environmental snapshot of south eastern...

Environmental Snapshot of South Eastern Europe

REReP Country Profiles

Environmental Snapshot ofSouth Eastern Europe

REReP Country Profiles

EditorYordanka Minkova

Szentendre, HungaryMarch 2006

This publication was funded by the European Commission CARDS programme and the Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway

E N V I R O N M E N T A L S N A P S H O T O F S O U T H E A S T E R N E U R O P E2

About the REC

The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) is a non-partisan, non-advocacy, not-for-profit international organisation with a mission to assist in solving environmental problems in Central and Eastern Europe

(CEE). The REC fulfils this mission by promoting cooperation among non-governmental organisations, governments,businesses and other environmental stakeholders, and by supporting the free exchange of information and public

participation in environmental decision making.The REC was established in 1990 by the United States, the European Commission and Hungary. Today, the REC islegally based on a charter signed by the governments of 28 countries and the European Commission, and on an

international agreement with the government of Hungary. The REC has its head office in Szentendre, Hungary, andcountry offices and field offices in 16 beneficiary countries which are: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Poland,

Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey.Recent donors are the European Commission and the governments of Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands,Norway, Poland, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, as

well as other inter-governmental and private institutions.The entire contents of this publication are copyright

©2006 by the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

No part of this publication may be sold in any form or reproduced for salewithout prior written permission of the copyright holder

ISBN: 963 9638 05 6

Published by:The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

Ady Endre ut 9-11, 2000 Szentendre, HungaryTel: (36-26) 504-000, Fax: (36-26) 311-294

Website: <www.rec.org>

This and all REC publications are printed on recycled paper or paper producedwithout the use of chlorine or chlorine-based chemicals

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

E N V I R O N M E N T A L S N A P S H O T O F S O U T H E A S T E R N E U R O P E 3

Foreword 5

Acknowledgements 7

Introduction 9

Abbreviations 10

Map of the Region 12

Environmental Profiles 13

Albania 13

Bosnia and Herzegovina 23

Croatia 39

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 51

Serbia and Montenegro 63


The Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP)undoubtedly constitutes the key policy framework forachieving stability in the South Eastern Europe regionthrough steadily closer association with the EuropeanUnion and the clear prospect of membership.

The efforts carried out by the countries in the pastyears have already yielded significant results. Theregion is becoming more stable and its countries areengaged in ambitious political and economic reformprogrammes based on EU law and practice.

In this context, the regional approach is essential toaddress the problems faced by the South EasternEurope countries. The Regional Environmental Recon-struction Programme has played a significant role inhelping these countries to work towards commongoals. Since its launch in 2000, the Regional Environ-mental Reconstruction Programme has successfully car-ried out a number of initiatives, ranging from strength-ening environmental compliance and enforcement to

supporting the environmental NGO movement orenhancing cross-border cooperation.

Of course, there is still a long way ahead of us toattain EU environmental standards for all South EasternEurope citizens, but the process is well underway andthe results obtained so far reflect the motivation anddynamism of both the EU and the countries concerned.

I welcome this publication as a tool giving us a bet-ter knowledge and understanding of the environmentalstate of play and priorities of the South Eastern Europecountries and thus helping us to target our futureactions in the region.

Stavros DimasCommissioner

BrusselsMarch 2006

Foreword from the European Commissioner for Environment


This publication was prepared by the Secretariat ofthe Regional Environmental Reconstruction Pro-gramme with input from the ministries of environmentof the countries, and comments and feedback from DGEnvironment of the European Commission.

The publication was edited, compiled and coordi-nated by Yordanka Minkova, REReP project managerof the Regional Environmental Center.

As this publication was undertaken with considerablyvaried input from many people, the list below serves toacknowledge the work of all contributors by chapter.The editor apologises for the involuntary omission of anyindividual who contributed to the publication.

AbaniaEdit Nordgaard, Project Manager, RECMihallaq Qirjo, Director, REC CO AlbaniaAlken Myftiu, Project Manager, REC CO AlbaniaNarin Panariti, Director, Policy, Integration andLegislation Department, Ministry of Environment,Forestry and Water Administration of Albania

Bosnia and HerzegovinaEdit Nordgaard, Project Manager, RECNesad Seremet , Director, REC CO Bosnia andHerzegovinaInka Sehovic, Information Manager, REC CO Bosniaand Herzegovina Sunita Selak, Project Manager, REC CO Bosnia andHerzegovina Jasna Draganic, Project Manager, REC CO Bosnia andHerzegovinaDjordje Stefanovic, Head, REC FO Banja LukaZdravko Begovic, Assistant Minister, Ministry ofPhysical Planning, Civil Engineering and Ecology ofRepublika SrpskaMehmed Cero, Assistant Minister, Federal Ministry ofPhysical Planning and Environment, Federation ofBosnia and HerzegovinaAndja Hadziabdic , Direction for Roads of theFederation of Bosnia and HerzegovinaOrs Marczin, Project Manager, REC

Karin J. Shepardson, Senior Operations Officer, theWorld BankRita Klees, Senior Environmental Engineer, Europeand Central Asia Region Environmental & SociallySustainable Development Unit, the World Bank

Croatia Edit Nordgaard, Project Manager, RECIrena Brnada, Director, REC CO CroatiaMirjana Papafava , Head, Department of EUIntegration and International Projects, Ministry ofEnvironment, Physical Planning and Construction ofCroatiaTheodor Klobucar, Expert Advisor, Department ofEU Integration and International Projects, Ministry ofEnvironment, Physical Planning and Construction ofCroatiaKarin J. Shepardson, Senior Operation Officer, theWorld Bank

Former Yugoslav Republic of MacedoniaEdit Nordgaard, Project Manager, RECKornelja Radovanovic, Project Manager, REC COformer Yugoslav Republic of MacedoniaOrs Marczin, Project Manager, RECGordana Kozuharova, Head of European IntegrationDepartment, Ministry of Environment and PhysicalPlanningJadranka Ivanova, Head of Department, Ministry ofEnvironment and Physical PlanningKaja Sukova, Head of Department, Ministry ofEnvironment and Physical PlanningMargarita Matlievska, Assistant Head of Department,Ministry of Environment and Physical PlanningBiljana Puleska, Councillor, Ministry of Environmentand Physical PlanningSaso Sekulovski, Assistant Head of Department,Ministry of Environment and Physical PlanningSasko Jordanov, Councillor, Ministry of Environmentand Physical Planning

Acknowledgements

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S


Ljupco Melovski, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Institute of Biology, St. Cyril and Methodious University, SkopjeKarin J. Shepardson, Senior Operations Officer, theWorld Bank

Serbia and MontenegroEdit Nordgaard, Project Manager, REC Srdjan Susic, Deputy Country Director, REC CO,Serbia and MontenegroUros Miloradovic, Project Manager, REC CO, Serbiaand MontenegroMiroslav Spasojevic, Assistant Director, InternationalCooperation and European Integration, Republic of

Serbia, Directorate for Environmental Protection,Ministry of Science and Environmental ProtectionJelena Cvetkovic, Department Head, EuropeanIntegration, Republic of Serbia, Directorate forEnvironmental Protection, Ministry of Science andEnvironmental ProtectionSrna Sudac Viotic, Director, REC FO Montenegro Biljana Djurovic, Head of the Section forInternational Relations, Ministry of Environment andPhysical Planning of the Republic of MontenegroLazarela Kalezic, Senior Advisor, Ministry ofEnvironment and Physical Planning of the Republic ofMontenegroZeqir Veselaj, Director, REC FO Kosovo (territoryunder UN interim administration)


This publication provides a snapshot of the envi-ronmental situation in those countries which are part ofthe Stabilisation Association Process (SAP), focusing onthe priority areas identified by the Regional Environ-mental Reconstruction Programme for South EasternEurope (REReP). It builds upon the first REReP publica-tion, Regional Environmental Reconstruction Pro-gramme (REReP): Building a Better Environment forthe Future for South Eastern Europe, (REC, 2001).1

Structured identically to those previous, these updatedenvironmental country profiles address the REReP pri-orities, aiming to present information in a concise andunderstandable form, highlighting progress andachievements. The country profiles also complementthe recent publication Environmental Reconstructionand EU approximation in South Easter Europe,2 whichcovers REReP achievements in 2003-2005.

A short description of current environmental condi-tions including information on soil, forests, agriculturalland, water, air and biodiversity is given at the begin-ning of each profile. An overview of national environ-mental priorities, economic instruments for environ-ment, and the progress of relations between eachcountry and the European Union is provided. Croatiaand the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia arealready EU candidate countries and Albania, Bosniaand Herzegovina, and Serbia and Montenegro are alsomoving steadily on the path to concluding Stabilisationand Association Agreements and eventual membershipin the EU. The publication also gives brief informationon environmental assistance provided by the EU and

other international financial institutions and donors.The profiles further outline the situation of the

countries under the four priority areas of REReP. Thestate of legal, political and institutional frameworks forenvironmental protection is given, as well as environ-mental policies and strategies. Although at differing lev-els, all of the countries are steadily advancing in har-monising their environmental policies, institutions andstandards with those of the EU. New environmentallaws are adopted and steps are taken to strengtheninstitutions and environmental enforcement bodies. Thenations’ environmental civil societies are also growing,developing expertise and creating focused networks.The state of regional and cross-border cooperation hasbeen enhanced since the beginning of REReP, and thenumber of cross-border memoranda of understanding,agreements and initiatives has rapidly increased.

Yet significant environmental problems whichthreaten human health and biodiversity exist. Whilereal signs of environmental improvement are showing,there are still enormous obstacles to overcome. Theefforts of these countries and their dedication in devel-oping environmental policy and legislation, strengthen-ing state institutions and civil society, and reducingenvironmental pollution should continue.

1 See: www.rec.org/REC/Programs/REREP/rerep_bbe.pdf

2 See: www.rec.org/REC/Programs/REREP/documents/RERePHighlights2005.pdf

Introduction


ASCI Areas of Special Conservation Network

BAT Best Available Techniques

BiH Bosnia and Herzegovina

CADSES Central, Adriatic, Danubian and South-Eastern European Space

CARDS Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation

CEE Central and Eastern Europe

CEI Central European Initiative

DG Directorate General

DISAE Development of Implementation Strategies for Approximation in Environment

DPA Dayton Peace Agreement

EAR European Agency for Reconstruction

EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

EC European Commission

ECNC European Centre for Nature Conservation

EEA European Environment Agency

EECCA Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia

EIA Environmental impact assessment

EIONET European Environment Information and Observation Network

ELPA Environmental Legislation and Planning Project for Albania

EU European Union

FBiH Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina

GEF Global Environment Facility

GMOs Genetically modified organisms

GTZ German Agency for Technical Cooperation

ICTY International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

IEB European Investment Bank

IFIs International Financing Institutions

IMF International Monetary Fund

IPPC Integrated pollution prevention and control

ISG Infrastructure Steering Group

IUCN The World Conservation Union

LEAP Local environmental action plan

Abbreviations

A B B R E V I AT I O N S


LOCP Lake Ohrid Conservation Project

MAFCP Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Consumer's Protection

MEAs Multilateral environmental agreements

MEPP Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning (former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)

MEPPPC Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction of Croatia

MIP Multi-annual Indicative Programme

MoEFWA Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Water Administration of Albania

NEAP National environmental action plan

NESs National environmental strategies

NFP National focal point

NGOs Non-governmental organisations

ODS Ozone depleting substances

OECD Organisation for European Co-operation and Development

OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

PEIP Priority Environmental Investment Programme for South Eastern Europe

POPs Persistent organic pollutants

PRTR Pollution release and transfer register

PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper

REC Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

REAs Regional environmental agencies

REReP Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe

PISG Provisional Institutions of Self-Government

SAP Stabilisation Association Process

SAA Stabilisation Association Agreement

SBA Stand-by-agreement

SEA Strategic environmental assessment

SECI South-Eastern Cooperative Initiative

SEE South Eastern Europe

SEEENN South Eastern European Environmental NGO Network

SEECP South-East European Cooperation Process

STM Stabilization and Association Process Tracking Mechanism

TAIEX Technical Assistance Information Exchange Office

UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

UNMIK United Nations Mission in Kosovo

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

WB World Bank

WHO World Health Organization


ALBANIA

C R O AT I A

BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

SERBIA ANDMONTENEGRO

C Z E C HR E P U B L I C

H U N G A R Y

FORMER YUGOSLAVREPUBLIC OF

MACEDONIA

S L O V A K I A

SLOVENIA

AdriaticSea

A U S T R I A

I TA LY

GREECE


LOCATION

South Eastern Europe, bordering the Adriatic Sea and IonianSea, between Greece and Serbia and Montenegro

AREA

Total: 28,748 sq kmLand: 27,398 sq kmWater: 1,350 sq km

LAND BOUNDARIES

Total: 720 km Borders: Greece 282 km, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia 151 km, Serbia and Montenegro 287 km

CLIMATE

Mild, temperate; cool, cloudy, wet winters; hot, clear, dry sum-mers; interior is cooler and wetter

ELEVATION EXTREMES

Lowest point: Adriatic Sea — 0 mHighest point: Maja e Korabit (Golem Korab) — 2,764

NATURAL RESOURCES

Bauxite, chromites, coal, copper, hydropower, iron ore, naturalgas, nickel, petroleum, salt, timber

NATURAL HAZARDS

Destructive earthquakes; tsunamis occur along southwesterncoast; floods; drought

CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Deforestation; soil erosion; water pollution from industrial anddomestic effluents

MAIN ECONOMIC TRENDS

2002 2003 2004 2005(projected)

Growth in GDP 3.5 6.0 5.9 6.0(real change, in percent)Inflation 5.2 2.4 2.9 2.1(change in consumer priceindex, in percent)Foreign direct investment 135 178 343 288(in million USD)Unemployment rate 15.8 15.0 14.5 n/a

Environmental Profile: Albania

S E R B I A A N DM O N T E N E G R O

A L B A N I A

Tirana

DurresAdriatic

Sea

G R E E C EITALY

Lezhe

Shkoder

0 50 100

kilometres

CROATIA

FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBL IC

OF MACEDONIA

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E : A L B A N I A



IntroductionThe Republic of Albania lies on the western

seaboard of the Balkan Peninsula. One of the smallestcountries in Europe, it has a population of 3.2 million(based on figures from 2004) and a territory of 28,748square kilometres. Of this total land area, 36 percent isforest, 15 percent is pasture, 42 percent is agriculturalland and four percent is covered by lakes. Mountainranges stretch along the northern, eastern and southernfrontiers while in the west, lowlands extend inlandfrom the coast for more than thirty miles. It is this low-land region that harbours the majority of the country’sagricultural resources, as well as most of the large,aging industrial structures established during the com-munist regime and now quickly falling into disrepair orruin. This low-lying area is also the most densely popu-lated in the country, and includes the Albanian capital,Tirana, which has a population of about 245,000.

Albania has a wealth of natural resources, with sixnational parks and 25 World Conservation Union(IUCN)-categorised protected areas of environmentalsignificance covering more than 76,000 hectares. Thecountry boasts a rich spectrum of biodiversity, includ-ing approximately 3,200 flora species and 756 faunaspecies. It also possesses a high diversity of ecosystemsand habitats. Within the territory of Albania are mar-itime ecosystems, coastal zones, lakes, rivers, ever-green bushes, broadleaf bushes, broadleaf forests, pineforests, alpine and sub-alpine pastures and meadows,and high mountain ecosystems.

The central institution responsible for environmentalissues in Albania is the Ministry of Environment,Forestry and Water Administration (MOEFWA). TheInspectorate of Environment represents the structurewithin the MOEFWA and is responsible for decen-tralised environmental protection. Several other min-istries and state bodies also have responsibilities relatedto environmental protection: the Ministry of Agriculture,Food and Consumer Protection (MAFCP); the Ministryof Public Works, Transport and Telecommunications;and regional, municipal and communal governments.

Regional dialogue with neighbouring countries andterritories has been actively pursued, notably in theframework of the Regional Environment Reconstruction

Programme for South Eastern Europe (REReP). Never-theless, the present environmental situation remainsgrave and much more must be done if Albania wishesto prevent its environmental problems from becoming aserious handicap to socioeconomic development.

Current Environmental ConditionsSoil, Forests, Agricultural Land

Agriculture is one of the most important sectors ofthe economy, representing 24.7 percent of grossdomestic product in 2003. Albanian agriculture grewby 2.8 percent in 2003, surpassing the previous year’sgrowth of 2.3 percent. The main drivers of growthwere livestock and arboriculture (representing 4.8 per-cent and 15.5 percent, respectively). However, farmingand livestock production still depend on investmentand especially on credit, both of which would help todevelop technology, raise competitiveness andimprove product quality. A number of institutionalreforms took place in irrigation and drainage in 2003,as well as in the research and extension services of theregional departments of agriculture.

Land degradation in different forms is considered acritical point, with erosion the most widespread phe-nomenon. Approximately 25 percent of the country’stotal surface area suffers erosion at an annual rate of20-30 tonnes per hectare. Land loss is particularlysevere in the area known as zone A (Shkodra, Tropoja,Saranda and Gjirokastra), which loses 52 tonnes perhectare each year.1 Human activities have acceleratedthis rate to 150 tonnes per hectare in some areas.Around 150,000 hectares is misused and degraded,especially abandoned land.2 Contamination of soil bypesticides and chemicals remains relatively low. In2002, 119,726 tonnes of pesticides and chemicals wereused, of which 33,896 tonnes were urea, 46,293 tonneswere ammonium nitrate, and 39,537 tonnes were dia-mon superphosphate.

Although some forests that humans depopulate arerecovering, forestry remains an important issue. A highlevel of illegal cutting, mainly in the northern areas of

Environmental Profile: Albania



the country, still occurs. Intensive harvesting of highaltitude forests (200-250 percent the annual cuttingallowance for about 40 years) has distorted the agestructure of the forests, with young forests dispropor-tionately present.3

WaterThe hydrographic basin of Albania has a total area

of 43,305 square kilometres, from which 28,748 km2, or67 percent, can be found within Albania’s borders.Overall renewable resources amount to 13,300 cubicmetres per capita, of which about 65 percent is gener-ated within Albania, with the remainder coming fromupstream countries. Resources are unevenly distributedthroughout the country.

The major water resource is surface water, found inrivers, lakes and lagoons. Significant rivers are theDrini, Mati, Ishmi, Erzeni, Shkumbini, Semani, Vjosaand Bistrica, and the country is crossed by severalrivers, which form part of six main basins. Albania alsohas a number of natural lakes and manmade lakes forenergy and irrigation. Lakes cover about four percentof the country’s territory.4

Contamination of surface and underground watersis widespread. In the great majority of rivers, there is anotable deficit of dissolved oxygen. In such cases, highvalues of chemical oxygen demand (COD) and of bio-logical oxygen demand (BOD) are generally observed.The rivers most affected by untreated urban sewage arethose of Tirana, Gjanica and Ishmi. Eutrophication isfound in some areas.5

The oil and gas processing industries account forabout 22 percent of overall liquid waste. One exampleis the Gjanica River, in which the waters of oil extrac-tion and processing are discharged, and among themost polluted in Albania. The Gjanica has a phenolcontent of 2.62-3.64 milligrams per litre, COD 131-157milligrams per litre, and BOD 42 milligrams per litre, allof which are far above established standards.

AirAir pollution in Albania remains uncontrolled, and

further deterioration of urban air quality is expectedwith the rapid increase in vehicle imports.

The percentage of diesel vehicles in the fleet isapproximately 85 percent. Accordingly, air qualitymeasurements recording nitrogen oxides concentrationin areas of Tirana with dense traffic have increasedmarkedly in comparison with 15 years ago. Air moni-toring for smoke content in Tirana’s centre and nearFieri’s centre shows an increase in air pollution con-nected directly with emissions of particles from diesel-fuelled vehicles. Tirana contains about 50,000 vehicles,

roughly 30 percent of the country’s total. Suspendedparticulate matter (SPM) and PM 10 are dangerouslyabove the World Health Organization guideline values,and a remarkable increase in nitrogen dioxide andozone has been seen due to the country’s rapidlyincreasing vehicle fleet (Deliu A., Monitoring data2002-2003).

In some areas of the country, and particularly in thecities of Elbasan and Fushe-Kruje, cement plants causeheavy air pollution, discharging huge amounts of par-ticulate matter into the atmosphere and amounting to10 percent of their overall production.

BiodiversityAccording to recent biodiversity assessments, there

are 3,250 higher plant species in Albania — about 30percent of the total in all of Europe — and 2,350species of lower plants, including mosses, algae, andfungi. There are 27 plant species found only in Albaniaand another 160 species endemic to Albania and adja-cent countries. Among the endemic plants are a num-ber of relict species such as Forsythia europa. Albaniais home to 756 vertebrate animal species including 70mammals, 323 birds and 36 reptiles. There are 64species of fish in Albania’s lakes and rivers, and 249species of fish in territorial marine waters.

Albania is home to 91 globally threatened speciesof animals including 21 mammal species, 18 birds,four reptiles, two amphibians, 28 fish, and 18 inverte-brates. Albania’s Red Book for Endangered, Rare, andEndemic Species lists 573 species of animals (includ-ing vertebrates and invertebrates) and 320 species offlowering plants, 45 fungi, and 25 marine plants. Alba-nia also has significant agriculture-related geneticdiversity, with 30 species of food plants native to thecountry, as well as nine local breeds of goats and fivebreeds of sheep.

National Environmental Priorities

Progress has been made by the Albanian Govern-ment in improving the environmental qualities, espe-cially in sensitive and hot spot areas, and in conservingnatural values and resources; however, some main pri-orities identified by the National Environmental ActionPlan (NEAP) 2002 remain of high importance. Thenational environmental priorities cover all environmen-tal components: air quality especially in big cities;water quality especially drinking water and sewagetreatment; soil protection from erosion and loss due tochange of use; and biodiversity due to illegal huntingand habitat loss.



In addition, frequently presented priorities in offi-cial documents and assessments include:

• design of environmental sectoral policies andimplementation of corresponding action plans;

• strengthening the national system of environmentalmanagement and all its components;

• preservation, development and sustainable use ofnatural resources;

• increasing the use renewable resources comparedto non-renewable resources;

• completion and approximation of the legal regula-tory framework with EU guidelines and its enforce-ment;

• strengthening the role of public and civil society;

• sustainable rehabilitation of hot spots and sensitiveenvironmental sites;

• promotion and education of preventive practicesrather than corrective ones;

• the need for environmental impact assessment ofdifferent activities;

• environmental strategic evaluation for plans, pro-grammes and policies;

• active involvement of local government in environ-mental problem areas and increase in legal respon-sibilities;

• strengthening and cooperation of inspectoratespromoting environmental protection, preparationof environmental information and the increase ofaccess by all interested parties;

• promotion of clean production technologies;

• environmental education in schools; and

• public awareness for environmental protection.

National Funds and EconomicInstruments for the Environment

The percentage of the Albanian federal budget allo-cated to the Ministry of Environment was 0.19 percentin 2004-2005, and 0.22 percent in 2003. In absolute fig-ures, this represents approximately EUR 2.46 million for2005, or 0.036 percent of the country’s GDP. Localauthorities have budget allocations that mainly focus oninfrastructure improvement, maintenance of drinkingwater system and sewerage pipelines. Funds allocatedto environmental investment are usually enlisted underservices without much direct reference to environment.

In recent years, Albania has progressed in introduc-ing some economic instruments for the environment.

Numerous laws in place either advocate their use orspecify precise details and charges. These can be divid-ed into those determined and administered at thenational level and the regional level. At the nationallevel, the following laws exist that address economictaxes/charges as well as non-compliance fines.

In the Law on Environmental Protection (Law No.8934, September 5, 2002), the general status of eco-nomic instruments in Albania is summarised. In addi-tion, articles 82 to 87 set out a series of potential envi-ronmental violations, together with fine and adminis-trative arrangements. A total of 15 types of violation aredefined, with fines ranging from ALL 30,000 to1,000,000, which are set by the environmental inspec-torate and enforced in cooperation with the statepolice. Fines are paid to the state budget, and delays inpayment incur an additional 10 percent penalty daily.

Under the Law on Central Taxes (No. 8977, Decem-ber 12, 2002) are three specific environmental taxesrelated to pollution: an import tax on cars to discouragethe more-polluting older and diesel cars; a carbon taxon fuel whereby drivers pay ALL 0.5 per litre for ben-zene and ALL 1 per litre for gasoline; and the plasticcontainer tax, covering all one-time-use plastic containers.

Permits with lease rates are required in the exploita-tion of natural resources, such as excavation for stone,humus, sand, gravel, etc., in forests and riverbeds;wood coal, tinder and lime production; beehive culti-vation; and quarrying.

In the Protection of Wild Fauna and Hunting Law(No. 7875, November 23, 1994), a range of infringe-ments is outlined together with associated fines, up toa maximum of ALL 80,000. Some examples of infrac-tion include hunting without permits; hunting outsidedesignated hunting zones; killing or collecting over thelimit; killing or collecting out of season; and damagingbird nests, eggs or fledglings. The Hunting Associationhas the authority to collect hunting fees.

In the Water Sources Law (No. 8093, March 21,1996), permits and authorisation for the use of inertmaterial, e.g. sand or gravel, through the mining ofrivers, streams or lakes are issued by the water authori-ties. The Council of Ministers is responsible for settingtariffs on water use for various purposes, taking intoconsideration a range of factors.

Additionally, financial incentives in the form ofloans, tax exemptions and fee exemptions for wateruse are available from the central government for thoseengaged in studies or technological development;processes, installations and new equipment that reducewater use, water consumption and/or pollution canalso be financed. Several existing laws detail adminis-trative and tariff arrangements for providing public ser-vices relating to solid waste and wastewater disposaland water supply, as well as fines for non-compliance.



Even today, command and control instrumentsdominate Albanian environmental policy. Revenuefrom non-compliance fines and administrativelicensing process are much too small to fund impor-tant environmental projects. For long-term environ-mental management in the country, there is a needfor the development of clear environmental financ-ing mechanisms and the strengthening of domesticenvironmental institutions for their implementationand management.

A national environment fund should be establishedto administer money collected through environmentaltaxes and fines. Guidelines and systems would need tobe established to define precisely how it is managedand how the money should be used and prioritised. Pri-oritisation should be in accordance with recommenda-tions in future National Environmental ActionPlans/National Environmental Strategies (NEAPs/NESs).

EU-Albania relations: the Stabilisation and Association Process

Along with most Western Balkan nations, Albaniahas been participating in the Stabilisation and Associa-tion Process (SAP) since its very beginning. The coun-try has benefited from the overall cooperation frame-work of the SAP, including autonomous trade prefer-ences, national and regional financial assistance underthe Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Devel-opment and Stabilisation (CARDS) and the prospect foran enhanced, far-reaching contractual relationship withthe European Union through a Stabilisation and Associ-

ation Agreement (SAA). Negotiations on a Stabilisationand Association Agreement draft began in early 2003.Agreement in principle has now been reached on mostelements of the text of the draft agreement. Environ-ment is one area in which cooperation will beincreased when the EU-Albania SAA is signed.

The first European Partnership with Albania wasadopted by the Council on June 14, 2004.6 Albaniaadopted its action plan for the implementation of Euro-pean partnership priorities in September 2004 and pro-vided the commission with progress updates inDecember 2004 and March 2005. The second Euro-pean Partnership identifies new priorities for action,with new priorities adapted to the country’s specificneeds and stage of preparation, and will be updated asnecessary. The European Partnership also providesguidance for financial assistance to the country. Alba-nia is expected to develop a plan with a timetable andspecific measures to address the priorities.

EU AssistanceSince 2001, the CARDS programme has been the

main financial instrument of EC cooperation with Alba-nia. At present, the main priorities for CARDS assis-tance are: justice and home affairs, administrativecapacity building, economic and social development,environment and natural resources, and democraticstabilisation. In the period 2001-2004, EUR 192.4 mil-lion was earmarked for Albania, of which EUR 14 mil-lion was directly devoted to environment, althoughother projects (notably those of infrastructure) oftencontribute to improving the environmental situation.For 2005-2006, the CARDS allocation to Albania forenvironment is minimum EUR 6.8 million.

