7th Annual Conference, Budapest, 9–11 September 1999
of the European Environmental Advisory Councils EEAC
EU Eastern Enlargement and
European Environmental Policy
Hosted by The Hungarian National Council on the Environment (OKT)
The Eastern Enlargement of the
European Union and Environmental Policy:
Challenges, Expectations, Speed and Flexibility
Alexander Carius |
Background Papers 161K |
Background Papers 46K |
To be published in: Katharina Holzinger and Peter Knoepfel
(eds.) 1999: Environmental Policy in a European Union of Variable Geometry?
The Challenge of the Next Enlargement.
Basel: Helbig&Lichtenhahn (forthcoming)
1 Introduction
At the June 1993 European Summit in Copenhagen it was decided that the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) associated with the EU can, in principle, accede to the EU. An indispensable precondition of accession, however, is that the candidate countries meet the ‘Copenhagen Criteria’. These criteria are a stable democracy, the rule of law, an appropriate standard of human rights, and the protection of minorities. A functioning market economy which can guarantee that the accession countries are capable of withstanding economic competition within the EU is considered to be a further central requirement. Finally, acceding states must be able to take on the obligations of EU membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union. To date, ten CEECs – the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – have concluded association agreements with, and applied for membership of the EU. All ten countries have been included in the European Union’s intensified pre-accession strategy under whose auspices they receive various forms of support in their efforts to meet the preconditions of accession. In March 1998 accession negotiations formally began with Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia and Estonia (the ‘pre-ins’) which, in the opinion of the European Council, already meet the essential criteria laid out above. The Eastern enlargement of the EU differs from earlier accessions in two fundamental ways. On the one hand, there are ‘quantitative’ differences:
- With ten CEECs as well as Cyprus and Malta, the number of candidate countries is substantially higher than for previous accessions (until now only one, two or at most three countries acceded simultaneously to the EU);
- The acquis communautaire, the EU’s legal corpus, which must be adopted by the accession countries is substantially more comprehensive than at the time of the EU’s Southern enlargement in the mid-80's – particularly as a result of the increased harmonisation in recent years as necessitated by the creation of the internal market;
- The economic disparity between current EU member states and the accession countries is considerably greater than with previous accessions. This is particularly the case for countries such as Romania and Bulgaria whose gross national product (GNP) per capita lies far below the EU average. As these countries have limited economic capacities, problems could arise both in transposing existing Community laws and passing new laws, for example in cases where the transposition of specific pieces of legislation requires substantial investments. Additionally, the fact that countries with highly developed economies – e.g. Germany, Austria and Italy – border on substantially less developed accession countries could lead to difficulties in both the accession negotiations and later membership. In this context, the issue of workforce migration is currently the subject of controversial debate.
In addition to these ‘quantitative’ differences between the EU’s Eastern enlargement programme and previous enlargements one can also distinguish a number of ‘qualitative’ differences:
- Since previous enlargements, European legislation has not only become more and more but has also changed in terms of its content and scope. On the one hand, EC law covers a greater range of policy areas than ever before. This is most evident in the field of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). However, even within specific sectors EC law has started to place greater demands on the member state institutions responsible for its implementation. This is particularly evident in the field of environmental policy where the Community now relies more heavily on procedural rules (for example, participation and information requirements) and pays special attention to the administrative preconditions for integrating environmental policy with other relevant policy areas. These increased requirements are coupled with a shift in emphasis of EU environmental policy towards the effective implementation of existing legislation.
- The EU urgently needs to reform both its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the methods it uses to calculate the extent of member states’ financial contributions. Although the urgency of the required changes is doubtless partially a consequence of the planned enlargement, reform is also necessitated by factors independent of enlargement; in particular, German reunification and the efforts of the US and other countries to globally liberalise agricultural markets.
- The process of Eastern enlargement is underpinned by a very strong foreign policy imperative. Spanish, Portuguese and Greek accession were certainly also motivated by foreign policy goals – i. e. the need to reinforce infant democracies. However, in the case of the EU’s Eastern enlargement this goal is coupled with security concerns which have assumed great importance, since the breakdown of the Warsaw Pact and the ensuing dramatic geo-political developments in Central and Eastern Europe. The current political developments and military escalation in the Balkans underline the necessity for political stability in Europe.
