special categories of waste………………………………. 15 Table 6: Hot spots - 9 priority locations of high risk………………………………………………………………………………… 16 Table 7: Coherence between NSRF and OPE…………………………………………………………………………………………… 38 Table 8: Quantity of produced municipal waste in 2011 in Croatia by counties……………………………………… 72 Table 9: Quantity of collected EE waste in 2010 and in 2011 in Croatia by counties………………………………. 73 Table 10: Quantity of collected lubricant edible waste oils in period 2007 – 2011 in Croatia…………………. 74 Table 11: Quantity of collected waste batteries and accumulators in 2010 and 2011 in Croatia by Counties………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
74
Table 12: Quantity of estimated amounts of produced construction and demolition waste in Croatia by counties………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
74
4
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AP Accession Partnership
CARDS Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CBS Central Bureau of Statistics
CEA Croatian Environment Agency
CF Cohesion Fund
CFCA Central Financing and Contracting Agency for EU Programmes and Projects
CODEF Central Office for Development Strategy and Coordination of EU Funds
CW Croatian Waters
DG Directorate-General
DISF Danube Investment Support Facility
EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
EC The European Commission
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EIB European Investment Bank
EPEEF Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund
EPOP Environmental Protection Operational Programme (IPA)
EPR
ERDF
Environmental Pollution Registry
European Regional Development Fund
EU European Union
EUROSTAT Statistical Office of the European Communities
FB Final Beneficiary
FWA Framework Agreement
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GoRC Government of Republic of Croatia
HRD OP Human Resources Operational Programme
IB Intermediate Body
IFI International financial institution
IPA Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance
IPARD IPA Rural development programme
IPPC Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (Directive)
ISPA Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession
MA
MBT
Managing Authority
Mechanical Biological Treatment Plant
MC Monitoring Committee
MoA Ministry of Agriculture
MoE Ministry of Economy
MENP Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection
MFEA Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
MFIN Ministry of Finance
MIS Monitoring Information System
MoC Ministry of Culture
MRDEUF Ministry of Regional Development and European Funds
5
NAO National Authorising Officer
NEAP National Environmental Action Plan
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NIPAC National IPA Coordinator
NPIEU National Programme for the Integration of the Republic of Croatian into the European Union
NPIS Nature Protection Information System
NSRF National Strategic Reference Framework
NUTS (French) nomenclature des unités territoriales statistiques – Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics
OG Official Gazette
OP Operational Programme
OPE Operational Programme Environment
P.E. Population equivalent
PA Priority Axis
PC Programme Complement
PP Public procurement
RCOP Regional Competitiveness Operational Programme
RES Renewable Energy resources
SAPARD Special accession programme for agriculture and rural development
SCF Strategic Coherence Framework 2007 – 2013
SDF Strategic Development Framework for 2006 – 2013
SEA
SF
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Structural Funds
SINP State Institute for Nature Protection
SSD Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Republic of Croatia
SWOT Strengths – Weaknesses – Opportunities – Threats
TA Technical Assistance
TOP Transport Operational Programme
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UWWTD Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive
WB World Bank
WMC Waste Management Centre
WMS Waste Management Strategy
WS Water supply
WW Waste water
WWTP Waste water treatment plant
6
SUMMARY
The Republic of Croatia proposes to use the European Union (EU) Cohesion Fund (CF) to co-finance the Operational Programme ‘Environment’ (hereinafter referred to as OPE). The OPE represents a programme document for absorbing the EU funds allocated for the implementation of the EU cohesion policy in the environment sector in Croatia covering a rolling seven-year period 2007-2013 and was elaborated under the coordination of the Managing Authority for the OPE, the Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection (MENP).
The OPE aims at developing environmental infrastructure and public services in municipal waste management and disposal, drinking water supply, municipal wastewater and water resources treatment in order to contribute to balanced and sustainable development of Croatia. The OPE builds on previous investments and capacity building initiatives funded by earlier EU programmes, most significantly, the Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-Accession (ISPA) and the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA).
The natural environment is a crucial part of economic and social capital of Croatia and one of the drivers of economic development, particularly considering the importance of tourism. In general it can be stated that environment is well preserved, however, the level of environmental protection needs to be increased to reach the EU level. The socio-economic analysis performed within the NSRF as well as more detailed analysis of environmental sectors within the OPE indicate that insufficient quality and incompleteness of environmental infrastructure is one of the key disparities leading to insufficient environmental protection. Substantial investment is therefore needed across all environmental sectors, primarily in the investment-heavy sub sectors of waste and water. These investments should assure adequate provision of environmentally related services and standards, while striking a balance between a strong need for economic development and preserved environment; in other words, they will secure sustainable development path, which is at the heart of the EU Gothenburg Strategy and Europe 2020 agendas.
The overall objective of the OPE is “Improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality of related services and corresponds to the thematic priority 2 of the NSRF”. This overall objective stems from the current situation analysis, accession process and Accession Treaty stipulations related to environment sector as well as national and EU policy documents. The analysis indicates that financially and institutionally demanding interventions are highly needed. SF assistance in this programming period will therefore be focused on those obligations i.e. respect of the transition periods, continuing and building upon support provided through IPA priority subsectors (i.e. waste and water).
In order to contribute to the overall objective, the OPE sets forward two specific objectives to be attained through the following priority axes:
Priority Axis 1: Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management in Croatia This axis will be financed from the CF and will support activities for development of new waste management infrastructure (waste management centres and related infrastructure) for waste treatment and disposal, including rehabilitation of incompliant landfills and highly polluted sites and including project preparatory activities for the above areas.
Priority Axis 2: Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improved water supplies and integrated wastewater management systems. This axis will also be financed from the CF and will support investments in water utility infrastructure - construction/reconstruction/upgrading of drinking water supply networks, water conditioning (treatment) plants, municipal sewerage systems and wastewater treatment plants, minimization of leakage from drinking water supply systems and sewerage systems including project preparatory activities for the above areas.
Priority Axis 3: Technical Assistance. This axis will support the effective management of the OP and preparation for the next programming period. This Axis will be financed from the CF.
The OPE 2007-2013 is based on the EU Council Regulation 1083/2006, which encompasses the general provisions on the use of the Structural Funds (SF) and the CF resources. Furthermore, the activities planned within this OP are in conformity with the Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 of 11 July 2006 establishing a Cohesion Fund providing eligibility rules of expenses issued by the CF. In addition, the OPE is fully consistent with the European Community Strategic Guidelines on cohesion. According to the SF/CF regulation, regions corresponding to the level NUTS II whose gross domestic product (GDP) per inhabitant by the purchasing power parity for the last three available years is less than 75% of the EU average may be supported within the aim “Convergence” from the SF/CF. The whole territory of the Republic of Croatia falls within this category being therefore eligible to make use of these financial resources.
7
The OPE draws upon existing EU and national policies and strategies. The Operational Programme was prepared within the framework of National Strategic Reference Framework, a key strategic document for the use of EU Cohesion policy Funds, which ensures that the assistance from the Funds is consistent with both, EU and national objectives and guidelines. The NSRF defines priority areas which will be financed from this OP and describes how the implementation of the OP is expected to contribute to the achievements of strategic objectives and thematic priorities of the NSRF. The OPE also takes account of the well-developed hierarchy of national environmental strategies and plans, such as Strategy for Sustainable Development, the National Environmental Strategy, sector strategies like Waste Management Strategy, Waste Management Plan, the Water Management Strategy, etc.
From strategic point of view, the priority was given to the investments necessary for compliance with the acquis in the environment sector, with emphasis on waste and water sub-sectors. Due to short programming period, other sectors like air and atmosphere, nature protection and energy will not be directly addressed through this OP, but it will provide a platform for building capacities, experiences and project pipeline needed for extension of assistance to new priority areas in the next programming period.
Particular programming features of the NSRF and the present operational programme related to environment are expected to significantly support the implementation of the strategies set by the Croatian government, and contribute to address weaknesses and problems in specific subsectors for which EU Funds support will be provided. Furthermore, the OPE strategy strongly builds upon the lessons and benefits of IPA III Environmental Protection Operational Programme (EPOP), through which about 131.3 mil EUR of IPA funds was allocated to the same sectors in period 2007 – 30 June 2013. The OPE strategy is derived from policy framework provided in NSRF, in essence continuing IPA strategy and the same ‘objective – priority - measure’ logic, as presented in the table below:
OPE Overall Objective OPE Priority Axes OPE Measures
Improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality of related services
PA1. Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management system in Croatia
Measure 1.1 Establishment of new waste management centres at county and regional levels
Measure 1.2 Elimination of sites highly polluted by waste
PA2. Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improved water supplies & an integrated wastewater management systems
Measure 2.1 Establishment of modern water supply systems and networks
Measure 2.2 Construction of wastewater treatment plants for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading the sewerage network
The OP document sets out the following key issues with supporting information: context, policy, sector and SWOT analysis, objective and strategy development. Furthermore, in addition to the description of priority axes, measures and proposed activities, it also provides the indicators to monitor and evaluate performance and presents the key features of implementation and management system that will ensure the delivery of the objectives.
8
SECTION 1: ANALYSIS
1.1 Baseline Analysis
1.1.1 Socio-economic situation
Croatia is situated at the Southeast of European continent, in-between Mediterranean, Middle Europe and Balkans. Due to its specific geographical position on a dividing line between several bio-geographic regions it has characteristic ecological, climatic and geomorphologic conditions - on relatively small area three distinct natural-geographic unities can be distinguished: northern plain and Pannonia region, coastal or Adriatic region, and mountainous region dividing the two. The total surface area is 87 661 km
2, of which 56 594 km
2 is land and
31 067 km2 is sea. According to the latest census in 2011
1 Croatia has 4 290 612 inhabitants and the average
population density of 75.8 inhabitants per km2 with larger concentration of population in continental part
(67%). By size of the territory and number of inhabitants Croatia can be considered as one of smaller European countries. Despite of quite large number of settlements (about 6.800), the population is concentrated in urban centres – 49% of all citizens live in 5 largest counties: City of Zagreb and County of Zagreb, Split-Dalmatia, Osijek-Baranja and Primorje-Gorski Kotar counties.
There are 21 counties in Croatia, including the City of Zagreb (regional self-government units) and 127 cities and 429 municipalities (local self-government units). Croatia is divided into two NUTS 2 regions: Adriatic
Croatia and Continental Croatia2.
Figure 1: General Map of Croatia
1
Provisional results of 2011 Census, September 2011 2 National Classification of Territorial Units for Statistics (Official Gazette No. 96/2012)
9
The Croatian economy is considered to be small with 4.3 million inhabitants and gross domestic product in current prices of EUR 45 billion. It recorded a relatively stable growth path accompanied by low inflation; the average growth rate of real GDP in the period 2000-2008 amounted to 4.2%. However, after a 5.1% growth rate in 2007 and 2.4% in 2008, real GDP declined by 6.9% in 2009, as a result of the economic crisis. The weakening of the economic activity was significant and the recovery rather sluggish; in 2010 and 2011 the real GDP growth rate amounted to –1.4% and 0.0%
3. Therefore, the
average growth rate in the period 2001-2011 amounted to 2.4%, which was relatively modest compared to other selected member states (Slovakia: 4.7%; Romania: 4.1%; Poland: 3.9%; Bulgaria: 3.9%; Czech R.: 3.3%; Slovenia: 2.6%)
4.
The reversal of a previous positive trend is apparent in relation to the gross fixed capital: during the period between 2000 and 2008 investments in fixed capital grew by an average rate of 8.7% reaching the share of gross fixed capital formation of 8.7% in 2008. However, reflecting the contraction pattern, from 2009 investments in fixed capital recorded a significant decrease; -14.2% (2009), -15.0% (2010) and -7.2% (2011). Stable economic growth followed by the persistent crisis period led to the decreasing of income gap in relation to EU27. Overall inflow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Croatia in the period 2000-2011 reached EUR 22.3 billion or EUR 5,033 per capita. During 2008 Croatia received EUR 4.2 billion of FDIs, which was the highest annual inflow in the last 15 years. The crisis brought the decrease in 2009 and 2010, when the annual FDI inflow amounted to EUR 2.4 billion and EUR 0.3 billion, respectively. In 2011 the inflow has risen again to EUR 1.1 billion. More than 56% of overall amount of FDI inflows in the period 2000-2011 were accomplished in the sectors of financial intermediation, wholesale and commission trade, and real estate business. The need for improvements in the business and investment climate, together with the need for structural reforms is recognized, which will increase the competitiveness of overall economy. The trade deficit of the Croatian economy (the average current account deficit in the period 2001-2011 amounted to 5.0%) reflects its growth path and import dependence of the domestic economic activity. At the end of 2008 current account deficit reached its highest point of 9.2% of GDP and at the end of 2009 it dropped to 5.1% of GDP. In the following two years it stabilized at -1.1% (2010) and -1.0% (2011). Consequently, gross foreign debt grew; at the end of 2008 it reached EUR 40.6 billion and at the end of 2011 it reached EUR 45.7 billion, accounting for 101.8% of GDP.
Since 2004, fiscal policy is in the on-going process of fiscal consolidation which has allowed for the consolidated general government balance to decrease from -4.1% of GDP in 2002 to -1.4% in 2008
5. In 2009, caused by
negative effects of the crisis, it recorded a new decrease of -4.1% of GDP, which has continued in the recent period, as it amounted to -5.1% of GDP in 2011. Inflation in Croatia, measured by the consumer price index in the period 2000-2007, was moderate, mainly due to the appreciation of the HRK/EUR exchange rate, slow nominal wage increase, mild labour productivity growth and intense competition in the retail trade. Continued increase in prices of food products and energy on the world market caused considerable growth of the consumer price index of 6.1% in 2008, however, in the following period 2009-2011 the CPI decreased, as it amounted to 2.4%, 1.1% and 2.3%, respectively Favourable labour market developments were recorder in period 2000 - 2008. The unemployment rate in 2008 (measured by ILO comparable rate) amounted to 8.4% and it reached its lowest level in the last 15 years. Since then however, under the influence of the global economic crisis, the ILO comparable unemployment rate has been increasing, amounting to 9.1% in 2009 and continued its rise to 13.5% in 2011. The registered
3 Preliminary data for 2010 and 2011
4 Source: Eurostat
5 According to the ESA 95 methodology
Table 1: Croatia – GDP (Gross Domestic Product) Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Real GDP growth rate 5.1% 2.4% -6.9% -1.4% p 0.0% p
GDP per capita, EUR 9,781 10,722 10,111 10,140 p 10,484 p
Source: Croatian Bureau of Statistics; p - preliminary data
10
unemployment at the end of 2011 was 17.8% higher than at the end of the previous year. The crisis hit the male-dominated manufacturing and construction industries most strongly.
Croatia’s geophysical location determines the environmental characteristics of the country, with the long coastal region, littoral highlands and the central plains. However, the dominant geological factor, the karst region, determines the most significant environmental issues in the country. Croatia's karst region is a unique relief with special hydrogeological and geomorphological features where ground waters are much more abundant than surface water. The karst area occupies about 54%
6 of Croatia's territory and it attracts the
majority of tourists, thus contributing significantly to GDP.
The state of the environment in Croatia has been assessed on a regular basis and reported in the State of the Environment Reports, prepared by the Croatian Environment Agency. Latest report covering the period 2005-2008
7 indicates as generally accepted opinion, that the overall state of environment in Croatia is relatively good.
The natural environment in Croatia is considered to be one of the key elements of economic and social capital driving economic development through tourism in the country. On the other hand, the degree of environmental protection is still lower than in other developed EU countries. In most European countries, environmental protection investments and current expenditure made by the public sector accounted for between 0.25 % and 0.9 % of GDP in 2009. Croatia (0.02 %), Latvia (0.08 %) and Estonia (0.16 %) were below this range.
The major issues influencing development strategy in environmental sector in the Republic of Croatia are the adoption of sustainable development concept and the accession to the European Union. The Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Republic of Croatia
8 proposes development concept fully compliant with the
European Union Community Strategic Guidelines on Cohesion, which promotes synergies between the economic, social and environmental dimensions. This strategy known as the renewed Lisbon strategy emphasises environment in growth, competitiveness and employment; environmental protection needs to be accounted for in preparing national strategies, programmes and projects with a view of promoting sustainable development.
Expansion of transport and tourism, or generally economic growth, increased energy consumption, social and physical processes are interconnected and correlated factors that put increasing demands on environmental structure in Croatia, particularly for high quality and reliable environmental services, such as water supply and the disposal of waste water, the management of solid waste, maintaining a clean air environment, clean sea and preserving the natural habitat. Over the past years, the environmental protection system in the Republic of Croatia has been continuously improved. However, considerable investments into the environmental infrastructure are still needed in order to reach adequate level of environmental services and standards and be fully in line with the acquis. Shift in macroeconomic conditions, which are currently generally less favorable than before global crisis, may, among other effect availability of national sources for the environmental expenditures and investments.
Shift in macroeconomic conditions should not be regarded as a new environmentally favourable trend, as it is not likely to have a lasting effect, since the general consumption (and municipal waste generation) patterns of Croatian population are likely to follow those of more affluent EU societies (displaying generally significantly higher waste generation figures). It can be argued, that reduction of purchasing power of the general public can result in change in consumer´s preferences towards the more affordable but less durable consumption goods, which in turn can lead to increased volumes of municipal waste. The above indicated changes in macroeconomic context will have no major impact on the results of water sector analysis as presented below. The main challenge of water management policy remains the uneven distribution of water sources spatially and temporally, which is especially problematic in coastal areas and islands during the dry seasons. The missing infrastructure for both water supply and waste-water treatment constitutes a major obstacle in reaching the standards required by the environmental acquis.
The OPE strategy is built upon strategic documents, consultation processes and detailed situation analysis that originates from comprehensive review of relevant analytical documents and statistical data. The text bellow summarises key findings of the analyses and provides detail elaboration for waste and water sectors, which is followed by a short overview across all major environmental sub-sectors.
6 Source: „An overview of the state of biological and landscape diversity of Croatia, with the protection strategy and action
plan“, Zagreb, 2000 7 http://www.azo.hr/lgs.axd?t=16&id=4207
8 Official Gazette No. 30/2009
11
1.1.2 Waste sector
In waste sector the largest challenges relate to law implementation mechanisms, weaknesses in control systems and reliability of data on the quantity and flows of waste. Furthermore, in order to establish operational waste management systems aligned with EU standards, there is a need for heavy investments in waste management infrastructure and accompanying soft measures on awareness raising and education.
In terms of institutional setup, responsibilities are divided among several institutions as well as vertically across level of governance; on national level the main executive body is the Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection (MENP) in charge of policy making and implementation (preparation of waste management measures and planning documents and supervision of implementation of the Waste Management Strategy and the Waste Management Plan of the Republic of Croatia). Main tasks of the regional/local government relates to adoption of respective waste management plans, determination of locations in respective physical plans, collection of data on waste and all necessary actions for management of the waste types under their jurisdiction. Cities and municipalities have the obligation to mutually cooperate and to ensure, under coordination by the county, the implementation of the measures prescribed for separate waste collection. Utility companies established by local/regional self-government units and/or private operators perform actual work, i.e. collection and disposal of municipal waste. According to the data from Croatian Environment Agency, there are 210 such companies on the whole territory of Republic of Croatia. On state level two more institutions have an important role within the waste management system; firstly, the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund (EPEEF) which co-finances projects and programmes in field of environmental protection and energy efficiency and which is also an executive body running systems for management of certain special waste categories (packaging and packaging waste, end-of-life vehicles, waste batteries and accumulators, waste oils, electrical and electronic waste, waste tyres). Funds for financing the activities of the EPEEF are secured in conformity with the “polluter pays principle”, from fees and charges collected from parties subject to paying environmental fees and charges as well as from other sources in accordance with special regulations. Another body is the Croatian Environment Agency (CEA), which collects, integrates, and processes environmental data. It performs tasks related to the development and coordination of the environmental protection information system (including data on waste) and management of data, e.g. preparation of the report on the state of the environment, cooperation with European Environment Agency and reporting in accordance with requirements of European Environment Information and Observation Network (EIONET), etc.
In terms of the waste management policy, the system and priorities within are determined by the Waste Management Strategy
9 which assesses the situation, identifies the problems and obstacles, establishes the
framework for waste reduction and sustainable waste management and sets 5 strategic objectives in the area of waste management:
1. Avoidance of generation and reduction of waste quantities at source and quantities of waste to be disposed, with simultaneous increase of material and energy recovery from waste;
2. Development of infrastructure for an integrated waste management system AEL (Avoidance-Evaluation-Landfilling), i.e. creating conditions for an efficient functioning of a system. It involves construction of infrastructure facilities and installations (regional landfill sites, waste-fuelled power plants and incinerators, facilities for waste treatment, bio-composting facilities);
3. Reduction of the risks from waste;
4. Contribution to employment in Croatia through the development of domestic industry and businesses, and the production of municipal equipment;
5. Education of administrative structures, experts and the public in order to solve waste management problems.
The Waste Management Strategy is being implemented through a Waste Management Plan for period 2007-2015
10, which serves as a framework document for waste management plans of the counties and for
elaboration of individual projects that fit into the county/ regional integrated waste management system. The basic task of the Plan is to organise the implementation of the broader goals of the Strategy, thus focusing on:
9 Official Gazette No. 130/05
10 Official Gazette No. 85/2007, 126/2010 and 31/11
12
a) establishment of an integrated waste management system;
b) remediation and closing of existing landfills;
c) remediation of "hot spots", locations in the environment which are highly burdened with waste;
d) development and establishment of regional and county centres for waste management, with pre-treatment of waste before final disposal or landfilling; and
e) complete computerisation of the waste management system.
Waste generation
The total amount of municipal waste produced in Croatia has had a steadily increasing trend – measured as average amount of kg per inhabitant, the values grew from 327 kg/cap/year in 2005, 373 in 2006, 388 in 2007 to 403 kg/cap/year in 2008. These amounts were significantly lower than the EU average (509 kg/capita in 2009) and further increase was expected due to economic growth, expanding tourism and increase in general consumption. Yet by 2010, the amount of generated waste fell for 9% and amounted to 393 kg/cap in 2009 and 367 kg/cap in 2010
11. It is assessed that in period 1995 – 2003, 74,5% of municipal waste was biodegradable
(kitchen and bio-waste, paper and cardboard, leather and bones, wood, textile). Furthermore, the assumption is that waste composition has changed in the last 10 years, so from year 2004 onward the average share of biodegradable waste is determined to be 67%. The Table 2 shows the estimates of the quantities of municipal waste produced in selected years, including the estimated quantities of biodegradable component. The biodegradable municipal waste generation has been increasing along with increase of total amounts of municipal waste. The trend of slight valuation of biodegradable waste can be observed through decreasing the share of biodegradable waste landfilled.
Table 2 Share of biodegradable waste 1997 - 2010
Year 1997 2000 2004 2005 2006 2008 2010
Municipal waste generated (t) 1.015.000 1.172.534 1.310.643 1.449.381 1.654.105 1.788.311 1.629.915
Biodegradable municipal waste generated (t)
756.175 873.538 878.131 971.085 1.048.667 1.126.899 1.012.651
Biodegradable municipal waste landfilled (t)
756.175 863.538 863.131 952.969 1.024.323 1.088.196 976.183
Share of biodegradable municipal waste landfilled (%)
100 98.85 98.29 98.13 97.68 96.57 96.39
In 2007, 2 004 059 tonnes of industrial (technological) waste was generated in total, out of which 1 951 539 tonnes (97%) was non-hazardous and 52 520 tonnes (3%) hazardous. In 2010, 1 592 609 tonnes of industrial waste was generated, out of which 1 534 295 tonnes (96%) was non-hazardous and 58 314 tonnes (4%) hazardous
12.
Import of non-hazardous waste for disposal and use for energy purposes is prohibited in Croatia. In 2010, 603 955 tonnes of non-hazardous waste were exported, mostly metal and wood. In the same year 225 224 tonnes of non-hazardous waste was imported to Croatia, mostly paper and cardboard waste (106 240 tones).
Waste collection and disposal
Organised collection of municipal waste services in 2010 covered 96% of the population of Croatia, which is a big increase in relation to the estimated 86 % in 2004 and especially 57 % in 1995
13.
Municipal waste collection is organised once a week in most areas (two to three times a week in larger communities) according to a set schedule. In certain counties with intensive tourism activities waste is collected even daily. Except from households, municipal waste is collected also from businesses, catering industry etc. according to the necessity. Waste is collected in plastic bags, vessels, containers, mobile presses or containers for reducing volume. The separate collection of individual municipal waste components is partially in place and is implemented with various intensities in almost all counties.
11
Croatian Environmental Agency: ‘Odabrani pokazatelji okoliša u RH 2011' 12 Croatian Environment Agency - Environmental Pollution Registry (EPR) 13
Croatian Environment Agency
13
Landfilling remains the main disposal option for municipal waste in Croatia and landfills absorb the biggest quantities of waste produced. Almost all collected municipal waste is disposed and the potentials for recycling, organic treatment (composting) and energy recovery are unexploited. Table 3 shows main discrepancies between Croatia and the EU average in respect to municipal waste generation, depositing, material recycling and other forms of recycling. Table 4 shows in detail data on collected and deposited municipal waste quantities per county, and provide comparison for selected years 2007 and 2010
14.
In total, in 2007, 1 652 618 tons of municipal waste were collected and almost 96% of collected municipal waste was deposited on the landfills. In 2010, 1 629 915 tons of municipal waste were collected and 1 537 228 tons of collected municipal waste was landfilled
15.