Short-term priorities• To strengthen administrative capacity and coordina-

tion at national and local levels;

• To implement legislation on environmental impactassessment;

• To adopt a strategy to further align environmentallegislation with the EU acquis, and properly imple-ment existing legislation, especially as regardsenforcement;

• To take action on environmental hot spots at Sharrasolid waste landfill and the Patos-Marinez oil extrac-tion area;

• To further develop and implement the NationalWater and Sanitation Strategy and the Rural Strategyfor Water Supply and Sewerage;

• To develop and implement a strategy for progressivealignment to the acquis in the areas of water supplyand sanitation;

• To implement international conventions to whichAlbania is party in the field of nature protection.

Medium-term priorities• To continue efforts to address toxic hotspots;

• To reduce pollution produced by the Balsh refinery,including discharge into the Gjanica River, and totake general measures against water pollution;

• To strengthen environmental monitoring and ensuresufficiently dissuasive sanctions against polluters;

• To continue implementation of regional and interna-tional environmental commitments.

ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES IN THE 2005 EUROPEAN PARTNERSHIP



EU assistance covered several environmental top-ics: environmental hot spots; removal, treatment anddisposal of arsenic solution from the nitrogen fertiliserplant in Fier (Phare 2000); pollution remediation at theBallshi refinery (CARDS 2002); design of a landfill forhazardous waste (CARDS 2002); construction of a land-fill (CARDS 2004); institutional and regulatory strength-ening, environmental legislation and planning (CARDS2002); environmental quality monitoring (CARDS2004); and territorial planning development of theTirana-Durres corridor (CARDS 2004).

The current project Environmental Legislation andPlanning Project for Albania-ELPA,7 has the overallobjective of supporting the Government of Albaniaobjectives in EU accession by improving the capacityof the environmental ministry and other key ministriesat national and regional levels to implement environ-mentally sustainable development in accordance withEU directives. Other projects (Pollution Abatement andControl at the Ballshi Refinery, and Designing a SecureLandfill Site for Hazardous Waste) are under imple-mentation. CARDS 2004 contains a list of four projectproposals, for a total value of approximately EUR 10million, on issues such as waste treatment, hazardouswaste management, environmental monitoring system,and regional sustainable and integrated development).

Albania also receives funds from the CARDS region-al programme, which finances collaboration of SEEcountries with the European Environment Agency andRegional Environmental Reconstruction Programmeactivities, for example.

Relations with International Financial Institutions

In Albania, World Bank (WB) assistance for envi-ronment focuses on natural resource managementthrough improved coastal zone management for sus-tainable development; protection of environmental andcultural assets; improved community-based manage-ment of hilly, mountainous, and erosion-prone land-scapes to reduce soil degradation, flooding and runoffinto the Adriatic Sea; and support for improved waterand wastewater management. In the future, the WBplans to broaden support for land management toinclude land tenure and land markets. In June 2005, theWB approved a credit of USD 17.5 million for the firstphase of the Integrated Coastal Zone Management andCleanup Project for Albania, a project with an estimat-ed total cost of USD 38.6 million expected to befinanced by several funding sources.

The Global Environmental Facility (GEF) is a majorfunding source for environmental projects implement-ed or under implementation such as Climate ChangeEnabling Activities (1998-2003); Capacity Building for

Sustainable Land Management (EUR 37,000 in 2005);Conservation of Wetland and Coastal Ecosystems in theMediterranean Region (USD 1.751 million, 1999-2006);enabling Albania to prepare its first national communi-cation in response to its commitments to the UNFCCC(USD 263,744 for the first phase up to 2002, USD405,000 for the second phase); the GEF Small GrantsProgramme (USD 200,000 in the 2005 budget); Inte-grated Ecosystem Management in the Trans-boundaryPrespa Park Region (USD 376,000); and PersistentOrganic Pollutants (USD 378,400 in 2005-2006).

The strategy of the European Bank for Reconstruc-tion and Development for Albania is to focus on pri-vate-sector development, to support SME participationin strategic privatisation (particularly in the bankingand telecommunications sectors), infrastructure financ-ing and development (particularly in the energy andtransport sectors). In 2004, the EBRD has approved thefinancing of a project to revive a cement factory worthabout EUR 25 million. In total, the EBRD has supported17 projects worth a total of EUR 206 million. Based onthe EBRD country strategy of 2004, the development ofa viable project pipeline in the municipal and infra-structure sectors, focusing mainly on water supply andpossibly urban transport and solid waste, is considereda priority.

REReP Priority AreasState of Legal, Policy and Institutional Framework

The Ministry of Environment, Forestry and WaterAdministration is the main lawmaker and authority inthe field of environmental protection matters. As such,the ministry has drafted or initiated most environmentallaws compiled in the compendium; it is also in chargeof all normative acts which can be considered horizon-tal legislation. The Law on Environmental Protectiondated September 5, 2002, is the new cornerstone ofenvironmental legislation in Albania. This law led tothe abrogation of the Law on Environmental Protectionof 1993 and is considered a framework law requiringnumerous other laws and sub-laws in order to be prop-erly implemented.

Albania has adopted some 10 laws and several sup-plementary decisions in the field of environmental pro-tection between 2001 and 2003. Important environ-mental acts include those on land protection (adoptedin 2001), environmental protection (2002), air pollution(2002), protected areas (2002), marine environmentpollution and damage (2002), environmental impactassessment (2003), solid waste (2003), treatment of pol-luted waters (2003), and transboundary lakes (2003).



Some secondary legislation has been adopted inareas such as environmental impact assessment, pro-tected areas, environmental management of pollutedwaters, and conservation of transboundary lakes. Eco-taxes are now collected on a number of products, e.g.carbon and plastic packaging, in accordance with legis-lation adopted at the end of 2002. However, overallimplementation of legislation remains weak. It is cru-cial that EIA legislation be fully and properly imple-mented, independent of potential conflicts of interest.

The main obstacles and constraints as concernshorizontal laws are that, apart from the EIA, no norma-tive acts have been adopted which provide an applica-ble legal system. The provisions of strategic environ-mental assessment fall short of the complexity of thisissue, public participation and access to informationare only partly regulated, and there are insufficient pro-visions on environmental liability. One main shortcom-ing is the unclear permit-issuance procedure. Theestablished system cannot be considered an integrativepermit system in the sense of the IPPC directivebecause there is no integrative approach.

Environmental Policies and StrategiesThe National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP),

prepared in 1993 and updated in 2002, is the basic doc-ument that presents the governmental policy in thearea of environmental protection. It was prepared byan inter-ministerial working group under the lead ofthe then National Environmental Agency, which subse-quently became the Ministry of Environment and, inturn, the Ministry of Environment, Forestry and WaterAdministration in September 2005. Among other aims,the NEAP seeks to design sectoral environmental poli-cies and implementation of action plans; completionand approximation of the legal regulatory frameworkwithin the European framework; its enforcement;active involvement of local government in environ-mental problem areas; and increasing of the legalresponsibilities of local government.

The National Environmental Strategy to be pre-pared under CARDS 2002: Environmental Legislationand Planning in Albania (ELPA) aims to improve sec-toral integration, provide up-to-date analysis of theAlbanian environment and proposals for future policy,and guide integration of Albania’s environmental poli-cies to meet EU obligations.

Among environment-related strategies is theNational Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2000),which defines national priorities and necessary institu-tional changes for the implementation of the Conven-tion on Biological Diversity. The Strategy for the Devel-opment of the Forestry and Pastures Sector in Albania(2003) aims at ensuring the management and sustain-

able development of forestry and pasture resources inaccordance with government policies. The NationalStrategy of Energy and Action Plan (2003) analyses andincludes changes that must occur to increase the secu-rity of the energy supply and optimisation of energyresources in order to meet demand and achieve futuresustainable economic development.

The Water Supply and Sanitation Strategy Sector inAlbania (2004) searches for a new mode of water andsanitation sector organisation within the burgeoningfragile market economy and of legal and institutionaladjustments. It analyses the decentralisation processand management practices on the ground. Most atten-tion is given to the achievements, accomplishmentsand obstacles on the road to reform, in addition to thecauses and consequences of the problems and ways ofenhancing the sector efficiency and sustainability. TheArhus Convention Implementation Strategy (2005) pre-sents the most recent initiative of the ministry of envi-ronment on further development of environmentalinformation systems publicly accessible, as well asdeveloping mechanisms of public involvement in theenvironmental decision-making processes.

The central institution responsible for environmen-tal issues in Albania is the Ministry of Environment,Forestry and Water Administration (MoEFWA), succes-sor to the Ministry of Environment of 2001-2005. A rela-tively new institution, MoEFWA is responsible for thedevelopment of environmental legislation and regula-tion framework, as well as issuing environmental per-mits and licensing.

The Inspectorate of Environment represents thestructure within the ministry and is responsible fordecentralised environmental protection. The inspec-torate, in addition to centrally located staff in Tirana, isalso responsible for staffing each of the 12 prefectures’regional environmental agencies. Together, the region-al environmental agencies and environmental officesare responsible for ensuring compliance with environ-mental regulations at prefecture and district levels.

The Directorate General of Forests and Pastures(DGFP) had been under the auspices of the Ministry ofAgriculture and Food (MAF) until 2005. The DGFP isresponsible for management and administration ofboth protected areas and hunting. In addition, theDGFP is responsible for forest and pasture manage-ment and administration; this includes private forests,state forests and communal forests, high alpine pastureand communal pasture, and the full range of biodiver-sity contained therein.

The MAF is the institution charged with administra-tion of the large majority of Albania’s productiveresources, e.g. agricultural land, forests, pastures andfisheries. The MAF has also been responsible for themanagement of protected areas, and the control and



regulation of hunting. The Directorate General of Fish-eries (DGF) within MAF is responsible for the adminis-tration of fishery resources, including marine fisheries,freshwater fisheries and aquaculture.

Structures of the Ministry of Public Works andTourism at national and local levels are responsible forissuing permits for construction activities. Approved in1998, the Urban Development law requires the conductof EIAs prior to the issuance of any construction permits.To enforce various laws and regulations governing con-struction, the Government of Albania approved theestablishment of the construction police (Law No. 7752,March 28, 1993) under the Ministry of Public Works andTourism. Construction police have the authority to ceaseillegal construction in urban areas and in areas of envi-ronmental importance. Similarly, construction policehave the mandate to control exploitation of inert materi-als, e.g. sand and gravel, from riverbeds.

Within the context of the 2001 Local GovernmentLaw, regional, municipal and communal governmentshave legal authority to take responsibility for environ-mental management within the municipality. Authori-ties at these levels of government include those forenvironmental planning, nature conservation, andenforcement of provisions of the environmental pro-tection law. Given the status of the decentralisationprocess at present, there is very limited capacity at thelevel of local government to assume responsibility forany of these competencies. Limited financing furtherconstrains the ability of local government to addressenvironmental issues.

The Ministry of Environment, Forestry and WaterAdministration (MoEFWA), as well as the five nationalinstitutions responsible for environmental matters,continue to have problems with coordination andmonitoring. Methodological standards for data collec-tion, management, and scientific analysis have notbeen standardised, and no central electronic databasehas been created.

In addition to the central governmental institutions,numerous governmental bodies have some responsi-bility for environmental issues. The National Academyof Science is comprised of numerous scientific researchinstitutes and centres, two of which have a role in bio-diversity conservation in Albania. In addition to servingas the training ground for new generations of scientists,Tirana University, the Agricultural University of Tirana,and the University of Shkodra are also responsible forimportant conservation research and environmentalmonitoring programmes.

State of Environmental Civil SocietyEnvironmental civil society in Albania is growing in

quantity and quality: More than 100 groups are regis-

tered non-governmental organisations (NGOs) aroundthe country, though the exact number is difficult toestablish due to sector dynamics and dispersion acrossthe country. In addition to purely environmentallyfocused NGOs, many others of a wider focus con-tribute to solving environmental issues at the commu-nity level. Nowadays, there is a clear tendency todevelop expertise and consultancy-type services at theNGO level, while the number of NGOs representingthe needs of specific communities is increasing. Finan-cial support, institutional strengthening and communityoutreach remain some of the challenges of the sector.During the past two years, the environmental NGOcommunity managed to create a focused network,Ekolevizja, a group of 14 environmental NGOs. Inaddition, Albanian NGOs developed partnerships withother sectors for some major public advocacy and pub-lic pressure campaigns, including those on geneticallymodified organisms (GMOs), importing waste, andenergy investments. As result of these activities, thedraft law on Protection of Biodiversity, containing achapter on GMOs, has been discussed several times inparliamentary commissions and was sent back to theprevious government. In addition, the former govern-ment was forced to withdraw plans to construct awaste incinerator mainly for imported solid waste inthe Kashar commune in the vicinity of Tirana by anItalian-Albanian consortium.

State of Regional and Cross-border Cooperation

Albania is a member of many initiatives currentlytaking place in the Balkans, including the Stability Pactfor South Eastern Europe and the South-Eastern Euro-pean Cooperation Process (SEECP). Albania also partic-ipates in the South East European Cooperation Initia-tive, the Adriatic-Ionian Initiative and the Black SeaEconomic Forum. Albania actively participates inREReP, co-chairing the task force in 2004 and 2005.

Albania has signed the following agreements forcross-border environmental cooperation:

Albania has signed a Memorandum of Understand-ing with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedoniaon management of Lake Ohrid. Albania and the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia have cooperated onthe management of water resources of Lake Ohrid andLake Prespa through the establishment of commonmanagement boards.

Albania and Montenegro have signed a Memoran-dum of Understanding on the Management of Use ofCommon Natural Resources, which focuses primarilyon Lake Shkoder. Several bilateral meetings are held inboth countries with the intention of developing coop-erative projects on this cross-border area.



Albania signed a Memorandum of Understandingwith Croatia on general environmental cooperation. Meet-ings of experts have been organised between the respec-tive ministries to identify potential fields ofcooperation.Relations with acceding and candidatecountries are constructive and have mainly focused onEU integration. Several agreements have been signedwith Bulgaria and Romania.

No specific agreement of environmental coopera-tion has been signed with either Bosnia and Herzegov-ina or Turkey.

Implementation of the 2002-2004 CooperationProtocol between Albania and Italy (representingEUR 205 million over the three-year period, in addi-tion to EUR 160 million for programmes alreadyunderway) has continued, with emphasis on roadsand transport, water and sanitation, energy, agro-industry, public heath, private sector developmentand social and institutional support. Cooperationbetween local and regional Italian and Albanian enti-ties has also increased.

Relations with Greece have remained positive. Inthe field of environment, Albania has signed a memo-randum of understanding with the country. Anothermemorandum of understanding, prepared in 2003, isawaiting ratification by the Greek parliament.

State of Environmental Health Threats and Loss of Biodiversity

Albanian environmental problems remain acute.Little has been done to address toxic hotspots identi-fied in Durres and Flora, as well as to tackle the prob-lems of radioactive waste in Tirana and Fier. Accordingto the Albanian Public Health and Environment Insti-tute, Albania’s urban areas have high levels of air pollu-tion due to uncontrolled development. In these areas,dust levels exceed World Health Organization stan-dards. Pollution from the Ballsh Oil Refinery and near-by oil wells is considered to be unacceptably high.There are hydrocarbon emissions in the air and soil,and water has been greatly affected. The latter is espe-cially evidenced in the persistent discharge of oil intothe Gjanica River. Further pollution is caused by indus-tries using copper and chromium, and Albania is alsoexperiencing soil erosion due to overgrazing and ille-gal logging, particularly in hilly and mountain areas.

Despite improvements, Albania’s biodiversity con-tinues to be seriously threatened. Threats to ecosys-tems and habitats originate from the country’s weakgovernance and economy. The government lacks thefinancial and human resources to use this structure tocounteract threats. Most threats are driven by takingadvantage of this weak governance to ignore land andnatural resource use laws. Rural Albanians may haveno other option than to unsustainably exploit naturalresources. The lack of a working system of spatialplanning to guide development and a functioning envi-ronmental impact assessment (EIA) process to avoid ormitigate impacts from commercial development areparticularly damaging to the natural environment.

ENDNOTES1. National Strategy for Socio-Economic Development (NSSED),

World Bank.

2. (UN, Albania: Common Country Assessment 2004).

3. Strategy on Forestry and Pastures, 2003.

4. Albania Water Supply and Wastewater Sector Strategy, 2003.

5. MoE, Monitoring Report 2003.

6. Council Decision 2004/519/EC3.

7. EU, CARDS 2002, EUR 2 million.

REFERENCESCentral Intelligence Agency. “Albania” in The World Factbook.

EBRD. Albania Country Strategy, 2004.

EBRD. Transition report, 2005.

EC. Albania 2005 Progress report. COM (2005) 561 final. Brus-sels, November 9, 2005.

EC. The European Partnership with Albania. COM (2005) 553.Brussels, November 9, 2005.

EC Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs. TheWestern Balkans in Transition.

Government of Albania Progress Report NSSED, 2004.

UNDP Albania. Human Development Report, 2004.

UNDP Albania. Albania National MDG Report, 2004.

World Bank. The Little Green Data Book, 2004.


LOCATION

South Eastern Europe, bordering the Adriatic Sea, betweenCroatia and Serbia and Montenegro

AREA

Total: 51,129 sq kmLand: 51,129 sq kmWater: 0 sq km

LAND BOUNDARIES

Total: 1,459 kmBorders: Croatia (932 km), Serbia and Montenegro (527 km)

CLIMATE

Hot summers, cold winters; areas of high elevation have shorter,cooler summers and longer, more severe winters; coastal areashave mild, rainy winters

ELEVATION EXTREMES

Lowest point: Adriatic Sea — 0 mHighest point: Maglic — 2,386 m

NATURAL RESOURCES

Bauxite, chromite, clay, coal, cobalt, copper, forest, gypsum,hydropower, iron ore, lead, manganese, nickel, salt, sand, zinc

NATURAL HAZARDS

Destructive earthquakes


Air pollution from metallurgical plants; limited sites for urbanwaste disposal; water shortages and infrastructure damage to the1992-95 conflicts; deforestation; water pollution; illegal wastedisposal


2002 2003 2004 2005(projected)

Growth in GDP 5.3 4.0 5.7 5.0(real change, in percent)Foreign direct investment 266 382 490 540(in million USD)Unemployment rate 40.9 42.0 n.a n.a

Environmental Profile: Bosnia and Herzegovina

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E : B O S N I A A N D H E R Z E G O V I N A



IntroductionBosnia and Herzegovina is a mountainous country

located in the southwest of the Balkan Peninsula, witha population of 4.1 million (as of 2004) and a highlyforested territory of 51,000 square kilometres. The cen-tral and southern landscape of the country is dominat-ed by the Dinaric Alps, which mark the convergence ofthree distinct ecological zones: the Mediterranean,Balkan and Central European. Plains and plateaux inthe north flank the Sava River.

The last decade in Bosnia and Herzegovina wasdominated by political and economic changes broughtabout by the dissolution of former Yugoslavia. Theyears between 1989 and 1991 were characterisedthroughout former Yugoslavia as a time of transitionfrom centralised to market economy, including liberali-sation of prices, privatisation, and often closure of inef-ficient public enterprises.

In 1991, the international recognition of Bosnia andHerzegovina as an independent and sovereign statespawned a four-year war between the three primaryethnic/religious groups in the country: Serbian/Ortho-dox, Bosnian/Muslim and Croatian/Catholic. The warincluded an extended siege on the capital city Sarajevo,and resulted in vast destruction to public structures,private residences and the utilities infrastructure. Thewar also caused the disruption of all governmental andeconomic systems, tragic human loss and the displace-ment of large portions of the population. The signingof the Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) in December1995 ended the violent conflict in Bosnia and Herze-govina, and an international military peacekeepingforce known as SFOR was deployed to guarantee acontinued measure of stability in the country — acountry that today remains reassuringly peaceful.

The country is divided into two distinct “entities,”the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH) andRepublika Srpska (RS). These entities are both subdi-vided into different configurations of local authoritieswith varying levels of decision-making power. TheFederation of Bosnia and Herzegovina is subdividedinto 10 cantons, while Republika Srpska is divided intolarger, less powerful municipalities. As a result of thedivergent governmental structures in the two entities,

policy differences between the two parts of the countryare still a major issue.

The Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Rela-tions coordinates environmental protection at the statelevel. However, as BiH is administratively divided intotwo entities and one district — the FBiH, RS, and theBrcko District (BD) — environmental responsibilitiesreside in the Ministry of Physical Planning and Environ-ment in FBiH; the Ministry of Physical Planning, CivilEngineering and Ecology in RS; and in the Brcko Dis-trict Government. The ministries of agriculture, watermanagement and forestry are responsible for watermanagement issues in both entities.

Moreover, FBiH is divided into 10 cantons, eachwith separate ministries responsible for physical plan-ning and environment. The fragmentation of BiH hasresulted in a government apparatus containing approx-imately 150 ministries and multiple levels of gover-nance at state, entity, cantonal and municipal levels.Regarding environmental protection, each entity cre-ates and implements its own policy exclusively. In linewith tradition, a department for environment wasestablished in the ministries related to spatial planning.

The distribution of competencies regarding interna-tional cooperation is extremely complicated, grantingthe right to international initiatives even to cantons.This results in considerable coordination requirements,delays and difficulties in entering international agree-ments. It also makes identification of clear national pri-orities or strategic objectives for cooperation impossible.

Since the end of the war in 1995, BiH has madeprogress in its international environmental cooperationat bilateral, regional, European and global levels. BiHwas admitted as a member of the United Nations onMay 22, 1992, when it also joined the United NationsEconomic Commission for Europe (UNECE). BiH thenaccessed to a number of global and regional conven-tions, and currently cooperates with a number of UNprogrammes and agencies.

Bosnia and Herzegovina promotes regional cooper-ation in the framework of the Stability Pact and theSouth-East European Cooperation Process (SEECP). Ithas been actively participating in the Regional Environ-mental Reconstruction Programme for South EasternEurope (REReP) with a number of regional projects

Environmental Profile:Bosnia and Herzegovina



implemented, initiating and strengthening cooperationbetween governments, non-governmental organisa-tions, media and other institutions on specific environ-mental topics.

Current Environmental Conditions

Due to the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, theenvironmental state and environmental management ismore complex than in other Central and Eastern Euro-pean states. Two-thirds of the country’s infrastructureand industry was ruined at the end of the war. Approx-imately two million land mines were deactivated.Thousand of tonmes of waste and garbage in urbanareas had not been handled in four years. Millions ofcubic meters of forests had been cut or destroyed.Other environmental problems extant before the warhave become more extreme in recent years due toyears of neglect of environmental infrastructure, e.g.solid waste landfills and wastewater treatment plants.

The causes of environmental degradation in Bosniaand Herzegovina are overuse and irrational consump-tion of natural resources. Pre- and post-war, the devas-tation of natural resources continued. In the post-warperiod, the environmental situation in BiH has notchanged much, and has in fact deteriorated significant-ly especially in areas such as water supply, wastewatertreatment, and waste collection. The country accumu-lated tonnes of humanitarian aid in pharmaceuticals,including a large quantity long since expired, and thuscould only be treated as waste material, for which therewere no adequate disposal facilities. Since there was alack of industrial activity — the major pre-war polluter— some environmental improvements were noted,particularly in air quality. In general, however, theenvironmental situation had deteriorated.

Soil, Forests, Agricultural LandThe agricultural sector once represented one of the

most important economic sectors in Bosnia and Herze-govina. Since the war, however, this has been indecline, with agricultural contribution to total GDPdecreasing from 9.2 percent in 1999 to 7.2 percent in2000. This decrease has had an impact on the numberemployed in these activities, which has been reducedby one-half from the pre-war level. In the year 2000,20,000 were engaged in agricultural labour, represent-ing only 3.2 percent of those employed.1

Limited soil resources and land capability charac-terise the conditions of the agricultural sector in Bosniaand Herzegovina. Those areas with suitable arable pro-duction potential cannot realise this potential without

the provision of irrigation facilities. At present, onlyabout two percent of the cultivable soil in BiH is irrigat-ed, and use of fertiliser is well below the Europeanaverage. This is exacerbated by the presence of numer-ous minefields and small land holdings.

Around 52 percent, or 2,600,000 hectares, of thetotal land area in Bosnia and Herzegovina is suitablefor agriculture with the remaining considered as forest-land. Although the total agricultural land area in FBiHand RS is similar, when the population of each are con-sidered — 2,250,000 for FBiH and 1,450,000 for RS —the division of agricultural land per capita in FBiH is0.56 hectares, whereas in RS, it is approximately 0.90hectares. Furthermore, when areas of fertile fields andgardens are considered, the division in FBiH declinesfurther and, at 0.23 hectares per capita, is half that inRS.2 An important consideration is the size of individualland holdings, which in Bosnia and Herzegovina arevery small, with 54 percent of properties occupying anarea of less than 2 hectares.

Land use in Bosnia and Herzegovina suffers frominadequate and irrational planning of resources. Inmost cases, loss of agricultural land is a result ofunplanned building of residential and industrial facili-ties and infrastructure, irrational exploitation of rawminerals and excessive erosion caused by deforestationand irregular treatment of slopes. In FBiH, this lossamounts to more than 3,000 hectares per annum, andin RS to more than 2,000 hectares. As more than 80 per-cent of the country has land slopes in excess of 13 per-cent, water-induced erosion is an increasing problemtoday, particularly when land cover is removedthrough uncontrolled exploitation of timber.

Since BiH has a rural population density of only 43persons per square kilometre, lower than any otherBalkan country, with sound management its forest “use”values, i.e. from timber and other products, can provideincome for the local economy. At the same time, its“non-use” values, i.e. from watershed protection andglobal ecosystem values, can also be protected.

New forest laws are targeted at developing a mod-ern forest management system, with separation of eco-nomic and control functions, capable of monitoringand ensuring sustainable and effective forest ecosystemmanagement.

WaterBosnia and Herzegovina is endowed with abundant

water resources, one of the most important factors inoverall economic development. Traditionally, very littleis invested in the protection of and from water.

From a hydrogeography standpoint, the Black Seacatchment area accounts for 75.7 percent of BiH territo-ry, and the Adriatic Sea 24.3 percent. All river streams



in BiH form seven river basins: Una, Vrbas, Bosna,Drina, Sava, Neretva with Trebisnjica and Cetina. High-ly unfavourable is a special characteristic of the naturalhydrological regime: the uneven distribution of waterin space and time. Natural lakes in BiH can be classi-fied as permanent and periodical lakes. Around 30smaller or larger artificial water reservoirs are found inBiH, of which 13 are found in the Trebisnjica riverbasin on the Neretva, and three on the Drina River.

Groundwater in Bosnia and Herzegovina is found inthree zones, each with unique characteristics. In thenorthern zone, groundwater reserves are located mainlywithin alluvium interconnected sediments of unbal-anced granulometric composition on Sava River banksand its tributaries at depths of 50 metres. In the centralzone, groundwater accumulates in voids and cracks oflimestone massifs and appears as karst springs such asthose in the Una, Sana, Bosna, Drina and Neretva riverbasins. The southern zone is in the Adriatic Sea catch-ment area and belongs to karst field area. Importantsprings are found in the Cetina, Neretva and Trebisnjicariver basins.

Drinking water quality is questionable and in somecases unsatisfactory. Pollution is still a threat to humanhealth due to old and damaged pipelines, uncontrolledchlorination, and low water pressure. Water qualitycontrol is inadequate, especially in rural areas wherewell-water is used. Wastewater treatment facilities arealmost nonexistent, so untreated wastewater is dis-charged to surface water.

The situation in the field of protection from conta-minated water is especially alarming. A lack of newflood protection systems is evident, while existing sys-tems are considerably damaged or neglected as a resultof conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Potable water in cities is supplied from groundwater(47 percent), wells and springs (27 percent), and surfacesources (20 percent), with the remainder comingthrough infiltration. Water production was estimated at420 litres per capita per day, of which 134 (or 32 per-cent) went to households, 147 (35 percent) to industry,and 139 (33 percent) to water loss. Drinking water sup-ply services cover only 56 percent of FBiH and 48 per-cent of RS, as compared with over 90 percent in Europe.

Water resources are under potential threat fromorganic pollution resulting from inadequate direct pro-tection and insufficient wastewater treatment plants.Other threats come from inadequate maintenance ofsewage systems, intense exploitation of forests, anduncontrolled use of pesticides. In most cases, watersources are not bacteriologically safe.

Almost 90 percent of wastewater is released with-out treatment directly into the nearest rivers, streamsand underground channels. Around 56 percent of theurban population is connected to a sewage system. For

settlements of more than 10,000, the extent of coveragerises to 72 percent, while in smaller settlements thisdecreases to about 10 percent.