- A very pertinent qualitative difference to previous European enlargements is the fact that the accession countries are still going through a process of political and economic transformation. Not only do these countries have to adopt the acquis communautaire, but they must also, and more or less simultaneously, fundamentally reform their economic and legal institutions by, among other things, introducing new regimes of ownership, privatisation and the dismantling of heavy state subsidies
These observations show that the EU’s Eastern enlargement programme is taking place under substantially more difficult conditions than any previous enlargements. On the one hand, the foreign policy goal of the stabilisation of Central and Eastern European democracies and their alignment to the West implies a need to complete enlargement as quickly as possible. On the other hand, the relatively high number of candidate countries, their economic situations, the increased scope and administrative requirements of the acquis, the urgent need for reform of specific EU policies and practices and the ongoing economic, social and political upheaval in the accession countries all speak in favour of an Eastern enlargement programme with a relatively long timescale which allows for careful preparation. In addition to the factors mentioned above one should also consider that Eastern enlargement will not only intensify existing EU problems – such as the need to reform the CAP and the issue of member states’ contributions – but also create new ones.
In substantive terms this will particularly affect EU structural policy. If the financial mechanisms currently in place were to continue unchanged after enlargement this would place a substantially increased burden on current member states. Eastern enlargement therefore also necessitates a rethinking of the Structural Funds. In this context it is worth noting that the means used by the Community to successfully incorporate the Southern countries into the EU – substantial compensation payments from the Structural Funds and the creation of the Cohesion Fund – are, as a result of restricted financial capacity, no longer open to the EU for Eastern enlargement.
This is particularly relevant for environmental policy as, in the case of Southern enlargement, it was the creation of the Cohesion Fund which made it possible for the Southern countries to meet their obligations in implementing European environmental law. Eastern enlargement also raises new problems for the EU’s decision-making mechanisms. The increased number of member states participating in the Council of Ministers would greatly increase the risk of deadlock in the decision-making process if the existing rules, which require either unanimity or a qualified majority, were not substantially modified. Similarly, a significant increase in the number of Commissioners is likely to reduce the efficiency of decision-making procedures and administrative arrangements in the European Commission. Yet, if the number of Commissioners remained constant after enlargement it would no longer be possible for each member state to nominate a Commissioner (or, in the case of the most populous member states, two Commissioners). In view of these problems the Treaty of Amsterdam provides for an intergovernmental conference to be held no later than one year after the total membership of the EU exceeds twenty countries. The purpose of the conference is to consider and initiate the necessary reforms to EU institutions.
Some of the challenges arising from Eastern enlargement mentioned above can, however, be perceived not as problems but as political opportunities for the EU. For example, the need to reform the CAP has long been recognised and could – due to the fact that Eastern enlargement seems almost unthinkable without a drastically changed CAP – finally receive the necessary impetus to overcome institutional and member state inertia. A similar argument could certainly be made for reform of the EU decision-making mechanisms and institutions. Having sketched the general problems and opportunities raised by Eastern enlargement, the remainder of this article will concentrate on the implications of enlargement for European environmental policy.
In this context the conclusion reached by the European Commission – that as far as Community environmental law is concerned, no accession country will be in a position to meet in total the obligations laid down in the acquis in the near future might give cause for scepticism, particularly as this level of pessimism is unparalleled for any other area of Community law. This begs the question which problems specific to the environmental sector lead the Commission to such a prognosis, and further: Despite these problems what are the possibilities for ensuring the greatest possible level of compliance with Community environmental legislation in an expanded European Union? From a point of view which focuses less on complete implementation of the acquis than the Commission does, it is possible to see enlargement as a unique opportunity to develop and benefit from a ‘pan-European’ environmental policy, where Europe is understood as encompassing both Eastern and Western Europe. For example, the marginal costs for the reduction of environmental pollution in the accession countries are, as a result of the generally lower environmental protection and price levels, substantially lower in the CEECs than in the current EU member states.
This raises the question of how this can best be exploited to promote pan-European environmental policy goals in the process of Eastern enlargement. The environmental opportunities and problems of enlargement can be discussed against this background, in particular the question of how to find ways of minimising the problems which the accession countries face in adopting the acquis, while at the same time maximising the environmental advantages of Eastern enlargement from a pan-European perspective. To this end the second section of this article looks more closely at the relationship between Eastern enlargement and European environmental policy. Section 3 deals with the EU’s pre-accession strategy which could serve as an important point of departure for developing measures to integrate environmental aspects into the process of accession.
In section 4 a brief discussion of important characteristics of the environmental situation in the accession countries and the ensuing adaptation requirements provides the background for considering ways of minimising the repercussions of the accession countries failing – as is highly likely – to fully comply with the environmental obligations laid out in the acquis at the time of their accession to the EU. Section 5 deals primarily with the urgent need for institutional change in the EU arising from Eastern enlargement. A controlled but flexible approach towards the accession process and the future shaping of European environmental policy is sketched out. The final section of the paper discusses possible ways of minimising the problems which the accession countries face in adopting the environmental acquis, while at the same time ensuring a high level of environmental protection in these countries.
Copyright © 2000-2004 by European Environment and Sustainable Development Advisory Councils, Den Haag. All Rights Reserved.