Table 4: Collected municipal waste and sent for disposal in the landfills in years 2007 and 2010
Data for 2007 Data for 2010
County
Collected municipal
waste (t)
Municipal waste sent for disposal in the
landfills (t)
Deposited out of
collected (%)
Collected municipal
waste (t)
Municipal waste sent for disposal in the landfills (t)
Deposited out of
collected (%)
Zagrebačka i Grad Zagreb
445.391 423.502 95,0 388.048 363.163 93,6
Krapinsko - zagorska 36.812 36.471 99,0 28.791 24.674 85,7
Sisačko - moslavačka 55.887 55.301 99,0 72.286 71.629 99,1
Karlovačka 40.966 40.964 100,0 39.632 39.111 98,7
Varaždinska 37.227 17.872 48,0 37.446 32.905 87,9
Koprivničko - križevačka
43.967 42.831 97,4 22.616 21.568 95,4
Bjelovarsko - bilogorska 35.874 35.762 99,7 35.346 35.169 99,5
Primorsko - goranska 127.276 122.674 96,4 132.608 125.557 94,7
Ličko - senjska 30.180 30.000 99,4 31.459 31.358 99,7
Virovitičko - podravska 29.114 27.226 93,5 36.379 26.031 71,6
Požeško - slavonska 13.769 13.769 100,0 14.525 14.495 99,8
Brodsko - posavska 50.432 50.198 99,5 48.274 47.623 98,7
Zadarska 76.957 75.251 97,8 83.605 82.928 99,2
Osječko - baranjska 93.757 92.088 98,2 93.357 91.407 97,9
Šibensko - kninska 47.531 47.345 99,6 52.630 51.775 98,4
Vukovarsko - srijemska 74.263 70.340 94,7 66.366 62.772 94,6
Splitsko - dalmatinska 202.338 201.688 99,7 223.369 222.655 99,7
Istarska 113.138 111.127 98,2 108.803 106.434 97,8
Dubrovačko - neretvanska
80.262 74.068 92,3 75.515 72.266 95,7
Međimurska 17.477 14.890 85,2 18.346 13.690 74,6
additionally determinated amounts16
20.514
TOTAL: 1.652.618 1.583.365 95,8 1.629.915 1.537.228 94,3
Largest share of municipal waste is generated in the Zagreb county and City of Zagreb (23,8%), Splitsko-Dalmatia county (13,8%) and Primorsko-goranska county (8,2%) which comes as no surprise since these are highly populated counties/areas. The smallest share of municipal waste is generated in Međimurska county (1,14%) and Požeško-slavonska county (0,9%), two less populated counties. A regional feature is the Adriatic
14
Reports on municipal waste for 2007 and for 2010, Croatian Environment Agency 15
Croatian Environment Agency, pubication: Odabrani pokazatelji stanja okoliša u RH, 2011 (http://www.azo.hr/OdabraniPokazateljiStanja) 16
Amounts which were reported on the questionnaires not intended for reporting data on municipal waste in to the Environmental Pollution Registry (EPR).
Table 3: Municipal waste - discrepancies between Croatia and the EU average
Indicator Year Croatia average
EU-27 average
municipal waste generation, kg per capita per year
2010. 3671
502
municipal waste depositing (landfilling), kg per capita per year
2010. 3462 186
material recycling from municipal waste, kg per
capita per year
2010. 12 121
other forms of recycling (including composting) from
municipal waste, kg per capita per year
2010. 3 72
source of information: Eurostat; 1, 2 – Croatian Environment Agency
14
Sea along with the coastal line as a tourist zone where the quantities of generated waste between summer and other months in the year greatly differ.
In 2010, there were 146 active landfills. According to the submitted data, 84 of them landfilled mixed municipal waste, while the other 62 landfilled production waste along with municipal waste. Waste is mostly disposed at the nearest landfill and in the county of its origin. There are 60 large landfills that account for landfilling of 85% of the total waste and have a catchment area with 72% of the total population. The volume of municipal waste arriving at landfills has gradually increased due to a larger proportion of the population with organised collection of waste and also due to greater volumes of waste produced per capita in previous decade.
The infrastructure and protection measures on landfills are generally insufficient and monitoring of the disposal effects on at least one of the elements (water, air, and land) is done only on a small number of landfills.
In-compliant municipal waste landfills represent hazard for health and groundwater contamination with an adverse impact on the landscape and tourism. The situation has been improving with the activities on remediation of municipal landfills through a programme initiated in 2004 by the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund (EPEEF). The programme identified 299 incompliant municipal waste landfills. EPEEF has concluded contracts with local authorities providing co-financing for the remediation of 299 official unregulated municipal waste landfills and by the mid- 2012, 107 landfills has been remediated.
It is estimated that only a little more than 50% of non-hazardous production (technological) waste generated is sent to licensed landfills or separated. Therefore, estimation is that almost identical volume is deposited at illegal dumpsites. Furthermore, most of the construction waste is deposited in an uncontrolled manner on landfills or dumpsites except of individual companies which deal with their waste properly. This imbalance has a detrimental effect on the environment, quality of life and the development of tourism. The situation is particularly complex on islands and in the coastal zone. However, remediation of landfills on many islands, which has been completed, and implementation of ordinances on separate waste collection have substantially reduced pressures on the environment. Out of 3000 unofficial dumpsites, 750 locations have been remediated through co-financing of the Environmental protection and energy efficiency Fund, mostly through waste removing method.
Accession Treaty has set transitional periods for gradual reduction of deposition of waste on existing landfills that are not aligned with the Directive on the Landfill of Waste
17, and gradual reduction of biodegradable
component of municipal waste which is deposited on landfills in order to reach target set by the Directive. National Waste Management Strategy and Waste Management Plan envisage establishment of new waste management centers (WMC). WMCs will include treatment of municipal waste before disposal and disposal of non-hazardous production (technological) waste. Landfill cells within WMCs are to replace scattered and non-compliant landfills for disposal of treated municipal waste and non-hazardous waste. Existing, non-compliant landfills are to be closed and remediated/conditioned until WMCs are functional and on some of the landfill locations a transfer stations will be established as integral part of waste management system. The use of modern waste treatment technologies will enable reduction of waste deposited on landfills and achievement of the target set for reduction of the biodegradable component of municipal waste which is disposed on landfills. WMCs can be established to cover the area of one or more counties and will be operated by a single public utility company owned by respective counties/municipalities. Such a county/regional level company will, in an appropriate legal manner, join efforts with existing city/municipal public utility companies to manage the waste management centre for the whole county/region.
Realization of goals of the National Waste Management Strategy and Waste Management plan have commenced with assistance of EU pre-accession programs ISPA and IPA: establishment of three such WMC’s are being co-financed within those pre accession programs (more detailed information under section 1.3) in accordance with above described model (county-level WMC, operated by a single public company).
Special categories of waste
According to the Ordinances on the flow of six special categories of waste (packaging and packaging waste, end-of-life vehicles, waste batteries and accumulators, waste oils, electrical and electric waste, waste tyres) the Ministry has set up a system of managing special categories on the basis of selective collection system and ‘the polluter pays’ principle. The producers and importers of packaging, electric and electronic appliances and equipment, vehicles, batteries and accumulators, tyres and oils are obliged to pay to the EPEEF the
17
Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the Landfill of Waste
15
remuneration, which, in turn is used by the EPEEF for financing the collection and recovery of waste generated upon the end of life cycle of such products.
The Ministry has also developed the Ordinances covering management of medical waste, construction waste, management of sewage sludge when used in agriculture, polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT), waste from producing titane-dioxide and the management of waste from extractive industries. Management of the animal waste is in jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agriculture. Use of mentioned systems is obligatory for all companies that produce corresponding waste types.
Separate collection is performed in two ways – for some categories citizens are included in the systems directly (e.g. packaging waste, batteries and accumulators, end-of-life vehicles), and for other categories separate collection takes place through the use of municipal “recycling yards”. The advantage is given to material use in reference to energy use, and the goals of disposal are prescribed by the Ordinances for each category of waste.
The quantities of packaging waste are assessed by the quantity of packaging placed on the market. An increase has been observed in the total quantities of packaging (Table 5). In 2010, 178 631 t of packaging waste have been separately collected. The goal set by the Ordinance on Packaging and Packaging Waste
18 is to use energy
or material recovery more than 60% of the packaging waste mass and to recycle 80% of the collected packaging waste mass.
In 2009 new electrical and electronic equipment and devices were placed on the market in the amount of 53 742.64 and 13 522 t of EE waste
19 was collected through primary selection and 17 748 t in 2010. The
consumption of batteries and accumulators is constantly increasing. In 2009, 8 142.36 t of new accumulators and batteries were placed on the market, while in the same period 7 179.68 t of waste batteries and accumulators were collected through primary selection
20 and 8 290 were collected in 2010. The Ordinance on
waste batteries and accumulators prescribes that the minimal process of waste batteries and accumulators includes the removal of all liquids and acids, and prescribes efficiency of recycling.
In 2010 in Croatia 20 488 t of lubricant oil was placed on the market (manufactured and imported). In the same year 6 639.81 t of waste lubricant oil (32%) was collected and as much as 6 535.23 t (98.4% of collected quantity) was reused/processed. In 2010, 1 260.38 t of waste edible oil was collected and 683.36 t (54%) of edible oil was reused/processed
21.
In 2008, 21 125.56 t of waste tyres were collected and 21 746 t was recovered. The Ordinance on Waste Tyre Management secures the management of previously discarded tyres in Croatia (70 000 to 100 000 tonnes), by organising occasional actions for the collection of discarded tyres from citizens, and paying a special fee to citizens for the delivered tyres. Ordinance prescribes that recycling has to comprise at least 70% of waste tires established on the basis of information on the quantity of imported tires in the previous year
22.
The number of end-of-life vehicles arising in Croatia may be assessed at the annual level since 2005 onwards as ranging around 70 000 vehicles – based on the calculations made by Croatian
Environment Agency using the data from Central Bureau of Statistics and Customs Directorate, it is estimated that 63
107 waste vehicles were generated in 2010. The quantities collected and treated are steadily rising – in year 2007 7 915 tonnes were collected whereas in 2010 there was 22 756.48 tonnes of end-of-life vehicles collected and sent for treatment
23. In line with the Ordinance on managing end-of-life vehicles
24, waste vehicles
18
Official Gazette No. 97/05, 115/05, 81/08, 31/09, 156/09, 38/10, 10/11, 81/11, 126/11 19
Electrical and Electronic Waste 20 Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund/Croatian Environment Agency 21
CEA Report on Waste Oils 2010 22
Croatian Environment Agency 23
CEA Report on End-of-life Vehicles 2010
Table 5: Overview of quantities of separately collected special categories of waste
Special waste category
Collected (tones)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Packaging waste 198 225 248 144 267 944 2480 411 187 631
end-of-life vehicles - 6 737 7 887 16 617 22 756
Waste batteries and accumulators - 6 484 10 737 7 180 8 290
electrical and electronic waste - - 5 719 13 522 17 748
Waste oils
lubricant - 6 115 7 068 6 784 6 640
edible - 1 132 1 606 2 145 1 260
Waste tyres 15 139 22 265 21 126 20 233 20 028
Source: CEA, EPEEF (published in: “Odabrani pokazatelji zaštite okoliša u RH”, 2011)
16
processors have to ensure re-use and recovery of at least 85% of the average collected waste vehicle mass during the year and re-use and recycling of at least 80% (after 2015 the target will increase).
Hazardous waste
The reported quantities of hazardous waste in 2005 were 35 542.5 t, in 2006 39 878.8 t, in 2007 52 520.1 t and in 2008 58 432 t, which shows the growing trend that might result from enlarged generation of hazardous waste and/or better enforcement of protective measures. Mentioned quantities relate to amounts of waste reported to the Registry, but it is estimated that the actual amount of generated hazardous waste is higher
25.
The import of hazardous waste except in cases of recovery when material recovery is used to create a new product or raw material which ceases to be waste after recovery is prohibited in Croatia.
There are currently no regulated sites for hazardous waste landfilling in Croatia. Therefore hazardous waste, which is not covered by separate collection systems for special categories of waste and hence requires disposal (waste which cannot be recycled, recovered, etc.) is exported. During 2005, a total of 13 265.45 tonnes of hazardous waste was exported
26 as opposed to 18 937 tonnes in 2010.
Thermal recovery of individual waste types is carried out within determined industrial facilities and hospitals. All energy plants with power exceeding 3 MW may be used for the co-incineration of category I and II waste oils. Cement factories are included in the hazardous waste management system and waste oils and some other waste types, e.g., waste tyres, meat and bone meal, are co-incinerated in cement factories. Specialised incineration plants within the premises of economic operators have some smaller capacity for the incineration of waste from their own activities and have also begun to provide hazardous waste incineration services to other parties. Incineration plants within hospitals incinerate their own infectious waste and provide services to other hospitals only in exceptional cases.
Rehabilitation of highly polluted sites
The Waste Management Strategy and Waste Management Plan of the Republic of Croatia identified nine priority locations (“hot spots”) of high risk created by long-term inappropriate management of industrial (technological) waste. Pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act (OG 110/07), for remediation of locations polluted by waste a remediation programme has to be developed. As prescribed
27, remediation programme
should, among other, contain: data on the location of the polluted site and on population in the immediate surroundings, sources of environmental pollution or origin of pollutants; determination of the level of danger; review of present investigation works and necessity of further investigation works; proposals of restoration methods; measures for restoring the quality of the environment to baseline condition or measures for the improvement of the current state of environmental pollution; costs of implementation of the restoration programme; proposal for environmental monitoring on the polluted site after restoration, etc.
On the basis of collected data the Ministry ordered the Program of remediation for the six locations of hazardous waste: 1) Factory Salonit d.d. (asbestos cement waste) in bankruptcy and Mravinačka kava; 2) red mud pool and the waste lye of the former alumina plant next to Obrovac; 3) unarranged depository with location large quantities of hazardous waste Lemić Brdo next to Karlovac; 4) site with slag and ashes-depository of slag in Kaštela Bay; 5) Pit Sovjak next to Rijeka - preparation of documentation for remediation co-financed through IPA; 6) site polluted by coke tar
24
Official Gazette No. 136/06, 31/09 and 156/09 25
State of the Environment Report of the Republic of Croatia 2005 – 2008, Croatian Environment Agency 26 Croatian Environment Agency 27
Ordinance on measures for remediation of environmental damage and restoration programmes (OG No. 145/08)
Table 6: Hot spots - 9 priority locations of high risk
1 Asbestos disposal site in Mravinačka kava (three
locations):
Factory Salonit d.d. (remediation of first phase finished in 2007.)
Location of playground “Omladinac” near the factory Salonit d.d. (remediation finished in 2009.)
Mravinačka kava (final remediation to be finished in
2011.)
2 Alkaline water and red sludge pools at the location of the former alumina plant in Obrovac (remediation started in 2006 – documentation for continuation of remediation is prepared; multi-criteria analysis needs to be developed for determination of most appropriate solution for remediation)
3 Illegal hazardous waste disposal site in Lemić Brdo near
Karlovac (location permit issued)
4 Slag and ashes-depository of slag in Kaštela Bay (investigation works performed)
5 Illegal hazardous waste disposal site – pit Sovjak, near the city of Rijeka (preparation of documentation through IPA)
6 Ex-coke plant in Bakar (remediation finished in 2010.)
7 Slag Landfill-Plomin I (remediated by owners)
8 Phosphorus Gypsum tailing dam in Kutina, Petrokemija (remediation plan prepared through Phare 2006 project)
9 Oil Sludge – Botovo (initial remediation plan prepared, further investigative work is needed)
17
and oil in the part of the chemical section of cokery in Bakar. Remediation of remaining 3 sites has been initiated by their owners. Remediation programme is managed and funded by EPEEF which also supports parallel programmes and projects dealing with rehabilitation of polluted sites. Table 6 provides overview of status of remediation.
Waste Management Plan identified four more “hot-spot” created by long-term inappropriate management of industrial (technological) waste:
1. Location of the factory Borovo in Vukovar (remediation of first phase finished in 2010);
2. Fuel oil in the screw factory (former TVIK factory) in Knin (remediation plan prepared through Phare 2006 project);
3. Area of the closed factory of electrodes and ferroalloys in Šibenik (EPEEF provided loan for remediation);
4. Island of Biševo - tar on the Salbunara beach (remediation finished in 2008).
Directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability is fully transposed through Environmental Protection Act, Regulation on the manner of establishing environmental damage28 and Ordinance on measures for remediation of environmental damage and restoration programmes. Polluter pays principle is applied in respect to remediation of “hot spots”, in accordance with stipulations of the Environmental protection Act. For “hot spots” for which subjects responsible for environmental damage cannot be determined, Environmental protection Act prescribes “when it is impossible to identify the polluter, the resources for removing pollution shall be secured from the budget of the local or regional self-government unit and from the State Budget”.
1.1.3 Water sector
In accordance with the legal framework, i.e. the Water Act29
, Act on Financing the Water Management30
and Act on Structure and Scope of the Ministries and Other Central State Administration Bodies
31, the main
executive body on national level for water management is the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) responsible for the implementation of national policy as well as the requirements set forth by the EU directives. Croatian Waters, MoA’s implementing agency, is a legal entity for water management established under the Water Act with the aim of “constant and undisturbed execution of public services and other tasks through which water management is achieved within the scope defined by plans and in accordance with available funds”. Finally, public water supply and wastewater management is under the authority of local self-governments and their utility companies. In 2009 there was 135 legal entities registered for provision of water utility services, covering one or more local self-government units
32.
The water management policy in the Republic of Croatia is determined by the Water Management Strategy (WMS)
33, the core national long-term strategic water management document for Croatia. It establishes a
unified water management policy and an integral and coordinated approach to improving the water system in line with international commitments. It also defines strategic goals, establishes current and future needs and services, and identifies how they might be met through management plans for the four water districts: water district of Sava basin and water district of Danube and Drava basins in Black Sea Basin; water district of river basins in Istria and Primorje (north Adriatic area) and water district of basins in Dalmatia (south Adriatic area) in Adriatic Basin.
The Water Management Strategy aims at establishment of integrated and coordinated water regime on the territory of Croatia with the following strategic goals:
1. Ensuring availability of sufficient quantities of good quality drinking water for supply of population;
2. Ensuring availability of water in required quantities and of adequate quality for various economic purposes;
3. Protecting people and assets against adverse effects of water;
28 Official Gazette No. 139/2008 29
Official Gazette No. 107/95, 105/05 30
Official Gazette No. 153/09 31
Official Gazette No. 150/11 32
Implementation Plan for Water Utility Directives, revised version November 2010 33
Official Gazette No. 91/08
18
4. Achieving and maintaining good status of water in order to protect aquatic and water-dependent ecosystems.
In addition to WMS, the policy is determined by general and sector legislative framework, notably The Constitution, the Water Act and Act on Financing Water Management, alongside accompanying secondary legislation. Croatian legal framework for water supply and wastewater collection and treatment is fully aligned with the EU acquis
34, appropriately supplemented with the implementation plan for water utility directives.
However, institutional weaknesses and managerial/organisational inefficiency of the whole system have been recognised and on the general level being addressed with appropriate legal remedies intensified since 2009 with enactment of Water Management Strategy, Water Act and Act on Financing the Water Management, supplemented by relevant by-laws. The new Water Act replaced the old Utility Management Act (and annulled provisions related to drinking water supply, sewerage and wastewater treatment), also transferring the jurisdiction upon water Public Utilities to the Ministry responsible for water management. The new Water Act and corresponding by-laws envisage comprehensive reorganization of the water utility sector. All institutional reforms in water sector envisaged by new Water Act are considered and incorporated in defined activities of OPE.
In overall water resources are still abundant and Croatia is considered to be relatively rich in water35
. The main challenge of water management policy in this respect is uneven distribution of water sources spatially and temporally, which is especially problematic in coastal areas and islands during the dry seasons. Inland surface water quality has been systematically monitored for several decades although the methodology and legislation was aligned with the UN/EU standards in 1998, hence defining year 2000 as a baseline
36. Generally in this
period the quality of inland surface waters was maintained or even slightly improved in some cases. The main source of public water supply is groundwater (about 90%), either abstracted from wells (mostly in the Black Sea basins) or springs (mostly in the Adriatic Sea basins).
37 In overall, the quality and quantity of water is
satisfactory, but growing anthropological pressures and increasingly unpredictable and extreme natural influences (draughts, floods) bring new challenges for the formulation of the appropriate water management policy. Especially in the light of noticeable spatial and temporal unevenness of water availability, water management needs to be appropriate for each body of water and reconciling sometimes contradictory needs and requirements from the society, economy, and environmental protection.
Public Water Supply
The coverage ratio (share of population able to connect to the public water supply systems) is about 80 to 82% for the whole Croatia, while it was only 63% in 1990. The connection rate (share of population actually connected to public systems) is somewhat lower and it is estimated to be 74% on average for the whole territory. However, there are significant differences in coverage between regions and counties - supply of the population is higher in the Adriatic basin (91%) than in the Black Sea basin (77%); connection rate is lowest in Bjelovar-Bilogora county (31%) and the highest in Istria County (99%). In the Sava river basin, excluding Zagreb County and including the eastern Slavonia, the level of public water supply is 62%
38. Overall, the level of the
connection of the population to public water supply systems in the major part of Croatia is satisfactory, especially in urban centres that have very high water supply; it is somewhat lower in the city outskirts and the lowest in the isolated areas. A portion of population that is not connected to the public water supply is supplied partially from the so-called local water supplies (rough estimation is between 15–20% of population) or individually from own wells, cisterns, etc. It is estimated that there are a few hundreds of local water supplies mostly in the area of Black Sea basin – self-organised systems that are not recorded in the system of water use collection but maintained by the users themselves, without systematic water quality control and proper maintenance.
In comparison to the EU, Croatia is below the average – for majority of European countries data indicates average level of connection of the population at about 90%, although the ratio expectedly varies among countries. Above-average connectedness close or equal to 100% is reported in Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark,
34
Implementation Plan for Water Utility Directives, revised version November 2010 35 According to UNESCO survey from 2003 accessibility and richness of water sources place Croatia at 5th position in Europe and 42nd in the world. Source: Water Management Strategy, 2008 36 Monitoring was done at about 270 stations in 2000 and 344 in 2006, against mandatory indicators – oxygen regime, nutrients group, biological and micro-biological indicators. Monitoring of particular elements such as metals, organic compounds, radio-activity and alike is done in specific cases. 37 Water Management Strategy, 2008 38 Ibid.
19
France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Cyprus and Malta. The lowest rates of connection to public water supply are observed in Romania (54.2%), Estonia (74%), and Lithuania (76%).
39
All public water supply systems implement the water disinfection (mostly by chlorine), while a portion of water is conditioned. In the Black Sea basin, water conditioning mostly occurs in the systems using surface water and to a lesser degree in the systems taking from the underground water. Notably this occurs when underground source is in alluvial aquifer, primarily in order to reduce the increased content of iron, manganese, ammonia and arsenic that are the consequence of natural reductive conditions (e.g. eastern Slavonia area). In the Adriatic basin water sources are mostly used only with compulsory disinfection except when surface water is used, which is mostly conditioned. Karst water sources typical for Adriatic basin sometimes display the problem of increased turbidity. The major water quantities are conditioned in Zagreb and Osijek.
The average annual quantity of the taken water for the needs of public water supply has not significantly changed in the last ten years. Between 1999 and 2007, the quantity of water supplied to households ranged between 175 and 190 million m
3. According to a Croatian Water estimate, the population not connected to the
public water supply systems abstracts 60 to 70 million m3 from private sources (water wells, etc.). In 2006,
average specific consumption of water in households amounted to 135 l/cap/day (between 113 and 149 l/cap/day)
40. The quantity of water used annually from the public supply system for individual sectors
(presented as total for mining, processing industry and energy, gas supply, without the hydropower sector) is between 80 and 125 million m
3. A decreasing trend was registered between 1999 and 2007, probably resulting
from the decrease in industrial production. In addition to uncontrolled intakes by self-organised local water supplies, large problem are losses in the system resulting from inadequate and out-dated infrastructure and other un-registered consumption (water for flushing pipelines, fire-fighters, etc.). According to the latest data, these losses are estimated to be about 44%
41 and this is quite problematic in terms of economic efficiency and
water pollution risk reduction42
.
39 Eurostat 40 Water Management Strategy, 2008 41 Croatian Environmental Agency: ‘Odabrani pokazatelji okoliša u RH 2011' 42
Problem with losses in the network has to be tacked by modernization and renewal of supply infrastructure, but it also calls for institutional/procedural reforms in terms of more concentrated water supply systems and more efficient management, since a relatively high number of small and under-capacitated companies impede rationality and reliability of the operations.
20
Figure 2: Use of water from public supply system for public and industrial use (without hydropower sector), 1997 - 2007
Source: Central Bureau of Statistics (Croatian Environmental Agency)
Public Sewerage Systems
The success of the water protection implementation against point sources of pollution depends on the level of construction of the public sewerage system, which is defined as a systematic and organized waste waters collection, sewerage and treatment including sludge disposal resulting from the treatment process. The public sewerage system in Republic of Croatia is highly underdeveloped in comparison to water supply. The average connection rate to the public sewage systems is 43,6%, with large differences between regions and between larger and smaller settlements. In 2007, connection of population to public sewerage systems was rather satisfactory in the settlements bigger than 10,000 inhabitants, where the rate of connection was about 75-80%. The major problems with the wastewater sewerage are in minor settlements up to 2,000 inhabitants, inhabited by 40% of the population
43. Particularly problematic is large number of especially small settlements with less
than 500 inhabitants - 5,387 settlements populated with about 800,000 citizens. In such settlements, due to technical-technological and financial limitations, the construction and operation of centralized public sewerage systems are hardly feasible, so pollutions from these settlements are treated as dispersed. The best connection of population to the sewage system is in the area of Littoral and Istrian basins (58%), while in Dalmatian basins only 31% of population is connected to the sewage system
44. Benchmarking again puts Croatia bellow the EU
average - the population served by a sewer system, regardless of the availability of treatment facilities in the EU varies from 43% in Romania to 99% in Netherlands and 100% in Malta
45.