In many cases, sewer systems have not been com-pleted, and are often only partially designed and con-structed; in some locations, their capacity is insufficientto receive storm water. Maintenance is mostly inade-quate and no regulations or legislation for such activi-ties exist. Some parts of the systems in turn requirereplacement of the damaged area, and about 850 kilo-meters of pipeline require cleaning.3

Water supply systems in Bosnia and Herzegovinaare still subsidised by the entity, cantonal (in FBiH), ormunicipal governments. The current prices establishedby the municipalities and water companies are too lowto adequately meet the requirements for normal func-tioning and maintenance. The funds collected throughwater fees are insufficient for major investments.

AirIn Bosnia and Herzegovina, the main sources of air

pollution are stationary, and include coal-poweredplants and industry. Large thermal power facilities usedomestic coal with low calorific values and relativelyhigh sulphur content. Even though these facilities areusually located in the vicinity of mines and are equippedwith tall stacks and modern filters for exhaust, they stillemit considerable quantities of sulphur dioxide, whoseemissions are not regulated in BiH.

A primary obligation for BiH (due to internationalagreements concerning air quality) is to gather the dataneeded to evaluate the gas emissions that are includedin conventions.4 Bosnia and Herzegovina is now estab-lishing a system for analysing statistical data to corre-spond to the current institutional configuration.

The basic causes of excessive air pollution inBosnia and Herzegovina include:

• the nature of the industry with its large energy andmetallurgy capacities built for the needs of themajor part of the former Yugoslavia (with 18 per-cent of the population of the former Yugoslavia,BiH contributed 13 percent to the national GDP,while its share in the emission of sulphur dioxideamounted to 28 percent);

• inappropriately built fireboxes in stoves and low-capacity boilers mainly built in accordance withWestern European licenses designed for other typesof coal, which did not enable efficient and low-pol-lution combustion of domestic coal;

• nonexistence of guidelines for consumption of coalbased on quality and local environmental conditions;

• nonexistence of technologies for refinement of coalintended for small fireboxes;



• poor maintenance of energy and industrial plants,particularly of the equipment critical to emission ofpollutants;

• state priority given to employment figures overenvironmental effects;

• short-term objectives of political leadership;

• lack of knowledge about environmental manage-ment; and

• almost complete lack of awareness and informationregarding cost-effective energy use.

Traffic, particularly in urban areas, is a significantsource of air pollution. In urban centres, the traffic, i.e.its lack of regulation, low speed and frequent stopping,presents a danger to human health, as it causes highemission of pollutants.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the emission of sulphurdioxide (SO2) into the atmosphere is very high, in spiteof the low level of industrialisation and urbanisation.(Although the data and analyses here refer to the pre-war period, they remain meaningful today, because thecauses have not been eliminated.)

Despite the high share of fossil fuels in the energysystem of BiH, CO2 emission in BiH is not high thanksto low overall consumption of energy per capita. BiHcoal is younger coal, with low heat content (two timeslower on average than coal in Poland and England).Thermoelectric power plants use some coal with evenlower heat content (8-12 megajoules per kilogram).Fuels used have a wide range of sulphur content, andBiH coal has high ash content, and many have highalkaline-compound content.

Technology normally accounts for less than 10 per-cent of air pollution. In BiH, however, this form of pol-lution is significant. The foremost polluters of air arethe iron and steel industries, based on the processingof ore from the Vares mine, in which sulphur content is10 times higher than the world average; the same orecontains high percentages of heavy metals. The ZenicaSteelworks is now in the process of technologicalrestructuring and its emission levels after restructuringare unknown. The BiH paper industry is another majorair polluter.

BiodiversityBosnia and Herzegovina anchors much of the bio-

logical diversity and broader natural resources of theBalkans. Considering the number of species and therelatively small land area, the country is among thefive richest countries in Europe in terms of speciesdensity and diversity. The flora of BiH contains some3,572 plant species, subspecies, and varieties, 500 ofwhich are endemic. About 19 percent of plant species

are thought to be under significant threat from landconversion, unsustainable management, and exposureto pollutants. The vertebrate fauna of Bosnia andHerzegovina includes some 502 species, 29 of whichare threatened.5

The main threats to biodiversity emerge from thecharacteristics of post-conflict economics forcing min-ing of otherwise renewable natural resources; limitedpublic awareness of mechanisms to improve resourceconservation; the lack of a coherent legislative frame-work and of substantial regulatory capacity; and policyand market failures that substantially undervalue envi-ronmental goods and services. Direct threats are posedon nature by:

• near non-existence of a protected areas network;

• unplanned conversion of land with high conserva-tion value;

• poor forest management and wood use;

• untreated municipal and industrial wastewater dis-charge;

• localised overexploitation of forests; and

• absence of environmental information and monitor-ing systems.

About 50 percent of the country is covered byforests and 25 percent with pastures. It is mostly hillyand mountainous, with only five percent of territoryclassified as plains, 24 percent as hills, 29 percent askarst, and 42 percent as mountains. With its rich forestecosystems, spectacular landscapes and opportunitiesfor nature-based tourism, development of a protectedarea network is a priority for Bosnia and Herzegovina,as only 0.55 percent of the territory is formally protect-ed. This puts BiH on the very bottom of the Europeanlist determined by the IUCN criteria. Wetland andaquatic ecosystems are some of the most endangeredareas, subject to intense devastation and degradation.Financing the protection of natural heritage is inade-quate; in principle, it is financed from the budget onthe basis of partial use of protected estates.

National Environmental Priorities The National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)

identified issues relating to environmental protectionwith measures proposed for their resolution. Solutionsto all major problems identified are in excess of theavailable financial, and institutional capabilities andresources. Two specific areas — preconditions forimplementation of the proposed activities — were thefocus of NEAP: legal and institutional strengthening,and preparation of strategies for planning and environ-mental management.



No. PRIORITY FIELD PRIORITIES

1. WATER RESOURCES/ • Preparation of integral plans for control of river basins;WASTEWATER • Execution of the project for long-term water supply for populations in

the most endangered regions of BiH, including the rehabilitation ofwater loss in water systems;

• Reconstruction and initiation of existing systems for wastewatercleaning and construction of sewage systems and machinery forcleaning, highest-priority areas first;

• Rehabilitation of flood prevention systems to the required securitylevel to enable adequate protection of population and land whilefacilitating the needs of sustainable development in jeopardisedregions and sustainable power production;

• Execution of projects related to the use of water in irrigating agricultural fields and production of electrical power.

2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT • Sustainable development of rural areas;OF RURAL REGIONS • Food production based on biological principles;

• Cultivation of agricultural soil with the objective of higher production asa function of eliminating/decreasing poverty;

• Soil categorisation to foster rational soil use, sustainable developmentand sustainable spatial management;

• Coordination of entity planning; • Preparation of a programme for long-term development of forestry.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL • Introduction of information systems (monitoring, GIS, data forMANAGEMENT developing geodetic and other layouts, climate change, supply of(INFORMATION SYSTEM/ equipment for measuring and control units); INTEGRAL PLANNING/ • Environmental education.EDUCATION)

4. WASTE/WASTE MANAGEMENT • Establishment of a strategy for waste management with an operativeprogramme for its implementation;

• Elimination of illegal dumpsites and rehabilitation of degradedregions;

• Rehabilitation of a number of existing landfills.

5. ECONOMY/SUSTAINABLE • Sustainable development strategy for the BiH economy; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • Preparation of a strategy for energy consumption in BiH, which also

includes decreasing sulphur content.

6. PUBLIC HEALTH • Establishment of a unique 21st-century health policy and strategyaccording to the document “Health.”

7. DEMINING • Demining

ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES BY FIELD



The priority areas were determined through arecognised NEAP prioritisation process based onexpert sector and multi-disciplinary analyses, trans-parency and democratic principles with the participa-tion of all stakeholders. The NEAP identifies prioritiesup to year 2020.

Subsequent to and based on the NEAP, the PovertyReduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), which provides theaction plan up to 2007, identified the following areasas priorities:

• institutional and legal priorities;

• air quality and climate change;

• water;

• soil/land;

• forests;

• waste;

• land use;

• biological and geological diversity, the cultural andhistorical heritage;

• public health; and

• improvement of environmental protection statistics.

In the area of water resources and management, thePRSP recognises the problem of mine water pollutioncontrol, prioritising it accordingly. In addition, thePRSP recognises the potential for utilisation of geother-mal waters for heating, hydroponic crop cultivation,therapy and tourism. The PRSP provides a set of indica-tors for monitoring improvements in the water sector,which includes local, EU and other indicators; theirapplication should be taken into consideration in BiH.

The section addressing the priorities for waste man-agement recognised the importance of developing aframework and entity laws on mineral resourcesexploitation. This should provide for the complex useof mineral resources, minimisation of damage to theenvironment, granting of concessions and responsibili-ties concerning waste generation and management.

The PRSP considered air pollution, land/soil, andforests as priorities and addressed these problems bygiving a list of priority measures. The PRSP gave the setof indicators for monitoring the improvements in thewater sector, which includes local, EU and other indi-cators; their application should be taken into consider-ation in BiH.


Fulfilment of tasks related to integration with theEuropean Union is not possible without efficientfinancing of environmental protection and economicsupport instruments. Besides ministries responsible forenvironmental protection, additional fundraising, theestablishment of efficient overall financial manage-ment, and a project management system is needed.BiH is working towards establishing environmentalfunds in both entities. Environmental funds will playan important role in environmental policy implemen-tation. Currently, each entity has adopted an environ-mental fund law. These laws have not been yet imple-mented; there are no management structures or flowof revenues. Laws also need further elaboration, onobjectives, priorities and type of activities. At present,the technical assistance project CARDS is assisting inestablishing environmental funds in both entities.

Required measures are the following:

• Establishment of environmental protection financialresources;

• establishment of an environmental protection fund;

• gradual increase in the price for using of certainnatural resources;

• improvement of structures of existing economicinstruments, and gradual and selective introductionof the new; and

• support of the improvement in the subsidy struc-ture, i.e. tax exemptions in the public income sys-tem for investments in environmental protection.

Entity budgets draw income from economic instru-ments related to use and pollution of environment, e.g.special taxes, concessions and other fees. These fundsare spent for various public functions, including envi-ronmental protection, but to a lesser degree. The statecollects funds from special taxes on environment-pol-luting products, e.g. tobacco products, oil derivatives,cars and other road vehicles, ships and airplanes; fromtaxes for cars and ships; from tolls; from fines chargedfor pollution; and from concessions for water supply.

The two most obvious barriers to cost recovery arethe current financial needs of the BiH government,which prevent long-term commitment to resolvingenvironmental problems, and the business communi-ty’s disbelief in financial and socioeconomic benefitsgained by reducing environmental degradation.

Industry resists the introduction of adequate pricesfor water, energy and raw materials, as well as pollu-



tion fees that could be used to cover the costs of envi-ronmental remediation and preservation of naturalresources. In addition, failure to incorporate environ-mental protection measures in economic developmentplans will simply increasingly compromise productacceptability to non-domestic consumers.

Water supply systems are still being subsidised byeither cantonal or municipal governments. The currentprices, established by the municipalities and watercompanies, are too low to adequately meet the require-ments for normal functioning and maintenance. Thefunds that are collected through water fees are insuffi-cient for major investment, which has resulted in lowor inefficient investments, lack of development, lowservice levels, and resistance from the population topay for the services. Mistakes in the past have led touneconomical water consumption and further degrada-tion of this resource.

Financing the protection of natural heritage is inad-equate. In principle, it is financed from the budget onthe basis of the partial use of protected estates.

EU-Bosnia and HerzegovinaRelations: the Stabilisation and Association Process

Bosnia and Herzegovina is participating in the Sta-bilisation and Association Process (SAP). Currently,no contractual framework between the EuropeanUnion and Bosnia and Herzegovina exists. Politicaland technical dialogue has been taking place throughthe Consultative Task Force (CTF), which meets regu-larly several times a year. Formal contractual relationsshould be established through the conclusion of a Sta-bilisation and Association Agreement (SAA). Negotia-tions regarding an SAA began on November 25, 2005.

The European Council endorsed the introductionof the European Partnerships as a means to materi-alise the European perspective of the Western Balkancountries within the framework of the Stabilisationand Association Process. The first European Partner-ship with Bosnia and Herzegovina was adopted bythe Council on June 14, 2004. The second EuropeanPartnership, adopted in 2005, identifies new prioritiesfor action. The new priorities are adapted to thecountry’s specific needs and stage of preparation,and will be updated as necessary. The EuropeanPartnership also provides guidance for financial assis-tance to the country. Bosnia and Herzegovina isexpected to develop a plan including a timetable andspecific measures to address the European Partner-ship priorities.

EU AssistanceThe European Commission supports reforms in

Bosnia and Herzegovina through CARDS, which hasbeen the main financial instrument for cooperationwith Western Balkan countries since 2001. The mainpriorities for CARDS assistance in BiH are democraticstabilisation, administrative capacity building, socialand economic reforms, justice and home affairs, andenvironment and natural resources. In the period 2001-2004 BiH received EUR 308.83 million, of which EUR18 million has been directly applied to environment,i.e. legal framework, policy, water and waste manage-ment). To this figure can be added projects devoted torural development and agriculture and local develop-ment, which may contribute to improving the environ-ment. BiH also receives funds from the CARDS regionalprogramme, which finances the collaboration of SEEcountries with the European Environment Agency andRegional Environmental Reconstruction Programmeactivities, for example.

Short-term priorities

• To adopt a State Environmental Law to createthe framework for nationwide harmonised envi-ronmental protection;

• To establish and ensure the proper functioningof the State Environment Agency.

Medium-term priorities

• To continue strengthening administrative capac-ity of the institutions involved in environmentalprotection, particularly at the state level, and toensure the implementation of already trans-posed legislation;

• To ensure that a functioning environmentalmonitoring system is in place.




The European Union is funding a EUR 1.7 mil-lion project in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 2003 to2005 to enhance awareness of environmental prob-lems and the links between environmental protec-tion and economic sustainability. The immediate tar-gets are central government ministries responsiblefor environment, but the wider object ive isimproved coordination with similar projects toenhance sustainable environmental managementacross the country.

Recent support through CARDS has been provid-ed for capacity building for environmental manage-ment, waste and water-quality management, and airmonitoring; for compliance with the EIA Directive inthe development of the national environmentalmonitoring system, river basin management pro-gramme; for technical assistance in the establish-ment of an environmental fund, providing supportto environmental field inspection; for environmentalcivil society; and others.

The Development of the Environmental Legisla-tion project funded by the PHARE Programme result-ed in a new set of environmental laws, providing anew structure for the environmental sector. The pro-posed structure has some elements of previouslyproposed institutional schemes but was not fully har-monised with them. The laws which resulted fromthese recommendations have been adopted by bothEntity Parliaments: by Republika Srpska in August2002 and by the Federation in July 2003.


Following its independence, BiH became a memberof various international financial institutions. It joinedthe World Bank in February 1993, the European Bankfor Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) in June1996, and the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) inOctober 2001.

In September 2004, the World Bank adopted itsCountry Assistance Strategy for 2005-2007, whichfocuses on reforms in the areas of public finance andadministration, private sector development and keysocial and economic infrastructure. The World Banksupported the preparation of the National Environmen-tal Action Plan (NEAP). Today, it is preparing analyticalwork to identify environmental issues connected withactions supported by policy-based lending such as pri-vatisation, and has a substantial programme of supportfor solid waste management and water/wastewatertreatment. The World Bank has also actively supported

a number of other environmental projects. One of themost important has been the solid waste managementproject, which resulted in the development andapproval of the Solid Waste Management Strategy,which both entities have adopted. Other projectsinclude forest development and conservation, small-scale commercial agriculture development, local initia-tives, water supply and sanitation, strategic environ-mental assessment, education development and elec-tric power reconstruction. The objectives of the 2002World Bank project Urgent Strengthening of Environ-mental Institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina were toimprove the institutional framework for environmentalmanagement in BiH at local, national, and state levels;to improve the environmental policy framework, andenvironmental monitoring and information systems.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Devel-opment mainly supports institutional building in theenterprise sector, infrastructure development and thefinancial sector. The EBRD has worked on mitigatingenvironmental damage, in particular with industrialclients and the power sector. Together with the Euro-pean Commission, it has also been working onupgrading BiH environmental legislation.

With its accession to the United Nations FrameworkConventions on Climate Change in 2000, BiH becameeligible for Global Environment Facility (GEF) funding,and it is using the opportunity to request funds in assist-ing implementation of this convention. GEF has alreadyapproved one project for national capacity self-assess-ment for global environmental management and twoothers await approval. The latter projects concernregional ecosystems and forest, biodiversity, and inter-national water protection and sustainable use. BiH hasprepared proposals for GEF funding of its national bio-diversity conservation strategy and action plan, thedevelopment of its national implementation plan for theStockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutantsand the preparation of its first national communicationto the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.


In order to improve and standardise environmen-tal legislation, both entities drafted new sets of envi-ronmental laws in accordance with the EuropeanUnion legislation.6 The development of properenforcement mechanisms has hardly begun. A sorelyneeded state-level environmental law is being pre-



pared. In the meantime, the differing internal struc-tures within BiH are driving the environmental lawsof the separate entities further and further apart.

To date, each BiH entity has adopted a set of sixnew environmental laws, which build a legal frame-work for the introduction of efficient environmentalmanagement in the country. The following six lawsare harmonised with EU environmental legislation:the Framework Law on Environmental Protection;the Law on Air Protection; the Law on Water Protec-tion; the Law on Waste Management; the Law onNature Protection; and the Law on the Fund for Envi-ronmental Protection. These laws represent a frame-work for the legal protection of the environment; setforth basic principles of protection; define basicnotions, terms, and authorities responsible for policyimplementation; and lay down basic rules for draft-ing specific measures in environmental protectionpolicy implementation, environment conservationand improvement.

Although these laws have been drafted in a mod-ern and Europe-compatible form, spirit and expres-sion, their full implementation is at this point unfeasi-ble bearing in mind the existing financial situation inBiH. However, BiH legal experts have nonethelessbeen working on drafting more than 80 bylaws toprovide for the implementation of the most importantprovisions and to set a solid basis for further worktowards a full implementation and affirmation of envi-ronmental laws.

The National Environmental Action Plan, anotherimportant instrument for implementing environmen-tal policy, was developed within a project supportedby the World Bank in 2003. The NEAP describes thecurrent situation in the environmental sector in BiH,identifies and analyses major environmental prob-lems, lists the main goals and priorities establishedduring the consultation process, and describes mea-sures for achieving these. This document wouldserve as the most important planning document forstrategic action in the environmental protection poli-cy for qualitative improvement of the current situa-tion. The NEAP primarily takes into account the reso-lution of priority issues regarding the environmentthrough institutional changes and strengthening ofhuman resources, and, in the sense of recognitionand definition, basic, fundamental guidelines andgoals related to long-term environmental manage-ment based on economic, social, scientific, educa-tional and other capabilities of the state. The docu-ment is based on the principles of sustainable devel-opment and direction of the national programme offighting poverty.

The complete process of NEAP preparation isorganised on partnership principles with full trans-parency, presence of the public, availability of all infor-mation, and most importantly, with direct participationof all relevant participants in its preparation, includingthe Council of Ministries, entity- and cantonal-levelministries, members of the environmental steeringcommittee of BiH (ESC), local administration, institu-tions, scientists, experts, nongovernmental organisa-tions and individuals.

In parallel with the NEAP, the complementaryproject of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper wasconducted, initiated and financed by the WorldBank. This project has included groups of issues andhas clearly defined their connection with the mea-sures and goals enumerated in the NEAP documentas follows:

• the influence of development strategies of the stateon the environment and sustainability;

• basic guidelines for environmental activities ofNEAP and their effects on poverty;

• environmental health priorities in health care policyand poverty reduction; and

• demographic and social issues, environment andpoverty.

This common state strategy determines the prin-cipal medium-term economic development prioritiesin BiH, taking into account their environmentalaspects as well.

In Republika Srpska, environmental protection isthe responsibility of the entity. In FBiH, it is dividedbetween entity and cantons, with each of the ten Can-tons having their own ministry in charge of the envi-ronment. There are no cantons in RS, and municipali-ties comprise the next tier of government with environ-mental management responsibilities. In the district ofBrcko,7 responsibility for environmental issues is dele-gated by the District Government to the CommunalAffairs Authority.

Presently there is recognition of the need to trans-mit certain environmental competencies from entityto state level, and to provide coordination of environ-mental protection activities on inter-entity levels.

The legal, constitutional basis for establishingenvironmental authorities on the state level is ratherweak. However, there is a basis to provide thisthrough adoption of the framework environmentallaw on the state level. New environmental laws,adopted in both entities in the last two years, call forthe establishment of inter-entity coordinating bodies.The Framework Laws on Environmental Protection



foresaw the need for an inter-entity environmentalcoordinating body with eight members, four to beappointed by the Government of FBiH, and four bythe Government of the RS.

In practice, two voluntarily established inter-entitycoordination and advisory bodies are presently inplace. These are the ESC and the Water Steering Com-mittee of BiH (WSC).

At the state level, only one coordinative, consulta-tive and advisory body has been established. In May2002, the state council of ministers established theSteering Committee for Environment and SustainableDevelopment of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Its mem-bers include representatives from various govern-mental institutions, i.e. ministries, at state and entitylevel; the District of Brcko; business associations, i.e.chambers of commerce and industry; universities;NGOs and other bodies which deal with environmentprotection issues; and independent experts from sever-al fields of expertise.

There is a glaring need for, among others, in-country harmonised legislation, permit procedures,environmental standards, and monitoring, throughthe state environment agency and/or the ministry forenvironment. Other problems with environmentalmanagement in BiH include inadequate expertiseand resources both financial and human; a lack ofenforcement abil i ty; a lack of awareness andunavailability of information sources for all stake-holders; an ineffectual and inefficient approach bybodies given the role of environmental protection;and a lack of coordination between the various lev-els of government involved. Another perceivedweakness is the lack of integration and inter-sectoralcommunication.

State of Environmental Civil SocietyThe new Framework Laws on Environmental Pro-

tection in both entities introduce rights of the public tohave free access to environmental information,8 anopportunity to participate in environmental decision-making and to have access to legal remedies in orderto enforce these rights.

Environmental NGOs in Bosnia and Herzegovinatook root only after the transition from the communistperiod, during which they failed to consistently playtheir role in representing civil society. During therecent conflicts, the NGOs either ceased to exist orwere prevented from carrying out their activities. Inthe environmental NGO sector, BiH shows a clearlack of strategy and capacity development of organi-sations and individuals within organisations. A basic

problem is the lack of adequate mutual NGO cooper-ation and networking in line with programme goalsand objectives. There have been attempts at an organ-ised approach to environmental issues, however, withpositive examples and steps forward in solving thoseproblems, but the entire process requires continuedand firm support. One example is the electronic net-working of environmental NGOs which, through thewww.ekomrezabih.net portal, maintains connectionamong NGOs, raising various issues and providingthe opportunity to inform a wider public with issuesrelated to BiH legislation and international environ-mental conventions.

Studying the funding sources of environmentalNGOs in BiH, it is clear that the dominant role inNGO-sector funding is still played by internationalorganisations and foreign donations. Support fromlocal institutions, i.e. ministries and local administra-tion, can be seen, but this form of funding, albeitgrowing, remains meagre. In some areas, the localbusiness sector has also recognised NGOs as partnersin society, finding interest in financing parts of NGOactivities. Some NGOs are trying to finance them-selves by launching independent businesses andimposing membership fees, an attempt to movetoward self-sustainability. The self-sustainability of theNGO sector in BiH is surely a frequently and compre-hensively debated topic. Although initiatives in BiH todraft a sustainable development strategy in the BiHNGO sector exist, NGO funding and sustainabilityremain issues of concern.


Bosnia and Herzegovina takes part in the RegionalEnvironmental Reconstruction Programme (REReP),which is the main environmental component of theStability Pact. Funding is made available through theREReP for regional and subregional activities. BiH hasparticipated in projects related to the ratification andimplementation of multilateral environmental agree-ments; capacity building for environmental impactassessment and strategic environmental assessment;strengthening of environmental agencies and inspec-torates; developing an environmental information sys-tem; hazardous waste management; rehabilitation ofurban environmental systems; river basin manage-ment; and cross-border cooperation.

An agreement on cooperation between theFORMEZ9 National Public Agency of the Governmentof the Republic of Italy, the Ministry of Foreign Tradeand Economic Relations BiH (MoFTER) and the entity



ministries for environment is awaiting signatures. Thisagreement is part of the Memorandum on Under-standing between BiH and FORMEZ for the Initiativefor Regional Cooperation: Strengthening and Qualifi-cation of Public Administration in Six Balkan Coun-tries. The agreement deals with the management ofprotected areas and has already been signed by thepresident of FORMEZ.

Bosnia and Herzegovina has signed an agreementwith Croatia on water management. A project docu-ment is being worked out involving BiH and Croatia onintegrated management of ecosystems of the Neretvaand Trebisnjica river basins.


Public health in BiH is considered through thefollowing aspects of environmental protection:drinking water; air quality (indoors and out); foodsafety; treatment of solid and liquid waste; ionisedand non-ionised emissions; appropriate housing;noise; animal health and its impact on human health;and accidents (chemical, human, natural), preven-tion and treatment.

Problems related to water quality in BiH arenumerous. Though there are legal regulations regard-ing water control and monitoring public health, whichare mandatory and include the control of springs, san-itation zones of water facilities and water hygiene,they are only partially applied. The quality of thewater supply is poor and is not in accordance withthe required standards. The most common cause ofirregularities in drinking water are microbiologicalparameters (i.e. heterotrophs, total koliforms andfecal streptococci), chemical parameters (i.e. ammo-nia and nitrates), and blur levels.

Air quality in indoor areas is a significant factor inachieving a healthy environment. Emission of radonfrom soil and construction materials is considered seri-ous worldwide, and BiH does not have the data for itsfacilities. Other negative influences include house dust,smoking, open flames, heating devices and the use ofcleaning materials.

Activities related to hygiene control of food and cat-tle feed are currently being completed at a veterinaryfacility followed by the implementation of modernmethods and techniques for microbiological, toxic andradiological analysis. BiH institutions still cannot con-firm mad cow disease in its earliest stages due to inade-quate diagnostic equipment.

Waste management in FBiH is unacceptable interms of ecology and health criteria. Due to an

increased amount of waste and inadequate sanitation,waste constitutes the largest ecological problem. Cur-rent practices of waste disposal cause direct pollutionof land, water, food and air. For the most part, dispos-al sites are used without special protection measures,are mostly improvised, and have become a part of theurban ambiance. Of special interest are expired medi-cine and medical matter, which arrived to BiH ashumanitarian assistance.

Liquid waste material from houses and precipitationare removed centrally through sewage only in largersettlements representing 50 percent and 34.7 percent ofthe population in FBiH and RS, respectively. Only onesewage network in Republika Srpska has equipmentfor purification (Trebinje), while 15 percent do in FBiH,so this wastewater goes directly to the recipient, typi-cally in the form of an open water stream.

The contamination of land with low content urani-um and possible endangerment of people’s health asa consequence of the use of munitions with low con-tent uranium is still not solved and it is a source forvarious speculations.

One important element of the living environment incities, settlements and work environment is noisecaused by sources such as technical devices used inhousing units, industry and traffic, the latter of which isthe greatest source of noise in cities.

Estimates claim that 1 million unexploded mines in16,000-20,000 minefields still sit in BiH territory. In theapproximately 1,500 minefields in Sarajevo, five per-cent of the total number of mines have been removed.The most affected areas are Gornji and Donji Vakuf,Travnik and Zenica, Mostar and Tuzla, and many otherareas that are not officially recorded. Large-scale demi-ning is currently taking place in BiH.

Documents linking health with risk factors in a liv-ing environment are, according to the World HealthOrganization’s European strategy Health for Every-body in the 21st Century adopted at the national levelas the National Action Plan for Health and Environ-ment of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovinaand the National Action Plan for Health and Environ-ment of Republika Srpska. These documents are theresult of joint action of the Institute for Public Healthof FBiH, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Envi-ronment and Urban Planning, the Ministry for Agricul-ture, Water system and Forestry in FBiH and the Min-istry of Health and Social Protection of the Republicof Srpska. Pressure placed on biodiversity, geodiversi-ty, natural heritage and cultural heritage by imbal-anced development in all segments of social and eco-nomic organisation in BiH has caused severe prob-lems in the environment. This trend continued after



the conflicts, when the intense transition and privati-sation process opened a number of issues on theposition and protection of natural and cultural values.The current problems are also contributed to by thedeficiency of adequate up-to-date legislation, and thedeficiency of sufficient implementation of existingregulations in all spheres of planning.

Forestry, with branches of agriculture, is one of thegreatest enemies of biodiversity. In BiH today,exploitation of wood is out of proportion, as is hunt-ing. Collection of plants and animals of economic sig-nificance is now done unplanned and imbalanced. Noplan for sustainable exploitation of medicinal herbs,snails, amphibians, reptiles and decorative undomesti-cated plants and animals exists in any part of the coun-try. A number of species, including some endemic toBiH, have reached international red lists. Agriculturalproduction has still not been adjusted to specificities ofsoil and ecosystems, especially in highland areas andin areas with high groundwater levels. The presence ofmines in mountainous areas causes difficulty in main-taining mine-free ecosystems without sheep, goats andcattle in excess of defined standards.

Pisciculture is more and more present in BiH’srivers and lakes. Fishponds are typically built withoutplan or selection and atop high-quality water sources.In addition, foreign breeds of fish are endangering thehabitat of domestic species. Biotechnology con-tributes to identification and characterisation of biodi-versity at a genetic level, offering opportunities fordevelopment and use of ecologically acceptable prod-ucts and processes.

In the intense and imbalanced urbanisationprocess, through residential construction, industrialconstruction, and construction of roads and infrastruc-ture, BiH daily loses hectares of useful soil and habitatsof diverse valuable species. This process intensified inthe post-war period, when most of the populationmoved to towns, while villages were left sparsely pop-ulated or abandoned altogether; the end result is fur-ther stress on and exploitation of biodiversity. Non-ecologic industrial production is inevitably accompa-nied by the discharge of environmentally hazardoussubstances throughout the ecosphere.

ENDNOTES

1. This number contains only those individuals who are regis-tered through employment in companies. Otherwise, a fargreater number of people are in agriculture producing goodsfor their own needs, but they are not included in the employ-ment data.

2. The critical agricultural land area needed for production ofthe required amount of food and raw materials for the sur-

vival of the population amounts to 0.17 ha per capita. Thearea per capita in FBiH is therefore a cause for concern.

3. Water Sector Institutional Strengthening Project in RS andFBH, Phare 1999.

4. The most important methodology in this field is EMEP/CORI-NAIR from 1990, for the preparation of cadastres of emissionin the atmosphere, which includes 11 main categories ofemission sources by sectors as well as IPPC methodologyfrom 1996. The analysis includes a list of eight pollutants:SO2, NOX, NMVOC, NH4, CO, CH4, NO and CO2.

5 Source: UNEP-WCMC, IUCN 2004

6 Law on Environmental Protection (“Framework Law”); Lawon Nature Protection; Law on Air; Law on Water Protection;Law on Waste Management; The Law on Environmental Pro-tection Fund.

7 The District of Brcko, as a unique territorial and administrativeunit in BiH, was established by the Decision of Special Arbi-trage in accordance with the Framework Peace Agreement forBosnia and Herzegovina. It is directly under the power andsupervision of the State of BiH, and the State laws which direct-ly apply to it. The Statute of Brcko defines the basic division ofpowers and responsibilities of the District. The District performsits legislative power through its Parliament, and its executive /administrative functions through the District Government.

8 Access to information is additionally regulated by the state aswell as the entity laws on free access to information held bygovernment.

9 The FORMEZ is an institute that operates to national leveland answers to the Department of the Public Function of thePresidency of the Council. For more information, visit:<www.formez.it>.

REFERENCES

Bosna-S Oil Services Company. Bosnia and Herzegovina UrbanInfrastructure and Service Delivery Project. Sarajevo, 2004.

CIA. “Bosnia and Herzegovina” in The World Factbook.

EBRD. Transition Report, 2005.

EC. Bosnia and Herzegovina 2005 Progress Report. Brussels,November 9, 2005.

EC. European Partnership with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Brus-sels, November 9, 2005.


Environmental Health Watch. Give Me Shelter.

KJKP RAD official website <www.rad.com.ba>.

Red Cross. Bosnia and Herzegovina Annual Appeal 2005.

USAID/Bosnia & Herzegovina, authored by Dave C. Gibson,Ron Sissem and Samir Dug. Bosnia and Herzegovina Biodiversi-ty Assessment, 2003.

UNEP/WHO/HABITAT/WSSCC. Guidelines on MunicipalWastewater Management. UNEP/GPA Coordination Office, TheHague, 2004.



UNEP-WCMC, IUCN 2004.

UNESCO-IHE Alumni from Central and Eastern Europe. CurrentPractices and Challenges in the Water Supply and SanitationSector Seminar Material. Sarajevo, May 2004.


Millenium Development Goals Report for Bosnia and Herzegov-ina, 2003.

National Environmental Action Plan for Bosnia and Herzegov-ina, March 2003.

Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper for Bosnia and Herzegovina,2003.


LOCATION

South Eastern Europe, bordering the Adriatic Sea, betweenBosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Hungary, and Serbia andMontenegro

AREA

Total: 87,677 sq kmLand: 56,610 sq kmWater: 128 sq kmSea: 31,067 sq kmAdriatic river basin: 22,134 sq kmTotal coast length: 5,835.3 kmCoast length: 1,777.3 kmInsular coast length: 4,058 kmNumber of islands and islets: 1,185

LAND BOUNDARIES

Total: 2,028 kmBorders: Bosnia and Herzegovina (932 km), Hungary (329 km),Serbia and Montenegro (266 km), Slovenia (501 km)

CLIMATE

Mediterranean and continental; hot summers; cold winters;coastal areas milder in winter and drier in summer

ELEVATION EXTREMES

Lowest point: Adriatic Sea — 0 mHighest point: Dinara — 1,830 m

NATURAL RESCOURCES

Bauxite, calcium, clay, coal, gypsum, hydropower, low-gradeiron ore, mica, natural asphalt, oil, salt, silica

NATURAL HAZARDS

Destructive earthquakes, floods, fires and tidal waves incoastal areas


Waste management, especially on remediation of municipallandfills; wastewater collection and treatment; as well as watersupply; air pollution; acid rain


2002 2003 2004 2005(projected)

Growth in GDP 5.2 4.3 3.8 3.5(real change in percent)Inflation 2.2 1.8 2.1 2.9(percent change in annualaverage consumer price level)Foreign direct investment 591 1,700 898 1,000(in million USD)Unemployment rate 14.8 14.3 13.8 n.a.

Environmental Profile: Croatia

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E : C R O A T I A



IntroductionThe Republic of Croatia lies on the northwestern

seaboard of the Balkan Peninsula. It has a populationof 4.43 million and a territory of 56,610 square kilome-tres, including over 1,000 islands. Of this territory, 53percent is agricultural land, 43.5 percent is forestland,and 0.6 percent is wetlands. The coastline, whichextends 1,777 kilometres, makes up over one-third ofthe border. Croatia lies on the edge of two major cli-matic regions, the Mediterranean and the Central Euro-pean continental region. The mainland can be dividedinto three distinct areas: the Pannonian plain, the Adri-atic highland basin, and the Dinaric mountain range.Croatia has a population of 4.43 million, and about800,000 live in the capital, Zagreb.

Croatia boasts a wealth of biodiversity, with around34,000 known taxa present, of which 7,523 are plantspecies, 24,087 are animal species, 1,744 are fungi and925 are lichens. Croatia has a great diversity of ecologi-cal systems and habitats. Within its territory there arewetlands, flood, mountain and Mediterranean forests,karst areas, coastal lands, islands, sea and arable landand grasslands.

Environmental protection is traditionally dividedbetween different administrative bodies, (sectors ordirectorates) with separate authorities, often makingan integral approach to environmental protectionmore difficult. After the last governmental reorganisa-tion at the beginning of 2004, several changesoccurred in the organisational structures and responsi-bilities of state environmental institutions. The formerMinistry of Environmental Protection and PhysicalPlanning (MEPPP) was reorganised as the Ministry ofEnvironmental Protection, Physical Planning and Con-struction (MEPPPC). The current responsibilities ofMEPPPC do not cover nature protection. Authorityover the Nature Protection Division was transferred tothe Ministry of Culture. The former State Water Direc-torate was transferred to the Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry and Water Management as a new division.The mandate of the former state directorate hasremained unchanged. Responsibility for industrial pol-lution control and risk management is shared betweenthe MEPPPC, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and

Water Management, the Ministry of Health and SocialWelfare, the Ministry of Economy, Labor and Entrepre-neurship and the Ministry of Interior Affairs.

The Environment Protection Agency was estab-lished in 2002. Its main task is environmental data man-agement. The State Institute for Nature Protection wasestablished in 2002 and as of September 2003 is thestate body responsible for implementation of natureprotection policy and technical expertise for the NatureProtection Division within the Ministry of Culture. TheFund for Environmental Protection and Energy Effi-ciency (FEPEE) was established as an extra budgetaryinstitution in order to ensure additional funds for envi-ronmental protection, energy efficiency and use ofrenewable sources of energy by the EnvironmentalProtection and Energy Efficiency Fund Act in 2003. Thefund became operational in January 2004.

Croatia is a member of many initiatives currentlytaking place, including REReP, the Adriatic-Ionian Ini-tiative, the Quadrilaterale (made up of Italy, Slovenia,Hungary and Croatia), the Central European Initiative(CEI), the South-East Cooperation Initiative (SECI), theAlps-Adriatic Initiative, the Danube Commission(ICPDR), the Interim Sava Commission, the TrilateralCroatian-Italian-Slovenian Commission for the Protec-tion of the Adriatic Sea, and the South-Eastern Euro-pean Cooperation Process (SEECP).


Croatia has a rich natural resource base, with 53percent of its territory covered by agricultural land,43.5 percent by forestland, and 0.6 percent by wet-lands. Over 90 percent of the soil surface is exposed towater and wind erosion of varying intensity, and partic-ularly severe in the karst area, where erosion hasreached the geological base. Central and coastal Istriaare most affected, with eroded material of 100-200tonnes per hectare annually. Large amounts of sedi-ment enter the delta and are deposited along the Neret-va River bank.

Environmental Profile: Croatia



Soil contamination, mostly due to heavy metals,pesticides and petrochemicals, is generally extant inCroatia. Available information shows overall trends ofacidification and soil compaction, and salinisation andalkalisation in eastern Slavonia and Barania.

Changes in land-use patterns are also widespread,causing the loss of 166,441 hectares of agricultural landbetween 1965 and 1987, at an annual rate of 7,235hectares (or 20 hectares per day). Between 1975 and1985, a number of plough-land areas and gardens weresignificantly reduced. In contrast, the increasing infu-sion of sea salt in the Neretva Delta results in localsclaiming wetlands that are ecologically valuable win-tering sites of waterfowl for agricultural use. Overallagricultural activity has not caused serious soil or envi-ronmental pollution, however, and the consumption ofpesticides and mineral fertilisers in the private sector isfairly low: approximately 550,000 tonnes annually, or25 percent of the Western European mean. Use of suchproduct continues to decrease, and today is 50 percentlower than that of the end of 1980s.

With 43.5 percent (2,485,611 hectares) of its territo-ry comprised of forests and forested land,1 Croatia isone of the most plentifully forested countries inEurope. Coniferous and leaf forests, the most valued,are situated in the mountainous and hilly areas, whilethe Slavonian oak is characteristic of the lowlands ofSlavonia. Forest fires, mostly due to human negligence,have been on the increase in areas with Mediterraneanvegetation, and accelerate soil degradation. In 1996,some 3,129 fires destroyed 29,000 hectares of wood-land. In the past 20 years or so, almost 7 percent ofCroatia’s forested land (or 2.5 percent of its total area)has been destroyed by fire.

WaterThe Croatian Water Agency (Hrvatske Vode) mea-

sures the quality of fresh water at 270 monitoring sta-tions via criteria including oxygen ratio, presence ofnutrients, and microbiological and biological parame-ters. Water quality is given a designation on a I-Vrange, with category I the highest. CWA data show thatthe worst conditions are found in the large rivers of theBlack Sea River Basin.

The Sava River, which in Slovenia passes throughsettlements with developed industry, e.g. Ljubljana,coal plants in Trbovlje and Zagorje, and the wood pulpfactory in Krsko, is considered category III-IV. Flowingthrough Croatia, the Sava River is contaminated byindustrial and municipal waste. Additionally, some ofthe river’s tributaries have a high nitrogen and phos-phorus content, which causes occasional river blos-soming and oxygen deficiency. Drava River water qual-ity is higher.

Although the river receives agricultural wastewaterfrom neighbouring Slovenia, Austria and Hungary, itsquality tends to improve on its way through Croatia.Data from 2003 on Croatian rivers, lakes and reservoirsshow considerable improvement, although, becauseworsening of water quality is caused mainly by uncon-trolled municipal discharge, there are fluctuations inplanned water quality categories. Biological parametermeasurements show the least deterioration, which indi-cates a long-term positive trend for the ecological stateof the waters.

Numerous hydropower plants and water reservoirsin Croatia and neighbouring countries still hold highpotential for electricity production but also the threatsof changing water regimes and negative effects toecosystems. The sewage system serves 40 percent ofthe population, with only 12 percent of all wastewatertreated. In municipal wastewater alone, this figure is4.4 percent, and less than 5 percent of water receivessecondary treatment, while tertiary treatment unitshave not been introduced in the country.

SeaSince 1998, some monitoring programmes have

been implemented in Croatia, including the nationalmonitoring programme known as the SystematicResearch of the Adriatic Sea as a Base for SustainableDevelopment in the Republic of Croatia or “ProjectAdriatic,” the National Programme for Monitoring theSanitary Quality of the Sea on Beaches of the CroatianPart of Adriatic Sea and the National Programme forMonitoring Marine Pollution from Land-Based Sources.

Seven smaller enclosed bays in the Adriatic coastalarea have been defined as hot spots for marine pollu-tion caused by municipal and industrial wastewaterdischarges, pollution from ships and river sediment.These conditions have resulted in increased eutrophi-cation levels and a higher concentration of nutrientsalts and hazardous substances, i.e. heavy metals,DDT, PCBs and chlorinated hydrocarbons, than per-mitted by regulations. Nevertheless, the beach waterquality in Croatia is very good, as determined by publichealth institutes in over 850 coastal and island loca-tions. The results of seawater quality testing on beach-es shows high quality, and about 98.5 percent of sam-ples comply with prescribed standards. Lika-SenjCounty has the highest number of beaches with high-quality seawater.

Seasonal variations of bacteriological pollution andcontamination with organic matter and sewage indicatethat the sea pollution on beaches is connected with thesewage disposal in major cities, settlements and ports.The moderate pollution of beaches occurs in July andAugust, simultaneously with maximum quantities of



discharged wastewater. Other factors influencing thedeterioration of the seawater quality in this timeinclude an increase of marine-property users andweather conditions that impact sediment.

As a result of population density, and inadequatecollection, drainage and discharging of wastewater, theseaside facing continental shores is much more bur-dened by wastewater than the coastal sea adjacent tothe islands. The testing of seawater quality conductednear islands encompassed only the sea nearby urbanareas, where the influence of wastewater is to beexpected. The remainder of the shore was not moni-tored and is deemed clean.

AirIn 2002, total emission of greenhouse gases

amounted to 28 kilotonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2)equivalent, a decrease of 11.5 percent from 1990. Thedecrease in emissions from 1991-1994 caused by thewar and closure of most heavy-industry facilities hasbecome a slight upturn, showing a constant annualincrease of 3.3 percent, with around 75 percent attrib-utable to the energy sector. According to Kyoto Proto-col obligations, Croatia must decrease its emissions, asdetermined by the baseline year 1990, in the period2008-2012 by 5 percent.

Air quality in settlements has been improving in thelast 10 years, thanks to the introduction of natural gasand heating facilities operated from heating plants, thesubstitution of alternative fuel sources to coal, and grad-ual reconstruction of the Croatian economy towardenvironmentally cleaner technologies. Due to use offuel with lower sulphur content in power plants from1999 and a decline in energy consumption, sulphuremissions have been decreased by 61.5 percent, carbonmonoxide (CO) emission by 12 percent, and NMVOCemission by 36 percent from 1990 levels. However,emission of nitrous oxides (NOx) has increased due theconstant increase in automotive transport, the mostsignficant contributor of such emission.

BiodiversityCompared to the majority of European countries,

Croatia has a great diversity of ecological systems andhabitats. Within its territory there are wetlands, flood,mountain and Mediterranean forests, karst areas,coastal lands, islands, sea and arable land and grass-lands. This diversity is reflected in a wealth of biodiver-sity, including flora, mycoflora and fauna species. Thewealth of Croatia’s endemic taxa, as well as of numer-ous rare and threatened relicts from the Tertiary andIce Age, is particularly notable in the karst under-ground, coastal mountains, and offshore islands. As the

ministry responsible for nature conservation in Croatia,the Ministry of Culture is implementing the KarstEcosystem Conservation Project, financed by GlobalEnvironmental Facility through the World Bank, withthe goal of improving conservation and sustainable useof the karst ecosystem.

Croatia boasts a wealth of biodiversity, with around34,000 known taxa present, of which 7,523 are plantspecies, 24,087 are animal species, 1,744 are fungi and925 are lichens. However, this figure represents aroundhalf the estimate of total Croatian species, includingthose of unexplored territory. This latter statistic testi-fies to the low degree of exploration of Croatian flora,mycoflora and fauna. The most extensive knowledgeexists of the higher species of plants, i.e. pteridophytes,gymnosprems, and angiosperms, with 4,288 species;vertebrate species number 1,085.

Systematic study and monitoring of the local bio-logical diversity must be strengthened, and a nationalprogramme to inventory Croatia’s biological diversity isto be developed. Croatia is one of the few Europeancountries without maps detailing flora, mycoflora andfauna and still lacks the essential field guides for identi-fication of species, which would enable a larger circleof nature lovers to join in inventorying. This issue isexpected to be solved by a CARDS technical assistanceproject aimed at helping the State Institute for NatureProtection develop a biodiversity inventory and moni-toring scheme, and a methodology for assessment ofprotected-area management plans, which would aid inefforts toward increasing insight and improvement ofthe capability in protecting and carefully conservingthe country’s valuable biodiversity.

Currently, around 10 percent of Croatian land isprotected, though there are proposals to increase thisto a figure nearer the EU average of 15-20 percent.There are eight national parks and 11 nature parksunder the auspices of the Ministry of Culture, Direc-torate for Nature Protection. Another six categories ofspatial protection — two strict reserves, 79 specialreserves, 31 natural monuments, 68 protected land-scapes, 91 park-forests, and 138 park architecture mon-uments — are of the responsibility of counties, whichare obliged to establish management authorities forthese protected area categories in their respective terri-tories. Due to limited resources, however, only sevenof 21 counties have done so thus far, and the level ofmanagement in some areas is rather poor. Withapproximately 43 percent of the territory of Croatiabeing forested, and a high level of biodiversity, defini-tion of the Natura 2000 site network will represent amajor challenge. The protection of endangered speciesoutside protected areas is envisaged by the new NatureProtection Act of 2003, but not yet fully ensured inpractice. Several mechanisms, such as the measures



and conditions for nature conservation issued by theMinistry of Culture for activities which can affect biodi-versity, e.g. hunting, riverbank maintenance, infrastruc-ture, already exist within the Act, but enforcement ofthe prescribed measures is to be strengthened.

Croatia has cooperated with the Visegrad countriesin building national ecological networks, and hasrecently finalised a project co-financed by the Euro-pean Commission’s LIFE III Fund, Building up theNational Ecological Network as a Part of the Pan-Euro-pean Ecological Network & NATURA 2000 Network(CRO-NEN). The new Nature Protection Act defines“national ecological network” (NEN) as a network ofnationally and internationally important areas. TheNational Ecological Network Map was drafted as pro-vided for by the Nature Protection Act, covering eco-logically significant areas of international and nationalimportance. NEN will be included in the Pan EuropeanEcological Network (PEEN) being developed by theEuropean Centre for Nature Conservation.


The main national priorities in the environmentalfield are the harmonisation of legislation relevant tothat of the European Union, and resolution of thewaste management situation.

A CARDS project on developing the EU Environ-mental Approximation Strategy to be finalised in early2006 is expected to result in approximation strategiesand implementation plans for the three sectors underthe competence of MEPPPC — waste management, airquality, and industrial pollution management (IPPC) —while ongoing efforts for aligning water sector legisla-tion will be supported by another CARDS-funded pro-ject focusing on urban wastewater treatment, anothermajor issue. The National Waste Management Strategywas adopted by the Parliament in October 2005, andseveral foreign assistance projects are already ongoingwithin the framework of implementing the strategy’smain principle, that of taking the regional approach towaste management, as opposed to the individual land-fills used in the past.


The Fund for Environmental Protection and EnergyEfficiency is mandated to ensure additional resourcesfor financing preparation, implementation and devel-opment of programmes, projects and similar activities

in the sector for the preservation, sustainable use, pro-tection and improvement of the environment, and toparticipate in funding of national energy programmes,with a goal of achieving energy efficiency and use ofrenewable energy resources. The fund is an extra-bud-getary legal entity, vested with public authority. Fundrevenues come from environmental fees recently intro-duced on the basis of the Fund for Environmental Pro-tection and Energy Efficiency Act.

At the moment, fees contributing to fund revenuesinclude charges for environmental emissions of sul-phur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NO2), calculat-ed and paid according to volumes produced by legaland natural persons through business activities, on cal-endar yearly basis; for non-hazardous industrial waste,according to volume deposited on disposal sites; forhazardous waste; and for motor vehicles, paid uponannual registration and technical certification of vehi-cles. According to the act, a further charge for CO2emissions and the environment user charge are alsoplanned to be introduced.

As of January 2006, the fund has been engaged in apackaging waste collection scheme financed by rev-enues from charges paid to the fund. According to theOrdinance of Packaging and Packaging Waste, thesefees include:

• disposal fees determined by packing material andproduct unit;

• returnable fees for one-time use packaging ofdrinks and beverages; and

• stimulative fees for packaging of drinks and bever-ages to encourage multiple use and/or returnablepackaging.

According to the Regulation on Substances thatDeplete the Ozone Layer, an additional charge onimport of those substances was introduced in 2006.This charge is also revenue for the fund, and is ear-marked for the disposal/destruction of waste-con-trolled and alternative substances.

In 2004 and 2005, fund allocations approved by theparliament for programmes of environmental protectionand energy efficiency totalled approximately EUR 35 mil-lion per year. The allocations were primarily focused onthe remediation of municipal landfills. The fund providessupport in the form of lower-interest loans, grants andsubsidies through public tendering procedures. The fundis primarily responsible to the Ministry of EnvironmentalProtection, Physical Planning and Construction and tothe Ministry of Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship.

Water supply and water protection programmes arefunded through Croatian Waters, the public water man-agement agency. The allocation approved by the par-liament for 2004 was EUR 76.7 million, and for 2005almost EUR 105 million.



The new Air Protection Act of 2004 anticipates thateconomic instruments will be used in financing air emis-sions reductions. A special regulation or governmentalmeasure may be adopted to provide tax exemptions forinvestment in purification equipment, in plants whichimplement technology, in raw materials and manufac-turing processes more favorably affecting air qualitythan other similar manufacturing processes and tech-nologies, and in use of renewable energy sources.

The state budget funds are allocated for environ-mental programmes and activities through budgets ofline ministries and state institutions. In 2004, budgetaryspending for environment amounted to EUR 51 millionEUR, or 0.46 percent of the total state budget. In 2005,EUR 56 million, or 0.47 percent, was allocated.

Other regular allocations exist for less developedlocal and regional governments in the form of centralgovernment support for financing development pro-grammes and capital expenditures, including environ-mental protection expenditures. A portion of this sup-port is administered through the Regional Develop-ment Fund according to priorities formulated throughinvestment projects within county operational pro-grammes, while environment-related investmentscover mainly municipal infrastructure, i.e. wastewatertreatment, water supply, and waste management.Counties and local governments also have their ownrevenues, which are partly used to finance environ-mental activities and programmes.

Environment-related revenue sources contributingto the state budget and local/regional budgets include:

• excise taxes on products that have an environmen-tal impact, e.g. tobacco products, oil derivatives,motor vehicles, vessels, and aircraft;

• administrative fees for state-, locally- and or region-ally-issued permits, depending on the type of per-mit, e.g. waste and protected spices;

• fines for non-compliance with waste managementlegislation paid to the town or municipality;

• fines for non-compliance with air protection legisla-tion, nature conservation, noise reduction, etc.; and

• others.

Charges for use of natural resources are collectedthrough fee levying such as:

• water protection charges, paid on the basis of dis-charged water quantity and its impact on waterquality and possible use, are paid to CroatianWaters with the amount invested in full in waterquality control; and

• fees for multiple non-wood forest functions paid toCroatian Forests, municipal charges such as watersupply charge, wastewater collection and treatment

charges, waste collection, transport and disposalcharges, tourist fees, concession charges (e.g. formarine resources exploitation, water and publicwater domains), fishing fees, charges for theexploitation of raw minerals, and others.

National financing of environmental protection waslow in the past period. Available funds and incentivesfrom public revenue have been insufficient for envi-ronmental investments. Significant improvement hasbeen seen with the introduction of new environmentalcharges based in the Law on Environmental Protectionand Energy Efficiency Fund of 2003 and the aforemen-tioned fund activities, which include subsidised interestrates on loans offered by Croatian development andcommercial banks. The subsidies have recentlyincreased bank financing of environmental projects.

EU-Croatia Relations: The Stabilisation andAssociation Process

The Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA)with Croatia was signed on October 29, 2001, andentered into force February 1, 2005. Croatia applied forEU membership in February 2003. In April 2004, theEuropean Commission issued a positive opinion on theapplication and recommended opening accessionnegotiations. The recommendation was endorsed bythe June 2004 European Council, with formal negotia-tions beginning in October 2005. The first step is thescreening process, in which Croatian legislation is com-pared in detail with EU legislation. This began in Octo-ber 2005 and examination of environment was fore-seen for April 2006.

The Accession Partnership2

The European Council endorsed the introduction ofpartnerships to place the European perspective ofWestern Balkan countries within the framework of theStabilisation and Association Process (SAP).

A European Partnership with Croatia was adopted bythe Council on September 13, 2004. On October 3, 2005,the member states started EU accession negotiations withCroatia. An Accession Partnership was adopted, updatingthe previous partnership on the basis of findings in the2005 Commission’s Progress Report on Croatia. This newAccession Partnership identifies new priorities for actionadapted to the country’s specific needs and stage ofpreparation, provides guidance for financial assistanceand will be updated as necessary. Croatia is expected todevelop a plan, including a timetable and specific mea-sures, to address Accession Partnership priorities.



EU AssistanceIn 2001-2004, the European Commission supported

reforms in Croatia through its CARDS assistance pro-gramme. For the environmental sector, the total finan-cial allocation for the period amounted to EUR 10.5million. The support was directed to legislation, waste,water, NGOs, environmental impact assessment,renewable energy sources, and other environmentrelated activities. CARDS has been financing a numberof strategies through several projects: Strategy for EUEnvironmental Law Approximation, National WasteManagement Strategy Framework — Focus on Munici-pal Waste, Capacity Strengthening Measures for theEnvironment Agency, Approximation of Water Man-agement Legislation with EU Water Acquis, and others.Croatia also receives funds from the CARDS regionalprogramme, which finances the collaboration of SEEcountries with the European Environment Agency andRegional Environmental Reconstruction Programmeactivities, among others.

Since becoming a candidate country in 2004, Croat-ia has stood to benefit from all three pre-accessionfinancial instruments: Phare for institution-building andeconomic and social cohesion, ISPA for environmentand transport infrastructures, and SAPARD for agricul-tural and rural development. Croatia also remains eligi-ble for the CARDS Regional Programme in 2005 and2006. Pre-accession financing will amount to EUR 105million in 2005 (EUR 80 million from Phare; EUR 25million from ISPA) and EUR 140 million in 2006 (EUR80 million from Phare; EUR 35 million from ISPA; EUR25 million from SAPARD). The Memorandum of Under-

standing on the Establishment of the National Fund,which provides a legal basis for the introduction of adecentralised implementation system for EU pre-acces-sion assistance, was signed in May 2005. Croatia hasused its experience in implementing CARDS to adaptand extend the current CARDS mechanism in order toimplement PHARE. Since the beginning of 2004, theTAIEX assistance instrument is also available to Croatia.