43 Water Management Strategy, 2008 44 Ibid. 45 Eurostat
21
Figure 3: Size of settlements and respective connection to sewerage
Most frequently a combined sewage system type is applied (waste waters and rainfall) while the separate sanitary sewage system is less frequently used (mostly waste waters). Combined sewage system is dominant in the continental part of Croatia, i.e. in the Black Sea basin, while the splitting system is more frequently present in the Adriatic basin. Implementation of water protection measures in combined systems is more complex, more expensive and less efficient, unlike the separate sanitary sewage system. Taking into consideration when the sewage system in cities was constructed, it can be assumed that the majority of sewage systems are permeable to water to a significant extent.
Connection of population to the wastewater treatment plants
Out of the total of 295 settlements with the built sewage system, 131 (44%) settlements also have a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP)
46. In another words, only 27% of total population is encompassed with
WWT utility (out of 43,6% of population served with collection of wastewater, 61% have systems that include treatment)
47. In 2009, in total 108 WWTP were operational, differing widely in the level of construction and
capacity - 33 plants have the wastewater pre-treatment facility, 20 have the primary wastewater treatment facility, 49 have the secondary wastewater treatment facility and 6 plants have the tertiary wastewater treatment facility
48. Thus the installed capacity of WWTP of 3,7 million PE
49 indicates the level of completeness
46
Water Management Strategy, 2008 47
Implementation Plan for Water Utility Directives, revised version of November 2010 48
Croatian Environment Agency: 'Odabrani pokazatelji okoliša u RH 2011' 49
Implmentation Plan for Water Utility Directives, revised version of November 2010
22
of the construction, yet does not provide the data on the wastewater treatment level. Large majority of plants built in the 1980s is oversized since the designs were based on spatial plans foreseeing high increase of population and industry production, hence also assuming high portion of industrial pollution that should be treated in a central waste water treatment facility. Changed conditions of economy have also conditioned the changes in the conception of industry wastewater treatment (devices for pre-treatment), so the major part of industry has built independent WWTP. In the construction of plants, for the purposes of water protection, it has been mostly invested in the tourist areas of Littoral and Istrian basins, meaning in Istria and Kvarner Gulf. Only 28% of the municipal wastewater in Croatia is treated in WWTP
50, which is far below the EU standards
ranging from 28 % in Romania to 99% in Netherlands, but in majority of the EU member states this ratio is not below 60-70%
51. Out of 28% of the population’s waste water quantity treated in Croatia, 43% is treated in the
pre-treatment and primary treatment level, while 57% of wastewaters is treated in the secondary treatment level. Treated waters are discharged back to natural recipient, whilst currently the sludge resulting from treatment process is land filled. With 56.4% of population not being connected to sewerage and 73% being without connection to facilities for treatment of urban wastewater, clearly public sewerage system and its efficiency are highly insufficient
52.
Decision on Designation of Sensitive Areas53
designated the Danube river basin and the Adriatic Sea area as sensitive areas for which higher degree of treatment is envisaged. The Decision is coherent with requirements of the negotiation process in the Chapter 27 Environment, and with the criteria for determination of sensitive areas stipulated in the Regulation of water quality standards
54.
Organization of watercourses and other waters
Croatia is subject to considerable periodic flooding; in non-urban areas these are inflicted by short extensive rains and/or sudden snow melting overflowing rivers, streams, karst feels and inland waters on lowlands, as well as causing flooding in urban areas at times of short precipitations of high intensity. It is estimated that floods potentially jeopardize about 15% of the national land territory, the major part of which is today protected by various levels of security. Flood protection system was highly damaged during the war, whilst pressing economic and social circumstances in upcoming years forestalled repair, maintenance and further development of flood protection systems. The current level of the functionality of the protection against floods system is at around 75%
55 - out of approximately 10,203 km of first level watercourses, 73% has completely
built protection systems, 24% are partially protected, while 3% of areas have no protective infrastructure. In total 2,252 km of defensive embankments were built on I level watercourses. At approximately 21,905 km of II level watercourses, the systems are completely built in about 75% of watercourses, while they have not been built or are partially built in the others. In total 438 km of defensive embankments were built on I level watercourses.
56
So far on the yearly basis and through Water Management Plan national funds have been regularly allocated for water management and specifically for activities for protection from adverse effects of water – mostly reconstruction and maintenance of flood protection structures and preparation of technical documentation. However, in line with the needs, as well as EU Directives and membership requirements, in upcoming years Republic of Croatia will need to intensify preparation of anti flood strategy documents (financial and other analytical documents such as flood hazard maps and flood risk maps) and invest concrete and significant resources in construction and rehabilitation of flood prevention infrastructure. Recently the preparation of anti-flood strategy has been initiated and technical assistance project under IPA I Component is programmed; Project ‘Development of Flood Hazard Maps and Flood Risk Maps’ will contribute to analytical approach in preparation of national anti-flood strategic document and provide frame and guidelines for its development.
Similarly, in terms of irrigation the infrastructure is not sufficient and so far has not been systematically built. Moreover the agricultural production in the past period has been oriented towards the production of cultures (primarily cereals and corn) for which irrigation is not essential. That resulted in the fact that in 2004 within the complete territory of Croatia 9,264 ha was irrigated, which was only about 0.86% of then used agricultural surfaces while the average of the total agricultural surfaces irrigated in the EU 15 was 13%
57. Consequently and
50 Water Management Strategy, 2008 51 Eurostat 52 Water Management Strategy, 2008 53
Official Gazette No. 81/10 54
Official Gazette No. 89/10 55 Water Management Strategy, Chapter 3.3.1. Regulation of water streams 56 Water Management Strategy, 2008 57 National Project of Irrigation and Agricultural Land and Water Management
23
expectedly, in the years of drought the agricultural production was heavily struck; in 2000 and 2003 for example, total damages from droughts in the agriculture exceeded HRK 3.4 billion. With the introduction of the National Project of Irrigation and Agricultural Land and Water Management, irrigated surfaces in Croatia increased by more than 50% in two years, so that about 15,000 ha of agricultural surfaces were irrigated by 2007. The largest irrigated surfaces in the continental part of Croatia are positioned in Varaždin, Virovitica-Podravina and Osijek-Baranja County, while in the coastal part the majority of surfaces are irrigated in Istria and Dalmatia, especially in the Neretva valley and in the Kaštela area in Split-Dalmatia County. It is estimated that the total of about 15-20 million m³ of water, together with water losses, is used for the existing irrigation
58.
In the first phase of the implementation of the National Project of Irrigation and Agricultural Land and Water Management, County irrigation plans were prepared by the 19 out of 21 counties and on the basis of which preparation and implementation of the projects can be undertaken with the aim to increase the total agriculture surfaces irrigated to 65.000 ha by the 2020 (i.e. to 6%). At the moment, four National pilot irrigation projects are determined (Vukovar-Srijem, Brodsko-Posavska, Split-Dalmatia and Dubrovnik Neretva counties). Through the rehabilitation program, in the period 2005-2009 approximately 1900 ha of irrigation systems (Vrana, Grabovo, Borinci) were fully rehabilitated and partial repair was conducted on approximately 2500 ha (Sinjsko polje, Imotsko polje, Rastok, Valtura).
1.1.4 Other environmental protection factors
AIR, ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE
In terms of emissions to atmosphere, generally a substantial decrease of main pollutants has been achieved in comparison to 1990. Notably, increased pollution from certain pollutants was noted from 1997 to the peak in 2007, but since then reverse positive trend is observed. Evidently the emissions in overall reflect developmental trends and actions - declining industrial production and economy restructuring in early ’90-ties, economic boost in second half of the same decade, improving legislation and introduction of air protection measures during the first decade of 21
st century. Economic growth is expectedly in connection with
greenhouse gases emissions - in comparison with 27 Member States, the Republic of Croatia is ranked as 21st
in total emission of greenhouse gases and contributes to global emissions with 0,1%. The biggest contributors are energy (72,2%), industry (13,3%) and agriculture (10,8%). Enforcement of international protocols, national legislation and various projects has contributed to the continuous reduction of the use of substances that deplete the ozone layer – as much as 93% in period 1990 to 2009
59.
Based on the air quality assessment for various substances, Republic of Croatia is spatially divided into 7 areas/zones and 6 areas/agglomerations, densely populated and/or industrially developed
60. The analysis has
shown that in all seven zones concentration of substances is sufficiently low, so all of them are designated category I in air quality. The situation is more complex in 6 inhabited areas/agglomerations - Zagreb, Sisak, Kutina, Rijeka, Osijek and Split. These inhabited areas are mostly in the first category of air quality in relation to sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and benzene, and with respect to other parameters either in the second (NOx, benzene, ozone) or third category (suspension solids, H2S, SO2), depending on the proximity of local sources of pollution (oil refinery in Sisak and Rijeka, soot factory in Kutina). In the period May-July, the whole territory of Croatia is under increased risk of exposure to high concentrations of the ozone above the prescribed limit 40 µg/m
3. Still, generally it can be argued that except for localised sources of pollution in
certain urbanised centres, the air quality is satisfactory and to large extent falls under category I. The main sources of pollutants’ emissions are industry, energy (including combined heating-power plant), household heating and transport
61.
NATURE, BIODIVERSITY AND SEA
58 Water Management Strategy, 2008 59
Source for all statistical data in this paragraph: State of the Environment Report of the Republic of Croatia 2005 - 2008 60
7 ZONES: HR 1 – Osječko-baranjska (except the City of Osijek), Vukovarsko-srijemska, Brodsko-posavska, Požeško-slavonska and Virovitičko-podravska counties; HR 2 – Bjelovarsko-bilogorska, Koprivničko-križevačka, Krapinsko-zagorska, Varaždinska, Međimurska, Zagrebačka (except the City of Zagreb) counties; HR 3 – Karlovačka and Sisačko-moslavačka (except Kutina and Sisak) counties; HR 4 – Istarska county; HR 5 - Primorsko-goranska (except the City of Rijeka) and Ličko-senjska counties; HR 6 - Zadarska and Šibensko-kninska counties; HR 7 - Splitsko-dalmatinska (Except the City of Split) and Dubrovačko-neretvanska counties; 6 AGGLOMERATIONS: Zagreb, Sisak, Kutina, Split, Rijeka, Osijek 61
Croatian Environment Agency
24
Due to its specific position at the crossroads of several bio-geographical regions, the Republic of Croatia is one of the richest European countries in terms of overall biodiversity. Croatia is the third richest country in Europe in the number of species per area; confirmed number of species is around 38 000, while it is estimated that actual number is far higher – from 50 000 to over 100 000. There is a large number of endemic species (about 7.5% of endemic flora) and significant part of species endangered on European level (e.g. bear, wolf and lynx)
62.
Systematic approach to biodiversity preservation has resulted in national classification of habitats and accompanying Ordinance
63, publication of red list of threatened species, red books for individual groups of
plants, animals and fungi, development of management plans for lynx, bear and wolf, etc. However, continuous loss of biodiversity is still observed as global trend, caused by degradation and loss of habitats, intake of alien species in eco-systems; environment pollution; spatial urbanization (including infrastructure and traffic); global climate changes and other.
Protected areas, including ones under preventive protection cover about 8.47% of Croatian territory or 12.06% of the land and 1.94% of territorial sea
64. Because of their special value, protected areas are key to biological
and landscape diversity and a backbone of ecological network.
In the frame of NATURA 2000, network of protected areas consists of Special Protected Areas (SPA) for wild birds, designated under Birds Directive
65, and Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated under the
Habitats Directive66
. Following the completion of the LIFE III project ‘Building-up of the National Ecological Network’ (CRO-NEN) in 2005, additional field research financed from the State budget resulted in designation of National Ecological Network in 2007
67. The network area covers 47% of the land and 39% of the marine part
of Croatia - all national parks nature parks, strict and special reserves, in addition to areas so far not designated under national classification. National Ecological Network is the basis for proposal of the EU ecological network NATURA 2000 in Croatia.
68 In line with the EU legislation, the network consists of areas important for
conservation of wild bird species and areas important for conservation of wild taxa (except birds) and habitats. Regarding the marine part of NATURA 2000, due to lack of data on marine species and habitat types further investigations are planned.
Specifically for Croatia, maritime environment, i.e. the Adriatic Sea, coast and islands are immensely important yet ecologically sensitive natural resource. The data collected so far indicate that with respect to biological elements the situation is satisfactory, while the coastal sea at beaches is of high quality. The share of hazardous elements in sea organisms and sediments is in most cases categorized in low or middle concentration, except at monitoring stations located in large urban centres and ports. The danger of pollution is proportionally increasing with the intensity of the sea traffic; water ballast and aquaculture in addition cause introduction of new and invasive species that threaten the biological diversity of Adriatic Sea ecosystem
69.
1.2 Requirements of environmental acquis (negotiation process)
The weaknesses and developmental gaps observed by comparative and sector analyses and pointing out towards strategic choices are further substantiated by accession process, notably implementation of the environmental acquis with obligations of the Republic of Croatia in transitional periods negotiated with the EU.
At Accession Conference held on 30 June 2011, EU and Croatia have closed accession negotiations. Accession Treaty between EU member states and Croatia was signed on 09 December 2011 in Brussels. Regarding Chapter 27 “Environment” transitional periods were agreed for heavy-investment Directives in field of waste management, water quality, integrated pollution prevention and control. Furthermore, adaptation periods were agreed in field of chemicals, technical adaptations regarding nature protection Directives, and derogations in climate changes area.
62 Ministry of Culture, Fourth National Report of the Republic of Croatia to the Convention on Biological Diversity (year 2009) 63 Ordinance on the classes of habitat types, habitat map, threatened and rare habitat types and by the measures for the preservation of habitat type, (OG 07/06 and OG 119/09) 64
Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection, register of Protected Areas (April 2012) 65
Directive 2009/147/EC on the conservation of wild birds as amended 66
Directive 1992/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora as amended 67
Regulation on Proclamation of the Ecological Network (NN109/07) 68
www.natura2000.hr 69
State of the Environment Report of the Republic of Croatia 2005 – 2008, Croatian Environment Agency
25
More specifically in the waste management area, focus should be directed upon remediation of existing landfills, waste recovery and minimising of amount of waste for its controlled disposal, reduction of the share of biodegradable waste and construction of centres for waste management. The related directive is Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste. Transitional period until 31 December 2018 has been agreed for remediation/conditioning of existing landfills and establishment of an integrated waste management system, i.e. the construction of required waste management centres (WMC). Also, transitional period until 31 December 2020 has been agreed, during which the share of biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills would be gradually reduced to reach the level of 35 % of the total amount (by weight) of biodegradable municipal waste produced in 1997 (as a reference/base year for Croatia).
In the field of water policy (Water framework directive), Directive 91/271/EEC on urban waste water treatment and Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption (Drinking water quality) requires to complete construction of related water management infrastructure and to improve wastewaters treatment technologies in agglomerations, which is financially very costly. Transitional period until 1 January 2024 has been agreed with regard to the final deadlines for the construction of wastewater sewerage and treatment systems (Council Directive 91/271/EEC). Also, transitional period until 1 January 2019 has been agreed for the implementation of Council Directive 98/83/EC, with regard to the microbiological parameters set out in Annex I – Part A and Part C and Annex III of the Directive.
From the strategic point of view priority was given to investments necessary for compliance with the acquis in the environment sector, with emphasis on the waste and water sub-sectors. Due to the short programming period, other heavy investments required in air sector and those relevant to the IPPC will not be directly addressed, but the OP will provide a platform for the building experiences and capacities needed for extension of assistance to new priority areas in the next programming period.
1.3 Lessons Learned from Previously Implemented Interventions
The Republic of Croatia has a significant experience and tradition of cooperation with the EU and use of the EU external assistance, dating back to 1996 and the first aid scheme, programme OBNOVA. From 2001 to 2004 the main instrument for channelling the assistance was Programme CARDS, from June 2004 and attainment of official candidacy status supplemented with other pre-accession programmes, notably PHARE, ISPA and SAPARD, and the latest Integrated Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance – IPA, available from 2007 onwards.
As expected the nature and focus of assistance has evolved over the years – while the first programme OBNOVA was focusing on post-war reconstruction, return of refugees and strengthening of democracy and the rule of law, the following CARDS was much more diversified and to a large extent supported institutional strengthening, capacity building and generally measures aimed to the increase of absorption capacity and alignment with the acquis. In that period, beginning of the first decade the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction (now days: Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection) was like other line ministries beneficiary of many technical assistance projects mainly aimed to facilitate the fulfilment of obligations arising from Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA). At the time majority of CARDS projects provided technical assistance (TA) for pilot and/or focused actions lying down foundations and building capacities for actions that will later on tackle key issues systematically and in larger scope; for example TA was provided for preparation of draft National Waste Management Strategy, draft Ordinance / Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment, draft compliance plan with the requirements of the UWWT Directive, preparation of initial strategic preparatory documents for investments such as draft Regional Waste Management Plans in two Counties (under the Municipal Environmental Management Capacity and Infrastructure), Assessment of wind and solar energy sources in pilot regions, etc.
In the same period, from 2000, the Ministry responsible for environmental protection (now days: Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection) has also participated in projects covered by programme LIFE – Third countries, which is focused exclusively on environment sector. Projects financed from LIFE included e.g. reconstruction of national emission inventory system, sustainable development of Croatian capacity in combined heat and power sector, CORINE land cover database for Croatia, building of national ecological network as a part of the pan-European ecological network and NATURA 2000 network, guidelines for starting the implementation of waste management plan in Croatia, Protection of biodiversity in Sava river basin, etc.
Programme PHARE become available to Croatia from budget year 2005; in terms of its thematic orientation it continued to strengthen the processes initiated by CARDS – capacity building and EU accession process - but increasingly also becoming available to beneficiaries outside state administration (non-governmental
26
organisations, SMEs, counties and other local stakeholders). Some of the projects financed under PHARE include, inter alia, Enhanced Environmental Inspection for Enforcement of New Environmental Legislation, Development of Hazardous Waste Management System Including Identification and Management of Hot Spot Sites in Croatia, Institutional Strengthening and Implementation of the NATURA 2000 Ecological Network in Croatia, Establishment of Air Quality Monitoring and Management System, and many others.
Programme ISPA that become available from 2005 was a kind of a benchmark as it offered for the first time a possibility to finance major infrastructure measures in the environment and transport sectors. The utilisation of ISPA was carried out in line with National ISPA Strategy for environment and entailed the implementation of 2 infrastructural and one technical assistance project – Bikarac Regional Waste Management Centre, phase 1 (6 mill EUR from ISPA), Karlovac water and waste water programme (22.5 mill EUR from ISPA) and Technical Assistance for IPA Pipeline Preparation (1.0 mill EUR from ISPA). The importance of the ISPA programme is twofold; on the one hand institutional set up for the implementation of infrastructure projects was set up and initial experience was gathered providing valuable lessons for IPA but also SF programmes. Works on Bikarac Regional Waste Management Centre has finished at the end of 2011, and new landfill was constructed, in accordance with Landfill Directive requirements. Further activities on establishment of an integrated system for respective County will continue with construction of transfer stations and introduction of waste treatment technologies. Karlovac water and waste water programme comprises of construction of waste water treatment plant and of construction/rehabilitation of water supply and sewerage network. Waste water treatment plant with a tertiary level of treatment and with a capacity of 100,000 PE has been constructed as well as water supply and sewerage network.
In the most recent period from 2007, IPA – Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance replaced all previous funding instruments providing unique framework for EU aid until the accession. General aim of IPA is to support the candidate and potential candidate countries in adoption of the acquis and preparation for structural funds, through 5 components: institution building; cross-border cooperation, regional development; human resource development and rural development. Under IPA Component I Transition assistance and institution building, the environment sector has benefited from a number of technical assistance projects aimed at institutional strengthening. The Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection was beneficiary of the project IPA 2008 Enforcement of the New Environmental Protection Act Harmonized with EU Legislation in Cases of Criminal Offences Against the Environment that aimed to increase capacities for detection and prosecution of criminal offences against the environment. Assistance in that subject is being continued via IPA 2011 project “Capacity Building of environmental inspection and other relevant authorities and institutions for preventing, recognising, investigating and prosecuting offences against the environments”. MEPN jointly with the Ministry of Health implemented IPA 2007 Chemical safety - Strengthening Legal Framework and Institutional Infrastructure for Protection from Dangerous Chemicals that aims to strengthen legal framework and institutional infrastructure for the protection from dangerous chemicals. IPA I 2009 project Capacity Building for the Implementation of the Environmental Acquis in the Areas of Waste Management, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control and Noise Protection is under implementation, which (beside noise protection component) aims at strengthening the capacities for control of trans boundary movement of waste and at establishment of regional-level centres for implementation of integrated pollution prevention and control. Furthermore, assistance was approved for development of capacity for assessment of the effects and impact of the programmes / projects on the environment and nature (IPA 2010 “Strengthening Capacities for Strategic Environmental Assessment at Regional and Local Level” and IPA 2011 “Strengthening the capacity of all relevant authorities for ecological network impact assessment”). Significant assistance is being devoted to the nature protection sub-sector for setting up and implementation of various aspects of NATURA 2000 network in Croatia (IPA 2007 TAF projects Development of Faunistic and Speleological Databases (CRO Fauna and CRO Speleo) and IPA 2008 Development of Habitats Types Database (CRO Habitats) as part of the National Nature Protection Information System (NNPIS) and Identification and Setting-up of the Marine Part of Natura 2000 Network in Croatia – Marine Natura 2000 and IPA 2009 NATURA 2000 Management and Monitoring (MAN-MON)). It is especially important to mention IPA 2010 project Development of Flood Hazard Maps and Flood Risk Maps which aims at preparation of Flood Hazard Maps and Flood Risk Maps on the pilot areas and set of guidance documents. IPA I 2009 project Capacity Building for Implementation Directive on Pollution Caused by Certain Dangerous Substances Discharged into the Aquatic Environment and the Water Framework Directive is aimed at harmonization of monitoring systems with the requirements of Water Framework Directive and Directive on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment and establishment of a certified quality assurance system. Finally two projects aiming at improving environmental data gathering and processing system are implemented by the Croatian Environment Agency, namely IPA 2007 Improving Environmental reporting and IPA 2009 Improving Waste Reporting”)
27
Furthermore, environment is tackled as ‘B’ sub-component of the IPA Component III Regional Development with the type of interventions analogous to ISPA programme and directly preceding the SF OP. These interventions are programmed and implemented through multiannual Environmental Protection Operational Programme 2007 – 2013
70 (EPOP) with an indicative budget of 154.5 mill EUR (131.3 mill EUR from IPA) and the
following priority axes: 1) development of infrastructure for waste management (establishment of county waste management centres); 2) protection of water resources through improved water supply and integrated system for waste water management; and 3) technical assistance.
IPA EPOP interventions in the waste sector follow the objectives of the Waste Management Strategy and focus on establishment of new WMCs at county/regional levels (16 projects identified) and remediation of sites highly polluted by waste (1 project). For the moment two major projects have been approved “County Waste Management Centre Marišćina” and “County Waste Management Centre Kaštijun”. For two major projects (“Kaštijun” and Marišćina” WMCs) contract for works have been signed in November/December 2011, and contract implementation commences under “design & build” conditions. Both WMCs include plant for mechanical-biological treatment of waste and new landfills. County-level public waste management companies were established, which were responsible for preparation of major project applications and preparation of tender documentation in cooperation with national bodies responsible for management of IPA. Those two WMCs are to be viewed also as a flag-ship projects acquiring valuable experience both in preparing/contracting EU funded project and in introducing mechanical-biological treatment technologies in Croatia. Regarding remediation of sites highly polluted by waste, TA project for preparation of documentation for remediation of one site highly polluted by waste has been approved and is under implementation since April 2012.
IPA EPOP interventions in the water sector have focused on establishment of modern water supply systems and networks (measure 2.1); and construction of wastewater treatment for domestic and industrial wastewater and upgrading sewerage network (measure 2.2). From 15 project initially included in the pipeline, for the moment 4 of them are being funded – “Water Supply and Sewerage System with WWTP for Slavonski Brod”, “Water Supply and Sewerage Improvements and Construction of the WWTP in Drniš” and “Water Supply and Sewerage Improvements and Construction of the WWTP in Knin”. All contracts for implementation of those three projects are signed (in total, 13 contracts) and works have commenced and are advancing. “Sisak - Waste Water Programme” has been approved by EC in January 2012 and implementation of contracts is to start in 2013. Additional IPA major projects application was submitted to the European Commission (EC) for approval: “Poreč – Sewerage and Wastewater Treatment Plants” (re-submitted in August 2012) and Osijek Water Infrastructure Improvement Project (submitted in December 2012).
The TA measures under Priority 3 of the OP have assisted the Operating Structure in all aspects of the EPOP management and publicity actions, also with the view of upcoming use of Structural Funds. In that context it is worthwhile to mention that Operating Structure received IPA TA assistance and capacity building for assessment and evaluation of major projects.
Experiences and capacities developed during the implementation of EU assistance programmes are built into this OP and certainly have influenced the strategic choices and funding options selected under this document. Special attention was paid to the lessons learned from ISPA and IPA IIIB because this CF OP represents “extended continuation” of those two programmes.
In terms of acquired experience and lessons learned from the preparation and implementation of the EU programmes and projects, the following conclusions can be drawn:
Administrative capacity is crucial for efficient and effective utilisation of funds; slowly the capacities are being developed at all levels, both in horizontal and vertical terms. However, the key to success does not lie in incremental and detached development of particular capacities, but rather in embedding administrative capacity development in everyday practice, i.e. full alignment of procedures, systems and structures applicable to both EU and national programmes.
Skilled and motivated staff is essential for the success and further efforts are needed to identify, train, develop and especially retain highly skilled staff.
Special importance has to be given to capacity building of the potential final beneficiaries in order for them to be able to prepare good project/tender documentation within limited time. By doing so a sense of ownership will be strengthened.