Relations with International Financial Institutions3

The World Bank has supported preparation of theNational Environmental Action Plan, as well as activitiesrelated to wetland protection; forest protection; biodiversi-ty conservation in karst landscapes; wastewater treatmentin eastern Slavonia and Adriatic coastal cities; and energyefficiency and renewable energy investments. The futureprogramme will support EU accession focused on imple-menting the environment acquis, absorption of EU funds,and planning for investment-heavy environmental direc-tives. Support programmes will include waste manage-ment, implementation of the Nitrates Directive and agri-environment measures of rural development. In additionto financial assistance, the World Bank has provided forseveral analytical and policy studies through its agencies.

Croatia has been a member of the European Bankfor Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) sinceMarch 1993. The City of Zagreb Solid Waste Manage-ment Programme started in 1998 as a loan to the city-owned company ZGOS, with the City of Zagreb guar-anteeing to rehabilitate the landfill to protect nearby

Short-term priorities• To continue to develop horizontal legislation, includ-

ing on environmental impact assessment and publicparticipation;

• To clearly define responsibilities and strengthen theadministrative and operational capacity at nationaland regional levels to ensure planning, includingpreparation of financial strategies;

• To continue to strengthen the capacity of nationaland regional inspection services to effectively enforceenvironmental legislation;

• To urgently adopt and implement a national wastemanagement plan.

Medium-term priorities• To ensure the integration of environmental protection

requirements into the definition and implementationof other sectoral policies;

• To develop an environmental investment strategybased on estimates of alignment costs;

• To continue to implement horizontal legislation;

• To continue work on the transposition of the EUacquis, with particular emphasis on waste manage-ment, water quality, air quality, nature protection andintegrated pollution prevention and control;

• To increase investments in environmental infrastruc-ture, with particular emphasis on wastewater collec-tion and treatment, drinking-water supply, and wastemanagement;

• To ratify the Kyoto Protocol to the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change.




water resources and reduce the pollution of air, soiland river. Following successful implementation, theprogramme was refinanced in 2003, and the EBRD iscurrently assisting the city and ZGOS to structure andprepare the Solid Waste Incinerator project for financ-ing under the Design-Build-Operate (DBO) model. Asstated in its strategy for Croatia (approved in March2005) the EBRD will work with large and medium-sized municipalities to develop their infrastructureprojects for prospective ISPA co-financing. In addi-tion, the EBRD will continue to reach small munici-palities through local banks, promoting investment inenvironmental infrastructure with donor support fromthe EU and the Netherlands. The EBRD will continueto support national infrastructure projects in the trans-port sector in particular. Infrastructure sector financ-ing will be closely coordinated with Croatian authori-ties and other IFIs, in particular the European Invest-ment Bank and the EU, leading to joint financingarrangements and mobilisation of ISPA/IPA fundswhere possible.


The 1994 Environmental Protection Act amended in1999 provides the legal framework for environmentalprotection. It is a framework regulation for strategicdocuments such as national strategy, programmes andreports on the state of the environment. This act alsorelates to future regulations that would create a legisla-tive base for increased public involvement in environ-mental affairs. The environmental sector was includedin the national programme for EU integration for thefirst time in 2004. The new Environmental ProtectionAct in line with the acquis communitaire is expected tobe adopted in 2006.

Different instruments for environmental protectionare in place: environmental impact assessment (EIA),environmental protection standards, environmentalstate monitoring, the Environmental Pollution Cadastre,the Environmental Protection Information System, pro-visions on liability for environmental pollution, envi-ronmental protection intervention plans, and environ-mental inspection of Environmental Protection Actimplementation. Various legal provisions exist toensure public access to environmental information,although the existing Environmental Protection Act isnot yet fully in line with the Aarhus Convention, whichCroatia has signed, but not yet ratified. Regulations onenvironmental impact assessment (EIA) contain provi-sions on public participation.

Overall, Croatia will have to make further consider-able and sustained efforts to align its legislation withthe environmental acquis and to effectively implementand enforce it. Effective compliance with a number ofpieces of community legislation requiring a high levelof sustained investment and considerable administra-tive effort (e.g. waste management, wastewater treat-ment and water supply) can be achieved only in thelong term and will require a significant increase inenvironmental investments. The basic legislative frame-work to enable Croatia to pursue the alignment withthe acquis is in place. At present, various strategies andaction plans give prominence to environmental protec-tion, such as the following.

The Strategy and Action Plan for the Protection ofBiological and Landscape Diversity of Croatia (NSAP)adopted in 1999 is the first document in which protec-tion of nature is planned in an integrated and systemat-ic manner. It was developed to promote nature protec-tion as an integrated activity based on species, habitatand protected area conservation. NSAP also aims toensure rational and sustainable use of natural resourcesby all users, with the focus on decentralisation ofimplementation efforts, from the traditional single-authority approach to the involvement of other actorsin monitoring and inventorying activities, especiallyNGOs and the scientific community.

The 2002 National Environmental Strategy andNational Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) outlinesthe integration of environmental concerns into othersectors as a main principle of action toward sustainabledevelopment. One priority is the task of analysing andharmonising Croatian legislation with the acquis, withgeneral cost estimates. The development of NEAP has,to the highest extent possible, followed the main ele-ments of the 5th and 6th EU Action Programmes, andas such represents one of the first sectoral documentsin Croatia within the framework of EU approximation.

In order to systematically promote and increaseenergy efficiency in the country, the Croatian Govern-ment initiated the Croatian Energy Sector DevelopmentStrategy (2002) and the PROHES project, Developmentand Organisation of the Energy Sector. The strategypromotes incorporation of the sustainable develop-ment concept in all measures, use of renewable energyresources and support for research, development anddemonstration of new clean and efficient technologies.However, Croatia still lacks both the capacity andfinancial resources to actively implement these initia-tives in practice.

In 2002, the Croatian Parliament also adopted theNational Strategy on Agriculture and Fisheries, whichsupports fair competition in the agricultural sector,with focus on sustainable rural development. The aimof the strategy is preservation of the rural sector, and



support for research in green agricultural techniquespromoting sustainable organic farming. The benefits ofthis approach are contributing to the creation of origi-nal Croatian products and brands; protection and con-servation of natural resources; and ensuring healthier,safer foodstuffs.

The Waste Management Strategy of the Republic ofCroatia anticipates a system of regional waste manage-ment centres and transfer stations, which would signifi-cantly reduce the number of uncontrolled landfills, andespecially minimise the waste pressure on islands.

The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Physi-cal Planning was established in 2000 as a central bodyof state administration. Under the new government’srecent reorganisation in January 2004, it has become theMinistry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planningand Construction (MEPPPC). The MEPPPC has respon-sibility for many different aspects of environmental pro-tection, although other ministries such as the Ministry ofCulture (in the Directorate for Nature Protection), andthe Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Manage-ment (MAFWM) also have important roles. In 2002, twonew institutions were established: the EnvironmentAgency and the State Institute for Nature Protection.Within MEPPPC, the key unit responsible for environ-mental issues is the Directorate for Environmental Pro-tection, which details administrative tasks relating togeneral environmental protection policies in achievingconditions for sustainable development, protection ofair, soil and sea, and waste management.

Other organisational units dealing with environ-mental issues are the Directorate for Strategic and Inte-gration Processes in Environmental Protection, theDirectorate for Inspection, the Directorate for Housing,Municipal Economy and Construction, and the Direc-torate for Physical Planning. The Directorate forInspection is organised in 20 office branches in countyseats under the head office in Zagreb, and almost halfof the approximately 500 ministry staff are assigned tothis directorate.

The Ministry of Culture has prime responsibilityfor nature protection through its Directorate of NatureProtection, with departments concerning sustainableuse of natural resources, biodiversity and landscapeinspection. The MAFWM manages most issues relatingto water management (excepting drinking andbathing waters) through its Directorate for WaterManagement. Other ministries competent in environ-mental protection are the Ministry of Health andSocial Welfare, the Ministry of Sea, Tourism, Trans-port and Development, and the Ministry of Economy,Labour and Entrepreneurships.

Local government has a limited but important rolein environmental protection. This role includes munici-pal waste management, a number of aspects of water

management, and air quality monitoring. Insufficientadministrative capacity at local levels affects their abili-ty to work closely with national institutions. Fundshave been secured for technical assistance in institu-tional strengthening at the local level within EU’sCARDS and Phare programmes. The environmentalinspectorate will be supported through the 2005 Phareproject Enhanced Environmental Inspection forEnforcement of New Environmental Legislation.

State of Environmental Civil SocietyAccording to Croatian legislation, the 2001 Law on

Associations, the terms “association” and “civil societyorganisation” encompass a range of non-profit organi-sations along the lines of NGOs, foundations and pri-vate institutions, and do not include political parties,religious communities or syndicates.

Public interest and citizen involvement concerningenvironmental issues in Croatia have increased sincethe late 1980s. Environmental NGOs typically identifyproblems, research needs, seek solutions on both localand global levels, and motivate citizens to get involved.More than 270 environmental groups are now regis-tered in Croatia, although a much lower number isactually active; the majority is concentrated in largetowns with around 40 percent in Zagreb, and mostnewer groups (30 percent) are located in smaller townsand villages. NGOs are active in around 100 differentlocations throughout Croatia. In Zagreb and othermajor towns, several advanced groups operate, andapproximately 20 organisations act as professionalNGOs dealing mainly with pollution-related issues. TheGreen Platform represents the reorganisation of 33NGOs into a single national NGO network, whichenables the organisation of joint campaigns and distrib-ution of responsibilities to the relevant national, region-al or local organisation. A steering group of seven isestablished, with one NGO hosting the secretariat.

According to certain extant regulations, e.g. the EIARulebook and the Physical Planning Act, the public isinvolved in some decision-making processes such asphysical plan development or evaluation of environ-mental impacts at the project level.

Financial support to NGOs is institutionalised inCroatia. On an annual basis, the MEPPPC announcestenders with the purpose of supporting NGO projectsand programmes. In 2005, HRK 2,000,000 (EUR270,000) in support was awarded to NGOs by theMEPPPC through the tendering procedure.

The overall weakness of Croatia’s environmentalmovement in the civil sector is reflected in organisa-tional problems such as lack of cooperation and net-working within the movement; lack of knowledge oflegal and administrative issues needed to communicate



with government stakeholders; weak institutionalcapacity for project development and implementation;low absorption capacity; underdeveloped fund-raisingskills; insufficient environmental training; and lack ofvolunteer support. Environmental NGOs, whichaccount for less than 1 percent of all civil societyorganisations in the country, require both institutionaland financial support to implement local environmen-tal projects, thus raising the awareness of the generalpublic as well as influencing environmental policy-making through public participation.

State of Regional and Cross-Border Cooperation

Croatia is an active member of several regional andsub-regional initiatives.

In December 2002, Croatia signed the Sava RiverBasin Framework Agreement with Slovenia, Bosnia andHerzegovina, and Serbia and Montenegro. In February2003, Croatia signed the Memorandum of Understand-ing on the Regional Electricity Market in South EastEurope (REM), and its addendum in December 2003.

Croatia signed an environmental agreement withBosnia and Herzegovina on water management rela-tions in 1996.

Relations with the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia are generally good, and there are no openissues. The countries have signed 24 bilateral agree-ments. Croatia has signed a general agreement with theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on environ-mental protection.

In the field of environment, Croatia has signed anagreement with Slovenia on water management rela-tions in 1996 and both are parties, together with Italy,to the Agreement on Protection of the Adriatic Sea andCoastal Area from Pollution (as successor states of theSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia). In this frame-work, the mixed Croatian-Italian-Slovenian Commis-sion for the Protection of the Adriatic Sea and CoastalAreas is active.

Cooperation with Hungary is strong through thecurrent Programme on Developing Ecological Structur-al Measures in the Drava River Basin funded throughthe INTERREG III B CADSES instrument. Hungary andCroatia also signed an agreement on water manage-ment in 1994.

Croatia and Albania have good political relations,with 23 bilateral agreements signed, including a gener-al agreement on environmental protection.

Bilateral relations with Italy, its largest trade partnerand an important investor, are extensive and of particu-lar importance for Croatia. The most successful form ofcollaboration between the two would therefore be anexchange of knowledge on environmentally friendly

industrial technologies and energy efficiency, bymeans of fairs and exhibitions. As party to theBarcelona Convention for the Protection of the MarineEnvironment and the Coastal Region of the Mediter-ranean and its Protocols, Croatia has actively participat-ed in activities of UNEP/MAP regional activity centres.Within the framework of the Trilateral Croatian-Italian-Slovenian Commission for the Protection of the AdriaticSea, a trilateral Agreement on the Contingency Plan forthe Adriatic was signed in 2005.


Urban air quality poses a major human healththreat, as do the emissions of gases and waste disposalsite pollution of water and soil. Lead inhalation andpollution of agricultural soil caused by traffic emissionsis another threat but has been decreasing since 1990,due to increased use of unleaded petrol in motor vehi-cles. Starting with 2006, leaded petrol will be prohibit-ed on the domestic market, and lead emissions fromroad traffic are expected to decrease to minimal levels.

According to analyses made in the preparations forEU accession, the health benefits to be received fromimplementing EU Air Quality Directives cover a broadrange, including decrease of bronchitis, tightness in thechest, and wheezing in the short term. Many chroniceffects such as lung cancer and cardiopulmonary dis-eases may decline. Benefits in Croatia include improve-ment of human health in presently polluted areas suchas Zagreb, Split, Sisak, Kutina and Rijeka. Sulphur diox-ide along with nitrogen oxides are the main precursorsof acid rain, which has been known to cause severedamage to crops, forests, lakes and streams worldwide.Reduction of pollution from these substances willreduce the amount of acid rain. Croatia is predominant-ly an importer of SOX and NOX. The trend of trans-boundary pollution by sulphur compounds has beendecreasing, whereas the trend with regard to nitrogenoxides has increased slightly. By measuring the chemi-cal composition of precipitation, shares of long-rangepollution by sulphur oxides of about 80 percent, nitro-gen oxides of about 70 percent, and ammonia of about50 percent have been established.

Although important and attractive as a resource,marine and coastal areas are facing permanent degra-dation caused by land-based and marine pollution, lossof coastal habitats due to urbanisation, and inadequatefishing management. Lack of overall environmentalawareness is still an important factor behind significantillegal use and overexploitation of natural resources.Due to decreased agricultural land area, the level ofpollution from agricultural production is moderate.Similarly, the low rate of livestock production currently



does not pose a particular environmental threat. Cer-tain types of fishing gear are causing particular damageto marine biodiversity. Forests, which are almost exclu-sively managed by state-owned public companyHrvatske sume are an important economic resourceand a major factor in environmental quality. The mostserious causes of forest damage are acid rain (predomi-nately caused by “imported” transboundary pollution),forest fires, and soil erosion.

According to the Red Data Books of Croatia, pre-pared until 2005 for 10 analysed groups of taxa, 395 ofthe 1,171 species covered (including 94 stenoen-demics) are endangered, while others belong to lower-risk categories or are inadequately known or explored.Due to the loss of their natural habitats by extensivebuilding, land reclamation for agriculture or construc-tion purposes, or due to climate change, six species offreshwater fish, four mammal species, 10 species ofvascular plants, 13 bird species and one reptile arethought to be extinct in Croatia.

Compared to other European countries, Croatia stillhas the highest biodiversity index, which needs to bepreserved through appropriate measures. The NationalBiodiversity and Landscape Strategy, adopted by theCroatian parliament in 1999, contains several sets ofaction plans and emergency conservation measures forparticular taxa and habitats. Within this framework, thenational action plans for the conservation of threehighly endangered large predator species — wolf,brown bear and lynx — are being developed or imple-mented. The recently finalised three-year action pro-gramme Conservation and Management of Wolves inCroatia has established the mechanism for long-termconservation of wolves and their harmonious co-exis-tence with humans. Project activities included institu-tional strengthening, wolf population monitoring andmanagement, damage reduction, education and infor-mation, and encouraging participation of interestgroups in decision making.

ENDNOTES1 Ministry of Agriculture, Forrestry and Water Management.

2 EC, Proposal for a Council Decision on the Principles, Priori-ties, and Conditions contained in the Accession Partnershipwith Croatia [SEC (2005) 1424].

3 EC Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs,The Western Balkans in Transition.

REFERENCES

CIA. “Croatia” in The World Factbook..

Croatia State Institute for Nature Protection. Red Data Book ofEndangered Plants and Animals of Croatia, 2004.

Croatian State Institute for Nature Protection <www.dzzp.hr>.

Croatian Environment Agency <www.azo.hr>.

EC. Croatia 2005 Progress Report. COM (2005) 561 final. Brus-sels, November 9, 2005.

EC. Implementation and Enforcement Capacities in Croatia forthe Environmental Acquis. COM (2005) 556. Brussels, Novem-ber 9, 2005.


The NBSAP. State Directorate for the Protection of Nature andEnvironment, 1999-2000.

REC Croatia. Strategic Environmental Analysis of Croatia.


The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management ofCroatia

The Ministry of Culture, Nature Protection Division, of Croatia

The Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning andConstruction of Croatia.

National authorities, IMF, EC estimates: (1) Before grants. (2)After grants. (3) Net. EHP.

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E S O F T H E C O U N T R I E S O F S O U T H E A S T E R N E U R O P E 49

LOCATION

South Eastern Europe, north of Greece

AREA

Total surface area: 2,713 sq kmPlain terrains: 4,900 sq kmWater surfaces: 488 sq kmReddish and mountain terrains: 20,325 sq km

LAND BOUNDARIES

Total: 850 kmBorders: Albania (191 km), Bulgaria (165 km), Greece (262 km), Serbia and Montenegro (232 km)

CLIMATE

Warm, dry summers and autumns; relatively cold winters withheavy snowfall

ELEVATION EXTREMES

Lowest point: Vardar River — 50 mHighest point: Golem Korab — 2,764 m

NATURAL RESOURCES

Arable land, asbestos, chromite, copper, gold, gypsum, low-gradeiron ore, lead, manganese, nickel, silver, timber, tungsten, zinc

NATURAL HAZARDS

Considerable seismic activity


Air pollution


2002 2003 2004 2005(projected)

Growth in GDP 0.9 2.8 2.9 3.5(real change, in percent)Inflation 2.4 1.1 0.3 0.0(change in consumer priceindex, in percent)Foreign direct investment 77 97 150 150(in million USD)Unemployment rate 31.9 36.7 37.2 n.a

Environmental Profile: formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia

F O R M E R Y U G O S L A VR E P U B L I C O F M A C E D O N I A

Skopje

A L B A N IA

B U L G A R I A

S E R B I A A N D M O N T E N E G R O

Kumanovo

Ohrid

Tetovo

G R E E C E

0 50 100

kilometres

Veles

Bitola

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E : F O R M E R Y U G O S L A V R E P U B L I C O F M A C E D O N I A

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E S O F T H E C O U N T R I E S O F S O U T H E A S T E R N E U R O P E50


IntroductionThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is a

small country located in the centre of the BalkanPeninsula. It has a population of 2,071,210 (based onfigures from 2004) and a territory of 25,713 square kilo-metres. Of this, approximately 49 percent is agriculturalland, 9 percent irrigated land, 37 percent forest, 2 per-cent lakes and 3 percent urban or industrial land.1 Theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is a countrywithout coastline, though it is rich in water resources,most notably the major lakes Ohrid, Prespa and Dor-jan. After becoming an independent state in 1991 withthe break-up of the Socialist Federal Republic ofYugoslavia, the country began a period of social andeconomic reform, which involved restructuring govern-ment, privatising large-scale public enterprises, andrewriting macroeconomic policies.

On the national level, the Ministry of Environmentand Physical Planning (MEPP) holds the legal obligationto create and implement environmental policy in theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, to lead theactivities in the area of the environment, and to providefor rational use of space and natural resources. Bodieswithin the MEPP include the State Environment Inspec-torate, the Service for Spatial Information Systems, andthe Office for Environment. Within the office for envi-ronment operates the environmental laboratory whichcarries out measurements and expert analyses of pollu-tion. According to the Law on Environment, the officewill be transformed into the Administration of Environ-ment, becoming a body within the MEPP with addition-al administrative activities under its competence.

Apart from the MEPP, which has the leading role inthe field of environment, other ministries also holddirect or indirect competences in the domain of envi-ronmental management including the Ministry ofDefence; the Ministry of the Interior; the Ministry ofEconomy; the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry andWater Economy; the Ministry of Health; and the Min-istry of Transport and Communications. Local self-gov-ernment units are responsible for regulating and per-forming activities of public interest and local impor-tance, especially in the domains of waste management,

integrated environmental permitting, compliance per-mitting, and inspection supervision.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia listsregional cooperation as one of the main pillars in itsinternational political activity. The country is a memberof the South Eastern Europe Cooperation Process(SEECP); Central European Initiative (CEI); StabilityPact (SP); South-Eastern Cooperative Initiative (SECI);and the Athens and Segedin processes.

Apart from the Regional Environmental Reconstruc-tion Programme, the country participates in severalregional activities and projects in the field of environ-ment such as: the Initiative for Development of anIndicative Map under the Pan-European EnvironmentalNetwork, coordinated by the European Centre forNature Conservation (ECNC); a regional initiativeaimed at the establishment of the Emerald Network ofAreas of Special Conservation Interest (ASCI); and aregional project Capacity Building for Improving theQuality of Data Input to National Greenhouse GasInventories. The MEPP attaches high importance to thedevelopment of bilateral cooperation, including coop-eration with regard to the protection, promotion andsustainable development of three natural lakes andborder massifs belonging to the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia and its neighbours.


Mountain soil predominates in the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia, accounting for 1,655,227hectares, or approximately 64.4 percent, of all land; soilin the valleys accounts for 916,073 hectares, or 36 per-cent. Approximately 665,000 hectares are arable land,with approximately 390,000 hectares lowland pasturesor land put to non-agricultural use.

The production of food based upon soil usedepends on the very quality of the soil itself and theextent to which it is polluted. Dominant causes of dis-turbance and endangering of soil quality in the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia include polluted

Environmental Profile: former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia



wastewater, air particles, surface coal and mineral rawmaterial excavation, erosion, improper use of chemi-cals in agriculture, roads, landfills, urban and rural set-tlements, livestock farms with inadequately built sup-plementary facilities, weekend cottage settlements, andinfrastructure.

Roughly half the territory of the state belongs to thefarming sector, for a total of 1,291,251 hectares. Sincethe 1960s, 18.6 percent of farming stock has been lost,which amounts to an annual permanent loss of 0.5 per-cent of farming soil. The abandonment of arable soilwithin rural areas as a result of population migrations,changes in soil use, and non-farming use of high-quali-ty farming soil have all contributed to a significantenvironmental disturbance.

A full decade before the former Yugoslav Republicof Macedonia acquired its independence, its agriculturewas marked by a constant moderate increase and a vir-tually unvarying 14-16 percent share in the GDP.According to the 1994 census, the agricultural-basedpopulation of 226,498 accounted for 11.79 percent ofthe total population.

The agricultural sector in the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia today impacts the waterresources of the country through 106 different irriga-tion schemes, which have a capacity to serve 124,000hectares. However, due to system inefficiency, notmore than 80,000 hectares are successfully irrigated.The irrigation systems consist of 17 high dams with atotal reservoir capacity exceeding 500 million cubicmetres of water and 8,110 kilometres of pipes andcanals. It is estimated that 550 square kilometres ofland are irrigated.

Most of the irrigation systems, including those ofTikvesh, Bregalnica, Strumica and Lipkovo, whichtogether account for more than 50 percent of all irrigat-ed land, are more than 15 years old. Limited analysishas been performed on pollution from agriculturalsources, and its effects on water basins are not clearlyknown. Levels of pesticide and fertiliser use havedeclined since 1990, and it is expected that this dropwill in turn reduce the pollution load to the groundwa-ter. The Kozjak dam finished in 2004 will add to theirrigation system.

WaterThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia con-

tains a considerable amount of water resources, bothunderground and surface. Surface water resources arethe most important source for meeting water demand.

Due to the morphological, hydro-geological andhydro-geographical structure of the relief, run-offquickly runs into the hydrographic network, i.e. rivers,streams and lakes, subsequently flowing out of the

country. The only exceptions are the karstic areas,where water is retained in the ground for a longer peri-od and recharges the river network.

According to the hydrographic division, there arefour river basin districts: the Vardar, Crn Drim, Strumicaand Juzna Morava. The Vardar River Basin District(Aegean watershed) is the largest, containing 80 per-cent of the water flow leaving the country. Of theremaining 20 percent, 13 percent flows through theCrni Drim River Basin District (Adriatic watershed),with only seven percent through the Strumica RiverBasin District, a tributary of the Bulgarian Struma River(Aegean watershed). The Juzna Morava Basin District(Black Sea) covers only 44 square kilometers.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is clas-sified as semi-arid region (Ovce Pole is the driest areain the central Balkan Peninsula), making the use, pro-tection, conservation and development of waterresources of significant importance.

The Ministry of Transport and Communicationsmanages primary infrastructure, i.e. drinking waterand wastewater infrastructure, as secondary infrastruc-ture, operational adjustments are managed by munici-pal enterprises. As user charges are low and oftenuncollected, enterprises are unable to maintain ade-quate technical standards. Municipalities are also incharge of disinfecting drinking water. Sewage systemsare used for collecting and disposing of urban waste-water and precipitation water from urban areas. Gen-erally, existing sewage systems in major urban areasare designed to collect and convey both wastewaterand precipitated water. Only 12 cities have construct-ed separate sewage systems. The city of Skopje hasconstructed a separate system for wastewater (56 per-cent) and for precipitated water (18 percent). Usually,collectors of precipitated water discharge water intothe closest recipient, while wastewater is dischargeddownstream from urban areas.

A collection network of 280.6 kilometers andsewage network of 1,239.1 kilometres run on thenational level. Sewage systems are local systems ineach urban area. Beside these local systems are threelarger or regional sewage systems protecting lakesOhrid, Prespa and Dojran. Besides those protectingthese lakes, there are also treatment plants in Sv.Nikole and Makedonski Brod. Unfortunately, only theplants in Vranista, Struga and Makedonski Brod are inoperation. The wastewater treatment plant in Vranistahas facilities for mechanical, biological and chemicaltreatment. The purification rate of the treated waste-water satisfies environmental requirements and is dis-charged into the Crn Drim River. Recently, treatmentplants in Sv. Nikole, Dojran and in Ezerani, Prespa,have been reconstructed, but their operation does notfully satisfy environmental standards.



According to data from the Republic Health Insti-tute, drinking-water quality is high in public supplysystems, and the water is safe. Public water supply util-ities also have individual laboratories for controllingdrinking water quality.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is richin mineral, thermal and thermo-mineral water. Mineraland thermo-mineral water are renewable resources.The main geothermal zones are in the areas of Volko-vo-Skopje-Katlanovo, Kumanovo-Kratovo, Isti Banja-Kocani-Stip, Strumica, Smokvica-Negorci-Gevgelija andKosovrasti-Debar-Baniste.

AirThe main sources of air pollution in the former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are mobile sources(i.e. traffic), and stationary sources (i.e. industry, ener-gy production, central heating and residential heating).Air-quality problems are particularly pronounced in theareas of major cities, thus potentially affecting 60 per-cent of the population. In the period 1990 to 1995, airemissions decreased by 50 percent due to the overallrecession and decline in industrial production follow-ing the political changes. Since then, however, thetrend is slowly reversing with modest but steady,increases in the level of industrial activity.

Almost two-thirds of annual sulphur dioxide (SO2)emission derives from the combustion and transformationof energy whereas energy production and mobile sourcesare the major sources of emissions of nitrogen oxides(NOX). The single most important contributor to dust emis-sions are industrial production processes, while road trafficis the major source of carbon monoxide (CO) emission.

As a result of obsolete equipment and lack of mod-ern technologies, the industrial sector is a major air pol-luter, with activity in the metallurgy sector,2 and thechemical industry.3 Energy production from thermalpower plants (REK Bitola covers approximately 75 per-cent of the nationwide electricity demand) and districtheating facilities are other sectors whose activitiesseverely affect air quality. Emission levels from mobilesources depend on the level of activity, quality of fuelused as well as age of the vehicle fleet. Persistentorganic pollutant (POP) emission derives mainly frompolychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs)4 and poly-chlorinated dibenzo-p-furans (PCDFs). Annual POPsemission (from a recommendation by UNEP) amountto 166 g TEQ/a.5 The energy sector is the most signifi-cant source of greenhouse gas emissions. Ozone-depleting substances (ODS) have been reduced by 90percent from the period 1995-2000, a result of thenational action to phase out ODS.

BiodiversityThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has

rich and varied biological diversity, due to its diverserelief, varying climatic influences (Mediterranean, con-tinental, mountain), diverse soil types and geologicbedrock. The abudance and heterogeneity of speciesand ecosystems appear to be basic characteristics ofthe country’s biodiversity, which includes more than18,000 taxa of flora, fauna and fungi, of which over 900are endemic. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia contains a large number of threatened ecosystemsand habitats on a European scale6 and a number ofendemic plant species, some very rare, including Astra-galus cerjavski and Tulipa marianae; Salvia jurisicii;Ferulago macedonica; and Sambucus deborensis.

Despite the fact that the diversity of flora and faunahas not been fully studied, findings to date indicatehuge wealth. As an example, the diversity of inverte-brate species on a relatively limited surface at somesites (Ohrid Lake, marsh ecosystems and others) can becompared to the diversity of coral reefs.

According to the national Biodiversity Strategy andAction Plan adopted in 2004, several main threats to bio-diversity exist, including habitat loss, land-use modifica-tion and habitat fragmentation. The main sectors affect-ing biodiversity in the country are agriculture, fishing,traffic and road infrastructure, and energy production.

Because the country has no national “red list” offauna, the numbers of threatened species listed are inaccordance with the European Red List of Vertebrates.According to this list, birds have the highest number ofthreatened species (66), followed by fish (30), mam-mals (16) and reptiles (one). At 51.7 percent of the totalrecorded species at risk, the most threatened group oforganisms in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia is fish. In this group, Salmo lumi is consideredextinct, whereas populations of carp (Cyprinus carpio)are at a level of critical endangerment.

Major portions of the endemic invertebrate fauna inthe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are intrin-sically linked to aquatic ecosystems. The threats to thisfauna result from the decline in water levels of certainlakes, eutrophication of these lakes, and the pollutionof riverine ecosystems.

About 6.6 percent of state land is under some formof protection through the Law on Natural RaritiesPreservation. Protected lands include three nationalparks with an area of 108,388 hectares, three areas withspecial characteristics that cover 2,338 hectares, 14 spe-cial plant and animal reserves that cover 2,647hectares, and 47 natural monuments covering 58,084hectares. All three national parks, Pelister (12,500hectares), Galicica (22,750 hectares) and Mavrovo(73,088 hectares), are in forested areas. The Law onNature Protection stipulates a transitional period of



three years after its entry into force when re-evaluationof protected areas designated prior to its adoption willbe completed, and new legal acts for their proclama-tion will be adopted in line with the new law, thusrounding off the system of protected areas.


The following overall national priority objectivesare identified in the second National EnvironmentalAction Plan (tentative date for adoption March 2006):

• to continue the process of approximation of theenvironmental policies of the European Union,framework legislation and directive-specificrequirements;

• to provide for integration of environmental policiesinto other sectoral policies;

• to provide for administrative structures needed toensure efficient environmental management;

• to ensure efficient implementation and enforcementof environmental requirements;

• to encourage a greater sense of environmentalresponsibility in industry, with environmental ser-vice providers and other actors in the field ofenvironment;

• to pave the way for an environmentally sustainableapproach which integrates environmental consider-ations into the activities of various economic sectorswhile simultaneously paying attention to socialneeds and economic growth;

• to solve important national environmental prob-lems not addressed or covered through the effortsof EU approximation nor through any other inter-national effort; and

• to improve the level of compliance with obliga-tions under regional and global environmentalagreements to which the former Yugoslav Repub-lic of Macedonia is party, also implying the coun-try’s active involvement in international systemsfor environment.

National Funds and EconomicInstruments for Environment

Environmental improvement and protection activi-ties have thus far been financed from various sources,including the Environment Fund, the federal budget,donations and loans. The most important activities that

have been financed concern the protection of lakesDojran, Ohrid and Prespa; the construction of watersupply systems; development of a sanitary landfill forSkopje; and preparation of local action plans. Somekey problems that need the largest investments, how-ever, have not been solved.

In 2002-2004, the financial resources of the environ-ment fund and MEPP budget have mainly been invest-ed in water, air, waste and biological diversity, withpublic education and awareness raising also supported.

Over the course of these three years, the MEPPand the environment fund have executed invest-ments amounting to MKD 658,702,000, broken downas follows:

• in 2002, MKD 359,442,000;

• in 2003, MKD 149,100,000; and

• in 2004, MKD 150,160,000.

The fund’s only revenue source was user chargesfor registering motor vehicles and navigation vessels.

The environmental law in force as of September2005 discontinued the fund. Under the auspices of theMinistry of Environment and Physical Planning, a spe-cial department now conducts the fund’s activities.The 2005 environmental law introduces new chargesfor environmental protection based on the polluter-pays principle, and introduces a wider range of envi-ronmental taxes and charges to be paid by legal andnatural entities. Implementation of these environmen-tal taxes and charges, as well as earmarking of themoney collected, would be based on the AnnualInvestment Program. However, these revenue streamswill need to be established, so direct governmentfunding will be required in the short term if progress isto be made.

EU-former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia relations: theStabilisation and AssociationProcessDevelopments in the Stabilisation andAssociation Process

The Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP)took a step forward when the Stabilisation and Associa-tion Agreement (SAA) came into force in April 2004.After the SAA came into force, the Cooperation Councilbecome the Committee for Stabilisation and Associa-tion of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedoniawith the European Communities, which held meetingsin June 2004 and September 2005.



The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia pre-sented its application for European Union membershipon March 22, 2004. Following a positive opinion fromthe European Commission on November 9, 2005, theEuropean Council granted candidate status to the for-mer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia at its December15-16, 2005, meeting. Negotiations on future member-ship have yet to be opened.

The ability of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia to assume membership obligations hasbeen evaluated according to the undertaking of obliga-tions set out in the Stabilisation and Association Agree-ment, and the progress achieved with adoption, imple-mentation and enforcement of the acquis. For legisla-tion enforcement, significant efforts will be needed,particularly in environment, including substantialinvestment and strengthening of administrative capaci-ty. Full compliance with the acquis can only beachieved in the long term and necessitates increasedlevels of investment.

The European PartnershipThe first European Partnership with the former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was adopted by theCouncil on June 14, 2004; the second European Part-nership, adopted in 2005, identified new priorities foraction. The new priorities are adapted to the country’sspecific needs and stage of preparation, and will beupdated as necessary. The European Partnership alsoprovides the country guidance for financial assistance.The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is expect-ed to adopt a plan, including a timetable and specificmeasures to address European partnership priorities.

EU AssistanceThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has

benefited from EU assistance since 1992. The PHARE

Multiannual Assistance Programme 1996-1999 providedEUR 2 million in 1997 and EUR 3 million in 1999. Insti-tution building and equipment were the main foci ofthe assistance. In 2000, EUR 1 million from the OBNO-VA programme was devoted to protection of the Var-dar River from chromium pollution. Under the PHARECross Border Cooperation, EUR 1.6 million was provid-ed for environmental protection in cross-border areas.

The CARDS programme has been the main financialinstrument for the former Yugoslav Republic of Mace-donia, mainly implemented by the European Agencyfor Reconstruction. EUR 10 million have been allocatedto environment for the period 1999-2003.

Agency activities in 1998-2005 included:

• development of new environmental legislation inline with EU laws;

• encouragement of public awareness of environ-mental conservation;

• provision of new environmental laboratory moni-toring equipment, books and information technolo-gy for the Ministry of Environment, and vehicles forthe environmental inspectorate;

• promotion of the use of unleaded petrol;

• promotion of home composting;

• supplying air-quality monitoring stations to com-plete the Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Networkand calibration laboratory;

• protection of the Vardar River from chromium pol-lution caused by leakage of chromium waste froman industrial landfill;

• provision of EU assistance to authorities in prepara-tion for the second National Environmental ActionPlan and preparation of three solid waste feasibilitystudies; and

• supplying water-quality monitoring equipment fortwo water-quality monitoring stations.

Short-term priorities• To improve the implementation of legislation and

environmental monitoring;

• To strengthen the Environmental Inspectorate andother enforcement bodies, to establish a credibleenforcement record, and to ensure that fines andother sanctions are effectively applied and have adissuasive effect;

• To strengthen administrative capacity at national andlocal levels, and to start the preparation of strategicplans, including financial strategies;

• To develop an environmental investment strategybased on alignment cost estimates.

Medium-term priorities• To integrate environmental protection requirements

into other sectoral policies, in particular through thedevelopment of environmental impact assessments;

• To increase investment in environmental infrastruc-ture, with particular emphasis on wastewater collec-tion and treatment, drinking water supply, tacklingair pollution and waste management.




Under the 2004 CARDS programme, EUR 2 millionwas allocated for institutional strengthening within theMinistry of Environment and Physical Planning (MEPP);EUR 2 million is allocated by the 2005 CARDS pro-gramme to further strengthen the framework for sus-tainable development through assistance to the MEPPin a number of key areas.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia alsobenefits from the CARDS Regional Programme. Sup-port was also provided for issues such as cooperationwith the European Environment Agency and with otherSouth Eastern European countries in the framework ofthe Regional Environmental Reconstruction Pro-gramme. Besides this, the EC has continued to providefunding under specific budget lines in the fields ofenvironment, justice, home affairs, and the SixthFramework Programme in Research, under which thecountry can benefit from funding for indirect actionswithin all thematic priorities of the programme.


The World Bank, GEF, EBRD and KFW 7 are majorplayers in environmental infrastructure development,particularly in solid waste and wastewater treatment, butalso in environmental management focusing on trans-boundary water issues. The Italian government is fund-ing a number of environmental projects, in particularactivities related to water protection in the Radika RiverValley, focusing on solid waste management and waste-water treatment. The Swiss government supports natureconservation relating to national park management andsurface water monitoring. German bilateral aid providesa senior air-quality monitoring instrumentation techni-cian with the task of supporting the establishment of anoperation and maintenance unit for the MEPP air-qualitymonitoring network. GTZ8 continues its assistance inimplementation of local environmental action plans.

Several initiatives and projects are underway for theenvironmental protection of Lake Ohrid. The LakeOhrid Conservation Project (LOCP) funded byGEF/World Bank was implemented in 1999-2004. Itdeveloped the basis for the joint management and pro-tection of Lake Ohrid by Albania and the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

As stated in the country strategy published in 2004,all new EBRD operations in the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia are subject to the bank’s envi-ronmental policy, and incorporate, where appropriate,environmental action plans into the legal documenta-tion in order to address issues raised during examina-tion, in line with the bank’s mandate to actively sup-port environmentally sound and sustainable develop-ment through its investment projects.

REReP Priority AreasState of Legal, Political and InstitutionalFramework

In the field of environment the following laws,approximated with relevant EU Directives, have beendrafted and adopted within the last two years: the Lawon Environment, the Law on Ambient Air Quality, theLaw on Waste Management, and the Law on NatureProtection; the Draft Law on Waters is expected to beadopted. Laws on GMOs and noise are being devel-oped by the ministry.

According to the new law in the field of environ-ment, the following secondary legislation was recentlyadopted:

• a decree determining projects for which, and crite-ria on the basis of which, the screening for an envi-ronmental impact assessment shall be carried out(Official Gazette of the former Yugoslav Republicof Macedonia No. 74/2005);

• a decision on determining products for whichexport/import/trade fees are paid (Official Gazetteof the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia No.75/2005);

• a decree for determining the activities of installa-tions requiring an integrated environmental permit,i.e. adjustment permit, with an adjustment plan andtime schedule for submission of application (Offi-cial Gazette of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia No. 87/2005);

• a regulation for content and form of the inspectioncard (Official Gazette of the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia No. 81/2005); and

• a decree on limits and thresholds for levels andtypes of polluting substances, deadlines for achiev-ing limit values, margins of toleration, target valuesand long-term objectives (Official Gazette of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia No.50/2005).

Environmental Policies and StrategiesStrategic directions of the former Yugoslav Republic

of Macedonia in the area of environmental protectionand improvement have been defined and elaborated inthe National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) devel-oped in 1996 with financial support provided by theWorld Bank. The development of the second NEAP,supported within the CARDS 2001, is in its final stages.

The process of integration of the environment intoother sectors is a main principle on which the develop-ment of the first NEAP was founded. The second



NEAP, to be adopted in March 2006, sets out short- andmedium-term goals and actions for environment pro-tection and improvement, observing the terms speci-fied in the National Strategy for the Integration of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia into the EU,the European Partnership Action Plan and the Pro-gramme for approximation of national legislation to thelegislation of the European Union.

On the national level, the Ministry of Environmentand Physical Planning (MEPP) holds the legal obliga-tion to create and implement environmental policy inthe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, to leadactivities in the area of the environment and to providefor rational use of space and natural resources.

The MEPP undertakes the following activities: mon-itoring the state of the environment, water, soil, flora,fauna, air and the ozone layer; protection against pollu-tion; protection against noise and radiation; protectionof biological diversity, geological diversity, nationalparks and protected areas; restoration of polluted seg-ments of the environment; proposal of measures forsolid waste treatment; spatial planning; spatial informa-tion systems; supervision within the scope of its com-petences; and other activities as stipulated by law. Bod-ies within the MEPP include the State EnvironmentInspectorate, the Service for Spatial Information Sys-tems and the Office for Environment. Within the Officefor Environment operates the environmental laborato-ry, which carries out measurements and expert analy-ses of pollution. According to the Law on Environment,the office will be transformed into the Administrationof Environment, as a body within the MEPP, with addi-tional administrative activities under its competence.

Apart from the MEPP, which has the leading role inthe field of environment, other ministries also holddirect or indirect competences in the domain of envi-ronmental management.

• The Ministry of Defence performs activities relatedto civil protection.

• The Ministry of the Interior is responsible for imple-mentation of a public security system; productionof, trade in, storage of and protection againstinflammable liquids, gases, explosives and otherdangerous materials and transport of such materi-als; and for the provision of aid in cases of naturaldisasters and epidemics.

• The Ministry of Economy conducts geological surveysand exploitation of mineral resources and energy.

• The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and WaterEconomy performs activities related to agriculture,forestry and water economy; use of agriculturalland, forests and other natural resources; huntingand fishing; protection of livestock and plantsagainst disease and pests; monitoring and studying

of water status, maintenance and improvement ofwater regimes; hydro-melioration systems; studyand research of meteorological, hydrological andbio-meteorological phenomena and processes.

• The Ministry of Health performs activities concerninghuman health through air, water, soil and foodstuffpollution monitoring; protection against communica-ble diseases, harmful impacts of gases, ionising radia-tion, and noise; hygiene and epidemiologic status.

• The Ministry of Transport and Communications per-forms activities related to inland waterways, hous-ing and public works.

Local self-government units are responsible for reg-ulating and performing activities of public interest andlocal importance as stipulated by law. The law definesthe list of competences of local self-government units,including environment and nature protection. Undernew environmental legislation, numerous responsibili-ties will be delegated to the local government, espe-cially in the domains of waste management, integratedenvironmental permitting, compliance permits andinspection supervision.

The government recently adopted the followingstrategies, prepared by the ministry, in the field of Envi-ronment: Strategy for Monitoring; Strategy for DataManagement; Strategy for Communications; and Strate-gy for Pubic Awareness Raising. A national strategy andthe Action Plan for Biodiversity Protection have alsobeen prepared and adopted in 2004. The NationalAction Plan for Elimination of Persistent Organic Pollu-tants was adopted in 2005. The Second National Com-munication under the Convention on Climate Changeis under preparation.

In accordance with the ministry’s areas of responsibil-ity and new legislation requirements, the ministry hasdeveloped a Functional Analysis with Institutional Devel-opment Plan. The major change related to institutions isthe establishment of the Administration of Environmentas an authority for environmental protection. Throughthis, future work at the ministry would focus more oncreating environmental policy, while the administrationwill take over the expertise. Both the administration andthe ministry need further capacity building. The new lawon waters provides that the MEPP will be an authorityresponsible for water management.

State of Environmental Civil SocietyAccording to the register of non-governmental

organisations in the former Yugoslav Republic of Mace-donia, approximately 200 environmental NGOs areregistered in the country. Many NGOs continue to beactive at the local level, mostly focusing on public gath-erings for clean-up campaigns, tree-planting, spreading



information on environmental status and trying to pro-vide debate and fora for solving local problems.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia hasratified the Convention on Access to Information, Pub-lic Participation in Decision-making and Access to Jus-tice in Environmental Matters (the Aarhus Convention).The Public Communication Office functioning withinthe Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning is apublic service that provides easy access to environ-mental information. The Public Communication Officecarries out practical application of Aarhus Conventionprinciples. A national report was prepared on AarhusConvention implementation, and a strategy on thisimplementation is in the final stages of preparation.

Regarding environmental media, the monthly maga-zine Ecology is distributed through primary schools buthas a broader public readership. Recently, the country’senvironmental journalists’ pool established an Ecologi-cal Press Center to organise training for local media andprivate stations that broadcast environmental informa-tion to the general public. However, the group itself isstill in need of capacity building and training to fullycomplete this task. There is no special environmentalcourse or developed curricula for students in primaryand secondary schools; it is left to eager teachers todevelop environmental education within the subject ofbiology. Teachers often organise activities such as “eco-clubs” or “biological sections,” where interested pupilscan volunteer to expand their knowledge on the sub-ject. In 1998, the ministries of environment and educa-tion joined the worldwide GLOBE environmental edu-cation programme, and four primary and five secondaryschools have begun running GLOBE activities in theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

The Public Communication Office (PCO) is a linkbetween the Ministry of Environment and Physical Plan-ning and the public. The basic principle of the PCO’swork is two-way communication with the public. Alibrary functions within the Public CommunicationOffice with a library fund in the field of environment.The office owns computers which are at put at the pub-lic’s disposal so that interested citizens may obtain usefuland new information. The Green Eco-caravan, a mobilePublic Communication Office, is used during the organ-ising of campaigns and other activities as a specific toolfor communication and getting closer to the citizens.


The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is anactive participant in the Stability Pact and in the SouthEastern European Cooperation Process initiatives. In par-ticular, it has initiated the coordination of countries par-ticipating in the SEECP in order to present joint conclu-

sions at the Thessaloniki Summit. Bilateral memorandafor cooperation on EU integration-related matters, whichprovide contacts at both administrative and political lev-els, were signed with Bulgaria, Croatia and Slovenia.

Agreements in the area of environment have beensigned with all neighbouring countries: Greece (2000),Albania (2000), Bulgaria (2000), and Serbia and Mon-tenegro (2002). Within the wider region, bilateral coop-eration in the field of environment has been estab-lished with Russia (1998), Croatia (2002), and theCzech Republic (2004). Cooperation on a bilateral basishas been initiated with Hungary, Slovenia and Ukraine.The country has even cooperated intensely withBavaria, carried out through the activity of the Mace-donian-Bavarian Intergovernmental Commission,where environment enjoys high priority.

An agreement between the governments of Albaniaand the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia forthe protection and sustainable development of OhridLake and its watershed was signed in July 2004. In thefield of environment, the country cooperates withBosnia and Herzegovina on the implementation ofREReP regional projects.

Relations with Bulgaria have also been developingon the basis of the shared objective of preparing forimplementation of EU environmental legislation. Amemorandum of understanding in the field of environ-ment was signed in 2000, and a number of bilateralmeetings on the technical and ministerial level wereheld. The Joint Project Document of the Neighbour-hood Initiative will be a basis for undertaking pro-gramme activities in both countries.

The Trilateral Project for Prespa Park is a regionalinitiative resulting from the Prime Ministerial Declara-tion on the Creation of the Transboundary Prespa Parkand the Environmental Protection and SustainableDevelopment of the Prespa Lakes, signed by the primeministers of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia, Albania and Greece in February 2000; the TrilateralPrespa Park Coordination Committee was established asits highest body.

The Strategic Action Plan for Sustainable Develop-ment of Prespa Park has provided a basis for the initia-tion of the multiannual Project on Integrated Manage-ment of Ecosystems within the Trans-boundary Area ofPrespa Park. The project development block was finan-cially supported by GEF and KfW. Currently, a full pro-ject proposal is under GEF consideration.

Cross-border cooperation with Greece on the man-agement of Lake Dojran resources is based on financialsupport provided through CARDS/INTERREG III A. Inthe framework of the INTERREG III B CADSES Pro-gramme, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedoniaparticipates in a regional project in the area of spatialplanning in South Eastern Europe.




There are still significant environmental hot spots inVeles, Bitola, Skopje, Jegunovce and Prilep, whereemissions from stationary and mobile sources repre-sent a significant threat to the quality of the environ-ment and human health. However, the present moni-toring system cannot establish clear links betweenenvironmental conditions and the impact on humanhealth, and additional evidence should be collectedabout the effects on the exposed population. More-over, while some information is available for some ofthe hot spots (e.g. Skopje, Veles), less is known aboutconditions at other critical sites, since the ability toinvestigate differs throughout the country.

Among air pollutants, emission of particulate matterand lead from both fuel and industrial sites remains animportant cause of concern. The air monitoring networkshould be regarded as an opportunity to redesign thesystem so as to allow informed assessment of possiblehealth effects, to clarify the different responsibilities forrealisation, and to improve the information flow itself.

The move towards greater government decentralisa-tion threatens to impair health conditions and creategaps in the provision of services between different partsof the country. The fact that environmental health ser-vices receive only some 2.5 percent of the total budgetallocated to health, and that public health institutes arefree to raise money by providing analytical services toinvestors, municipalities and public and private investors(e.g. in permit application), leads institutes to increasing-ly invest in analytical equipment to satisfy demand andto compete with one another in providing these ser-vices. However, there is the risk of unnecessary prolifer-ation of relatively sophisticated equipment (e.g. that foranalysing heavy metals in different media), and theproblem of the reliability and quality of analysis, andmaintenance of the analytical equipment. Although theState Public Health Institute occasionally provides train-ing on analytical methods, this cannot be considered asubstitute for a good programme of common methodol-ogy development, inter-laboratory comparability assess-ment, and data quality assurance and procedures.

Considering its size, the former Yugoslav Republicof Macedonia is a country relatively rich in biodiversity,constituting one of the most important centres ofendemism in Europe. A large proportion of its floraand fauna — 117 of the 3,700 higher plant species, and674 animal species and subspecies — are endemic, andmany of these (e.g. 113 of 411 vertebrate species) arealso threatened due to various causes.

Basic factors which have led to the currentunfavourable state of the environment, including biodi-versity, include general historical processes leading toan unstable political and socioeconomic situation,

inadequate spatial planning, and inappropriate landuse practices. From this process, several underlyingcauses of biodiversity loss emerge. These include agenerally low level of education (particularly in ruralareas), resulting in a low awareness of interrelationsbetween human actions and biodiversity; militaryaction in the region, and the state’s recently reducedand unstable economic influence; growing povertyresulting in greater dependence of the rural populationon natural resources; inadequate and incomplete legis-lation which fails to clarify duties or address the over-lap in responsibilities and competencies within agen-cies liable for enforcement; non-compliance with exist-ing regulations; lack of spatial planning regulations forareas with special natural values; uncontrolled urbani-sation and greenfield industrial investments; migrationfrom rural areas to urban centres; and intensification ofagriculture, leading to the abandonment of less com-petitive local animal breeds and plant varieties.

Mainly as a result of the underlying causes, manydirect threats emerge, resulting in further biodiversityloss. The most important are as follows:

• habitat loss due to land conversion, with most pro-nounced impacts on water dependent habitats suchas marshes and swamps; land degradation; andfragmentation due to major transportation channels;

• overexploitation of natural resources, includingover-hunting, over-fishing (often with illegal meth-ods such as explosives); and trade in wild speciesof animals, fungi and plants;

• under-exploitation of meadows and pastures due tothe recent decline in livestock, resulting in theexpansion of shrub vegetation;

• water extraction; and

• pollution, especially point-source pollution affect-ing water resources.

ENDNOTES1 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and

the World Pank, The Little Green Data book 2004.

2 Lead and zinc smelter MHK Zletovo-Veles and ferro-alloySILMAK-Jegunovce, Maksteel-Skopje, Balkan Steel-Skopje,Metalski zavod Learnica-Skopje, FENI Industries-Kavadarci.

3 OKTA Refinery, OHIS chemical complex and TITAN cementfactory

4 In the first phase of the inventory, the dioxin-like PCB emis-sions are not included.

5 MEPP, National Implementation Plan on Reduction and Elim-ination of Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2004.

6 See the annexes of the EU Habitat Directive and the BernConvention.



7 KfW banking group, Germany.

8 German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ).

REFERENCES CIA. “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” in The WorldFactbook.

EBRD official website <www.ebrd.com>.

EC. Commission Opinion on the Application from the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia for membership of the Euro-pean Union. COM (2005) 562. Brussels, November 9, 2005.

EC. European Partnership with Former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia. COM (2005) 557. Brussels, November 9, 2005.

EC. Stabilisation and Association Report, 2004.

EC Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs. The

Western Balkans in Transition.

European Agency for Reconstruction official website<www.ear.eu.int>.

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Biodiversity Strategyand Action Plan of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.Johannesburg Summit, 2002.

World Bank, The Little Green Data Book, 2004.

UNECE. “Human Health and the Environment,”<www.unece.org/ env/epr/studies>.

National Assessment Report of the Former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia, July 2002.

“Protection of Natural Heritage” in the Spatial plan of the FormerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia, 2004.

National authorities, IMF, EC estimates. (1) Before grants. (2)After grants. (3) Net. EHP.


LOCATION

South Eastern Europe, bordering the Adriatic Sea

AREA

Total: 102,350 sq kmLand: 102,136 sq kmWater: 214 sq km

LAND BOUNDARIES

Total: 2,246 kmBorders: Albania 287 km, Bosnia and Herzegovina 527 km,Bulgaria 318 km, Croatia 41 km in the north and 25 km in thesouth, Hungary 151 km, the former Yugoslav Republic of Mace-donia 221 km, Romania 476 km

CLIMATE

Cold winters and hot, humid summers in the north; continentaland Mediterranean climate in the centre; hot, dry summersalong the southern coast; heavy winter snowfall inland in thesouth.

ELEVATION EXTREMES

Lowest point: Adriatic Sea — 0 mHighest point: Daravica — 2,656 m

NATURAL RESCOURCES

Antimony, arable land, bauxite, chromite, coal, copper, gas,gold, hydropower, iron ore, lead, limestone, magnesium, mar-ble, nickel, oil, pyrite, salt, silver, zinc

NATURAL HAZARDS:

Destructive earthquakes


In the Republic of Montenegro, pollution of coastal waters fromsewage outlets, especially in tourist areas such as Kotor; in theRepublic of Serbia, air pollution, waste management, waste-water treatment, and hazardous waste.


2002 2003 2004 2005(projected)

Growth in GDP 3.8 2.7 7.2 4.0(real change, in percent)Inflation 21.2 11.3 9.5 16.2(change in consumer priceindex, in percent)Foreign direct investment 562 1,405 1,028 1,600(in million USD)Unemployment rate 29.0 31.7 31.7 n.a

Environmental Profile: Serbia and Montenegro

SERBIAAND

MONTENEGRO

MONTENEGRO

Belgrade

Subotica

AdriaticSea

A L B A N I A

BULGARI

C R O AT I A

BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

H U N G A R Y

R O M A N I A

SERBIA

Vojvodina

Kosovo

Novi Sad

NisNovi Pazar

PristinaNiksic

Cetinje Podgorica

0 50 100

kilometres

FORMER YUGOSLAVREPUBLIC OFMACEDONIA

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E : S E R B I A A N D M O N T E N E G R O



IntroductionThe State Union of Serbia and Montenegro is a

topographically diverse country situated in the centreof the Balkan Peninsula. The territory of Serbia andMontenegro, today encompassing the Republic of Ser-bia in the north and the much smaller Republic ofMontenegro in the south, has a total area of 102,173square kilometres and a population of 8.2 million.Serbia and Montenegro is rich in natural resourcesand has a high level of biodiversity, with a legacy ofstrong environmental management and a developedenvironmental legal framework from the past politicalregime. With 300 kilometres of coastline along theAdriatic Sea, and 588 kilometres along the DanubeRiver, the country has an essential role to play insome of the primary shared resource regimes in SouthEastern Europe.