70
Up to 1st
of July 2013
28
Establishment of the management (implementation) system is an extremely time-consuming process and effort that is needed in order to ensure a productive management (implementation) system within each of the sub-sectors is usually underestimated. Therefore introduction of new sectors and possibly new institutions in the implementation of the SF/CF needs to be done gradually and over a longer period of time.
An inadequate and poorly-prepared project pipeline is counter-productive for the use of funds and it takes time to adequately prepare projects, especially major projects. In relation to that a limited capacity for the project preparation exits and it is manly located at the national level (not at the regional one). Additional emphasis should be put on project preparation since only well prepared projects for the current and upcoming financial perspectives can guarantee absorption of allocated EU funds within the given n+x period and minimise the risk of de-commitment.
Negative experience with certain previous waste projects under IPA emphasised the need of adequate promotion, publicity measures and dissemination of information to all key stakeholders but also to wide public. As previously stated it will be improved via stronger involvement of the local authorities in the whole project cycle but also through formal involvement of the non-governmental sector.
In accordance with general experiences and lessons learned described above the following points were recognised as key to success and appropriate measures for tackling them are built in the strategy for the programming period 2007-2013:
The management system has been established combining EU requirements and the existing national set up. This process is time-consuming and requires gradual improvements in order to maintain its stability. This lesson is fully acknowledged by developing management structure for the SF/CF that very similar to the one for IPA i.e. the same institutions with a similar scope of work involved in IPA will remain for SF/CF and it is expected that efficient working procedures and experience developed under IPA will ensure smooth implementation of the SF/CF, based on validated management / implementation paths.
Implementation of ISPA and IPA indicated certain weaknesses in the waste and water management organizational system especially on the local level. Utility companies as beneficiaries of the projects do not have sufficient capacities to prepare and implement projects thus in the framework of the IPA and OPE operations, the issue is addressed by involvement of national institutions - Croatian Waters and EPEEF. For the time being, until the capacities on the local level are sufficiently developed, implementation of the waste and water management projects financed by EU funds is secured by the following:
Croatian Waters and EPEEF acting as Implementing Bodies (IPA) / Intermediate Bodies level 2 (SF) also take care of project implementation and help the utility companies to take over constructed infrastructure and properly maintain and operate it;
Preparatory work on the projects among other studies entails also the analysis of the utility company (); on the basis of this screening, measures for organisational improvements are proposed (management plan).
There is a need to create a project pipeline with a sufficient number of well-prepared projects prior to the beginning of the programming period which would guarantee best utilization of available resources. Given that the experience and expertise in the area of project preparation is concentrated in two sectoral agencies (Croatian Waters and EPEEF), it was decided to earmark a significant amount of resources from their annual budget plans to project preparation in order to create a project pipeline and to ensure the quality and timeliness of the project preparation process. In order to ensure a high quality project pipeline, it was decided to allocate as much resources as possible for project preparation activities.
Since it is proven that establishment of a productive management / implementation system (structures, procedures, competences) within each sub-sector requires significant time and efforts, it was reckoned that inclusion of any sector additional to water and waste (such as energy, nature protection, air quality, etc.) will require considerable amount of time and resources to be invested in building up a fully operational and efficient system. Introduction of new sectors and consequently new institutions in the implementation of the SF/CF is necessary, but it has to be done gradually and over a longer period of time. Having in mind the time available for the use of SF/CF within the 2007-2013 perspective, inclusion of new priority areas and new institutions in the OP management is regarded highly risky and decision is made to maintain the OP focused on areas in which experience and
29
capacities for implementation exist - water and waste management (IPA priorities). Therefore the involvement of the abovementioned new sectors (type of activities) is postponed for the next programming period that will provide sufficient time and financial resources for them to be adequately introduced in the EU financing.
1.4 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis
STRENGHTS
WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
General environment
- Unique natural environment & biodiversity
- Low level of air pollution
- Endorsed basic strategic documents and core legislation in the field of environment (in general and specifically for in relevant and related sub-sectors)
- Implementation and legal framework aligned with EU standards
- Relevant institutions for environmental protection set up in all relevant sub-sectors (water, waste, air protection, nature, etc.)
- Strong NGOs and tradition of civil activism in the area of environmental protection
- Favourable natural conditions for use of renewable energy sources (hydro, biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, etc.)
- Insufficient integration of environmental protection in other sector policies
- Insufficient capacities of institutions dealing with environmental protection at national and local level
- Relatively high number of public utility companies
- Limited funds for investments in environmental protection to satisfy harmonizing/implementation needs of financially demanding directives
- Insufficient public awareness on environmental issues
- Inadequate structure of the fuel base and abatement technology (high dependency on non-renewable energy sources)
- Continuous alignment with EU standards providing for improvement of current status in environmental protection
- Availability of EU funds to support infrastructural projects in the field of environment
- Interest of domestic and foreign investors in the sector of environment
- Improvement of environment and acceleration of economic growth with provision for new jobs through Investment in environmental infrastructure
- Public participation in decision making process on environmental matters and contribution of civil sector to decision making and increasing awareness in general
- Rationalisation of the public utility sector
- Potential for utilisation of renewable energy sources and increasing energy efficiency
- Development of the NATURA 2000 network in EU
- Unsustainable development and deterioration of environment due to economic pressures and short sighted policy agendas
- Need for heavy and long-term investments, lack of awareness and vested interests in some industries postpone / prolong achievement of compliance with environmental requirements in certain fields (e.g. air quality, water management, etc.)
- Lack of investment into environmental infrastructure and environment protection due to global economic crisis
- High percentage of sensitive areas in the country is vulnerable to pollution (karts area especially
- Exposure to trans-boundary pollution (air)
- Negative impacts of global climate change
- Loss of biodiversity due to degradation and loss of habitats
Waste
- Efficient and operational remediation programmes for uncontrolled landfills and sites highly polluted by waste
- Initiated establishment of national system of county/regional facilities for treatment of municipal solid waste
- Increased awareness, understanding and application of the ‘polluter pays’ and ‘producer responsibility’ principle
- Increasing generation of waste
- Insufficient separate waste collection, low rate of waste recovery
- Insufficient facilities for waste treatment
- No disposal facility for certain types of waste, especially hazardous waste
- High number of dumpsites and highly polluted areas ( “hot spots”)
- Inadequate coordination and
- Improvement of waste management by implementing integrated waste management system on county/regional level
- Increased re-use of waste
- Introduction of technologies for environmentally sound disposal of selected types of hazardous waste
- Large quantities of biomass and waste from agricultural, forest and forest based industries as potential sources of renewable energy
- Negative public attitude towards construction of waste treatment facilities
- Risk for human health and environment from highly polluted sites
30
STRENGHTS
WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
managing the waste flows on local level due to insufficient capacities
- Lack of reliable data concerning waste types and quantities
- Reclamation of brown-field sites to attract new investors
- Investments in new technology for managing waste with positive effect on opening new work places
-
Water
- Relatively high quantities of good quality of ground water resources
- Relatively low level of surface water pollution
- Favourable status of water sources to supply population through public water lines
- (State) Institutions for water management experienced in managing internationally financed projects
- Well developed system for detection and attenuation of flood risk
- Substantial loss of drinking water due to the old and inadequately managed water supply networks
- Substantial infiltration and ex filtration of water due to water networks permeability
- Insufficient construction and depreciated infrastructure for sewerage and treatment of waste water
- Unbalanced connections to the water supply and sewerage network; low share of connections to water supply / sewerage in some settlements
- Low share of collected waste water that is treated
- Some parts of country lack economically viable water supply and water resources
- Public health threat from water supplied by individual water supply systems that are not monitored and permanently controlled
- Insufficient infrastructure for protection of natural disasters (floods) in many areas
- Limited quantities of water available for irrigation from some watercourses, especially during drought periods
- Improvement of quality of surface waters and further development of the water quality monitoring system
- Investment into new infrastructure and restructuring of property for managing waters in the water sector has a positive effect on opening new work places
- Trans boundary significance of measures in water sector, good cooperation with neighbouring countries
- Participation in cross border initiatives as ICPDR (International Commission for the Protection of the Danube) / DABLAS (Danube Black Sea Task Force) thus achieving integrated regulations in all aspects of river management for trans-boundary watercourses
- Completion of flood risk analysis with the aim to asses investment needs in the future
- Some zones of sanitary protection of drinking water sources are outside the Croatian territory
- Natural disasters (floods, drought)
31
SECTION 2: STRATEGY
2.1 Overall Objective of the OP
The strategy of the Operational Programme Environment has been developed in response to the challenges in environmental fields, while taking into consideration the wider policies, strategies and guidelines of both the EU and the Republic of Croatia. Specifically, strategy formulation took into account the following elements described in the Section 1:
1. Socio-economic, sector and comparative analyses;
Analyses indicated that poor quality and incompleteness of environmental infrastructure is one of the key disparities leading to insufficient environmental protection and diminished attractiveness of the regions, which consequently, require supplementary investments or state guarantees in order to attract/create business activities and secure the minimal quality of living environment and satisfaction of social needs. Socio economic analysis - factual evidence provided in Section 1 of this document has been analysed and interpreted in order to detect main problems and challenges. In addition, the comparative analyses have shown that environmental infrastructure and protection quality levels in Croatia are still lagging behind the developed EU countries in most sub-sectors (e.g. waste management, water management, etc.). This directs the OPE strategy towards completion and improvement of waste management infrastructure (covering separation, recycling and reuse of waste, processing and its controlled disposal), and water and wastewater management infrastructure (covering surface and ground water pollution, rational use and protection of drinking water sources), as two key areas that require the most significant investments and remedial actions. In this respect the OPE strategy firmly continues on the strategy already established and affirmed through IPA assistance.
2. Requirements of the environmental acquis (negotiation process);
The OP strategy for the programming period 2007-2013 is responding to identified needs and ensuring fulfilment of requirements resulting from the environmental acquis, giving the priority to fulfilment of obligations that imply high investments and complicated technical implementation. In this respect this OP is directly supporting the implementation of Directives in priority sectors of waste and water management, whilst referring to transitional periods that have been negotiated (as described in Chapter 1.3) and ensuring continuation in heavy investments in the respective fields initiated under IPA Environmental Protection Operational Programme.
3. Experience from implementation of the EU assistance in the respective environmental sub-sectors up to date (ISPA / IPA);
Experience and lessons learned during the use of ISPA and IPA pre-accession programme are built in the OPE strategy and expected to ensure adequate absorption of the available funds within very limited programming period; primarily this is secured by directing resources to the priorities already receiving EU assistance, i.e. to areas with existing competences and structures for EU programme implementation and management – practically it implies the direct continuation on the IPA priorities – waste and water management.
On the basis of the situation analysis (including priorities in the national policy documents), accession process and negotiations on the aquis and experience from implementation of EU programmes the Overall objective of the OPE is derived:
Improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality of related services
CONTRIBUTION OF THE OP TO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE NSRF
The overall objective of the NSRF is to support convergence of Croatia with other EU countries by accelerating economic growth and fostering employment. In support to the achievement of this overall objective, three strategic objectives have been identified:
32
o Competitive economy based on market integration, institutional reforms and sustainable development,
o Improving environment for job creation and employability,
o Balanced regional development and improvement of living conditions.
The overall objective of the NSRF, together with its strategic objectives, defines the strategic focus of the investments planned in a broader development context, while four thematic priorities of the NSRF channel them in a more specific direction. Thematic priorities of the NSRF are:
o Development of modern transportation networks and increased accessibility of the regions,
o Improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality of related services,
o Higher competitiveness of SMEs and support to knowledge-based economy,
o Improvement of labour market efficiency, development of human capital and reinforcing social inclusion.
Second thematic priority of the NSRF, improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality of related services, is the overall objective of OP Environment and will be addressed directly through the implementation of this OP. The results obtained from the OP implementation, more specifically, upgraded environmental services and facilities, will also contribute directly to the achievement of NSRF strategic objectives being environmentally sustainable economic growth, development of economic activities and improving living conditions in the regions.
2.2 Consistency of the OP Objective with the priorities identified in national and EU policies documents and strategies
NATIONAL POLICY DOCUMENTS
The Strategic Development Framework 2006-2013 (SDF) is a national overarching document covering the existing strategies and serving for development of any other sector strategies, which defines the national development goals of Croatia and identifies 10 strategic areas in which simultaneous and coordinated actions are required to achieve specified development objectives. Each strategic area defines a set of goals together with instruments and related actions that are expected to contribute to the main strategic goal of the SDF, which is growth and employment in a competitive market economy acting within a European welfare state of 21
st century. Pertinent for this OP is 6
th area “Space, Nature, Environment and Regional Development”. Among
the nature and environment related instruments and actions identified by the SDF there are:
o “care for the environment and the protection of existing biological diversity and the maintenance of natural resources ….being an integral dimension of the development of the infrastructure, energy, agriculture…..”
o “establishment an integral computerized system for waste management, to sanate and close existing and “wild” landfills, and establish centres for waste management”
o “preservation of water quality, ….improvement the level of coverage of the country with the public water system, to improve the quality of waste water treatment, and the availability of the sewage network, but also to improve the quality of the flood defence system”
Sustainable development offers to each country and at the global level a positive long-term vision of society that is more prosperous and delivers a better quality of life for current and future generations. In practice it requires that economic growth supports social progress and respects the environment. The Croatian Parliament adopted on 20 February 2009 the Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Republic of Croatia (SSD), as a key document for directing long-term economic and social development towards the sustainable developmental path respective of environmental concerns. The Strategy contains fundamental principles and establishes guidelines for long term actions in 8 key areas by defining objectives and determining measures for their implementation: 1) Encouraging population growth in the Republic of Croatia; 2) Environment and natural resources; 3) Promoting sustainable production and consumption; 4) Ensuring social and territorial cohesion and justice; 5) Ensuring energy independence and increasing the efficiency of energy use; 6) Strengthening public health; 7) Interconnectedness of the Republic of Croatia; and 8) Protection of the Adriatic Sea, coastal
33
area and islands. The OPE will obviously directly support and contribute to the second and third key area of this strategy.
Croatia has a well-developed hierarchy of policy documents under (aligned with) the Strategic Development Framework 2006-2013 and Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Republic of Croatia, sector strategies, particularly the National Environmental Strategy (2002); various sector related strategies (energy, transport, etc.), and strategies and plans for environmental sub-sectors (including waste, water)
The Environmental Strategy (2002) is an umbrella strategic document for the environment in Croatia, which emphasises the sustainable development concept as the main determinant of the development strategy of Croatia. The long-term environmental objectives are conservation and improvement of water, sea, air and soil quality, conservation of biological diversity, and preservation of natural resources. It defines two groups of priorities: top-priorities and other priorities, both containing topics identified as national priorities and respecting the EU policies and strategies. The top priorities of environmental protection are: 1) Waste; 2) Water; 3) Air quality; 4) The Adriatic, islands and the coastal region; 5) Soil; 6) Nature and biodiversity protection, and 7) Environment in urban areas. It also demonstrates that environmental pressures come from all economic sectors. Therefore this OP will directly tackle two top priorities – waste and water management.
As regards national sectoral strategies, objective of this Operational Programme corresponds and will contribute will to the achievement of the strategic goals set in the:
a) Waste Management Strategy by provision of:
- Reduction of waste disposed at landfills and reducing proportion of biodegradable waste in communal waste;
- Establishment of a comprehensive system of waste management and construction of centres for waste management and adequate waste treatment.
b) Water Management Strategy by provision of :
- Construction of drinking water supply infrastructure which will enable increase of the connection level of the public water supply system and improve the water supply system efficiency ;
- Crating preconditions for investments in the flood protections measures;
- Construction of waste water infrastructure will enable increase of the connection level of the public waste water system and adequate treatment of waste waters.
EU POLICIES DOCUMENTS AND STRATEGIES FOR THE USE OF EU ASSISTANCE
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC GUIDELINES
The Community Strategic Guidelines (CSG) set out a single, coherent strategy on how the EU regional and cohesion policy will more effectively fulfil a long-lasting commitment to sustainable development. The CSG on Cohesion for the programming period 2007–2013 assign three major objectives of the EU cohesion policy:
1. Making Europe and its regions a more attractive place to invest and work
2. Improving knowledge and innovation for growth
3. Creating more and better jobs
Actions envisaged under this OP Environment are consistent with the CSG and mainly contribute to the first objective, namely one of its priorities aiming to ‘Strengthen the synergy between environmental protection and growth’. In other words, the CSG is again drawing on sustainable development concept and stimulates cohesion programmes that will balance the needs of economy and environment. In this regard, a high priority shall be given to the provision of environmental services; these include infrastructure for waste and wastewater treatment, natural resource management, decontamination of polluted land to prepare it for new economic activities, and protection from certain environmental risks (through the promotion of natural resource management, better use of ICT technologies, focused research, etc.). As elaborated above, the strategy of this OP is focused on the investment in the environmental structures that respond to identified needs and ensure fulfilment of international obligations of the Republic of Croatia. These investments are increasing the attractiveness of regions and contributing to long-term sustainability of economic growth through reduction of external environmental costs to the economy (such as health costs, clean–up costs or damage recovery) and stimulation of innovation and job creation. Hence the OPE directly contributes to the
34
achievement of the first objective of the CSG, namely to the four actions recommended for contributing to the fulfilment of the priority:
- Basic aim of the OP is to provide for investments in environmental infrastructure in order to comply with environmental legislation in fields of water and waste;
- By providing basic environmental services contribution to the increase of the attractiveness and improvement of conditions for business;
- Actions funded under OP will proved for more efficient usage of resources and thus contribute to the emission decrease;
- Risks (mainly health and nature preservation related) will be decreased by implementation of OP.
LISBON PROCESS, GOTHENBURG STRATEGY AND EUROPE 2020
At the Lisbon summit in March 2000, the EU leaders set out a new strategy built on a member states’ consensus and joint vision of modernised Europe. The result become known as the Lisbon strategy, or Lisbon process in a wider sense, with a clear vision in its core – development of the EU as the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-oriented economy by the year 2010. The strategy focused on growth and jobs, each having a concrete target:
- Total investment (public and private) of 3% of GDP of the EU in the area of research and development by 2010
- Employment rate of 70% by the 2010 expressed as the proportion of working age population of the EU in employment
The European Summit in Gothenburg held in June 2001 completed the Lisbon Strategy by adding an environmental dimension. This “third pillar” of the Lisbon Strategy reasserted emphasis on the protection of the environment and the achievement of a more sustainable pattern of development. This renewed Lisbon strategy was consistent in orientation towards harmony, balance and synergy between three fundamental policy areas / development dimensions – economical, social and environmental. The Sustainable Development Strategy of the EU adopted in 2001 in Gothenburg was renewed in 2006. The renewed strategy reaffirms the commitment to sustainability principle by defining the long-term objectives and actions in several areas that will enable the EU to achieve a continuous long-term improvement of quality of life through management and efficient use of resources, addressing the ecological and social innovation potential of the economy and ensure prosperity, environmental protection and social cohesion. The strategy sets seven priority areas, many of which are predominantly environmental:
Climate change and clean energy Sustainable transport Sustainable consumption & production Conservation and management of natural resources Public Health Social inclusion, demography and migration Global poverty and sustainable development challenges
Projects proposed under this OP help combat damaging health effects of waste water due to the discharge of untreated municipal and industrial wastewater and run-off of agricultural chemicals and provide for adequate treatment of wastewater and waste by upgrading and constructing the infrastructure. Therefore this OP will contribute to the fourth and fifth priority areas: Conservation and management of natural resources and Public Health.
Moreover, closing/conditioning landfills and introducing a system which includes sorting and treatment facility, proposed under PA1, enable partial recovery of materials as well as produces a fuel that can be used for the generation of power. It can thus be concluded that waste projects as envisaged under this OP can in the long run lead to the improvement of resource efficiency.
Introducing efficient water and wastewater tariff can increase motivation for decreasing the overall quantity of water consumption and thus wastewater quantities. Introducing efficient waste tariff, i.e. forming the price on the basis of quantity of produced waste in the waste tariff can directly contribute to waste prevention, can induce separate collection and/or waste recovery.
35
In conclusion, the integrated system of waste and water management proposed in OP as well as the implementation of the ‘Polluters pay principle’ envisaged in water and waste projects supported through this OP contribute to the efficient use of resources proposed by the Gothenburg Agenda.
In 2005 the European Commission published “The renewed Lisbon Strategy” to take account of the changes that had taken place in Europe since the original Lisbon Strategy was developed and to adjust European policy in the light of these changes. In relation to the environment sector the strategy states under the heading of “3.2.4. Expand and improve European infrastructure: The Single Market needs to be equipped with modern infrastructure to facilitate trade and mobility. Progress here has been disappointingly slow and this now needs to be addressed. A modern infrastructure is an important competitiveness factor in many enterprise decisions, affecting the economic and social attractiveness of locations. It guarantees mobility of persons, goods and services throughout the Union. Also, infrastructure investments especially in the new Member States will encourage growth and lead to more convergence, in economic, social and environmental terms. Given the long term effects of infrastructure, decisions should significantly contribute to sustainability. Similarly, fair and efficient systems of infrastructures pricing will serve this objective.”
The aims of the Renewed Lisbon strategy are implicitly addressed in the OPE through the emphasis on upgrading environmental infrastructure particularly in the waste and water sectors which can in the long run contribute to the economic and social attractiveness of the area.
In response to the serious economic crisis, in June 2010 the European Commission adopted a new EU's growth strategy which sets out a vision for Europe's social market economy for the coming decade - Europe 2020 Strategy. It rests on three priority areas:
Smart growth, developing an economy based on knowledge and innovation;
Sustainable growth, promoting a low-carbon, resource-efficient and competitive economy; and
Inclusive growth, fostering a high-employment economy delivering social and territorial cohesion.
Progress towards these objectives will be measured against five interrelated and mutually reinforcing EU-level targets, which Member States will be asked to translate into national targets reflecting starting points:
75 % of the population aged 20-64 should be employed.
3% of the EU's GDP should be invested in R&D.
The "20/20/20" climate/energy targets should be met. These involve greenhouse gas emissions 20% lower than 1990, 20% of energy from renewables and 20% increase in energy efficiency.
The share of early school leavers should be under 10% and at least 40% of 30-34–year-olds completing third level education (or equivalent) should have a degree or diploma.
20 million less people should be at risk of poverty.
In relation to the OPE it is important to underline that one of the main priorities at the heart of Europe 2020 is Sustainable growth – promoting a more resource efficient, greener and more competitive economy prosper in a low-carbon, resource constrained world while preventing environmental degradation, biodiversity loss and unsustainable use of resources. The Commission also put forward seven flagship initiatives in order to catalyse progress under each priority theme. One of seven flagships Commission put forward is "Resource efficient Europe". This flagship is aimed at helping decouple economic growth from the use of resources, support the shift towards a low carbon economy, increase the use of renewable energy sources, modernise transport sector and promote energy efficiency.
As mentioned previously, closing/conditioning landfills and introducing a system which includes sorting and treatment facility, proposed under PA1, enable partial recovery of materials as well as produces a fuel that can be used for the generation of power. It can thus be concluded that waste projects as envisaged under this OP can in the long run lead to the improvement of resource efficiency. Closing landfills also helps reduce greenhouse emissions which arise from the landfill. This can partially enable Croatia to meet the Europe 2020 targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change more easily.
Moreover, it is estimated that the integrated water management system as proposed under PA2 of this OP can bring a greater efficacy in water implementation and thus provide an incentive to polluters to invest in wastewater pollution reduction and control.
36
Secondly, it is argued that introducing efficient water and wastewater tariff can increase motivation for decreasing the overall quantity of water consumption and thus wastewater quantities. Introducing efficient waste tariff, i.e. forming the price on the basis of quantity of produced waste in the waste tariff can directly contribute to waste prevention, can induce separate collection and/or waste recovery. This conduces to individual and corporate responsibility for the waste consumption and life-cycle of products sold.
In conclusion, the integrated system of waste and water management proposed in OP as well as the implementation of the ‘Polluters pay principle’ envisaged in water and waste projects supported through this OP contribute both to the second priority area of Europe 2020 Strategy: Sustainable growth, as well as to the seventh flagship "Resource efficient Europe". Such approaches to resource efficiency proposed under this OP can in the long run help limit emissions, save money and boost economic growth. Indirectly this can also underpin economic, social and territorial cohesion.
Cohesion Policy is the EU single most important instrument for promoting the Lisbon, Gothenburg and Europe 2020 agendas. The EU is mobilising all appropriate national and Community sources, including the instruments of Cohesion policy, towards achievement of set out goals. The link between EU Sustainable Development Strategy and EU Cohesion policy provides a platform for contribution to European policy objectives through this OPE because it aims at convergence as one of the objectives of the Cohesion policy of EU.
The table below illustrates how the OPE corresponds to both the EU and national strategic documents:
Priority Axis
EU Policy Framework Policy framework for EU assistance
programmes National Policy Framework
Community Strategic Guidelines, 2007-2013 (Guidelines for Cohesion Policy
2007-2013)
Europe 2020
NSR
F 2
01
3
ISP
A/I
PA
En
viro
nm
ent
Str
ateg
y
Stra
tegi
c D
evel
op
me
nt
Fram
ewo
rk
20
06
-20
13
Stra
tegi
c C
oh
eren
ce F
ram
ewo
rk 2
00
7-
20
13
Envi
ron
men
tal S
trat
egy
Guideline 4.2: Making Europe and its regions more attractive to invest and
work (strengthen the synergies between environmental protection and growth)
Sust
ain
able
gro
wth
–
pro
mo
tin
g a
mo
re r
eso
urc
e ef
fici
ent,
gre
ener
an
d m
ore
com
pet
itiv
e ec
on
om
y
Dev
elo
pm
ent
of
the
infr
astr
uct
ure
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
n t
o
the
bu
sin
ess
attr
acti
ven
ess
Inve
stm
en
ts in
red
uct
ion
of
emis
sio
ns
(Kyo
to)
Ris
k p
reve
nti
on
PA 1. Waste infrastructure
X X X X X X X X X
X
PA 2. Water Infrastructure
X X X X X X X X X
X
PA 3. Technical Assistance
X X X X
X
2.3 Specific Objectives
General strategic approach for the programming period 2007-2013 focuses on the implementation of policies aimed at achieving convergence with the EU, improving the living standards of citizens and promoting sustainable and balanced development. Therefore the OP contains two specific objectives which are designed to respond to the main challenges in the waste and water management, which are identified through factual survey, strategic assessment and SWOT, lessons and experiences from past interventions and strategic
37
documents on national and EU level. Those specific objectives contributing to the overall objective of the OP are the following:
1. Reduction of waste being generated and landfilled, providing adequate infrastructure for waste management and reduction of the risk from waste
This objective is divided into two operational goals:
i) establishment of new waste management centres as key infrastructural precondition for integrated waste management system (including provisions for closure of newly built landfills)
ii) conditioning or closure/rehabilitation of incompliant landfills and elimination of sites highly polluted by waste (“hot-spots”)
The objectives of an integrated waste management system in Croatia are: minimization of generated waste; minimization of waste deposited to landfills in the course of the primary separation of useful waste; reduction of share of biodegradable waste in municipal waste deposited; minimisation of adverse impacts of the deposited waste on environment, climate and human health; generated waste management fully on the principles of sustainable development; and energy recovery of waste. The waste management system in Croatia is to be organized as an integrated unity of all actors in the system at national, regional and local level.
2. Provision of quality drinking water with raised connection levels, improved rational use of water
resources and achieving and maintaining good status of water protection through improved wastewater collection, treatment and connectivity to sewerage
This objective is divided into the following two operational goals:
i) establishment of modern water supply systems and networks ii) construction of WWTPs for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading sewerage
network.
The strategic objective of sustainable water use in Croatia is to provide sufficient water quantities of adequate quality, in compliance with planned needs, and to achieve the necessary level of water supply dependability for all users, including aquatic eco-systems and those connected with water. The general policy of raising the health and living standards of the population requires further development of the public water supply system, in terms of increased connectivity and reliability of supply and reduction of losses in the network.
The strategic water protection objective is to preserve water quality and prevent the degradation of water, primarily for the purpose of preserving human health and the environment and achieving the good ecological status of water, in order to make it suitable for planned uses. This would be achieved through construction and modernisation of wastewater collection and treatment facilities.
2.4 Priority Axes
In response to the defined specific objectives the interventions envisaged under Operational programme are divided into three Priority Axes.
The Priority Axis 1 Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management system in Croatia (to be financed by CF)
This Priority Axis aims at supporting implementation of new integrated waste management concept including constructions of waste management centres and conditioning, closure/rehabilitation of the incompliant landfills and remediation of locations highly polluted by waste (“hot-spots”). To that end, projects will be concentrated around two measures:
a) Measure 1.1 Establishment of new waste management centres at county and regional levels
b) Measure 1.2 Elimination of sites highly polluted by waste
Therefore the PA1 is envisaged to contribute to the first specific objective.
The Priority Axis 2 Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improvement water supplies and integrated wastewater management systems (to be financed by CF)
38
This Priority Axis aims at supporting development of infrastructure by construction of new and/or refurbishment of existing facilities for drinking water supply and wastewater collection and treatment through public networks and treatment facilities. Projects will be funded under two measures:
a) Measure 2.1 Establishment of modern water supply systems and networks
b) Measure 2.2 Construction of wastewater treatment plants for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading the sewerage network.
Therefore the PA2 is envisaged to contribute to the specific objective 2.
The Priority Axis 3 Technical assistance (to be financed by CF)
This Priority Axis aims at providing support for management and implementation of the OPE and programming and preparation activities for the next financial perspective 2014 – 2020.
As mentioned under chapter 2.1 the OP focuses on the 2nd
thematic priority of the NSRF “Improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality related services” ”. The contribution of each priority axis of the OPE to the implementation of the four NSRF thematic priorities and one horizontal priority is indicated in the table:
Table 7: Coherence between NSRF and OPE
OP priority axes
NSRF priorities
Priority Axis 1: Developing waste
management infrastructure for establishing an
integrated waste management system
in Croatia
(CF)
Priority Axis 2: Protecting Croatia’s
water resources through improvement
water supplies and integrated wastewater
management systems
(CF)
Priority Axis 3: Technical assistance
(CF)
1 Development of modern transportation networks and increase attractiveness of the regions
+ +
2 Improvement of environmental infrastructure and quality related services
++ ++ ++
3 Higher competiveness of SMEs and support to the knowledge based economy
+ +
4 Improvement of labour market efficiency, development of human capital and reinforcing social inclusion
+ +
Horizontal priority
Balanced regional development + +
++ Direct and significant contribution
+ Indirect contribution
Achievement of the overall objective of the OPE will contribute to improved state of environment and enhanced environmental protection in its sub-sectors thus supporting sustainable development which recognises the environment as one of the three pillars of development. Construction and extension of environmental infrastructure on the territory of Croatia will increase the social and economic attractiveness of the regions, create better living conditions for citizens, help to improve the public health and raise the standard of living.
The OPE will be financed from the CF.
39
2.5 Ex-ante Evaluation
Ex-ante evaluation was performed within IPA TAIB 2008 project: “Ex-ante evaluation of Programme Documents and strengthening evaluation capacity for EU funds post-accession”. Project was implemented by the consortium comprised of: LSE Enterprise Ltd; CASE – Centre for Social and Economic Research; EUROPE Ltd; Euroconsultants Croatia Ltd. Contracting Authority was Central Finance and Contracting Agency and project beneficiary was Ministry of Regional Development and EU Funds.
Evaluation of the OP “Environment” (Draft version March 2012 and Draft version January 2012) took place between March 19 2012 and June 11 2012 and Final Report was issued in September 2012. The evaluation process has had four stages: planning and structuring; obtaining data; analysing information; and evaluative judgement and it was conducted in accordance with the methodological working paper
71.
Herby it is intended to stipulate the main features of the evaluation reports – conclusions and recommendations - while the full ex-ante report is attached to this document (Annex 2) for additional information. The main conclusions of the Ex-Ante Evaluation are as follows:
The March 2012 draft of the Operational Programme Environment 2007-2013 may be qualified as a document that meets the EU standards.
The Programme document presents reasonable detailed baseline analysis, capable of serving its main purpose – identification of needs for intervention, in order to achieve maximum cost-effective improvement in key aspects of the environment in Croatia.
The baseline analysis does not pay particular attention to the broader socio-economic environment. Note however, that in evaluators opinion, the missing description of the socio-economic context did not have negative impact on the overall soundness of the analysis, its conclusion and consequently on the OP´s rationale and proposed strategy.
Considering the high investment-intensity of interventions necessary for addressing those identified needs, the presented strategy rationally concentrates on interventions where the limited national financial resources constitute critical barrier to their implementation (i.e. interventions of critical importance for achieving of environmental policy goals that would not be possible to implement in foreseeable future without external financial assistance).
The OP introduces a consistent set of complementary priorities supporting not only the main Programme objective, and the priorities´ own respective objectives, but also with potential for mutually reinforcing effects resulting from their simultaneous implementation.
The strategy and interventions are coherent with EU and national policies, including complementarity with the other Operational Programmes.
Indicators presented are largely appropriate to measure the changes in relation to the specific objectives of the Programme.
The expected impact of the Programme is broadly in line with the objectives set. Socio-economic impacts are limited by the relatively modest amount of financial resources allocated to the Programme.
The future Programme implementation bodies already take actions that should lead to the timely preparation of necessary OS descriptions and start of the Compliance Assessment.
Following recommendations were suggested in the Ex-Ante Evaluation Report and following actions taken as response to recommendations:
Regarding the socio-economic analysis: Consider to expand the baseline analysis and to include a brief outline of main relevant socio-economic trends.
71
EC, DG Regional Policy. “The New Programming Period 2007-2013. Working Document No 1: Indicative Guidelines on Evaluation Methods: Ex-Ante Evaluation. (August 2006)”.
40
Baseline analysis (chapter 1.1) has been supplemented with analysis of socio-economic situation under (new) sub-chapter 1.1.1.
It is recommended to introduce context indicators in the OP for both sectors of waste and water (section 5.1.3 of the Ex-Ante Evaluation Report)
Context indicators were not introduced to OPE, giving the limited scale of the Programme and time-frame of its implementation. Ex-ante Evaluation Report notices that: “….analytical part of the OPE provides specific information (including quantitative) on the situation in the concerned areas of intervention (water, waste)”. Also, the Report concludes that: “…Indicators presented are largely appropriate to measure the changes in relation to the specific objectives of the Programme”. In respect to the above stated, bodies responsible for drafting this OP concluded that introduction of context indicators would not further facilitate evaluation of environmental quality progress resulting from the OPE interventions.
Regarding the expected results and impact: as has also been recommended by the Commission, the quantification of its main objective (the amount of persons covered by the Programme) should be improved and supported by a well-explained quantification of the results for the main measures, which is especially lacking.
Having in mind that existing indicators are evaluated as largely appropriate to measure the changes in relation to the specific objectives of the Programme and giving the fact that indicators are designed to represent continuation of activities commenced under IPA OP “Environmental”, bodies responsible for drafting this OP concluded that no changes are required to existing set of result indicators. Specific output indicators on the level of measure will be provided in programme complement type of document.
Regarding the implementation: the demarcation among the role of MA and Central Coordination Authority should be clearly designed.
In July 2012 Law was adopted regulating institutional framework for structural instruments in programming period 2007-2013 in Croatia. Law has clearly defined the role of bodies responsible for management and control, including demarcation between the role of MA and Central Coordination Authority (Coordinating Body). This is more detailed in Section 4 of this OP.
It is recommended to revise and further develop Chapter 3.4 to reflect the changes in design of NSRF and all OPs.
Section 3.4 of this OP has been revised in order to reflect changes in operational programmes for 2013 allocation from structural instruments.
2.6 Strategic Environmental Assessment
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of this OPE is the responsibility of the Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection (MENP). SEA procedure was conducted in line with the provision of the Environmental Protection Act (OG 110/07), Regulation on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programme (OG 64/08) and Regulation on information and participation of the public and public concerned in environmental matters (OG 64/08), which are aligned with Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. The following activities were, among others, carried out within this procedure:
- The decision on initiating the strategic assessment of the OPE was published on the web site of the Ministry (http://www.mzoip.hr/doc/Strateska/Odluka_26_04_2010.pdf).
- Decision on the content of the strategic impact study was published on the web site of the Ministry (http://www.mzoip.hr/doc/Strateska/Odluka_25_10_2010.pdf).
- The Advisory expert committee for SEA was appointed in December 2010. Committee is the advisory expert body appointed by the head of the body competent for carrying out the SEA, which evaluates the likely significant effects of a plan or programme on the environment, also including alternative options.
- A draft of the strategic impact study was prepared and submitted to the members of the committee.
- The committee for carrying out the SEA met on 28 December 2010. The completeness and expert aspects of the strategic impact study with regard to the established content of the strategic study and the draft proposal of OP has been evaluated by the committee, which concluded that strategic impact
41
study has certain shortfalls; however those are not an obstacle to determine completeness and expert soundness of the study. Study should be reviewed and supplemented, as suggested by the committee (update study according to the new version of the OP; definition of goals in air protection sector, and as regard CAFE Directive; advisable to prepare a map showing areas of planned interventions and areas of ecological network; technical and data corrections were suggested).
- Updated version of OP was submitted to the authorised expert legal entity (Consultant) in February 2011 and new updated version of study has been prepared.
- The Advisory expert committee held its second session in June and July 2011. Members of the Committee asked for further up-grading of the Study. Scope of the OP has been reduced to waste and water sectors due to the short programming period of six-month. It was emphasised that reduced scope of the OP does not affect findings of the Study for respective waste and water sectors.
- Third session of the Committee was held on 24 October 2011. Study was accepted. Scope of the Opinion issued by the Committee reflects the new scope of the OP and envisaged interventions in waste and water sectors.
- In accordance with Decision issued by MENP, public debate procedure was launched on Strategic Study on environmental impact of the drat Operational Programme “Environment”. Launching of the procedure was publicised in daily newspaper “Jutarnji list” and on MENP web front-page. Public debate procedure lasted from 12 June – 12 July 2012. Non-technical summary of the Strategic Study and entire draft OPE were made public on MENP’s web page (http://www.mzoip.hr/default.aspx?id=12592). In addition, Strategic Study and drat OPE were submitted via regular mail to all Counties (20) and City of Zagreb with invitation to provide opinion and comments on both documents. Public presentation of the Strategic Study and draft OPE was held on 05 July 2012 in MENP premises (attended by representatives of companies “Janaf”, “WTW Wasswtechnik GmbH”, administrative unit of City of Zagreb and responsible state bodies). Discussion during public presentation mainly related to sewage sludge management. Written comments were received from 14 Counties and City of Zagreb and one NGO and one municipality. Among others, comments were related to methodology used for preparation of Strategic Impact Study; also, opinion was expressed that it would be beneficial if Strategic Study has taken into consideration different potential locations for construction of waste management centres. Study did not analyse variant solutions of locations of individual WMCs because determination of such locations is conducted through procedure which encompasses multi-criteria analysis of alternative locations and/or determination of adequacy of locations in county-level physical plans, which is subject of separate SEA procedure. Interventions to be financed within OPE has to comply with applicable rules, including those related to physical planning and EIA procedure. Economic and financial viability of the specific projects are subject to obligatory project documentation and subsequent project appraisal, as prescribed by the Regulation 1083/2006. Received comments and opinions related to the text of the OPE are elaborated under section 2.7 of the OPE.
- Based on described SEA procedure, final environmental protection measures and the environmental monitoring plan in relation to the OPE were established, as contained in the report in Annex 3 of this OP.
2.7 Partnership Process
The development of the OP is carried out through an consultation exercise led by the future Managing Authority (MA) of the OP – MENP. This consultation exercise puts into the practice one of the key principles in preparation of the OP and strategic planning in general – a principle of partnership, as it is defined in the Council Regulation No. 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 (the General Regulation). According to the regulation, the partnership principle has to be inexorably applied in stages of programme cycle, from preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of OPs.
Partnership principle has been introduced through the establishment of the Drafting Group for the OPE. The members of the OPE Drafting Group were identified among main social partners and governmental institutions which share responsibilities in relevant sectors. These are:
Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection (Managing Authority)
Ministry of Agriculture (responsible for water management)
Ministry of Regional Development and EU funds
Ministry of Economy
42
Ministry of Culture
Ministry of Maritime Affairs, Transport and Infrastructure
Ministry of Finance
Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund
Croatian Waters
Croatian Environment Agency
Association of Counties
Association of Towns of the Republic of Croatia
Association of Municipalities of the Republic of Croatia
Croatian Chamber of Economy
Water and Sewage company (KP Vodovod i Kanalizacija)
NGO “Sunce”
The OP Drafting Group has become operational in 20 May 2009, when representatives of the DG member institutions met at their first meeting and adopted rules and procedures for the OP Drafting Group. The rules of procedure define the roles and responsibilities of member institutions, as well as tasks of the future OP MA that is in charge of facilitating and leading the process. Although each member is expected to represent its own sub-sector and provide inputs in its own area of expertise, typically the decisions of the partnership are based on democratic and transparent processes, as well as informed decision-making and consensus.
At the second meeting on 15 June 2009, the consultation consisted of OP Drafting Group members providing views on the policies, measures and potential operations to be included in the OP and a series of reviews and comments on the content of draft OPs prepared by the MA. OP Drafting Group third meeting was held on 29 June 2009 where the need to hold further bilateral meetings with representatives of the different sectors was emphasised. Possible measures under technical assistance Priority were discussed as well issues regarding identification and maturity of infrastructural projects. Fourth meeting of the Drafting Group was held on 12 April 2010 with following topics discussed: changes made in the draft OP since last meeting and issues to be further improved in the text of the OP; time schedule for NSRF and OP; Strategic Environmental Assessment of the OP; developments regarding project identification and preparation. Fifth meeting of the Drafting Group was held on 20 January 2011 with following topics discussed: EC comments on submitted working version of OP (May 2010) and further improvements of the text of the OP; information on SEA of the OP procedure.
Upon need, the MA organised particular consultation sessions and/or bilateral meetings with the Drafting Group members and other relevant stakeholders in order to assure their active involvement in the OPE preparation. Also, each of the OP Drafting Group members carried out their own “independent” consultation with relevant partners in order to ensure synergies created through combination of top-down and bottom-up approach.
Public consultations on the National Strategic Reference Framework took place on 18 June 2010. The list of invited stakeholders included regional and local government representatives as well as representatives of public and scientific institutions. On this occasion NSRF and OPs as their constituent parts were presented, including OPE with its overall objective, goals, priority axes, measure and potential beneficiaries. During the sectoral discussion on OP, types of operations and projects which were in a preparatory phase were presented. Stakeholders had the opportunity to find out which are the possibilities for including projects to the project pipeline, which are the preconditions for successful nomination of projects and whether there are possibilities to introduce additional priorities to the OP.
At Accession Conference held on 30 June 2011, EU and Croatia have closed negotiations and accession date has been foreseen for 01 July 2013. Setting of Croatia’s accession date has allowed for demarcation of IPA/structural funds activities in the current programming period. Re-drafting of the OP was undertaken by the responsible Ministries and the Central Office for Development Strategy and Coordination of EU Funds (now MRDEUF), in order to reflect those developments and reduced time-horizon of SF OP.
Organization of the next round of consultations for OPE took place when the programme was in a more advanced stage – in November / December 2011 partnership consultation were held for waste sector and for water sector separately: on 30 November 2011 dialogue with waste sector partners took place, which was organised by MENP. At the meeting participated representatives of counties administrative units responsible for waste management, representatives of county-level public utility companies, representatives of association of municipalities, Croatian Chamber of Economy, NGO network “Zeleni Forum”. MENP, EPEEF and NRSF coordinating body presented draft OPE, its implementation structure and priorities. Emphasis of discussion was on opportunities, conditions and problems regarding envisaged projects in the field of waste management.
43
Representative of Association of Municipalities asked for justification regarding envisaged co-financing of total costs of landfills and accompanying infrastructure within future WMCs: it is envisaged that local/regional units cover 20% of total costs. It was explained that EPEEF will provide national co-financing having in mind financial burden it may be exposed to. EU funds and EPEEF will provide for 80% of total cost, but EPEEF part goes above public eligible expenditure, and will provide co-financing to match 80% of total eligible costs. Representative of Osijek-Baranja County pointed out lack of capacities in their administrative units for coping with such complex projects. MA’s State Secretary reminded that within EU negotiations, Croatia has taken over obligation to strengthen administrative capacities on all levels. With regard to project preparation, special attention should be given to the strengthening of county –level utility companies. Representative of Primorsko-Goranska County asked about implementation structure and whether it is envisaged that county-level utility companies implement their projects as a beneficiary. It was explained that envisaged structure foresees that EPEEF will play role of large beneficiary/contracting authority on behalf of end recipients (county-level utility companies). View was expressed that requirement that all municipal/town level utility companies sign agreement on use of WMC prior to the launch of the project is too strict. It was explained that only with those agreements signed - scope and waste quantities of the future WMC can be established. MA’s State Secretary emphasised that project proponents (utility companies) should give due attention to proper conduction of EIA procedure. Representatives of Counties which are to start implementing WMC project financed under IPA shared their experiences as regard preparation and tendering of their projects, stressing that needed efforts are demanding. Representative of utility company for Osijek-Baranja County asked whether is it possible to finance project which does not include mechanical-biological treatment technology. MA’s State Secretary confirmed that if feasibility study shows that there are better solutions, all project in line with Waste Management Plan can apply for EU and national co-financing. As regard remediation of landfills, new concept is proposed by the MENP and EPEEF according to which there should be a grouping of landfills into a single county level project, rather than to remediate landfills on case-by-case principle. Remediation should be connected to process of WMC establishment. EPEEF has in past decade signed contracts with local authorities for remediation of landfills. Where works on remediation has already started according to the contracts, those should be completed. Otherwise, it was proposed to local authorities to accept grouping of landfill remediation into a single county-level project. Some participants confirmed that they have received such proposal from EPPEF but objected to short time that was given to them to respond. MA’s State Secretary pointed out that this is a proposal for further discussion within partners, and local authorities may propose another concept or may stay with current contract signed with EPEEF and receive national co-financing (ranging between 40-80%, as per pre-defined conditions).
All representatives of counties were reminded on obligation ensuing from Accession Treaty as regard waste sector. Need to ensure proper and timely project preparation activities were stressed.
Consultation with water sector partners organized by Ministry of Regional Development, Forestry and Water Management - MRDFWM (now-days: Ministry of Agriculture) and “Croatian Waters” (CW) was held on 12 December 2011. At the meeting participated representatives of utility companies, representatives of municipalities, cities and counties, association of municipalities and NGO, representatives of Central Office for Development Strategy and Coordination of EU Funds and Ministry of Environment. MRDFWM and CW representatives presented availability of using EU funds through EOP modification, as well as the possibility of using EU funding through structural funds, which will be available to the Republic of Croatia after accession to EU membership.
The focus was on IPA EOP modification, Operational Programme for the structural funds preparation, possibilities for financing of preparation and implementation of projects, activities on preparation of projects, including eligibility criteria and maturity of projects for financing from EU funds.
The emphasis in discussion was on preparation of projects and solving of property relations, meeting the requirements for successful implementation of projects in terms of the municipal sector consolidation. Questions were also related to meeting the N +3 rule, possibilities and methods of applying for structural funds financing, horizontal issues - such as designing the wastewater treatment plants of appropriate capacity.
In course of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) procedure, public consultation on SEA study and draft OPE was conducted in the period 12 June - 12 July 2012. Besides making available respective document on MENP’s web page, Draft OPE (version March 2012) along with SEA Study was submitted to all Counties (20) and City of Zagreb with invitation to provide opinion and comments on both documents. In respect to the draft OPE, 14 Counties and City of Zagreb provided written response. In their written response, 11 counties did not provide any suggestion to re-draft OPE or any part of it. Comments and suggestions for re-drafting parts of OPE were: “to include in which of the counties county-level waste management centres are planned” – this
44
suggestion did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE, since indicative list of major projects is already included under section 3.1.6 and envisaged interventions under OPE ensue from national strategic and planning document. One of the Counties commented that “OPE does not mention location for hazardous waste….problem is emphasised when preparing physical planning document for local level” - this comment did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE, since OP retains interventions commenced under IPA, which does not include hazardous waste management. In part of draft OPE “Baseline Analysis”, there was suggestion to “determine areas of erosive processes and floods” and to “provide data on water supply connection on county level” - suggestion and comment did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE since interventions related to flood prevention infrastructure are not envisaged under OPE. Data on level of connection of the population to water supply are contained in draft OPE in a way to be comparable to EU member states data. Further, it was suggested that: “In section Implementation, special attention should be put on economic effectiveness of the waste management centres projects, in respect to population number and waste quantities” - suggestion did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE, since economic and financial viability of the specific projects are subject to obligatory project documentation and subsequent project appraisal, as prescribed by Regulation 1083/2006. There was comment ”special attention should be given to public opinion expressed in course of implementation of certain programmes and project, which may significantly influence dynamics and course of implementation” - comment did not require re-drafting of any part of OPE, this being subject of procedures prescribed by specific Laws and regulations. City of Zagreb suggested that data on waste quantities on pages 66-68 (of draft OPE in Croatian language) should be separately presented for City of Zagreb and Zagreb County. According to the explanation obtained from Croatian Environment Agency, data are at the moment collected for area covering both City of Zagreb and Zagreb County and currently is not possible to present it separately. Also, it was commented that “…highly polluted locations which are to be remediated under OPE should be specified” - comment did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE since all such locations are included under Baseline Analysis section of OPE, as identified in national strategic and planning documents. In respect to water sector, there was comment that “… under priority objectives, construction of sewerage system and WWTP should be included” - comment did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE since this issue is elaborated within Priority Axis 2 and respective measure. Same County commented that under Priority Axis 2 “… protection of water springs, especially in karst area, should be included” – one of the OP measures is construction of infrastructure which will contribute to protection of springs intended for drinking water, in line with obligations from Accession Treaty, and this comment did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE. Further comment was that “… sources of water pollution should be tackled” – in respect to outcome of the SWOT analysis and identified priorities, giving the fact that this OPE is continuation of IPA OP and having in mind limited scope of OPE, comment did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE. Issues raised by the NGO and municipality (from Split-Dalmatia County) related to Priority Axis 1 (waste), and were of following nature: “Waste management centres (WMC) are not acceptable for Croatia, because of their cost (separate collection 10 times cheaper); WMC are based on mixing of municipal and hazardous waste; WMCs are placed in the karst area (hazard to ground waters); WMCs are encouraging waste production and mixing of waste; Instead of mega-structures, goals of waste management should be achieved by education and incentives for separate collection”. In reflecting those concerns, MENP underlines that OPE merge IPA and allocation from structural funds/Cohesion Fund (SCF). Priorities and possible interventions of the OPE are framed with funding available under IPA and 6-month allocation from CF and are aligned with applicable strategic and legal documents. Priorities of the OPE relay on obligations from Accession Treaty. As explained in text of the OPE, WMCs will include treatment of municipal waste before disposal. In section 3.1.5 OPE contains result indicators, setting the targets for reduction of waste deposition to be achieved by the operation of WMCs. As indicated in section 1.1., 54% of the territory of Croatia is karst area. Locations of WMCs are subject to legal requirements. Economic and financial viability of the specific projects are subject to obligatory project documentation and subsequent project appraisal, as prescribed by Regulation 1083/2006. Having in mind above stated, raised issues did not require re-drafting of relevant part of OPE.
2.8 Horizontal Issues
OPE takes account of the European horizontal principles such as sustainable development, equal opportunities and gender equality, and information society.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The sustainable development as a horizontal priority has a determining importance to the OPE from the view of its overall orientation and general content.