In the Republic of Serbia, the Ministry of Scienceand Environmental Protection has the key responsibil-ity in environmental protection. The Directorate forEnvironmental Protection is an authority within theMinistry for Science and Environment and has a widerange of responsibilities. Other ministries with com-petences for the environment include the Ministry ofAgriculture, Forestry and Water Management; theMinistry of the Economy; the Ministry of Health; theMinistry for Capital Investment; the Ministry for Min-ing and Energy; and the Ministry of Trade, Tourismand Services. Municipalities and cities have compe-tences in the field of urban planning, environmentalprotection, improvement of the environment, andpublic utilities.

In the Republic of Montenegro, the Ministry ofEnvironment and Physical Planning is the bodyresponsible for most activities concerning environ-mental protection. The Ministry has legal competencerelated to the general policy of environmental protec-tion with authority in the following fields: protectionof nature and protected natural resources; air protec-tion; trade and disposal of hazardous materials;ionised and non-ionised radiation issues; protectionfrom the effects of hazardous and harmful sub-stances; chemicals; and biodiversity. Other ministrieswith competence for the environment are the Min-

istry of Economy; the Ministry of Health; the Ministryof Agriculture, Forestry and Water Resources; and theMinistry of Internal Affairs. On the local level, majorcompetence regarding environmental policy is vestedwith regional offices of the different ministries. Localgovernment has much less power, although they arenot excluded.

Serbia and Montenegro continues its active partici-pation in regional initiatives such as the South EasternEurope Cooperation Process (SEECP), the Stability Pactfor South Eastern Europe, the Central European Initia-tive, the Adriatic-Ionian Initiative, and Initiative Tisa. InApril 2003, Serbia and Montenegro joined the Black SeaEconomic Cooperation Council and ratified the Interna-tional Commission for the Protection of the DanubeRiver. Serbia and Montenegro has actively participatedin REReP, the Interim Sava Commission, and in theInternational Commission for the Sava River Basin.

Current Environmental Conditions Soil, Forests, Agricultural Land

Forests cover 28 percent of Serbia and Montene-gro territory; forestland represents one of the nation’smost important natural resources, particularly in theRepublic of Montenegro with its 543,000 hectares (or39 percent of the territory) of forest. Forestry has aspecific role in the economy of Serbia and Montene-gro due to public interest in environment, generationof jobs and revenue. Hence, investment is needed inforest reproduction and in development of forestryinfrastructure. Forests cover about 27 percent of theterritory of the Republic of Serbia. The state owns56.2 percent of these, and private interests 43.8 per-cent. State-owned forests tend to cover larger areasand are characterised by a better species structurethan private forests. By law, state-owned forests aremanaged by public utility companies. Excessive cut-ting of trees in mountainous parts of Serbia and Mon-tenegro is responsible in part for increased erosionand flooding. In Montenegro, the Tara and Lim basinswere identified as particularly vulnerable areas.

Environmental Profile:Serbia and Montenegro



Around 36 percent of Serbia and Montenegro isarable land, and 13 percent pasture. Due to very inten-sive agriculture, about 20,000 square kilometers (or 20percent of Serbia and Montenegro land) can be classi-fied as degraded, mostly due to water erosion, exceptin Vojvodina where the main cause is wind erosion.The rate of soil erosion is three to four times that of thenatural level. Erosion, not all related to agriculture, isreported to be moderate to extreme for 26 percent ofSerbia. Among other causes of land degradation areopen pit-mining and unregulated waste disposal. Ofthe total degraded area, only 4 percent is in Montene-gro, which is mountainous and less industrially devel-oped than Serbia. Large areas of land around manyindustrial complexes have been severely polluted byvarious heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants,and are now classified as environmental hot spots. Irri-gation is used on only 40,000 hectares in the Sava andDanube Basins. Problems of oversaturation and salinityhave not been reported.

Serbia is well suited to intensive agricultural pro-duction. Indeed, Serbia (not including Kosovo andMetohia) is comprised of 66 percent agricultural land.Of the total population of the Republic of Serbia, 10percent work in the agricultural sector, contributing19.2 percent to national GDP. About 85 percent offarmland is privately owned, and 15 state-owned. Pri-vate farms tend to be small and fragmented, and manyare used principally for subsistence farming. Statefarms are usually large, highly mechanised and locatedin the fertile and flat plain regions. In Serbia and Mon-tenegro’s portion of the Danube Basin, there are about100 farms with an average of 1,000 cattle and 130 pigfarms for a total of 1.2 million animals. Very few ofthese farms have any advanced form of waste collec-tion and treatment; simple lagoons are common. Theresulting runoff of nitrogen and phosphorus into theDanube and, eventually, into the Black Sea, contributesto the eutrophication of this international water bodyand a decline in fish production and biodiversity.

WaterOn the whole, Serbia has plenty of freshwater, but

distribution varies across space and time. It is estimatedthat about 8 percent of all available surface water origi-nates within Serbia. The remainder comes from outsidenational borders through the Danube, Sava, Tisza,Drina and other rivers. Existing groundwater resourcesin Serbia and Montenegro amount to 244 cubic metresper capita per year. Total abstraction is about 180 mil-lion cubic metres per year. The extraction of ground-water exceeds the natural capacity of replenishment incertain aquifers, leading to reduced levels of ground-water. Groundwater resources are of special signifi-

cance for Serbia, as they provide up to 90 percent ofthe water supply for households and industry andabout 70 percent of drinking water.

Household surveys show that around 84 percent ofthe population in Serbia and Montenegro has runningwater. According to the findings from the Public HealthInstitute of the Republic of Serbia, 29 percent of sam-ples from water supply systems did not satisfy physical,chemical or bacteriological standards in 2001. Thesewage system in Serbia serves only about 33 percentof the country’s population, insufficient for adequateprotection of water quality. According to a 2003 WorldBank report, sewage systems serve 45 percent in urbanareas of Vojvodina, 76 percent in the cities of centralSerbia, and about 22 percent in rural areas of Serbia.Only 28 towns in Serbia have municipal and industrialwastewater treatment plants.

In the Republic of Montenegro, only 60 percent ofresidents are connected to the public sewage system,with large regional differences. Wastewater treatmentplants are heavily overburdened and often dischargeuntreated sewage. Water quality problems at coastalbeaches are of particular concern, given the impact onhealth, environment and tourism. In small towns andrural settlements, sewage systems are nonexistent, witharound 28 percent of the population using septic tanksand absorbing wells, the contents of which are notalways disposed of properly.

In addition to deterioration leading to significantphysical losses of 50 percent or more and limitations inwater treatment and sewers, the system is plagued byhigh per capita water consumption. This figure reaches300 litres per capita per day, whereas the average inEurope is 180-200, and collection rates can be as low as50 percent. There is a lack of demand management andmisuse of the water supply for non-household activitiessuch as irrigation in peripheral areas. In Montenegro,water supply and wastewater treatment are insufficientto meet summertime needs, when tourists more thandouble the area’s population to over 500,000.

The water quality in Serbia is generally low and isdeteriorating. Examples of very clean water of Class Iand I/II are rare, and those that exist are found mainlyin mountainous regions, e.g. along the Djetinja, Rzav,Studenica, Moravica and Mlava rivers in central Serbia.The most polluted rivers include the Stari Begej,Lugomir, Crnica, Lukavic and Veliki Lug. The waterquality suffers especially from eutrophication causedby nutrients and organic pollutants from untreatedsewage and agricultural run-off, and heavy metals. Inlarge rivers such as the Danube, Sava, Tisa and Morava,increased bacteriological pollution is found down-stream of large cities such as Belgrade and Novi Sad.



AirThe main sources of air pollution in Serbia include:

the energy sector, i.e. thermoelectric power plants; oilrefineries; district heating plants; the chemical industry;household fuel combustion; industry; individual heat-ing boiler plants; traffic; construction; inadequate stor-age of raw materials; and waste dumpsites.

The majority of air pollution results from the com-bustion of low-quality lignite and engine fuel. Lowenergy prices, irrational and inefficient energy con-sumption, inefficient combustion technologies, inade-quate maintenance of industrial plants, and obsoletevehicles increase emissions despite the reduced indus-trial and economic output in Serbia and Montenegro.

Important sources of air pollution are the oilrefineries in Pancevo and Novi Sad, the cement facto-ries in Popovac, Kosjeric and Beocin, and chemicalplants and metallurgical complexes located in Pancevo,Krusevac, Sabac and Smederevo. Old vehicles, many ofwhich were recently imported, still use leaded or low-quality fuel. No plans to introduce systems of vehiclecontrol in traffic to improve maintenance and reducethe discharge of leaded fuel are in place. Pollution,including soot concentrations, resulting from traffic isincreasing, especially in larger towns.

Systematic monitoring of air quality is performedthrough a network of measuring points. Results duringthe year 2002 indicate that the average annual value forsulphur dioxide (SO2) exceeded the maximum dailyallowable concentration (MAC) in Bor, Smederevo, andKragujevac. Concentrations were exceptionally high inBor at 117 micrograms per cubic metre, compared tothe MAC of 50 micrograms. The MAC was exceeded inBor on 123 days, indicating that over 34 percent of allmeasurements were above the MAC.

In Montenegro, the levels of pollution from SO2and PM are periodically above limit values in the vicini-ty of Niksic (due to the ironworks plant), Plevlja (thecoal mine and power plant), and Podgorica (the alu-minium smelter). Regarding global and transboundaryaspects of air pollution, Serbia and Montenegro ranksamong those countries whose estimated yearly con-sumption of controlled ozone depleting substances isless than 0.3 kilograms per capita.

BiodiversityThe great scope of biological diversity in Serbia

and Montenegro is caused by its bio-geographicalposition and the openness of the territory to sur-rounding regions. It hosts a large variety of ecosys-tems ranging from Mediterranean and sub-Mediter-ranean evergreen forests, various deciduous forests,and coniferous woods typical of the Euro-Siberianand North American regions, to freshwater bodies and

marine ecosystems on the Adriatic. This makes Serbiaand Montenegro one of the six European centers ofbiological diversity, and is home to 39 percent ofEurope’s vascular plant species, 51 percent of its fishfauna, 74 percent of its bird fauna, and 68 percent ofits mammalian fauna. The flora and fauna of Serbiaand Montenegro is characterised by a great diversityof species, including more than 8,000 plant species,15,500 animal species, 550 species of fungi, and about400-500 species of lichen. The exceptional richness ofplant and animal species and their communities is fur-ther illustrated by the existence of around 1,400species of freshwater algae, 1,500 species of marinealgae, 565 species of moss and 650 species of macro-mycete. Around 1,600 wild plant and animal speciesconsidered internationally significant inhabit Serbiaand Montenegro.

A number of Serbia and Montenegro’s nature areashave been recognised as internationally significant.Among these are the Obed Swamps, Ludas Lake,Shkoder Lake, and Carska bara–Stari Begej, RamsarWetlands of International Significance; on the WorldNatural Heritage List is Durmitor National Park withpart of the Tara River Canyon and the Kotor-RisanBay; and the Tara River Canyon, which has beenincluded in the biosphere reserves grid of theUNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme. Serbia andMontenegro is a signatory to the Convention on Bio-logical Diversity (1992) and the Convention on Tradein Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora(1973), and ratified both treaties in 2001.

National Environmental PrioritiesIn Serbia1

General policy objectives of the National Environmen-tal Strategy address the general causes of environmentalproblems, grouped in the following key policy areas:

• Full integration of environmental policy with eco-nomic and other sectoral policies, and sectoralenvironmental strategies should be developed andimplemented. Environmental principles should alsobe integrated into spatial and urban planning.

• Institutional capacity for development and enforce-ment of sectoral and environmental policy shouldbe strengthened generally and emergency responsesystems should be developed.

• Upgrading the environmental monitoring andenforcement system will require establishingaccredited laboratories, enforcement of norms andstandards and mandatory quality control of analy-



ses and emission monitoring, self-monitoring bypolluters, the establishment of inventory of pol-luters and an environmental information system.

• Developing a comprehensive legal environmentalsystem through adoption of sectoral laws andbylaws, improved law enforcement monitoring,and increasing capacities of the judiciary system.Laws relevant to the environment should be furtherrevised and gradually harmonised with the EU envi-ronmental acquis;

• Establishing an effective system of environmentalfinancing and economic incentives. Environmentalliabilities should be adequately addressed in theprocess of privatisation. The polluter-pays princi-ple should be fully implemented. An effective sys-tem of economic instruments should be introducedto provide strong incentives for pollution reduc-tion. Effective financing mechanisms should beintroduced to stimulate environmental expendi-tures and provide reliable sources of financing forthe Environmental Fund.

• Improving formal and informal environmental educa-tion to be based on the National Strategy for Environ-mental Education. Increase environmental awarenessthrough improved information and communicationwith the public and develop mechanisms for publicparticipations in environmental decision making inline with the Aarhus Convention.

Implementation of policy objectives of the NationalEnvironmental Strategy requires significant reform ofcurrent environmental policy and environmental insti-tutions. Environmental policy reform efforts are broad-ly divided into two phases.

The short-term phase (2005-2009) should involvepractical, financially feasible reforms which can beimplemented immediately. These reforms refer primari-ly to legislative and regulatory reforms, aiming at har-monisation with the EU environmental acquis.

The medium-term phase (2010-2014) will bedependent upon prior implementation of the preced-ing phase. It should focus on wider application ofincentive-based instruments, accelerated harmonisa-tion with the EU environmental acquis, improvementof environmental quality, strengthening public andstakeholder involvement in decision making, andresolving problems at other threatened sites. Majorcapital investment projects will be implemented dur-ing this phase, particularly in urban wastewater treat-ment, waste management infrastructure and industrialpollution abatement.

In Montenegro2

In March 2001, the government of Montenegrocommissioned a study entitled, “The DevelopmentalDirections of Montenegro as an Ecological State,”which represents a long-term sustainable developmentstrategy. The document reflects the distinctiveness ofMontenegro with respect to its unique natural charac-teristics and represents a basis for establishing sustain-able development through the integration of economic,ecological and social development. Specific objectivesof sustainable development are set in the fields of min-eral-raw materials, power supply, agriculture, forestry,industry and transport. The government of Montenegroadopted the Agenda of Economic Reforms for Mon-tenegro for 2003-2006 as a comprehensive four-yearplan in March 2003.

The agenda defines the following as priority activi-ties in the area of environment:

• modification of the umbrella Environment Law con-sistent with European Union standards andrequirements;

• harmonisation with EU standards and requirements,and implementation of relevant subordinate lawsand regulations — i.e. environmental impact assess-ment, solid waste, radiation, hazardous waste, inte-grated pollution prevention control (IPPC), envi-ronmental labeling, noise pollution, environmentaltaxes and fees, air quality, protected areas, andrights and procedures for environmental inspection— under the exclusive authority of the Ministry ofEnvironment and Physical Planning;

• harmonisation with EU standards and requirementsand implementation of other relevant laws and reg-ulations (i.e. water, forestry and hunting, agriculture,mineral resources, marine and fresh water fisheries,privatisation, trade, transport, public health, tourism,and coastal zone management) wholly or partlyunder the authority of other ministries;

• establishment of the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) by combining relevant scientific andtechnical institutes in a new EPA as an umbrellaagency subordinate to and serving the needs of theMinistry of Environment;

• foundation of the Montenegro Ecological Fund;

• support in implementation of all environmentallaws and regulations at the municipal level (i.e.decentralisation of environmental responsibilitiesand training);

• information dissemination and support of publicparticipation in environmental decision making atall levels, i.e. collaborative development of a pro-gramme of information exchange and dissemina-



tion among federal and municipal government enti-ties, NGOs and other community organisationsaimed at encouraging and increasing public partici-pation in environmental decision making;

• development of a comprehensive environmentalinformation and monitoring system, i.e. revision ofthe current state environmental monitoring pro-gramme and its methodology based on internation-ally accepted criteria making compatible othercountries’ data; elaboration of internationally-basedquality observation, sampling, analytical work anddata processing standards; new equipment for fieldobservations, sampling and laboratories; data pro-cessing technology and software; and elaborationof special monitoring programmes for protectedterritories such as state nature reserves, nationaland regional parks, and strictly managed naturereserves;

• strengthening of pollution control in the energysector, industry, agriculture, forestry, transport, andelaboration of a new municipal sector model basedon the polluter/user-pays principle; and

• improvement of protected areas management andbiodiversity conservation, i.e. strategy development;conformity with the Convention on Biodiversity(CBD) and other international conventions; reviewand completion of the “red list,” habitat characterisa-tions and other records, with annual revisions; revi-sion of laws and regulations accordingly; and anelaborate network of protected areas with regularreview and revision based on monitoring.


In the Republic of Serbia, approximately 0.05 per-cent of the Republic’s budget was spent for environ-mental investments in 2005.

The Environmental Fund of the Republic of Serbia isestablished by the Law on Environmental Protection. Thegovernment of the Republic of Serbia appointed its direc-tor and management board on February 24, 2004. TheFund for Environmental Protection became operationalon May 25, 2005. Development of projects to be financedby the fund is ongoing. Initial funds were provided bythe Ministry of Finance. The fund is financed from:

• earmarked funds of the republic budget realised onthe basis of penalties for activities in the trade ofwild flora and fauna, EMAS system registration fees,and charges for environmental pollution;

• funds realised on the basis of changes in ownership

of the firms in the privatisation process;

• revenues realised on the basis of international bilat-eral cooperation on programmes, projects andother activities in fields of environmental protectionand energy efficiency;

• revenues and receipts from the management of thefund’s liquid assets;

• contributions, donations, grants and assistance; and

• other sources in compliance with law.

At present in the Republic of Montenegro, the eco-fund laws are in the process of adoption by the govern-ment. Establishment of the eco-fund would contributeto efforts to protect environment, follow the principleof sustainable development, and strengthen Montene-gro as a proclaimed ecological state.

Adoption of the Law on the Eco-fund and formationof the eco-fund as a separate account would increasefinancial resources to solve the country’s environmen-tal issues, and advance measures to achieve goals ofsustainable development the government laid out as aself-proclaimed ecological state. The eco-fund wouldalso encourage the process of association in the Euro-pean Union. Furthermore, the fund would have animportant role in the implementation process of thepolluter/user-pay principle due to the significantresources of revenue from economic instruments, i.e.taxes and fees, related to environmental protection.Since it is crucial to spend limited existing resources inthe most efficient way, and it is indispensable to attractinternational and commercial financing, the fund as aninstitution with management of the overall eco-finan-cial resources would have an essential role in accom-plishing these goals.

Economic Instruments for Environment in Serbia

The Law on Environment Protection in the Republicof Serbia provides the basis for application of effectiveeconomic instruments: user charges, environmentalpollution charges, refund or exemption mechanismsand/or reduced charges for environmental pollution,and local government fees. In compliance with thislaw, adoption of bylaws, regulations and an actionplan for the implementation of economic instruments isnecessary. In the water sector, a legal basis exists forpenalisation for the introduction of effluent chargesunrelated to wastewater standards. Economic instru-ments currently in force include mainly user charges(for water abstraction, water supply, waste, and naturalresources) and non-compliance charges, which aregenerally set below incentive levels. MSEP-DEP hasprepared a draft ordinance on charges for air pollution.



Effluent charges are paid by those discharging intosurface water, groundwater or manmade channels.Charges are based on the volume of discharge and thequality of the recipient body. Published rates areincreased by 50 percent for Class I water bodies, and 25percent for Class II. Polluters may be exempt fromcharges if they have primary or secondary treatmentplants. Revenues are collected in a special account ofthe Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Manage-ment and are earmarked for water-related expenditures.

Exemption from payment of import duties isapplied to equipment used directly in environmentalprotection, provided that the equivalent equipment isnot produced locally. User charges are currently themost widely used economic instruments. Industry, agri-culture and drinking water supply enterprises andcommunities pay charges for abstraction of a permittedvolume of water according to tariffs set out in theDecree on Charges for Water Abstraction, Water Pro-tection and Material Excavated from Water Bodies. Inaddition, rates based on the final price of products arepayable for bottled water. Enterprises and householdsreceiving water from public water supply systems paycharges according to user categories or quantity. Tariffsare also payable by enterprises and households on thebasis of sewage discharge.

Economic Instruments for Environment in Montenegro

As in Serbia, the Law on Environment (OfficialGazette RCG, no 12/96) gives the bases for applicationof certain economic instruments such as thepolluter/user-pays principle. The amount and methodof payment of different eco-instruments are furtherregulated by sub-laws. In that sense, the act on feesand the process of balancing and payment for envi-ronmental pollution (Official Gazette RCG 26/97)establishes fees for emission and products which havenegative effects on environment (i.e. air emission, haz-ardous waste, fossil fuels, CFCs and motor vehicles).This act can be seen as very progressive, taking intoaccount the time of passing and fees it regulates, e.g.fee for use of fossil fuels, which are rarely seen todayin even more developed policies on environmentalprotection. However, the act has not been implement-ed. Thus, only revenue from eco-instruments that goesto the budget is the once of 1 percent of the invest-ments that requires EIA study by the Law on Environ-ment (Official Gazette RCG, no 12/96), and fee onmotor vehicles registration.

Some financial instruments for water use and pollu-tion, use of natural resources and biodiversity arebeing executed; fuel, motor vehicle and boat taxationare regulated through the taxation policy. Revenue

generated from these fees goes directly to the republicbudget or the accounts of the institutions in charge ofindividual resources, e.g. the Forest Directorate, andthe Public Enterprise for National parks.

Popular opinion is that existing financial instrumentsand fees are insufficient in number and efficacy toensure implementation of the polluter/user-pays princi-ple and a change in behavior toward environment.Depleted economic power of the citizenry, current lowlevels of revenue, and possible regressive effects offinancial eco-instruments are the main obstacles to theintroduction of new financial eco-instruments. Howev-er, eco-instruments are mainly seen as an insufficientlyused tool in achieving environmental protection goalsand in collection of financial resources.

The new Law on the Eco-fund, in the process ofadoption by the Government of Montenegro, regulatesfinancial eco-instruments in some manners.

EU-Serbia and MontenegroRelations: the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP)

Serbia and Montenegro is participating in the Stabili-sation and Association Process (SAP). Formal contractu-al relations between the EU and Serbia and Montenegroshould be established through the conclusion of a Sta-bilisation and Association Agreement (SAA). On Octo-ber 3, 2005, the council adopted negotiation directivesand authorised the start of negotiations between the EUand Serbia and Montenegro. SAA negotiations wereofficially opened in Belgrade on October 10, 2005.3

The EU Council of Ministers adopted the decisionon the principles, priorities and conditions contained inthe European Partnership with Serbia-Montenegroincluding Kosovo, in compliance with UN SecurityCouncil Resolution 1244 of June 10, 1999. This mecha-nism shall exclusively determine relations between theEU and Serbia and Montenegro until the Stabilisationand Association Agreement has been signed.

This renewed European Partnership4 lists short- (12-24 months) and medium-term (three to four years) pri-orities in preparing for further integration into theEuropean Union.

EU AssistanceThe CARDS programme, mainly implemented by

the European Agency for Reconstruction, has been themain financial instrument for Serbia and Montenegro.

EUR 14 million was allocated to Serbia for environ-ment for 1999-2003. All agency programmes haveaddressed problems on a nationwide basis: Enterprises,



health institutions, and municipal services across thecountry have all been helped. In 2002, EUR 50,000 wasallocated for capacity building in the environmentalfield; in 2003, EUR 8 million.

From the CARDS Annual Programme 2004, EUR 14million was allocated for environment for supportingthe hazardous and medical waste treatment facilitythrough design and construction of a physical-chemicaltreatment facility; design and construction of a class Ilandfill; design and construction of a hazardous wastestorage station; and further capacity building for theMinistry for Protection of Natural Resources and theEnvironment, and the Environmental ProtectionAgency in the planning, management and monitoringof large-scale environmental infrastructure develop-

ment projects and implementation of the National Haz-ardous Waste Management Plan. In line with the Euro-pean Partnership with Serbia and Montenegro, theCARDS Annual Programme 2005 allocated approxi-mately EUR 9.5 million for Serbia to support capacitybuilding in the water sector.

For Montengro, EUR 6 million was allocated for1999-2003 for environment. Agency activities includepreparing a feasibility study on the priorities of waste-water treatment in the coastal region; preparing a feasi-bility study on introducing regional solid waste disposalsites; construction of sewerage and a waste treatmentplant by Skadar Lake in Virpazar. In the period 2002 to2004 some EUR 5.7 million was spent on environmentalissues (i.e. waste management, wastewater treatment,

Short-term priorities for Serbia:• To continue approximating legislation to EU legisla-

tion and standards in air pollution, waste manage-ment and nature protection;

• To adopt and begin implementing the National Envi-ronment Protection Strategy;

• To strengthen administrative capacity, notably of institu-tions and bodies responsible for planning, permitting,inspecting, monitoring, and project management;

• To develop a multi-annual plan for financing invest-ment;

• To implement adopted legislation, notably on envi-ronmental assessments and industrial pollution;

• To start construction of a facility for the treatmentand safe disposal of hazardous waste.

Short-term priorities for Montenegro:• To continue approximating legislation to EU legisla-

tion and standards, notably environmental protectionframework legislation;

• To implement and enforce adopted legislation;

• To develop an overall environment protection strate-gy for water, waste, and air;

• To adopt the Land Use Plan;

• To adopt the sustainable development strategy andsectoral strategies, e.g. integrated coastal zone man-agement, biodiversity, climate change;

• To strengthen administrative capacity.

Medium-term priorities for both republics:• To continue implementing and enforcing legislation

approximated to EU legislation;

• To continue implementing legislation on environ-

mental impact assessment;

• To ratify and start implementation of the KyotoProtocol;

• To ensure a viable financial framework for the imple-mentation of a medium- to long-term environmentalprotection policy.

Medium-term priorities for Serbia:• To adopt and start implementing strategies on air pol-

lution, waste management and nature protection;

• To continue implementing the National EnvironmentProtection Strategy and the Water Strategy.

• To continue strengthening the administrative capaci-ty of environmental institutions and bodies;

• To begin implementing the multi-annual plan forfinancing investment;

• To finalise construction of a facility for the treatmentand safe disposal of hazardous waste.

Medium-term priorities for Montenegro:• To continue approximating legislation to EU legisla-

tion and standards, notably legislation on air pollu-tion, water and waste.

• To begin implementing the land use plan and theoverall environment protection strategy.

• To develop an overall environment protection strate-gy for water, waste, and air;

• To begin implementing the sustainable developmentstrategy and sectoral strategies, i.e. integrated coastalzone management, biodiversity, climate change;

• To continue strengthening the administrative capaci-ty of line ministries and bodies in charge of environ-mental planning, permitting, inspecting, monitoring,and project management.




and institutional and capacity-building) under CARDS.In 2005, EUR 1.2 million was allocated for institutionaland capacity building of the Ministry of the Environ-mental Protection and Urban Planning of the Govern-ment of Montenegro. Establishment of the Environmen-tal Protection Agency is one task in the project.

The CARDS Programme allocation for 2005-2006 forenvironment and natural resources for Serbia and Mon-tenegro amounts to EUR 37 million.


In Serbia, the World Bank has supported govern-mental efforts to integrate environmental concerns intoprivatisation, and plans to focus on environmental andsocial considerations of the mining industry in the Borregion. The World Bank also supports programmes toreduce livestock-based pollution of the Danube,improve drainage and flood management, and pro-mote agro-biodiversity in the south. In Montenegro, thefocus of the World Bank’s programme is on sustainabletourist management through a loan for improved solidwaste, water and wastewater management in coastalareas, and land-use planning and watershed manage-ment in coastal and hilly areas.

EBRD activities in Serbia and Montenegroincreased significantly during the last strategy period,reaching EUR 691 million by March 2005 (in 2004, thisnumber was 146 million). Initially, energy and otherinfrastructure projects dominated the portfolio, but thebank has since successfully shifted its focus to the pri-vate sector and has diversified its portfolio. The bank’sapproach to supporting environmental improvementwithin Serbia and Montenegro is twofold. First is theensuring, through support of specific environmentalprojects, that key environmental concerns areaddressed. For example, coastal pollution within KotorBay mainly caused by discharge of untreated munici-pal wastewater is currently being addressed throughdevelopment of a municipal infrastructure project forthe city of Herceg Novi. Similarly, the city of Suboticamunicipal project addresses the pollution of Lake Palicon the outskirts of that town. Secondly, all EBRD oper-ations in Serbia and Montenegro are subject to thebank’s environmental policy and incorporate, whereappropriate, environmental action plans in legal docu-mentation in order to address issues raised duringenvironmental due diligence.