45
Sustainable development is a fundamental and overarching objective of the EU, aiming to continuously improve the quality of life and wellbeing for present and future generations, by linking the three pillars: economic development, protection of the environment and social justice. It supports dynamic economy with full employment, high education, health care, social and territorial integrity levels, as well as a high level of environmental protection. Environmental protection being one of the three pillars of the sustainable development concept implies that the concept is both horizontal and central issue of this OP. Measures undertaken under the OPE will have twofold effects in regard to the sustainable development concept:
o Investments in waste and water will directly contribute to environmental protection in given areas;
o They will contribute to economic development through investments, job creation and the creation of adequate environmental conditions for living and business.
The priority axes of the OPE are contributing to the protection and improvement of the status of individual components of the environment, whereas the OP as a whole contributes to the preservation of the favourable status of the environment for the coming generations. Besides the direct effects on the environment like more effective waste management and promotion of waste re-use, reduction of water pollution and improvement of the quality of the drinking water, the OPE will lead to better quality of life and economic goals. The construction of the necessary infrastructure for waste treatment, the infrastructure for water supply and for wastewater collection, discharge and treatment shall contribute towards the overcoming of health and ecological risks as well as towards the provision of quality environmental services to citizens. Investments in environmental infrastructure also have an economic dimension, supporting sustainable economic growth, job creation and to promoting investment opportunities in the economy, hence contributing to convergence and increasing the competitiveness of regions. All the above shall directly contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy and to one of the strategic objective of the NSRF, which is promotion of sustainable development.
Legal instruments such as Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and SEA assure application of preventive actions and sustainable development concept in operational terms. All interventions under this OPE that fall within the scope of the regulation will be subject to EIA procedure, while the OPE as a whole is subject to strategic environmental assessment that will identify possible effects of the programme on the environment in national and trans-boundary context (see chapter 2.6). Furthermore, attention will be paid to sustainability and environmental protection requirements, inter alia, in the selection phase where highest economic/ social/ environmental impact is regarded as one of the main selection criteria, but also through the monitoring and evaluation processes. In this manner the sustainable principle will be further strengthened and assured on all levels and in all elements of this OPE, starting from individual interventions to the level of the whole OP and its overall impact.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND GENDER EQUALITY
Support of principal rights, non-discrimination and equal opportunities form one of the key principles applied in the EU. Equal opportunity principle is among the pillars of the European Employment Strategy and European Framework Strategy on Non-discrimination and Equal Opportunity, from which the horizontal priority is derived. Equal opportunities means diminishing and avoiding discrimination and social exclusion on different basis like gender, race, ethnic origin, religion, disablement, age or sexual orientation. A special stress is placed on the principle of gender equality (equal opportunities for men and women); in the EU structural funds context, this means the need to look at the contribution to equal opportunities and gender equality in all stages of programme cycle - programming, implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
For the purpose of ensuring an effective application of the principle of equal opportunities, Croatia has transposed the acquis communautaire in national labour and anti-discrimination legislation. Gender Equality Law
72 defines and regulates protection from discrimination on the grounds of gender, as well as equal
opportunity mechanisms. The Gender Equality Ombudsperson monitors the implementation of the Gender Equality Law. Croatian Government adopted the National Policy for the Promotion of Gender Equality 2011-2015
73. The objectives of the policy include the reduction of female unemployment and elimination of
discrimination, promotion of women’s entrepreneurship and improved enforcement of relevant labour laws. It also strengthens and promotes measures that support the reconciliation of professional and family obligations. The most important benchmark in this respect is enactment of the first national Anti-discrimination Act in 2008
72
Official Gazette No. 82/08 73
Official Gazette No. 88/11
46
which provides a comprehensive framework for combating discrimination and has been aligned with the EU acquis. Central body for fight against discrimination is the People’s Ombudsman.
The operations financed under OPE shall be implemented by observing the principles of promotion of equal opportunities and prevention of all forms of discrimination, as stipulated in the Croatian legislation harmonized with the acquis. The principle of equal opportunities is integrated in all OPs including the OPE and it encompasses all measures and activities during the period of planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation that directly influence or contribute to the promotion of equality between women and men, social inclusion and diminishing any form of discrimination. The involvement of society and communities in infrastructure construction, operation and maintenance will be sought, in an effort to contribute to the reduction of unemployment and poverty alleviation.
OPE supports the establishment of the equality of opportunities for the access to the environmental infrastructure as one of the important factor influencing the living conditions and living standard of inhabitants and for the favourable environment as one of the main constitutional rights of the citizens of Croatia. On an operational level, the application of the equal opportunities principles during the implementation of the EOP will be ensured by indicators designed to plan and asses the contribution of operations to the promotion of equal opportunities, where it is applicable and appropriate (for instance projects’ impact on horizontal priority equal opportunities will be assessed in the grant application, where the applicant states if a project impacts equal opportunities).
INFORMATION SOCIETY
The objective of this horizontal priority is to support more efficient and quality based implementation of NSRF priorities through effective information-communication technology (ICT) implementation and use.
In the development of information society the world is facing gradual change of its traditional understanding in terms of an information triangle (education, research and innovation), which changes to a square (fourth dimension is added – informatisation). The introduction of ICT and improved efficiency of processes resulting from ICT use contribute significantly to the increased efficiency and effectiveness of information dissemination and thus to the implementation of concrete programmes and projects.
In the OPE context, the use and promotion of ICT will occur on both the OP level (through computerised management and monitoring system) and projects level. Under Priority Axis 1, for example, projects will heavily rely on the use of ICT - map/cartographic review of the official landfill sites is already available through the official GIS
74 basis of the Croatian Environmental Agency. CEA has developed other GIS browsers, databases
and applications available at http://www.azo.hr/ISZO-Informacijski. However, the same GIS based information is not available for unofficial dumpsites in Croatia, so it is expected that OPE interventions will contribute to further development and upgrading of digital databases and application of GIS.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER RESILIENCE
The impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly evident across Europe. Building capacity to cope with the inevitable impacts of climate change is necessary across key EU policy fields, and has a special importance for expenditure programmes, such as those financed by Cohesion Policy. The disaster risk resilience, prevention and management will be promoted in the preparation and implementation of the programmes. Due consideration will also be given to the resilience of infrastructure to natural and man-made disasters in compliance with any requirement which may be set out in relevant Union legislation. In line with the Technical guidance on integrating climate change adaptation in programmes and investments of the Cohesion policy COM(2013)135 the possible climate impacts have been tackled within the programing phase i.e. the preparation of this OP and is reflected in the analysis chapter of this OP including SWOT .
On the side of project implementation level the goal is to create the conditions for project beneficiaries to prepare proposals where climate change adaptation is taken into consideration. In parallel it is also necessary for Managing Authority to monitor project implementation. This will be done by providing technical support
74
GIS – Geographic Information System – is a system designed to capture, store, manipulate, analyse, manage and present all types of geographically referenced data; in simplest terms, GIS is the merging of cartography, statistical anaysls and database technology (Source: Wikipedia)
47
and advice to project beneficiaries and by on-going monitoring of projects during and after implementation with support from environmental partners/adaptation experts
48
SECTION 3: PRIORITY AXES
3.1 Priority Axis 1 – Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management system in Croatia
Priority Axis 1 will be co-financed from the Cohesion Fund (CF)
3.1.1 Main objectives
Main objective of PA 1 is to support development of integrated waste management system through investments in waste infrastructure, construction and/or reconstruction of the facilities and to support projects preparation in the sector. It will consist of two types of Measures:
Measure 1.1 Establishment of new waste management centres at county and regional levels
This measure aims at improvement of recovery and disposal of municipal waste through construction of county / regional waste management centres primarily for municipal and non-hazardous waste; centres will include waste pre-treatment facilities, transfer stations and recycling yards and associated infrastructure necessary for efficient functioning of an overall system. More specifically, measure 1.1 will aim to contribute to the achievement of the OP Objectives as follows:
- Reduction of waste being generated and landfilled by extraction of reusable fraction from municipal waste; the removal of biodegradable component from waste, consequently alleviating environmental footprints and increasing efficiency;
- Providing adequate infrastructure for integrated waste management system consisting of county/regional waste management centres with disposal area, transfer stations, infrastructure for preliminary sorting and preliminary storage of waste with sorting and pre-treatment; infrastructure for establishing separate collection where a waste stream is kept separately by type and nature so as to facilitate a specific treatment; facilities for recovery operations, recycling yards and facilities and associated infrastructure consequently improving access to, and delivery of environmental services to the whole population.
Measure 1.2 Elimination of sites highly polluted by waste
This measure aims at minimization of the risks from waste, especially pollution of surface and ground waters, air and soil as well as reduction of the risks to human health likely to arise from uncontrolled waste disposal. It covers closure and rehabilitation of incompliant landfills and/or their conditioning to allow for further operation, if justified, as well as remediation and rehabilitation of highly polluted and contaminated sites (“hot spots”). More specifically, measure 1.2 will aim to contribute to the achievement of the OP Objectives as follows:
- Reduction of the risk from waste i.e. elimination of the adverse effects of the uncontrolled waste disposal caused by sites highly polluted by waste and existing incompliant municipal waste landfills and consequent protection of ground waters, human health and environment in general.
As a horizontal objective of the OP and this Priority- Ensuring adequate project pipeline for waste management investments, thus supporting effective and timely implementation of the OPE, increasing absorption capacity and facilitating preparation for the next EU financial perspective - it is included in the Priority axis 1 as the integral part of both measures.
3.1.2 Expected impacts
- Increased environmental and economic benefits from minimisation of waste volumes generated, collected and disposed and from usage of materials and energy recovered from waste;
- Greater preservation of natural environment yielding social and economic benefits;
- Contributing to reduction of regional and local disparities and developmental gaps by increasing quality of life, attractiveness and competiveness of regions benefiting from the OPE;
49
- Contributing to fulfilling international obligations, especially with respect to EU aquis and membership requirements;
- Increased direct and indirect economic benefits coming from the investments;
- Efficient absorption of available EU funds.
3.1.3 Indicative type of operations envisaged for funding
Measure 1.1 Establishment of new waste management centres at county and regional levels
- construction of new county/regional waste management centres
- construction of related facilities for disposal of waste, sorting, preliminary storage, waste pre-treatment and waste recovery;
- construction of selective collection systems, recycling yards and transfer stations;
- provision of adequate facilities for handling/treatment of other specific waste streams
- supply of special equipment (compactors, special waste collection vehicles, bulldozer, and other equipment in function of WMC)
- project preparation
- capacity building of beneficiaries for implementation of proposed projects and for operation and maintenance of facilities that will be constructed and building the capacities of the utility sector in general (e.g. improvements in organisational structure set-up, improvements of business processes, etc.)
Measure 1.2 Elimination of sites highly polluted by waste
- closure and rehabilitation or conditioning of municipal waste landfills
- remediation and rehabilitation of sites highly polluted by waste (“hot spots”)
- project preparation
- capacity building of beneficiaries for implementation of proposed projects and for operation and maintenance of facilities that will be constructed and building the capacities of utility sector in general (e.g. improvements in organisational structure set up, improvements of business processes, etc.)
3.1.4 Indicative list of beneficiaries
Measure 1.1 Establishment of new waste management centres at county and regional levels
Beneficiaries:
- Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund
- Regional and local self-government units and municipal/county/regional companies or other public bodies dealing with waste management as future owners / operators of built infrastructure
- Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection through project preparation activities
Measure 1.2 Elimination of sites highly polluted by waste
Beneficiaries:
- Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund
- Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection
- Regional and local self-government units and utility companies
50
3.1.5 Quantified targets and indicators
Programme indicators relate to the effect of interventions, and one of the core points of programming is to express "measurable objectives" which can then be used for setting up targets.
Indicators of the OPE are set, where possible, in accordance with the EU Working document No.2 “Indicative guidelines on evaluation methods: monitoring and evaluation indicators”.
Target values, i.e. desired achievements for all measures are set on the basis of the projects envisaged to be carried in the programming period covered by this OP. Indicators will help in measuring the effects of operational expenditures in terms of outputs and results while measuring impacts will come, generally, after some time of implementation of the interventions due to the nature of projects - large-scale infrastructure that requires certain time to be realised. Monitoring reports will be the main source for data collection (projects monitoring reports but also annual and final reports on implementation).
Indicator Type Unit Initial value
(year)
Target value
(2016 year)
Review frequency
Source of information
Priority Axis 1. Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management system in Croatia
Population served by the new waste management centres R Nr
0
(2007) 580.000
3-years period
MENP
Reduction of waste deposited in the landfills (county level) R %
0
(2007) 70
3-years period
MENP
Reduction of waste deposited in the landfills at national level, as a result of newly opened waste management centres
R % 0
(2007) 11
3-years period
MENP
Area rehabilitated R km2
0
(2007) 0.62
3-years period
EPEEF
3.1.6 Indicative list of major projects
In line with Article 37 (1) h) of the general regulations the indicative list of major projects is presented below.
No Title of project Sector Estimated budget [M€]75
1 County WMC Marišćina (Primorsko-goranska County) Solid waste
(Mr. 1.1) 35,8
2 County WMC Kaštijun (Istria County) Solid waste
(Mr. 1.1) 34,8
3 County WMC Bikarac – second phase (Šibensko-kninska County) Solid waste
(Mr. 1.1) 17,0
TOTAL: 87,6
75
Projects 1 (Marišćina) and 2 (Kaštijun) are considered to have been approved as major projects under Regulation 1083/2006, article 105a (as amended by the Accession Treaty). Project 3 (Bikarac – second phase) does not constitute major project in the meaning of the Article 39 of the Regulation 1083/2006 and is included in the list for informative purposes.
51
3.2 Priority Axis 2 – Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improved water supplies and integrated wastewater management systems
Priority Axis 2 will be co-financed from the Cohesion Fund (CF)
3.2.1 Main objectives
The main objective of this Priority Axis is to enhance water utility infrastructure and the related services by investments in construction and/or reconstruction of the facilities, and to support projects preparation in the sector. It will consist of two types of Measures:
Measure 2.1 Establishment of modern water supply systems and networks
This measure aims at achieving and maintaining sustainable management of water resources through investments in water supply systems including regional ones, increase in network connection, reduction of losses and increase of the reliability and efficiency of the water supply system. More specifically, measure 2.1 will aim to contribute to the achievement of the OP objectives as follows:
- Provision of quality drinking water and increase of the connection rate of population to the public drinking water supply by construction/reconstruction/upgrading of drinking water supply networks as well as water treatment (conditioning) plants;
- Rational use of drinking water by following measures:
a) primarily through mitigation of water losses from distribution water supply networks by minimisation of leakage from water supply systems increasing utilization of drinking water from water sources ;
b) implementation of appropriate protective measures at zones of the water sources sanitary protection.
Measure 2.2 Construction of wastewater treatment plants for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading the sewerage network
This measure aims at preserving the water quality and preventing the degradation of water primarily for the purpose of preserving human health and the environment and achieving the good ecological status of water in order to make it sustainable for planed uses through investments in waste water collection and treatment facilities. More specifically, measure 2.2 will aim to contribute to the achievement of the OP objectives - being the achieving and maintaining goods status of water protection - as follows:
– Increasing the population’s connection rate to the public sewerage systems via construction/reconstruction/upgrading public sewerage system (including supply of equipment for cleaning of network, septic tank cleaning vehicles, etc);
– Construction/reconstruction/upgrading of waste water treatment plants including sludge treatment facilities (including supply of laboratory equipment, etc);
– Reduction of leakages from existing sewerage network (including supply of leakage detection equipment, etc).
This Priority focuses on the fulfillment of heavy investments under the water directives in the agglomerations of more than 2,000 population equivalents through investments that will comply with transitional periods defined in the course of negotiations under Chapter 27. The single investments/ operations will be of an integral nature i.e. a single project will encompass all the activities/measures necessary for compliance with the Directive within respective agglomerations. Investments can also encompass projects in specific agglomerations that deal with individual and small parts of the water supply/sewerage system provided that they contribute to the achievement of the goals of the priority axis. Investments under this measure are related to the agglomerations referred under the Urban Waste Water Treatment/Drinking Water Directives and will contribute to the implementation of requirements of these Directives in specific agglomerations, whereby priority is given to agglomerations with shorter transitional periods and higher environmental impact.
52
Priority can also cover agglomerations of less than 2,000 population equivalents (not covered by UWWTD/DWD) that are due to a risk of not achieving good water status according to Water Frameworks Directive requirements and danger of negative impact on NATURA 2000 sites and drinking water protection zones. Water bodies with associated agglomerations which can have impact on not achieving good water status according to WFD requirements are identified under River Basins Management Plan. Investments located in such identified list (of water bodies and associated agglomeration), tackling risk and negative impact of achieving good water status, will be possibly selected for financing, subject to the compliance with the applicable OP selection procedure and criteria.
As a horizontal objective of the OP and this Priority – ensuring adequate project pipeline for water management investments, thus supporting effective and timely implementation of the OPE, increasing absorption capacity and facilitating preparation for the next EU financial perspective – it is included in the Priority axis 2 as the integral part of both measures.
3.2.2 Expected impacts
- Improvement of environmental services in the public sector in regions providing sufficient quantities of good quality drinking water for the water supply of population.
- Contribution to the achievement of the complete and harmonized water regime within the national territory focusing on achievement and sustainability of a good condition of waters for the purpose of protecting water and water-dependent eco-systems.
- Contribution to minimizing regional and local disparities and developmental gaps by increasing quality of life, attractiveness and competitiveness of regions benefiting from OPE.
- Contributing to fulfilling international obligations, especially with respect to EU acquis and membership requirements;
- Increased direct and indirect economic benefits coming from the investments;
- Efficient absorption of available EU funds.
3.2.3 Indicative type of operations envisaged for funding
Measure 2.1 Establishment of modern water supply systems and networks
- construction/refurbishment of water supply networks and investments in detection and elimination of leakage
- provision of adequate water conditioning of drinking water through water treatment plants in cases of inadequate water quality distributed by water supply systems
- supply of equipment necessary for water supply such as: metering equipment for public water supply systems, leakage detection equipment and laboratory equipment, truck cisterns, etc.
- project preparation
- capacity building of water utility companies for implementation of proposed projects that will be implemented and for operation and maintenance of facilities that will be constructed and building the capacities of utility sector in general (e.g. improvements in organisational structure set up, improvements of business processes, etc.)
Measure 2.2 Construction of wastewater treatment plants for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading the sewerage network
- construction/refurbishment and extension of waste water networks – sewerage, detection and elimination of leakage
- construction of new waste water treatment plants and/or refurbishment/upgrading of existing waste water treatment plants
53
- construction/ rehabilitation of sludge treatment facilities
- supply of equipment necessary for the waste water collection and processing
- projects preparation
- capacity building of water utility companies for implementation of proposed projects that will be implemented and for operation and maintenance of facilities that will be constructed and building the capacities of utility sector in general (e.g. improvements in organisational structure set up, improvements of business processes, etc.)
3.2.4 Indicative list of beneficiaries
Measure 2.1 Establishment of modern water supply systems and networks and Measure 2.2 Construction of wastewater treatment plants for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading the sewerage network
Beneficiaries:
- Croatian Waters
- Operators of the water utility infrastructure – (public) water utility companies at local level
- Regional and local self-government units
3.2.5 Quantified targets and indicators
Programme indicators relate to the effect of interventions, and one of the core points of programming is to express "measurable objectives" which can then be used for setting up targets. Indicators of the OPE are set, where possible, in accordance with the EU Working document No.2 “Indicative guidelines on evaluation methods: monitoring and evaluation indicators”.
Target values, i.e. desired achievements for all measures are set on the basis of the projects envisaged to be carried in the programming period covered by this Operational programme. Indicators will help in measuring the effects of operational expenditures in terms of outputs and results while measuring impacts will come, generally, after some time of implementation of the interventions due to the nature of projects - large-scale infrastructure that requires certain time to be realised. Monitoring reports will be the main source for data collection (projects monitoring reports but also annual and final reports on implementation).
Indicator Type Unit Initial value
(year)
Target value
(2016 year)
Review frequency
Source of information
Priority Axis 2. Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improvement water supplies and integrated wastewater management systems
Population connected to new / rehabilitated public water supply network
R Nr 0
(2007) 20,000 Annually
MoA, PUC, project monitoring reports
Population connected to new / rehabilitated sewerage network R Nr
0 (2007)
44,550 Annually MoA, PUC, project monitoring reports
Population served by the new WWTP (capacity of WWTP) R Nr
0 (2007)
472,500 PE Annually MoA, PUC, project monitoring reports
3.2.6 Indicative list of major projects
In line with Article 37 (1) h) of the general regulations the indicative list of major projects is presented below.
54
No Title of project Sector Priority deadline
Estimated budget [M€]76
1 Water supply and sewerage system with WWTP for Slavonski Brod WS/WW Mr. 2.1/2.2
2018 29,6
2 Water supply and sewerage improvement with WWTP in Knin WS/WW Mr. 2.1/2.2
2020 15,7
3 Sisak waste water programme WW Mr. 2.2
2018 32,7
4 Construction of the County Bjelovar Bilogora regional water supply system WS Mr. 2.1
55
5 Construction of the County of Koprivnica Krizevci regional water supply system WS Mr. 2.1
52
6 Osijek: Water supply, wastewater collection and wastewater treatment plan of Osijek
WS/WW Mr. 2.1/2.2
2018 72,5
7 Wastewater treatment plant of Velika Gorica WW Mr. 2.2
2018 47
8 Poreč: sewerage & wastewater treatment plant WW Mr. 2.2
2018 67,2
9 Water infrastructure improvements in town of Vukovar WS/WW Mr. 2.1/2.2
2018 48,3
10 Istrian water protection system WW Mr. 2.2
2023 40
11 Regional water supply of Zagreb, subsystem Zagreb East WS Mr. 2.1
99,2
12 Sewerage and Wastewater Treatment System for Agglomeration Kaštela-Trogir WS/WW Mr. 2.2
2018 55
13 East Slavonia Regional water supply system WS Mr. 2.1
75
14 Zabok-Zlatar: waste water treatment WW Mr. 2.2
2018 73
15 Rijeka: sewerage & wastewater treatment plant WW Mr. 2.2
2018 112
TOTAL 819,2
76
Projects 1 (Sl. Brod), 2 (Knin) and 3 (Sisak) are considered to have been approved as major projects under Regulation 1083/2006, article 105a (as amended by the Accession Treaty). Other projects with total cost below 50 million euro are included in the list because of their importance to the commitments under chapter 27.
55
3.3 Priority Axis 3 – Technical Assistance
Priority Axis 3 Technical Assistance will be co-financed from the Cohesion Fund (CF)
3.3.1 Main objectives
The main objective of this Priority Axis is to facilitate effective and efficient management and implementation of the OP, support strengthening of the administrative capacity and finally to support successful preparation for the next programming period. It will consist of one Measure:
Measure 3.1 OP management and capacity building
PA and Measure 3.1 will aim to contribute to the achievement of the OP objectives as follows::
- strengthening and supporting the system for implementation of the OPE and assistance in implementation of the OPE
- strengthening and developing the capacity of institutions participating in the management process of the OP for effective execution of their responsibilities in the OPE measures
- increasing the level of knowledge and capacity of the beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries of the programme
- increasing the public knowledge on the possibilities of obtaining support from the EU funds
- assistance in preparation for the next SF programming period 2014 - 2020
3.3.2 Expected impacts
The technical assistance is to provide backing for sound management and implementation of the OP along with strengthening administrative capacity of the structures involved in the management and implementation of OPE as well as beneficiaries in order to maximise impact of the programme.
3.3.3 Indicative type of operations envisaged for funding
Operations under this Priority Axis and Measure 3.1 cover 3 specific areas of activity
a) Support to the management / implementation of the OP
General administrative procedures connected with the use of EU funds are complex in nature and usually require high level of expertise in a wide range of areas. This measure will support preparatory, management, monitoring, evaluation, information and control activities.
Framework operations:
- assistance in preparation of programming documents (including procedures and rules for selection and approval of projects) and OP-level evaluations
- evaluations and appraisal of the projects, control of technical documentation and provision of external expertise for those purposes;
- assistance in procurement checks, control of tender documentation and project / contract management
- supervision of rules on the granting of State aid including provision of external expertise;
- support for preparation, improvement and revision of working procedures and tools for all aspects of management / implementation process
- support and expertise for implementation of working procedures including performance of management verifications
- activities of the Monitoring Committee, working groups, committees and commissions under OP, including expenditures for participation of experts and other participants;
56
- activities related to monitoring, including preparation of studies and reports on the progress of the OP’s implementation, preparation of supporting documentation for drafting annual and final reports
- ensuring the inclusion of quality and reliable information in the Management Information System, and connected activities ensuring the effective management, monitoring and evaluation of the OP and the information exchange with the EC and stakeholders;
- the acquisition and installation of the computer units and system, and other equipment for managing, monitoring, controlling and evaluating activities;
- assistance in preparation of Communication Plan and execution of the publicity and visibility activities and measures including organising information and promotional events, publishing promotional materials and carrying out analyses of the effects of such events.
b) Strengthening the capacity of the MA, the IBs, public bodies and the Beneficiaries for the implementation of the OP
The strengthening of administrative capacity aims at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the public bodies involved in the implementation of the OP.
Framework operations:
- strengthening capacities and institutional building (via training, workshops/seminars on the job assistance, study tours and other means) of the:
o institutions participating in the implementation, management and control process of the OP for effective management of the OP, including identification, preparation and assessments of project applications;
o beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries of the programme for preparation, management, monitoring and implementation of projects.
- strengthening capacities on horizontal issues relevant for the adequate implementation of the OP (such as EIA, NATURA 2000 etc);
- enhancing capacities of MA and IBs for monitoring, management and control functions, including provision of necessary IT equipment, expenditure related to at-site monitoring and control of the projects;
- reinforcement of administrative capacities of MA and IBs by secondment of civil servants/officials or employment of other staff during the period of eligibility of expenditure and by measures for retention of trained and experienced staff of authorities (MA and IBs) responsible for management, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, audit and control of the OPE (including salary costs with social charges).
c) Preparation for the next SF programming period 2014-2020
On a short and medium-term basis, this technical assistance is needed as a basis for the preparation of all necessary documents for next programming period and includes also strengthening of capacities for the management / implementation of the new OP.
Framework operations:
- Preparation of the OP and all necessary programming documents;
- preparation of studies and analyses of appropriateness and effectiveness of the OP implementing structures, established procedures, control mechanisms with the aim of formulating recommendations for the operational improvement of the effectiveness of the programme’s management or for the use of experience in the following programming period;
- Assistance in preparation of all necessary institutional and legal procedures (such as Manual of procedures) for implementation of SF 2014-2020;
- Preparation of Communication Plan;
- Elaboration of sector studies, concepts, analyses, methodologies and reports providing basis for programming and contributing to improvements in respective sector;
57
- Identification of potential projects and project preparation in the priority areas identified within programming documents for 2014-2020 other than those included in the PA 1 and PA2 of this OP 2007-2013. In terms of time, the respective TA will be implemented once the main priorities are identified within the 2014-2020 programming process that will secure adequate usage of the assistance. It is envisaged for such “new” priority areas to include, inter alia, energy sector (including RES and EE), nature protection and air quality. In principle it is expected that the beneficiaries of such assistance will be public bodies (such as ministries and agencies) responsible for the relevant priority areas (see chapter 3.3.4 below)
- strengthening capacities and institutional building (via training, workshops/seminars on the job assistance, study tours and other means) of the:
o new institutions that will participate in the implementation, management and control process of the OP either as a part of formal structure (being subject to compliance assessment procedure ) or being public bodies with sectoral responsibilities under OP
o beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries of the programme for preparation, management, monitoring and implementation of projects
3.3.4 Indicative list of beneficiaries
For Measure 3.1 under this Priority Axis the following potential beneficiaries are identified:
- The Managing Authority of the OP
- The Intermediate Bodies
- Coordinating Body
- The Certifying Authority
- The Audit Authority
- Relevant organisational units of MENP and MoA
- Existing and potential OPE beneficiaries
- Public bodies (such as ministries and agencies) with sector responsibilities
3.3.5 Quantified targets and indicators
Indicator Type Unit Initial value
(year)
Target value
(2016)
Review frequency
Source of information
Priority Axis 3. Technical Assistance
Trainings for staff in the national bodies aimed to increase capabilities for independently identifying, preparing and assessing project applications
R Nr 0 (2007) 40 Annually MA, IBs
OP funds absorbed R % 0 (2007) 100 Annually MA, IBs
3.4 Demarcation with similar interventions under other OPs and EU Funded Projects
The OPE will contribute to the achievement of Croatia’s global NSRF objectives by improving conditions for growth and employment through the protection and improvement of the environment as well as of the administrative capacity. In this regard, OPE’s synergies with other OPs within the SF/CF framework that contribute to increasing and improving the quality of human capital, the development of an innovation and knowledge society and the adaptability to economic and social changes are considered.
58
The OPE contributes to strengthening economic integration by developing environmental infrastructure and enhancing access to services of general interest, by improving governance for a better quality of public policy, and by raising Croatia’s skills in environmental protection.
All four OPs under Structural funds (Transport, Environment, Regional Competitiveness and Human Resource Development) are mutually dependent, since the performance of all sectors together is a key prerequisite for achieving sustainable development. In this sense, they are integrated in their contribution to Croatia’s economic, environmental and social future.
The complementarity and synergy between the four OPs is most evident in the light of the NSRF since its main task is to assure the consistency between priorities for the assistance from the SF. The text bellow describes consistency and correlation of OPE with the other four OPs.
Transport (TOP)
The development of transport links and modes is, on one hand, a necessary prerequisite for economic development, but on the other, a sector that has a major influence on the environment. In that sense, the development of sustainable transport is closely linked to environmental protection and preservation. TOP has two priorities that complement environmental concerns: Priority axis 1 - Upgrading Croatia’s rail transport system and Priority axis 2 - Upgrading Croatia’s inland waterway system and therefore emphasis is laid on the development of railway and inland waterway transport systems. This strategic decision is also in line with the orientation towards promotion of multi-modal transport and shift from polluting road to less polluting and energy efficient rail/river transport modes.
Regional Competitiveness (RCOP)
Adequately developed municipal (including environmental) infrastructure and social infrastructure is a precondition for economic development, attraction of investment and improvement of the quality of life, i.e. for enhancing business related and basic municipal infrastructure. The development of basic infrastructure is a prerequisite for the growth of productive investments and entrepreneurship activities. Additionally, investment conducted in the course of the OPE will create opportunities to increase SME development as well as to improve the investment climate and raise interest among domestic and foreign investors.
Although investments in water and waste management envisaged under OPE will have an effect on the quality of life and attractiveness of Croatian regions, there are no overlaps with Priority Axis 3 of the RCOP (Development and upgrading of the regional infrastructure and raising the attractiveness of regions). The construction of the regional infrastructure (sewerage and water supply) under OPE excludes the one relating to the tourism and business zones which are to be financed by the RCOP. Activities envisaged in the RCOP (Regional infrastructure) relate to development, among others, of tourism related infrastructure, which will aim predominantly at cultural/historical sites, while the OPE interventions focus on provision of public services that facilitate and indirectly contribute to regional development. However, in general, considering all foreseen measures, it can be argued that the two OPs are mutually supportive and complementary, with difference being in targeted beneficiaries – while RCOP focuses more on private sector, the OPE is concerned with provision of public utilities.
Human Resources Development (HRD)
Investment in environmental infrastructure should stimulate short-term employment within the construction sector, but it will also underpin economic activity within the beneficiary regions. In both cases, it is important that employment demand is matched by skill supply.
Rural Development
IPARD programme 2007 – 2013 serves as the planning document for the Programming period for the usage of the agricultural and fishery funds (agriculture and rural development) for the whole respective period. That means that IPARD programme will remain applicable till the end of 2013, i.e. also during the first 6 months of the EU membership.
Out of the activities relevant for the OPE it has to be noted that IPARD program enables investments in the construction and/or reconstruction of sewage system and/or wastewaters treatment plants but only for the local self-government units with less than 10.000 inhabitants and up to the 958.000€ of eligible expenditure. Therefore demarcation line towards similar type of investments that are possible to be financed through the OPE is primarily established in relation to value (size) of the projects with OPE mostly financing investments that are above mentioned threshold. Second line of demarcation concerns the possible location/areas that can
59
receive funding with OPE envisaged to finance almost exclusively investments located in the agglomeration for which transition periods are granted and as such listed in the Annex of the Accession treaty while Rural development programme (IPARD) can finance investments outside of those areas. Exceptions of this rule in terms of OPE are expected to be minimal (if any) and would have to be justified in details by urgent need (such as prevention of pollution of NATURA sites or drinking water zones). Finally the overlapping of IPARD and OPE will be mitigated through institutional coordination within the Ministry of Agriculture being on the one hand Managing Authority for Rural development programme / IPARD while on the other hand it is Intermediary body level 1 for the OPE. Moreover, call for proposals for projects under measure 3.1 of IPARD programme has been finalized and all projects eligible for IPARD funds have been identified, actions funded under measure 301 cannot be eligible for funds under this OPE.
3.5 Complementarity with other sources of investment
CO-ORDINATION WITH INTERNATIONAL FINANCING INSTITUTIONS (IFI)
IFIs may respond to specific interests of Croatia such as implementation of the provisions of the acquis and assist in those areas where their expertise or past country experience creates a comparative advantage. IFIs support may also be available to cover part of the co-financing, or pre-financing of projects included in the pipeline of the EU Funds programming.
Based on their experience from the new EU member states and previous activities in Croatia, programming provisions of the IFIs are in line with the current challenges faced by the country. Their contribution to Croatia’s strategic development goals could be made even more efficient if their action is directly linked to the programming provisions of the Structural Funds.
Overall coordination of the IFIs assistance and its synergy with EU assistance is ensured by MFIN as the national contact point for international financing institutions, and MRDFEU as National IPA Coordinator. That coordination is being implemented through regular consultations with relevant IFIs in ordered to achieve maximum synergy and impact. Besides MRDFEU and MFIN, MA and relevant institutions participating in the OP management are and will continue to be in contact with the international financing institutions to regularly update them on the developments with regard to the project pipeline preparation.
The proposal below singles out some possibilities for matching EU and IFIs’ efforts and it has been made on the basis of the current provisions in the NSRF and the OPE. It should be considered as a starting point for further consideration of the IFIs contribution to EU Funds’ programming.
The World Bank (WB) applies its strategic priority in Increasing Sustainability of Long Term Development and in this respect it might assist in many operations under the OPE.
Furthermore, there are number of examples of direct synergies or follow-ups between concrete WB projects and OPE interventions. In water management sector for example, World Bank has been present through the Inland Waters Project and Costal Cities Pollution Control Project.
The objective of the Coastal Cities Pollution Control Project is construction, rehabilitation and improvement of sewerage systems together with wastewater treatment systems in the coastal cities of the Republic of Croatia. The project is in its second phase of implementation. The objective of the Inland Waters Project comprises investments in the water management sector (water supply, sewerage, wastewater treatment and protection against floods) in the area within Danube river basin. Both projects financed by the WBs loans will complement the EU structural funds financing within this OP in two ways: by securing part of the loan resources for preparation of projects which are going to be implemented by support of EU funds, and by financing different phases of the same project. The latter one refers mainly to the construction of the WWTPs in case were the first phase of the investment was subject to WB financing while necessary subsequent phases will be financed by EU funds.
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has one of its strategic priorities in supporting national infrastructure projects - energy efficiency - renewable energy. Although in this first programming period the OP does not foresee investments in energy, it is to be expected that energy will make an important part of the OP for next programming period. Therefore, the coordination with EBRD in development of appropriate project pipeline is recommended and reasonable.
60
As of particular importance is the fact that EBRD works with a number of large and medium sized municipalities to develop their infrastructure projects for respective EU co-financing (along with lending). The examples of such projects relate to the involvement of EBRD in ISPA project Program for Water and Wastewater for town of Karlovac and IPA Sisak Wastewater Project.
The European Investment Bank (EIB) has a set of strategic priorities, one of which is infrastructure improvements in environmental, health and education sectors. Therefore the cooperation might be coordinated in terms of contribution to building water supply and sewage systems in small agglomerations.
On 26 November 2010, the Croatian Parliament adopted the Law on ratification of the Finance Contract between the Republic of Croatia and the EIB related to co-financing of ISPA and IPA projects. The value of this loan is 200 million Euros. Thanks to this loan, the funds will be provided for national co-financing of the already approved ISPA and IPA projects in the waste and water sector.
Also in 2011 two framework loans were signed with EIB that are envisaged to finance activities complimentary to this OP:
- “Mainland infrastructure facility (Integral development of Local community)” supporting multi-sector (transport, electricity, social and environmental infrastructure) investment schemes in municipalities in 13 counties, located on the Croatian mainland. The project will support approximately 130 relative small-sized municipal infrastructure schemes. Out of that Environmental Protection Schemes will be focused on construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation of small sub-projects aiming at improving the environmental sustainability of concerned municipalities by constructing and improving recycling stations, waste sorting stations and the closing of old waste sites. Total value of the facility is 67.8 m€ out of which 25€ m is EIB loan.
- “Municipal water financing facility” supporting improvements in water supply systems, waste water collection and treatment as well as storm water disposal in municipalities located in all Croatian counties, with the exception of the capital city. It comprises smaller scale projects located in the smaller communities. Total value of the facility is 150 m€ out of which 75 m€ is EIB loan.
Size of the projects is the main demarcation line in terms of the sources of financing between this OP and above listed activities eligible for financing under EIB framework loans with the latter one financing small scale projects on the local level while OP finances mainly large projects that are of national importance in a way that they present obligation of the Republic of Croatia as per Accession treaty.
In conclusion, the activities and strategies of IFIs in Croatia have a strong potential for complementarity and synergy with OPE interventions. Established cooperation will be nourished further with a long-term vision in order to secure absorption capacity in the environmental sector and this and also in future programming periods.
JASPERS
JASPERS (Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions) is an instrument which assists new EU Member States in the preparation of major projects to be submitted for financing under Structural Funds. The European Commission made available the JASPERS facility to Croatia prior to EU accession in line with the practice established with the previous acceding countries. Croatia therefore started using the assistance provided by the JASPERS initiative in April 2011. JASPERS team of experts have been assisting the preparation of high quality infrastructure projects through video conferences, site visits and numerous working meetings. JASPERS Action Plan for Croatia envisages a set of infrastructure projects in the environment sector to be assessed or/and developed as well as a set of horizontal tasks to be carried out under JASPERS assistance. A number of JASPERS Guidance Notes for mature projects in waste and water subsectors have been issued. Through JASPERS assistance transfer of skills and knowledge is expected in order to build capacity in the relevant ministries and agencies for the preparation of mature project pipeline and even more significantly for assessing the quality of project applications.
61
SECTION 4: IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter describes the system of implementation of the OP “Environment” in accordance with the provisions laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No.1083/2006. The content of this chapter includes basic information allowing an understanding of the main implementation features of the OP.
4.1 Management
The institutional system for implementation of structural instruments is stipulated in the Law on Establishment of Institutional Framework for the Utilization of the Structural Instruments of the European Union in the Republic of Croatia, which was adopted on 6 July 2012
77. Designation of particular Institutions for performing
tasks prescribed in the Law are determined in the Governmental Regulation on the bodies in the management and control system for use of European Union structural instruments in the Republic of Croatia
78
Responsibilities
The overall responsibility for the correct and efficient implementation of the commitments embodied in the documents concerning the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund is ensured by the Government of the Republic of Croatia, represented by the Ministry of Regional Development and EU Funds (MRDEUF), the Ministry of Finance, the Agency for the Audit of EU Programmes’ Implementation System and the Managing Authorities.
The Ministry of Regional Development and EU Funds is designated to perform the role of central Coordinating Body. It shall ensure strategic coherence across the EU and national policies, and complementary use of national and EU financial resources in pursuing national development goals. Furthermore it is responsible for programming, setting up the System, adopting the rules, developing an integrated Management Information System (hereinafter referred to as the MIS), monitoring implementation at the national level as well as coordination with the Commission
Ministry of Finance is designated to perform the functions of Certifying Authority for all OPs, in line with the requirements of Article 59 of General Regulation No. 1083/2006.
The Agency for the Audit of EU Programmes’ Implementation System has been designated the Audit Authority for all OPs, in line with the requirements of Article 59 of General Regulation No. 1083/2006. The Audit Authority is operationally independent from the Managing Authorities and of the Certifying Authority.
According to the above-mentioned Law and Decree the institutional framework for the management of OP Environment is presented in the following table while the detailed description of the tasks is provided further in the text.
Managing Authority Intermediate Body Level 1 Intermediate Body Level 2
Priority Axis 1 (waste sector)
Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection
- Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund
Priority Axis 2 (water sector)
Ministry of Agriculture “Hrvatske vode”
Priority Axis 3 (technical assistance)
- Central Finance and Contracting Agency
MANAGING AUTHORITY OF THE OP „ENVIRONMENT”
Management and implementation of the OP “Environment” is performed in accordance with the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1083/2006 and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1828/2006, amended by (EC) 846/2009.
77
Official Gazette No. 78/2012 78
Official Gazette No. 97/2012
62
The function of Managing Authority for the OP “Environment” is performed by the Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection. In respect of the requirements of Article 60 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1083/2006, the Managing Authority of the OP “Environment” is responsible for managing and implementing the OP in accordance with the principles of sound financial management and clear separation of functions.
The responsibilities and functions of the Managing Authority are the following:
a) ensures that projects are selected for funding in accordance with the criteria applicable to the Operational Programme and that they comply with applicable national and European Union rules for the whole of their implementation period;
b) ensures verification that the co-financed products and services are delivered and that all the expenditure declared by the beneficiaries for projects have actually been incurred and comply with European Union and national rules;
c) ensures that there is a system for recording and storing in electronic form accounting records for each project under the Operational Programme and that the data on implementation necessary for financial management, monitoring, verifications, audits and evaluation are collected;
d) ensures that beneficiaries and other bodies involved in the implementation of projects maintain either a separate accounting system or an adequate accounting code for all transactions relating to the project without prejudice to national accounting rules;
e) ensures that evaluations of Operational Programmes are carried out; f) establishes procedures to ensure that all documents regarding expenditure and audits required to
ensure an adequate audit trail are kept in accordance with the requirements; g) ensures that the Certifying Authority receives all necessary information on the procedures and
verifications carried out in relation to expenditure for the purpose of certification; h) establishes the Monitoring Committee for each Operational Programme in agreement with the
Coordinating Body and ensures its proper functioning; i) guides the work of the Monitoring Committee and provides it with the documents required to
permit the quality of the implementation of the Operational Programme to be monitored in the light of its specific goals;
j) draws up and, after approval by the Monitoring Committee, submits to the Commission the annual and final reports on implementation of Operational Programmes;
k) implements the information and visibility measures as defined in the communication plan prepared by the Coordinating Body;
l) provides to the Commission the information to allow it to appraise major projects; m) provides to the Intermediate Bodies the instructions for the performance of the delegated tasks; n) supervises the performance of Intermediate Bodies on risk-assessment basis; o) monitors the progress of implementation of the Operational Programme and conducts annual
examination; p) monitors the implementation of n+3 rule and takes necessary measures to avoid de-commitment; q) coordinates preparation of and endorses plans for implementation of Operational Programme
priorities and approves measures in line with the same (could be changed by approval of Programme complement);
r) organises and chairs annual review meetings with the Commission on the progress of the implementation of the Operational Programme;
s) carries out the evaluations as defined in the evaluation plans; t) contributes to the preparation of description of the System; u) prepares internal written procedures for performance of its functions following the Rules
approved by the Coordinating Body; v) enters relevant data in MIS and ensures exchange of data with the Commission through the
SFC2007; w) stores the documents and records of the performance of functions to ensure adequate audit trail.
Within the MA, the requirements for segregation of functions of selection and approval of operations and management verifications will be fully respected. Internally the tasks of implementation and monitoring of operations will be separated from the control tasks.
INTERMEDIATE BODIES
The functions of the Managing Authority set out in Article 60 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1083/2006 provide a suitable framework for allocating the functions of the Managing Authority between the Managing Authority and the Intermediate Bodies. In line with articles 2.6 and 59.2 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1083/2006,
63
provision of the Law on Establishment of Institutional Framework provide the possibility for the OP “Environment” Managing Authority to delegate the implementation of designated OP priority axes/measures to Intermediate Bodies level 1 and/or Intermediate Bodies level 2.
Responsibilities of the Intermediary bodies are the following79
:
Intermediate Body level 1 is a national body which, under the responsibility of the Managing Authority, performs the delegated functions related to the selection of projects for funding as well as the following additional functions:
a) drafts the selection criteria for the respective priority or measure and submits the same to the Managing Authority for verification;
b) initiates and develops strategic projects which contribute to the achievement of the priority goals of the Operational Programme;
c) prepares and improves the sector specific parts of NSRF and Operational Programme; d) defines measures for implementation of Operational Programme priorities and develops
conditions and plans for their implementation; e) carries out the evaluations of Operational Programme as defined in the evaluation plans; f) prepares forecasts of the absorption of Funds and financial commitments to projects; g) monitors the implementation of the Operational Programme priorities and measures as well as
reports on the same to the Managing Authority; h) prepares and submits to the Managing Authority information on major projects; i) plans and manages budget allocations from the Funds and national resources and ensures
national co-financing for projects; j) concludes the grant agreement with the beneficiary and the Intermediate Body level 2 k) prepares and submits to the authority responsible for payment requests for transfer of public
funding to beneficiary and ensures the wholeness of payments of public contribution; l) ensures the recovery of the amounts unduly paid and keeps records of the amounts recoverable
or recovered; m) provides to the Certifying Authority and to the body responsible for payments the information on
the amounts recoverable and recovered.
For the Priority axis for which Intermediate Body level 1 is not established the functions referred to above shall be performed by the Managing Authority
Intermediate Body level 2 is a national or public body which, under the responsibility of the Managing Authority, performs the delegated functions related to the verification that the funded products and services are delivered and that the expenditure declared by the beneficiary for the project has been actually incurred and complies with national and European Union rules for the whole of the project implementation and durability period
For tasks delegated to Intermediate Bodies, the Managing Authority retains overall responsibility for ensuring that they are properly conducted. Therefore, the MA should, in its supervisory capacity, obtain assurance that the tasks have been properly carried out by performing quality checks on verifications made by the Intermediate Bodies.
BENEFICIARIES
The potential beneficiaries of operations envisaged by the OP “Environment” are the bodies applying for support to implement operations in accordance with the OP provisions. Such entities are public institutions involved in the management and implementation of OP (MA and IB), other public institutions and agencies, namely: Croatian Waters and Environment Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund as well as operators of the water utility infrastructure – (public) water utility companies at local level and Regional and local self-government units and municipal/county/regional companies
Beneficiaries will be mainly responsible for:
a) development of the application for the provision of assistance;
b) proper implementation of the operation/project;
79
Detailed list of responsibilities is prescribed in the Law on Establishment of Institutional Framework for the Utilization of the Structural Instruments of the European Union in the Republic of Croatia, which was adopted on 6 July 2012
64
c) reporting to the IB on the financial and physical progress of the operation/project;
d) compliance with visibility and information requirements in accordance with EU rules (at the operation/project level).
The beneficiaries shall be responsible for ensuring that the expenditure they declare for co-financing is legal and regular and complies with all applicable Community and national rules..
In submitting the payment claims for expenditure eligible for co-financing, beneficiaries shall substantiate the incurred expenditures and their compliance with the requirements contained in the financing decision on the funds to be allocated within the assistance. All payment claims must be supported by confirmed invoices and other documents of equal probative value.
The beneficiaries must keep project dossiers providing adequate audit trails. Guidelines for beneficiaries will include detailed provisions for audit trail.
The beneficiaries must make the documents on project available at any time for inspections carried out by authorized persons or entities. The documents shall be archived in compliance with applicable regulations.
Main principles with regard to the selection and approval of operations
In the overall process of implementation of the OP “Environment”, the Managing Authority bears the overall responsibility for project selection and contracting procedures under the programme. The Managing Authority guarantees the transparency, objectivity and efficiency of the selection procedure, and thus the quality of selected projects.
The operations/projects of OP “Environment” shall be selected for funding by using the following types of selection procedure:
an open call for proposals
an restricted call for proposals
IB level 1 is in charge of planning and launching of call for proposals as well as for carrying out the process of project selection.
4.2 Monitoring and Evaluation
MONITORING
Monitoring of the OP “Environment” is the responsibility of the OP Managing Authority under the control of the OP “Environment” Monitoring Committee (MC). Monitoring is carried out under the partnership principle. At all levels of management, uniform monitoring principles will apply, both in physical and financial monitoring and information and reports will be presented in agreed format and limited to certain indicators.
The Monitoring Committee will be set up within three months after the decision approving the OP, as per Art. 63 of Council Regulation No. 1083/2006. The main responsibility of the Monitoring Committee is to ensure the effectiveness and quality of the implementation of the OPE. The OPE Monitoring Committee will be composed of representatives of the Managing Authority, representatives of the Coordinating Body, of the Certifying Authority, Audit Authority, all Intermediate Bodies, and other relevant institutions, social partners, and stakeholders from private, public, and civil sector interested in active participation in OP implementation. Representatives of the European Commission shall participate in an advisory capacity in the Monitoring Committee; when appropriate, delegates of the European Investment Bank and European Investment Fund or other financing institutions will also be invited.
Each institution will nominate one full member for the MC and one substitute member, with high decision-making power. Effort will be made that the composition of the OP “Environment” Monitoring Committee reflects the requirements of gender balance. Subsequent changes in the membership or composition of the MC may be agreed by the MC itself, subject to national legislation, without any requirement to amend the OP “Environment”. The Monitoring Committee will be chaired by the official of the Managing Authority, while the MA staff will act as Secretariat of the Monitoring Committee. The MC will draw up and adopt its own rules of procedure within the national institutional, legal and financial framework.
65
EVALUATION
Evaluation of the OP is an important tool, necessary for the overall management of the OP. It is meant to assess the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the financial assistance deployed, as well as the impact and sustainability of the results achieved.
The systematic evaluation of the OP “Environment” will be performed in full compliance with the provisions set forth in Council Regulation (EC) No. 1083/2006, articles 47 – 49.
Three types of evaluations are relevant for this OP:
ex ante evaluation (see chapter 2.5. and Annex 2);
interim evaluation (during the period of implementation of the OP);
ex post evaluation.
The national institutional framework for evaluation comprises 2 levels:
Coordinating Body prepares methodology and strategy for evaluation of Operational Programmes evaluations plans, coordinates, organizes or performs evaluations related to the use and implementation of structural instruments, ensures that general public is familiarized with the results and ensures implementation of activities; -
Managing authority carries out the evaluations as defined in the evaluation plans.
The evaluations will be financed mainly from the technical assistance budget and the evaluation results shall be made publicly available through an easily identifiable and accessible means of communication.
Under the coordination of MRDFEU, a follow-up mechanism for evaluation recommendations shall be set forth in the Evaluation Procedures Manual to be applied by the OP “Environment” MA.
4.3 Certification of Expenditure
The Ministry of Finance is designated to perform the functions of Certifying Authority for all OPs in line with the provisions of Article 61 of General Regulation No. 1083/2006. The Certifying Authority, being a national body responsible for certifying statement of expenditure and applications for payment before submission of the same to the Commission, performs the following functions: :
draws up and submits to the Commission certified statements of expenditure and applications for payment;
certifies the expenditure;
ensures for the purposes of certification the receipt of adequate information from the Managing Authority on the procedures and verifications carried out in relation to expenditure included in statements of expenditure;
takes account for certification purposes of the results of all audits carried out by and under the responsibility of the Audit Authority;
maintains accounting records in electronic form of expenditure declared to the Commission;
keeps an account of amounts recoverable and of amounts withdrawn following cancellation of all or part of the contribution for a project;
provides the Commission with the provisional forecast of the applications for payments;
provides the Commission with the statement on withdrawn and recovered amounts, pending recoveries and irrecoverable amounts
The institution performing the functions of the Certifying Authority may also be responsible for payments, additionally verification, irregularity monitoring and preparing part of the Rules governing activities of the bodies in the System
The Certifying Authority does not intend to delegate its functions to other bodies.
66
4.4 Audit
The Government of Croatia has designated the Agency for the Audit of European Union Programmes' Implementation System (ARPA) to perform the functions of the Audit Authority in accordance with Article 62 of Council Regulation No. 1083/2006. Audit Authority, being the national body functionally independent from the Managing Authority and the Certifying Authority responsible for external audit of the proper and efficient functioning of the System, performs the following tasks:
ensures that audits are carried out to verify the efficient functioning of the System;
ensures the execution of audits of operations on the basis of an appropriate sample in order to verify
expenditure declared;
prepares and submits to the Commission audit strategy;
prepares and submits to the Commission annual control report and final control report;
issues an opinion as to whether the System is functioning properly and effectively in order to provide
reasonable assurance that statements of expenditure presented to the Commission are accurate and
there is a reasonable belief that the subject transactions are legal and regular;
where applicable, submits to the Commission a declaration for (partial) closure assessing the legality and
regularity of the expenditure concerned;
prepares internal written procedures for performance of its functions;
during audits takes into account internationally accepted audit standards;
enters relevant data in MIS and ensures exchange of data with the Commission through the SCF2007;
stores documents and record of the performance of functions to ensure adequate audit trail;
performs compliance assessment of the System for each Operational Programme and prepares a report setting out the results of the assessment and giving an opinion on the compliance of the System with relevant EU Regulations.
The Audit Authority does not intend to delegate its functions to other bodies.
4.5 Financial flows
The main procedures for mobilization and circulation of financial flows in order to ensure their transparency while implementing this operational programme are presented below. It is important to emphasize that the system described herein is common for all EU structural assistance administered in Croatia according to the Convergence objective; therefore, it will be equally applied to all operational programmes under the aforementioned objective. The following two essential aspects of the financial flow system may be distinguished: a) co-financing of actions by EU structural assistance and national funds; b) the cycle of movement of EU funds to final beneficiaries. The national co-financing of EU structural assistance will be ensured from the resources of the state budget, other national public contribution, municipal budgets, and final beneficiaries’ own funds. The potential of the national co-financing of EU structural assistance will be ensured by the integrated planning of EU structural assistance in the State budget. The State budget preparation and provision for EU structural assistance and national co-financing is ensured in accordance with the applicable Instruction for preparation of State budget of Republic of Croatia for certain period (issued by the State Treasury of the Ministry of Finance), and forms part of overall procedure related to preparation of the State budget. As a rule, the funds from EU structural assistance designated for allocation to a particular economic sector will be included into the annual budget of a relevant budget user- Intermediate body 1 (usually – a relevant ministry), responsible for co-ordination of the state policy in this area, by integrating these funds into budget appropriations. The European Commission will transfer EU structural assistance funds to a separate bank account opened specially for each fund with the Croatian National Bank and administered by the State Treasury of the Ministry
67
of Finance. These funds will be transferred to the single treasury account, which is located in the Croatian National Bank. These funds will be transferred to final beneficiaries through the State Treasury Financial Information System (STFIS). STFIS is designed to process all transactions relating to all phases of the budgetary cycle. All budget users are connected into a single financial - information system- STFIS through which State treasury may conduct transactions. Final beneficiaries will submit payment applications to the Intermediate body 2 that will verify the eligibility of expenditure declared by the final beneficiaries to be financed from EU structural assistance funds, following the procedure established in the common rules adopted by Coordinating Body (MRDEUF) and following relevant instructions of the Managing Authority. After setting the amounts specified in payment applications eligible for financing from EU structural assistance funds, the budget user- Intermediary body, will prepare the requests for payment (RfPs) to the State treasury for the amounts to be proceeded in STFIS. After preparation of the RfP in STFIS, the process of verification and validation of the RfP will take place following the general procedure for payment of the State budget funds. After receipt of a proper RfP for a particular State budget appropriation item, under which expenditure of EU structural assistance is planned, the State Treasury of the Ministry of Finance will transfer the amount of EU structural assistance funds specified in the RfP from a single treasury account directly to the final beneficiary. Thus, transparency of the cycle of movement of EU funds down to final beneficiaries shall be ensured by the mentioned several key measures:
After EU structural assistance is integrated into the State budget, during its payment the
general control measures for payment of the State budget funds shall be applied;
EU funds, using STFIS, will be transferred directly to final beneficiaries, thus enhancing the
performance of the audit trail principle, also allowing to implement the principle laid down in
the Regulation, stating that EU funds have to reach the final beneficiary as soon as possible,
in a most effective manner;
The system will ensure that in all cases EU funds for final beneficiaries will be transferred only
after verification and validation of amounts eligible for financing from EU structural
assistance funds by the procedure established by the Coordinating Body (MRDEUF) and
instructions of the Managing Authority.
STFIS will also ensure that all interest accrued on EU structural assistance transferred to Croatia in advance will be designated for the implementation of this operational programme as public national co-financing. Flowchart of financial flows is presented in the Annex 5.
4.6 Information and Publicity
Information and publicity actions of the OP “Environment” will be included in the Communication Plan (CP) prepared in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1828/2006, having the following aims:
- to raise public awareness on EU Cohesion Policy and on the opportunities offered by the Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund in Croatia;
- to highlight the role played by the European Union in co-financing the OP “Environment” activities, in supporting Croatia’s economic competitiveness, in fostering economic development and reducing regional disparities;
- to raise public awareness on OP “Environment” and its objectives, priority axes, mechanisms;
- to inform the (potential) beneficiaries on the conditions of eligibility for financing under OP “Environment”, procedures for examining applications for funding and of the timeframe foreseen, criteria for selecting the operations to be financed, contacts at national, regional or local level providing information on the OP;
- to disseminate information on approved and financed projects as well as on results achieved and best practices;
- to ensure access to information to all target groups;
68
- to ensure maximum comprehensibility of the information provided to the public on Funds’ allocation and management.
The following target groups have been identified for the information and communication actions of the OP “Environment”:
a) the general public
b) the (potential) beneficiaries
c) opinion leaders and the media, with particular reference to: leading economic and financial newspapers, leading TV and radio stations; key local media
d) the “partners for communication”, i.e. all those bodies that can help the Managing Authority and Intermediate Bodies to disseminate information widely.
Beneficiaries will be informed about their responsibilities, such as: informing the public about the assistance obtained from the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, displaying billboards, permanent explanatory plaques and the emblem of the European Union referred to in Art. 8 of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1828/2006, complying with the technical characteristics of information and publicity measures referred to in Art. 9 of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1828/2006.
The beneficiaries shall also be informed that their projects are part of a priority axis in an Operational Programme co-financed by the Cohesion Fund that their names, the name of the operations and the amount of public funding that is allocated to the operations will be published.
The tasks of the OP “Environment” Monitoring Committee with relation to information and publicity issues include adopting the Communication Plan and monitoring its implementation. Communication and publicity measures will be subject to regular evaluations carried out by the Managing Authority and Monitoring Committee. The Coordinating Body shall ensure the coordination of communication activities among institutions engaged in information and publicity activities for all the OPs across the Structural Funds system.
Managing Authority ensures the with the requirements stipulated in the Art 69 of the SF Regulation 1083/2006 and implements the information and visibility measures as defined in the communication plan prepared by the Coordinating Body
Intermediate Bodies level 1 and 2 jointly implements information and visibility measures as defined in the communication plan prepared by the Coordinating Body, with special attention on the measures intended for the beneficiaries
Tasks and operations envisaged under the CAP are specified in the “Technical Assistance” priority axis of the OP.
4.7 Management and Information System (MIS)
In view of accumulation, summarising and presenting the data of the ERDF, ESF and Cohesion funds, Croatia uses a single Management Information System (MIS). The scope of the Management Information System is twofold and its purpose is to manage operational programmes and projects, as well as to serve as financial control mechanism to enable the smooth processing of payments. The MIS ensures that all the data, necessary for financial management, monitoring, supervision, audit and evaluation are collected and secured as required by the General and Implementation Regulations. MIS provides a possibility to monitor the operational data and financial information on:
- implementation of separate projects, financed from Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund; - progress of implementation of separate operational programmes; - general progress of implementation of the assistance under the Convergence Objective; - verifications of results, detected irregularities, and audit.
MIS facilitates implementation of the following functions: 1. Management: placement of the data on financial plans and indicators of operational programmes into computer system, forecasts and monitoring of financial plans and indicators, supervision of obligations and execution of payment plans, control of the N+2/N+3 rule.
69
2. Administration: project registration, administration of agreements, forecasts on projects implementation and supervision of their execution, registration of verification results, control of eligibility of expenditure and payment. This function also includes the provision of accumulated data enabling for an easy identification of project implementation and payments problems. 3. Accountability: provision of information on progress of projects, elaboration of summaries for reports, provision of information on the expenditure, collection of information necessary for execution of control, audit, evaluations, submission of reports to the Commission via electronic media (for audit purposes, pursuant to the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006) The system allows for a multi-user group environment with distinct roles and tasks. MIS is managed centrally by the Coordinating Body (MRDEUF) and developed in co-operation with other institutions; managing authorities, responsible ministries (Intermediate body 1), agencies (Intermediate body 2), certifying and audit authority. The system issues numbers of standard and customised reports to meet the needs of the various data groups, both on an ad hoc and/or regular basis. It is envisaged that data placement commence in July 2013. This system ensures the data transmission between Managing Authority and the European Commission (as foreseen in Article 60 (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006).
70
SECTION 5: FINANCIAL TABLES
5.1 Annual commitments
Operational programme reference (CCI number):
Year by source for the programme, in EUR:
Year / Source Cohesion Fund
2007 16 999 500
2008 12 780 156
2009 18 500 250
2010 21 300 000
2011 21 900 000
2012 28 105 890
2013 161 513 215
In total 2007-2013 281 099 011
5.2 Total Financial Allocation
The table bellow demonstrates the financial plan of the OP, giving for the whole programming period, the amount of the total financial allocation of each fund in the operational programme, the national counterpart and the rate of reimbursement by priority axis.
Operational programme reference (CCI number):
Priority axes by source of funding, in EUR:
Priority axis Fund
Community Contribution
National resources
Indicative breakdown of national resources
Resources in total
Level of co-
financing
For
information National public
resources
National private
resources
a b = c + d c d f = a/e EIB Other
PA 1. WASTE CF 73 944 906 13 049 105 13 049 105 86 994 011 85
PA 2. WATER CF 199 094 853 35 134 386 35 134 386 234 229 239 85
PA 3. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CF 8 059 252 1 422 224 1 422 224 9 481 476 85
In total CF 281 099 011 49 605 715 49 605 715 330 704 726 85
71
5.3 Indicative Breakdown of the Community Contribution per Category
OPE contains the indicative breakdown of funds allocation by categories in line with the provisions of Articles 37, par.1 (d) of the Council regulation No. 1083/2006 and according to the Commission Regulation No. 1828/2006. The categorization represents the ex-ante estimation on the use of the funds under OPE; the categories considered are the codes by dimension (Priority Theme, Form of finance and Territory type), as they are listed in Annex II of the Commission Regulation No. 1828/2006.
Commission reference No: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Name of the programme: Operational Programme “Environment”
Date of the last Commission decision for the operational programme concerned: …/…/…
Code * Priority theme dimension EU contribution (€)
Environmental protection and risk prevention
44 Management of household and industrial waste 61 784 906
45 Management and distribution of water (drinking water) 15 927 588
46 Water treatment (waste water) 183 167 265
50 Rehabilitation of industrial sites and contaminated land 12 160 000
Technical assistance
85 Preparation, implementation, monitoring and inspection 7 079 252
86 Evaluation and studies; information and communication 980 000
Code * Form of finance dimension EU contribution (€)
01 Non – repayable aid 281 099 011
Code * Territory type (territorial dimension) EU contribution (€)
00 Non applicable 281 099 011
* The categories are coded for each dimension using the standard classification.
72
Annexes
Annex 1: Sector Analysis Supplementary Information and Statistics
MUNICIPAL WASTE
Table 8: Quantity of produced municipal waste in 2011 in Croatia by counties
County Total amount
of collected
(generated)
municipal
waste (t)
Share of the
County (of
total
collected
waste) (%)
Mixed
municipal
waste (t)
Separately
collected from
municipal waste
(t)
Sent for
recovery (t)
Sent for disposal
(D1) (t)
1.Zagrebačka 74.859 5,0 65.160 9.698 2.562 69.556
2. Krapinsko - zagorska 23.955 1,6 21.641 2.314 488 21.282
3. Sisačko - moslavačka 55.068 3,6 52.652 2.415 430 54.170
4. Karlovačka 51.879 3,4 45.192 6.688 1.184 50.136
5. Varaždinska 35.041 2,3 29.821 5.220 4.934 28.457
6. Koprivničko - križevačka 20.406 1,3 19.259 1.147 917 18.731
7. Bjelovarsko - bilogorska 31.871 2,1 30.140 1.730 652 31.219
8. Primorsko - goranska 129.513 8,6 102.230 27.283 10.910 117.224
9. Ličko - senjska 30.041 2,0 29.394 647 634 29.394
10. Virovitičko - podravska 29.668 2,0 26.729 2.939 2.347 27.321
11. Požeško - slavonska 14.040 0,9 13.006 1.034 507 13.533
12. Brodsko - posavska 50.514 3,3 47.044 3.469 2.819 47.302
13. Zadarska 87.242 5,8 82.478 4.764 1.108 86.119
14. Osječko - baranjska 83.947 5,6 78.833 5.114 3.026 80.921
15. Šibensko - kninska 50.543 3,3 47.026 3.517 1.153 49.375
16. Vukovarsko - srijemska 43.142 2,9 41.825 1.318 959 42.183
17. Splitsko - dalmatinska 204.025 13,5 181.301 22.724 2.379 201.646
18. Istarska 115.124 7,6 101.002 14.123 6.828 108.196
19. Dubrovačko -
neretvanska 61.333 4,1 53.435 7.898 4.452 56.869
20. Međimurska 18.258 1,2 13.535 4.722 4.055 12.645
21. Grad Zagreb 301.170 19,9 225.021 76.149 22.196 278.944
Estimations and additionally
determinated amounts80 133.657 70.518 63.139 62.414 70.536
Total: 1.645.295 100 1.377.242 268.053 136.955 1.495.758
Source: Croatian Environment Agency
80
Estimations of waste quantities for population not covered by organized collection of waste and for municipalities for which data were not submitted. Additionally determinated amounts which were reported on the questionnaires not intended for reporting data on municipal waste in to the Environmental Pollution Registry (EPR).
73
EE WASTE Table 9: Quantity of collected EE waste in 2010 and in 2011 in Croatia by counties
County Collected EE
waste 2010 (t)
Share of the County (of total
collected EE waste) (%)
Kg per inhabitant 2010
Collected EE waste
2011 (t)
Share of the County (of total
collected EE waste) (%)
Kg per inhabitant 2011
Zagrebačka i Grad Zagreb
6 437,54 36,27 5,91 7 307,02 41,71 6,71
Krapinsko - zagorska 823,13 4,64 5,78 920,48 5,25 6,46
Sisačko - moslavačka
273,27 1,54 1,47 187,66 1,07 1,01
Karlovačka
347,26 1,96 2,45 250,41 1,43 1,77
Varaždinska
365,79 2,06 1,98 360,07 2,06 1,95
Koprivničko - križevačka
189,06 1,07 1,52 145,75 0,83 1,17
Bjelovarsko - bilogorska
107,78 0,61 0,81 96,02 0,55 0,72
Primorsko - goranska
2 045,89 11,53 6,70 1 618,36 9,24 5,30
Ličko - senjska
67,48 0,38 1,26 93,36 0,53 1,74
Virovitičko - podravska
196,76 1,11 2,11 158,88 0,91 1,70
Požeško - slavonska
72,63 0,41 0,85 101,76 0,58 1,19
Brodsko - posavska
1 177,36 6,63 6,66 872,86 4,98 4,94
Zadarska
224,95 1,27 1,39 330,07 1,88 2,04
Osječko - baranjska
1 173,83 6,61 3,55 1 096,76 6,26 3,32
Šibensko - kninska
278,39 1,57 2,47 428,81 2,45 3,80
Vukovarsko - srijemska
481,57 2,71 2,35 587,98 3,36 2,87
Splitsko - dalmatinska
1 222,36 6,89 2,64 1 187,07 6,78 2,56
Istarska
890,94 5,02 4,32 627,73 3,58 3,04
Dubrovačko - neretvanska
1 166,46 6,57 9,49 971,34 5,54 7,91
Međimurska
205,19 1,16 1,73 176,00 1,00 1,49
TOTAL:
17 747,64 100,00 4,00 17 518,39 100,00 3,95
Source: Croatian Environment Agency
74
LUBRICANT AND EDIBLE WASTE OILS Table 10: Quantity of collected lubricant edible waste oils in period 2007 – 2011 in Croatia
Type of waste oils Quantity of collected lubricant and edible waste oils (tones)
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
lubricant waste oils 6 115,27 7 068,22 6 784,47 6 639,81 6 391,00
eatable waste oils 1 132,28 1 605,93 2 145,07 1 260,38 1 195,92
Source: Croatian Environment Agency
WASTE BATTERIES AND ACCUMULATORS Table 11: Quantity of collected waste batteries and accumulators in 2010 and 2011 in Croatia by Counties
County
Collected waste batteries and accumulators
2010 (t)
Share of the County (of total collected waste
batteries and accumulators) (%)
Collected waste batteries and accumulators
2011 (t)
Share of the County (of total collected waste
batteries and accumulators) (%)
Zagrebačka i Grad Zagreb 1 862,63 22,47 2 093,93 24,69
Krapinsko-zagorska 39,23 0,47 111,15 1,31
Sisačko-moslavačka 133,94 1,62 136,40 1,61
Karlovačka 417,45 5,04 360,80 4,25
Varaždinska 470,52 5,68 489,42 5,77
Koprivničko-križevačka 2 570,43 31,01 2 316,62 27,32
Bjelovarsko-bilogorska 268,02 3,23 186,44 2,20
Primorsko-goranska 481,20 5,80 621,40 7,33
Ličko-senjska 57,29 0,69 76,21 0,90
Virovitičko-podravska 48,03 0,58 21,12 0,25
Požeško-slavonska 40,14 0,48 41,63 0,49
Brodsko-posavska 86,93 1,05 59,69 0,70
Zadarska 63,53 0,77 100,83 1,19
Osječko-baranjska 490,60 5,92 434,14 5,12
Šibensko-kninska 178,11 2,15 59,87 0,71
Vukovarsko-srijemska 132,49 1,60 180,40 2,13
Splitsko-dalmatinska 262,03 3,16 233,39 2,75
Istarska 388,16 4,68 509,30 6,01
Dubrovačko-neretvanska 48,15 0,58 108,21 1,28
Međimurska 251,42 3,03 339,26 4,00
TOTAL:
8 290,30 100,00 8 480,21 100,00
Source: Croatian Environment Agency
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE Table 12: Quantity of estimated amounts of produced construction and demolition waste in Croatia by counties
County
Estimated amounts of produced construction and demolition waste 2001-2005 (t)
Share of the County (of total estimated amounts of produced construction and demolition waste) (%)
Estimated amounts of produced construction and demolition waste 2006 – 2015 (t)
Share of the County (of total estimated amounts of produced construction and demolition waste) (%)
Zagrebačka 78 992 6,30 111 027 4,73
Krapinsko-zagorska 36 329 2,90 51 062 2,18
Sisačko-moslavačka 47 285 3,77 66 462 2,83
Karlovačka 36 165 2,88 50 831 2,17
75
Varaždinska 47 128 3,76 66 240 2,82
Koprivničko-križevačka 31 747 2,53 44 622 1,90
Bjelovarsko-bilogorska 43 957 3,50 45 269 1,93
Primorsko-goranska 113 329 9,04 246 132 10,49
Ličko-senjska 19 912 1,59 43 245 1,84
Virovitičko-podravska 30 846 2,46 31 767 1,35
Požeško-slavonska 28 350 2,26 29 196 1,24
Brodsko-posavska 58 385 4,66 60 127 2,56
Zadarska 48 531 3,87 99 171 4,23
Osječko-baranjska 109 164 8,70 112 423 4,79
Šibensko-kninska 33 810 2,70 69 089 2,95
Vukovarsko-srijemska 67 634 5,39 69 653 2,97
Splitsko-dalmatinska 138 866 11,07 283 768 12,10
Istarska 76 545 6,10 166 242 7,09
Dubrovačko-neretvanska 36 798 2,93 75 196 3,21
Međimurska 30 206 2,41 42 456 1,81
Grad Zagreb 140 175 11,18 581 298 24,79
TOTAL: 1 254 154 100,00 2 345 276 100,00
Source: LIFE -THIRD COUNTRIES 2005 project “Development of sustainable system for management of construction waste”
Figure 4: Landfilling of municipal waste by countries
76
Figure 5: Municipal waste generation and treatment, by type of treatment method (kg per capita)
Source: Eurostat
Figure 6: The overview of the percentage of population connected to public water supply in EU and other countries
Source: Eurostat
77
Figure 7: Overview of the percentage of population connected to urban waste water collecting system in EU and other countries
Source: Eurostat
78
Annex 2: Ex ante Evaluation report
Uploaded through SFC20007 “Associated documents”
The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of the Consultant and can in no way be
taken to reflect the views of the European Union.
79
Annex 3: Strategic Environmental Assessment Report
Uploaded through SFC20007 “Associated documents”
80
Annex 4: State Aid Guidelines for the OPE 2007 – 2013
State aid – Priority axis 1 - Developing waste management infrastructure for establishing an integrated waste management system in Croatia
Measure 1.1: Establishment of new waste management centres at county and regional levels
Collection and disposal of municipal waste is the competence of public authorities (usually self-government entities or special utility companies created by public authority to manage the waste). Building, re-building and modernization of waste infrastructure is performed on condition of natural or legal monopoly and as such do not involve state aid, independently of the fact is it public authority, public company or agency. The construction of infrastructure facilities such as regional and/or county-level waste management centres primarily for municipal and non-hazardous waste including mechanical-biological treatment, transfer stations and recycling yards as associated infrastructure to the waste management centres will not involve state aid at no level of granting as long as the beneficiaries are counties and county / regional utility companies responsible for waste management and Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund.
Such a monopoly does not exist in a case of activities relating to the receipts and shipments of waste by means of transport, such as garbage trucks and sanitation trucks, and on the recovery and disposal of waste. Co-financing of projects related to such activities, in particular through the acquisition or modernization of such means of transport or the construction, expansion, reconstruction or modernization of facilities for the management of waste is a state aid.
In case of aid for the acquisition or modernization of transport vehicles, the scheme dedicated for such activities (aid for acquisition of new transport vehicles which go beyond Community standards or which increase the level of environmental protection in the absence of Community standards) can be used (800/2008 Regulation)
81
These considerations do not apply to projects in the waste management industry. Conducting such a waste management is not for the public, is a natural part of the operation of industrial enterprises. Co-financing of this kind of projects is therefore a state aid.
Measure 1.2: Elimination of sites highly polluted by waste.
For that measure the above mentioned information regarding measure 1.1 remains valid.
State aid – Priority Axis 2 – Protecting Croatia’s water resources through improved water supplies & an integrated wastewater management
Measure 2.1 Establishment of modern water supply systems and networks
Operations undertaken under the Measure 2.1 concern: construction or refurbishment of public water supply networks; investments in public water treatment facilities at the regional and local level, detection and elimination of leakage; provision of adequate water conditioning of drinking water through water treatment plants in cases of inadequate water quality distributed by public water supply systems; supply of metering, leakage detection equipment and laboratory equipment.
In case of co-financing public infrastructure of the mentioned kind which after completion is going to be used by the population of the given county / municipality, it will involve no state aid.
Measure 2.2 Construction of wastewater treatment plants for domestic and industrial wastewaters and upgrading sewerage network
This measure includes operations such as extension of waste water collection networks; construction of new waste water treatment plants and/or refurbishment / upgrading of existing waste water treatment plants; construction and rehabilitation of sludge treatment facilities. For this measure, the argument mentioned above for measure 2.1 applies by analogy.
81 Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General block exemption Regulation)
81
Annex 5: Financial Flows
Bank payment order to transfer EU structural assistance and national co-financing
Information about compliance of expenditures declared in accordance to the controls of established system
Beneficiaries
Croatian National Bank
European Commission
State Treasury of the Ministry of Finance
Certifying Authority National Fund Department of the
Ministry of Finance
Single account of the State Treasury
ERDF account
ESF account
Cohesion Fund account
Implementing agencies – intermediate bodies 2
Payment application, supporting documents
Responsible ministries – intermediate bodies 1
Expenditure verification report for transfer of funds
Request for payment to the State Treasury
Transfer of funds
Information about transfer of funds
Information about transfer of funds
Applications for payment to EC
Transfer of EU structural assistance and national co-financing
Information flow Transfer of funds
Information about payments received from EC
Managing Authority (Operational Programme)
Instructions for implementation of delegated tasks to verify expenditures
Supporting documents
Information about submitted payment declarations
Statement of expenditure
Audit institution
Information about audits carried out
Statement of expenditure
Coordinating
Body