REReP Priority AreasState of Legal, Political and InstitutionalFramework

The Constitutional Charter of State Union Serbiaand Montenegro (adopted in February 2003) states thatenvironmental protection is the responsibility of thetwo constituent republics. However, the State UnionSerbia and Montenegro is an international entity and istherefore subject to international agreements, includingthose on environment.

Republic of SerbiaThe legal/legislative and institutional framework is

founded in the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia,stipulating the right to a healthy environment and theduty of all, in line with the law, to protect and enhancethe environment. Environmental legislation in Serbiaconsists of large number of laws and regulations(approximately 100). Legislative, executive and judicialpowers are mostly practiced through the legally pre-scribed scope of competences of republic authorities.According to the law, certain competences are delegatedto the autonomous province and the local government.

The new legal framework for environmental pro-tection was introduced in 2004 in the Republic of Ser-bia by the Law on Environmental Protection, the Lawon Strategic Environmental Assessment, the Law onEnvironmental Impact Assessment, and the Law onIntegrated Prevention and Pollution Control. The mostsignificant issues covered by the Law on EnvironmentalProtection include fundamental principles of environ-mental protection; management and protection of nat-ural resources; measures and conditions of environ-mental protection; environmental programmes andplans; industrial accidents; public participation; a moni-toring and information system; clearly identified com-petences of the Environmental Protection Agency;reporting; financing environmental protection; andinspection services and fines. The new laws are har-monised with the EU Directives on EnvironmentalImpact Assessment (85/337/EEC), Strategic ImpactAssessment (2001/43/EC), IPPC (96/61/EC) and PublicParticipation (2003/35/EC).

The Ministry of Science and Environmental Protec-tion Directorate for Environmental Protection (DEP)has the key responsibility in environmental protection.The Directorate for Environmental Protection (DEP) isan authority within the Ministry for Science and Envi-ronment and has a wide range of responsibilities iden-tified in the law.

Other ministries with competences for the environ-ment include the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry andWater Management Directorate for Forests and Direc-



torate for Water (in water, forests, livestock farm waste,etc.); the Ministry of the Economy (in industry); theMinistry of Health (in enforcement of sanitary regula-tions relevant to the environment); the Ministry forCapital Investments (in urban planning, constructionand use permits, and road, air, rail and water traffic);the Ministry for Mining and Energy (in energy efficien-cy, and permits for extraction of mineral resources);and the Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Services.

Responsibilities for water resource managementand water quality are with the Directorate for Water,which is within the Ministry of Agriculture, Water Man-agement and Forestry. The Directorate for Water is alsospecifically responsible for development of water man-agement policy, rational consumption of waterresources, provision of drinking water supply (exclud-ing distribution), flood protection, issuance of permitsfor water abstraction and discharge, and collection offees for water use and discharge.

In addition, there are several institutions responsi-ble for environmental monitoring, including the Insti-tute for Nature Protection, the Hydro-MeteorologicalInstitute (also known as Hydromet), and public healthinstitutes. The Environmental Inspectorate covers com-pliance monitoring and monitoring of emissions. TheRecycling Agency, which is a government institutionnot subordinate to the Ministry for Science and Envi-ronment, is given responsibility for waste management,particularly in recycling and waste recovery.

In 2002, certain environmental competences weretransferred to the Autonomous Province of Vojvodinaunder the Law on Competences of the AutonomousProvince of Vojvodina. The Provincial Secretariat forEnvironmental Protection and Sustainable Develop-ment of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina hascompetences related to environmental programmedevelopment, pollution control, EIA, inspection, andmonitoring within its territory.

There is an overlap of competences between theWater Directorate and the Directorate for EnvironmentalProtection in relation to water quality and water pollution.

Forest management is under the discretion of theForest Directorate, which forms part of the Ministry ofAgriculture and Water Management. A potential con-flict of responsibilities exists between the Forest Direc-torate, which manages forests considered to be withinthe economic sector, and the DEP, which is chargedwith protection of forest ecosystems.

Municipalities have competences in the field ofurban planning, environmental protection andimprovement of the environment and public utilities.At the local level, secretariats for environmental protec-tion have limited competences for environmental man-agement including air-quality protection, noise protec-tion, management of communal waste, urban planning,

construction permits for smaller facilities, and strategicassessment of plans, programmes, EIA and integratedpermits within their statutory tasks.

Republic of MontenegroIn accordance with the constitution, the Republic of

Montenegro adopted the Environmental Law (“OfficialGazette of the Republic of Montenegro,” nos. 12/96,55/00) in April 1996. The law set up the first environ-mental protection system in Montenegro, the firstobligations of entities performing activities potentiallydamaging to the environment to take prescribed mea-sures for environmental protection and establishedenvironmental standards, and appropriate penalty pro-visions. The environmental policy is implementedthrough the National Environmental Protection Pro-gram, which has been adopted by the government ofMontenegro. Local authorities and institutions respon-sible for protection of particular environment sectorsadopt individual protection programmes that must beharmonised with the national programme. Supervisionas to the enforcement of the law and regulations shallbe entrusted to the ministry. The activities of such areperformed by the environmental inspection in compli-ance with the law.

Air management is still subject to the 1980 Law onAir Protection (“Official Gazette of the Republics of Ser-bia and Montenegro,” nos. 14/1980 and 16/1980). TheLaw on Agricultural Land (“Official Gazette of theRepublic of Montenegro,” no. 15/1992) prescribesmodels of protection of this resource. The Law on theProtection of Nature (“Official Gazette of the Republicof Montenegro,” nos. 36/77, 2/82) protects nature as awhole along with natural areas of remarkable value.According to this law, the Republic Institute for Protec-tion of Nature enacts regulations for granting the statusof protected area to certain objects of nature.

The Law on National Parks (“Official Gazette of theRepublic of Montenegro,” no. 47/91), defines the pro-tection, conservation and management of nationalparks as natural assets of general interest. In theRepublic of Montenegro are four national parks:Biogradska gora, Durmitor, Lovcen and Skadarskojezero. Procedures for the preparation and adoption ofthe Physical Plan for National Parks and the Programfor Protection Development and Maintenance ofNational Parks are defined by this Law. Competenciesof wardens and park rangers are established in last partof the law.

The Energy Law (“Official Gazette of the Republicof Montenegro,” no. 39/2003) regulates the followingenergy sector activities: generation, transmission, distri-bution and supply of electricity in the market and/or asa public service; organisation and functioning of theelectricity market; production and the market of coal



for the needs of electricity generation; and transport,distribution, storage, wholesale and retail trade, andsupply of petroleum products and gas.

The Law on Spatial Planning and Development(“Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro,” no.XX/2004) regulates the basis for spatial planning anddevelopment, types, content and procedure for thepreparation and adoption of plans; conditions for thosepreparing plans and for their implementation; and car-rying out supervision of the implementation of the pro-vision in the law.

Several new laws have been recently adopted bythe Government of Montenegro, including:

• the Law on Strategic Environmental Assessment;

• the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA); and

• Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC).

A draft law on the eco-fund is in the process ofadoption by the government of Montenegro).

The Republic of Montenegro has most institutionsnecessary to implement environmental legislation inplace. The Ministry of Environment and Physical Plan-ning is the body responsible for most activities con-cerning environmental protection. The ministry haslegal competence related to the general policy of envi-ronmental protection and also has authority in the fol-lowing fields: protection of nature and protected natur-al resources; air protection; trade and disposal of haz-ardous materials; ionised and non-ionised radiationissues; protection from the effects of hazardous andharmful substances; chemicals; and biodiversity. Inaddition, the ministry has authority over developmentand implementation of physical planning documents,granting construction permits, arrangement systems,utilisation of construction sites and solid waste man-agement. In the development of physical planning doc-uments, implementation of strategic impact assessmentis obligatory; in construction permit issuance theimplementation of environmental impact assessment(EIA) is now obligatory. The ministry administerssupervision over the Hydro-meteorological Institute,and public enterprises, including the national parks ofMontenegro, the Center for Eco-ToxicologicalResearch, and Coastal Zone Management.

The Ministry of Environment and Physical Planningshares some of its competences with the Ministry ofEconomy in the areas of energy policy, energy supplyand mineral resources; with the Ministry of Health inthe areas of chemicals, drinking water, noise and radia-tion protection; with the Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry and Water Resources in the areas of soil,forestry and water protection; and with the Ministry ofInternal Affairs in the areas of risk assessment and con-trol, and civil protection. The Department for Environ-

mental Protection and the Department for InternationalCooperation, bodies within the Ministry of Environmentand Physical Planning, are responsible for implementa-tion of the administrative procedures in the area ofenvironmental protection. Other ministries also carryout some administrative procedures.

The Public Enterprise Center for EcotoxicologicalResearch and the Hydro Meteorological Institute carryout monitoring of the quality of surface water, groundwater and air pollution. Soil contamination and radia-tion are monitored by the Public Enterprise Center forEcotoxicological Research; biodiversity is monitored bythe Nature Protection Institute. The Institute for PublicHealth and its regional health protection institutesmonitor drinking water quality. The InspectorateDepartment, a body within the Ministry of Environmentand Physical Planning, is responsible for the supervi-sion of implementation of legislation in the area ofenvironmental protection.

On the local level, much authority regarding environ-mental policy is vested in the regional offices of the dif-ferent ministries. Local governments have much lesspower, although they are not excluded from taking overa greater sphere of assignments, with their actual tasksdetermined by modest financial resources and technicalfacilities, excepting Podgorica. Therefore, localautonomous government involves citizens’ and self-gov-ernment bodies’ rights to organise and manage certainpublic works on the basis of their own responsibility andthe best interests of the local population. The municipali-ty passes the programme of development and environ-mental protection, spatial and urban plans, developmen-tal plans and programmes. Furthermore, the municipalityorganises and secures conditions for preservation andprotection of natural assets, performing tasks of organisa-tion, use and protection of construction land. The munic-ipality performs tasks from its authority through its ownand local community bodies and public services.

Environmental Civil SocietyThere are approximately 1,200 alternative, non-

profit NGOs in Serbia and Montenegro, and roughly200 of these have an environmental focus. Environ-mental NGOs are one of the largest and most wide-spread groups in Serbia and Montenegro. Their mainactivities include:

• awareness-raising campaigns (performed by 78 per-cent of NGOs);

• education (72 percent);

• conferences and meetings (69 percent);

• information dissemination (65 percent); and

• networking (62 percent).



Environmental NGOs in Serbia and Montenegroview cooperation with domestic and foreign NGOs, aswell as with EU organisations, as critical to solvingenvironmental problems. NGOs most often enter intocooperation in project implementation and campaign-ing, less often in lobbying and fundraising. TheseNGOs look for other organisations with a high level ofprofessionalism that share their goals and ideas inorder to exchange information, ideas, and experience.Cooperation assists NGOs in realising projects and ini-tiatives, in achieving stronger public presence, and inlaying the foundations for future cooperation.

An electronic discussion list ([email protected]) wasset up in December 2002 to serve as a tool for theexchange of information on regional environmentalissues. Both the discussion list and meetings helpedenvironmental organisations to learn about one anotherand the opportunities for cooperation. Several joint pro-jects have resulted from the effort, including one with asmany as 14 environmental NGOs. The success of the listhas confirmed the need for communication channels.


Serbia and Montenegro continue its active partici-pation in regional initiatives, notably the South EasternEurope Cooperation Process (SEECP), the Stability Pactfor South Eastern Europe, the Central European Initia-tive, the Adriatic-Ionian Initiative, and Initiative Tisa.

In April 2003, Serbia and Montenegro joined theBlack Sea Economic Cooperation Council and ratified theInternational Commission for the Protection of theDanube River. The final conference of the WorkingUnion of Danube countries took place in Belgrade inOctober 2003. A framework agreement was also signedon the regulation of the Sava River. Serbia and Montene-gro actively participated in the Interim Sava Commission,as well as in the International Commission for the SavaRiver Basin, which was recently constituted in Zagreb.

In May 2005, a memorandum of understandingwas signed with Albania in the area of environmentalprotection. The Republic of Serbia and Bosnia andHerzegovina cooperate on a transboundary project onthe Neretva Delta under the REReP programme. Thereis an initiative for the conclusion of an agreement oncooperation with Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovinain protection from catastrophes and natural disasters.

Preparations are being made for the signing of anagreement on cooperation between the Republic ofSerbia and Croatia. Recently the Agreement on Foun-dation of Joint Committee for Natural Wealth Manage-ment and for Cooperation in Natural and Other Cata-strophes was signed in Dubrovnik. The signatories areDubrovnik (the Neretva District and the city of

Dubrovnik), the municipality of Herceg-Novi, and themunicipality of Trebinje.

Serbia and Montenegro and the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia have signed three agreementsin the area of environmental protection:

• the Agreement between the Federal Government ofthe Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Govern-ment of the Republic of Macedonia in the Area ofEnvironmental Protection, signed on July 19, 2002(with ratification in progress);

• the Agreement between the Federal Government ofthe Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Govern-ment of the Republic of Macedonia in the Area ofPlant Protection and Plant Quarantine (signed onApril 23, 1997, and entered into force on March 10,1998); and

• in May 2005, the formation of a mixed committeefor cooperation in the area of environmental pro-tection was agreed.

With Slovenia, an agreement was concludedbetween the Federal Government of the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia and the Government of theRepublic of Slovenia on Cooperation in the Area ofPlant Quarantine and Plant Protection (signed onJune 18, 2002).

There are plans for signing an agreement on coop-eration in the field of environmental protectionbetween the Republic of Serbia and Hungary. TheRepublic of Serbia also participates in the Neighbour-hood Programme with Hungary and Romania.

There are preparations for the signing of an agree-ment on cooperation in the field of environmental pro-tection between the Republic of Serbia and Bulgaria.Two ministries competent for environmental protec-tion, from the Repbulic of Serbia and Bulgaria, signed amemorandum on establishing Stara Planina, a trans-boundary nature park. There are plans for signing anagreement on cooperation in the field of environmen-tal protection between the Republic of Serbia andRomania, as well as an agreement on cooperation andmutual assistance in emergencies.

Serbia and Montenegro is a signatory to the Con-vention on Biological Diversity (1992) and the Conven-tion on Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Faunaand Flora (1973), ratifying both treaties in 2001.


In the past decade, environmental health issues havenot had top priority in Serbia and Montenegro, whilepolitical, social and economic issues have dominated.Significant polluters are the mining industry; industrial



facilities in the petrochemical, chemical and heavyindustries; thermal power plants; heating; and motorvehicles. Industrial production fell drastically during thepast decade, contributing to the reduction of certainpollutants, but facilities still operating with inappropri-ate environmental standards continue to add to air,water and soil pollution. The worst environmentalhealth problem in the Balkans is respiratory health, dueto high tobacco consumption and poor ambient airquality. Unfortunately, there has never been a systemat-ic assessment of the health effects of air pollution in Ser-bia and Montenegro. In general, the present levels ofindustrial and vehicular air pollution are in concentra-tions that a number of studies have associated witheffects on mortality and hospital emergency admissions.

Environmental health issues should become a higherpriority at all levels of government. Existing laws, regula-tions and standards should be better integrated, enforcedand revised according to World Health Organizationguidelines and other international standards and prac-tices, such as those of the European Union. Greater hori-zontal coordination and harmonisation among relevantministries and institutions is needed, as is vertical coordi-nation between the federal government and republics,and republics and municipalities. Comprehensive envi-ronment and health action plans are essential.

The biological diversity of Serbia and Montenegro,both in terms of ecosystems and species is relativelyhigh. With its position on the crossroads between theBalkan and the Pannonian regions, Serbia and Mon-tenegro plays host to as many as 4082 vascular plantspecies and 647 vertebrate species.5 Although the rich-ness of the country, and threats arising would justifymore, the total share of protected areas is currentlyonly about 3.7 percent of the national territory. Howev-er there are plans to increase this by bringing newareas under protection. The main threats to biodiversityin both the Republic of Serbia and the Republic ofMontenegro are habitat degradation, illegal extractionor poaching, alien invasive species and pollution fromvarious human sources.

In the Republic of Serbia, approximately 600 plantspecies and 270 animal species are under various cate-gories of threat attributed to:

• loss of natural habitats, e.g. draining swamps andclearing forests, due to the expansion of agricul-ture, particularly on the Pannonian Plain of north-ern Serbia;

• loss of habitats and species due to illegal construc-tion, unregulated tourism, expanding transport net-works and water infrastructure such as dams;

• an inadequate network of protected areas;

• degradation of forests due to excessive exploitationand lack of sustainable forest management prac-

tices that take into account biological diversity offorests and natural processes of forest renewal;

• excessive, unregulated and often illegal hunting,which especially affects large mammals and birds;

• overgrazing in some mountain areas and under-useof pastures in others, due to the high decrease incattle and sheep;

• over-harvesting of non-timber forest products suchas fungi, snails, and aromatic and medicinal plants;and

• industrial pollution and other point-source pollu-tion affecting rivers and lakes, and unregulated,improper disposal of solid and hazardous wastes.

Although hard data is lacking for many species,indications are that biodiversity is also on the decline inthe Republic of Montenegro. Convincing evidence isseen in the strong decrease of wintering bird popula-tions, reported as a result of the International Water-fowl Census (IWC) performed on Skadar Lake. Thecensus showed that, between 1999 and 2005, a drop ofnearly 800 percent was recorded from 250,000 to35,000. Similarly in Durmitor National Park, waterfowlspecies declined from 172 species before the 1990s toless than 40. The principal reasons for the biodiversitydecline in Montenegro are as follows:

• loss and degradation of mountain forest habitatsdue to illegal logging and uncontrolled clear-cuttingin mountain forests, tourism development, trans-port and water infrastructure;

• loss of coastal habitats and species due to rapidtourism and infrastructure development along thecoast;

• excessive, unregulated and often illegal fishing andhunting;

• gravel mining in the Moraca River, the main tribu-tary of Skadar Lake;

• pollution from wastewater discharge of the alumini-um plant in Podgoriza and steelworks in Niksic, aswell as from tourism and urban infrastructure;

• an insufficient network of protected areas;

• overgrazing, particularly in mountain areas; and

• over-harvesting of non-timber forest products suchas fungi and snails.



ENDNOTES1 Serbian National Environmental Strategy. Draft submitted for

inter-ministerial consultation, June 17, 2005.

2 The Developmental Directions of Montenegro as an Ecologi-cal State, March 2001; Agenda of Economic Reforms forMontenegro, March 2003.

3 Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report, Brussels,November 9, 2005 SEC (2005) 1428.

4 Proposal for a Council Decision on the Principles, Prioritiesand Conditions contained in the European Partnership withSerbia and Montenegro including Kosovo as defined by theUnited Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June1999.

5 UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2004.

REFERENCESECPD. The Sustainability strategy of the ecological state of Mon-tenegro, 2002.

EBRD. 2005 Transition Report.

EC. European Partnership with Serbia and Montenegro includingKosovo as defined by the United Nations Security Council Reso-lution No. 1244, June 10, 1999.

EC. Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report. Brussels,November 9, 2005.

European Agency for Reconstruction official website,<www.ear.eu.int>.

UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2004.

World Bank. Serbia and Montenegro Country EnvironmentalAnalysis/Environmental Sector Review, 2003.

Agenda of Economic Reforms for Montenegro, March 2003.

The Developmental Directions of Montenegro as an EcologicalState, March 2001.

National Environmental Strategy of the Republic of Serbia, 2005.


IntroductionThe territory of Kosovo1 is in the centre of the

Balkan Peninsula. It is a small rural region of 10,887square kilometres, with a population about 2.4 millionpeople. Geographically, Kosovo is in the shape of abasin, surrounded by mountains and divided by a cen-tral north-south ridge into two sub-regions of roughlyequal size and population. Kosovo has historically beenan ethnically mixed region, with the majority in most ofits 30 municipalities ethnic Albanian. A few municipali-ties, however, were traditionally ethnic Serbian, whileothers remained mixed with other minority ethnicities,including Muslim Slavs, Turks, Croats and Roma.

After the war in 1998, the territory was placedunder the civil authority of the UN Interim Administra-tion Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) and is effectively aUN protectorate. UNMIK is authorised to exercise ulti-mate legislative and executive powers. The Constitu-tional Framework for Provisional Self-government ofKosovo divided responsibilities between UNMIK andthe Provisional Institutions of Self-Government (PISG)for the purpose of developing a meaningful self-gov-ernment in Kosovo pending final settlement.

General democratic elections were held in 2001 and2004, and provisional institutions of self-government(i.e. assembly, government and president) were estab-lished. The Government of Kosovo is comprised of 13ministries, among them the Ministry of Environmentand Spatial Planning. Within the Assembly of Kosovoexists a Parliamentary Committee on Agriculture,Forestry, Environment and Spatial Planning which con-sists of 11 members.

According to the Law on Environment, there aretwo levels of competent administrative institutions onenvironment: the centralised Ministry of Environmentand Spatial Planning and municipality authorities at thelocal level. The ministry implements responsibilitiesthrough:

• the Department of Environment;

• the Kosovo Environmental Protection Agency (withtwo institutes: the Institute on Nature Protectionand the Hydrometerelogical Institute); and

• the environmental inspectorate.

Other ministries involved in environmental decisionmaking include the Ministry of Energy and Mines; theMinistry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development;the Ministry of Trade and Industry; the Ministry of Trans-port and Telecommunications, and the Ministry of Health.

Under UN Security Council Resolution 1244, Koso-vo’s participation in regional fora, and negotiation ofinternational agreements falls under UNMIK authority.However, PISG line ministries are closely associated inthese initiatives to ensure that the Kosovo governmentis fully capable of fulfilling its obligations under theconstitutional framework for self-government. As rec-ommended in commission communication on Koso-vo’s future,2 Kosovo has continued to be an active par-ticipant in the work of the Regional EnvironmentalReconstruction Programme (REReP); ministry officialsare involved in different regional activities, mainly inlegislation enforcement and REC public participationprograms. The Ministry of Environment and SpatialPlanning in 2003 organised a regional environmentalconference in which ministers and ministry officialsfrom all neighbouring countries participated. After thisConference, the ministry signed memoranda of under-standings with Slovenia and Turkey; a memorandumwith Albania is in process.


The total area of Kosovo is 10,877 square kilometreswith two major plains: the Kosovo Plain and the Duk-agjini Plain. The climate is characterised as continentalwith some Mediterranean influence in the lower areas.

Of the total area, 53 percent (585,000 hectares) isagricultural land, 41 percent (455,000 hectares) is forestand forestry land, and 6 percent is classified as “other.”Around 51 percent of farmland is used for grains (i.e.corn, wheat and barley), 45 percent for pastures andmeadows, 3 percent for vineyard and groves, and 1percent miscellaneous. Of the total agricultural area, 88percent is privately owned, while the rest is property ofsocially owned companies.

Environmental profile:Kosovo (territory under UN

interim administration)

E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O F I L E : K O S O V O ( T E R R I T O R Y U N D E R U N I N T E R I M A D M I N I S T R A T I O N )


Agriculture contributes to 30 percent of the GDP ofKosovo, while it economically supports 60 percent ofthe population. Along with the forestry sector, agricul-ture contributes 35 percent of the GDP. The agricultur-al sector in Kosovo faces four major challenges:

• loss of farm land, as more than 1,000 hectares annu-ally are transformed de facto into built areas;

• parcel fragmentation, with the amount of landavailable per farming household (0.5-2 hectares)low;

• industrial pollution, as agricultural land is underconstant threat from polluters of all sizes, mainlythrough soil and water pollution; and

• a number of controlled and uncontrolled landfills inKosovo situated in or near farming areas.

Forestland accounts for some 41 percent of the totalarea of Kosovo, or around 455,000 hectres (figures varydepending on the source). Of this area, 56 percent isstate-owned. Illegal woodcutting together with agricul-tural, industrial and urban development are causes ofstress on these areas. Illegal woodcutting is a particu-larly acute problem, as poverty compounded with elec-tric shortages push the population to rely heavily onwood-burning for heating during winter months.

From 1999 to 2002, 1,988 hectares of trees have beenplanted, including white pines (Pinus silvestris), blackpines (Pinus nigra) and oaks. According to the Ministryof Forestry, Agriculture and Rural Development, 185,890cubic metres of woods were cut for firewood and tech-nical purposes (representing 145,695 and 30,195 cubicmetres, respectively) in 2002. There is no data for illegalwood cutting, but some estimates suggest that the statis-tics are higher than those of legal cutting.

WaterThere are four river basins in Kosovo flowing into

three distinct catchments areas: the Black, Aegean andAdriatic seas. Virtually no water flows into Kosovo,save the source of the Ibar, which is 30 km upstreamfrom the border. The major towns in Kosovo are sup-plied mainly by reservoirs: the Gazivoda reservoir forMitrovica; the Batllava and Grancanka reservoirs forPristina; and the Radoniq reservoir for Djakova/Dakovica. Other towns rely on surface water and/orgroundwater.

Water quality in the lowland rivers is poor, owingto the lack of wastewater treatment and waste disposal,while the upstream rivers are mostly of high quality.Some of the main rivers downstream of larger munici-palities and industries, e.g. the Sitnica River, are soheavily polluted that the water cannot be used forwater supply or irrigation. Groundwater quality is also

affected by pollution from untreated wastewater frommunicipalities and industries. Forty-four percent of thetotal population (and only 8.4 percent of the rural pop-ulation) has access to the water distribution system.People in rural areas rely on village water-supply sys-tems, their own wells, springs and/or surface water.Rural wells are generally in bad condition, and thewater quality is poor owing to organic contamination.

There is no wastewater treatment in Kosovo, andonly 28 percent of homes are connected to a sewagesystem. In villages and other small settlements, waste-water is disposed of in open channels, which contami-nate surface water and groundwater, resulting in poor-quality drinking water from wells. As a result, there is ahigh incidence of water-borne diseases. Industrialwastewater is not treated either, and the effluent is dis-charged directly into rivers.

Recent chemical and bacteriological monitoringshows that the majority of rivers in Kosovo are pollutedand may not be used even for industrial purposes priorto water treatment. While most rivers at the source areof good quality, this quickly changes when they passthrough towns and industries downstream.

The demand for water in the last century hasincreased sixfold, i.e. at a rate twice that of populationincrease. Half the population relies on the public watersystem, while half use wells as a means of supply(Water Master Plan Kosovo, 1983). The amount ofwater available per household is estimated at 1,600cubic metres per year.

According to the Report on State of Environment(2003), only 20-30 percent of the population is connect-ed to a sewage network. The report also indicates that:

• There are no major sewage treatment plants func-tioning in Kosovo.

• An estimated 707,000 people (36 percent of thepopulation) are connected to sewerage, of which77 percent live in the main towns.

• An estimated 167,000 cubic metres of raw (sanitary)sewage is produced in Kosovo, and 50,000 in Pristi-na alone.

• Most of the sewage network is combined sanitaryand storm sewage.

• Receiving waters are under intense strain fromorganic pollutants.

• A treatment plant was built in Pristina in 1975 butwas abandoned.

AirEmissions above the maximum allowable concentra-

tion values used to be common in Kosovo in the vicinity



of mining, industrial and energy complexes (e.g. as inObiliq), as well as in larger towns such as Pristina.

Two of the most important pollution sources inKosovo are located within or close to the city of Mitro-vica and in the region of Obiliq/Pristina. Mitrovica isthe site of one of the largest lead mining, smelting,refining and battery plant complexes in Europe. Thisposes a serious health risk due to the environmentalpollution caused by lead, cadmium, zinc, copper, andtoxic gases (which include sulphur dioxide, sulphur tri-oxide, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides).

Situated close to the surface lignite deposit inObiliq are two large thermal power plants, both ofwhich suffer from a lack of maintenance. The Western-designed Kosovo B of 600-MW capacity has filters thatare working with a removal capacity of 98 percent. Thefilters from the Russian-designed Kosovo A are operat-ing at a considerably reduced capacity, with removalrates between 50-80 percent. One of the 200-MW unitsemits about 25 tonnes of dust and ash per hour, result-ing in emissions that exceed European standards fordust pollution by 74 times.

Among the air emission from the power plants arecarbon dioxide (CO2), sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogenoxides (NOx) and dust, but emission levels are current-ly not measured. Information available from 1988 putSO2 emissions at 47,300 tonnes per year, with dust at78,600 tonnes per year. Because power plants are nowrunning at much lower capacity, emissions of SO2 andNOx are likewise lower. Dust emissions may exceedthe listed value, due to poorly functioning filters atKosovo A. All these emissions lead to a higher risk ofupper and lower respiratory tract diseases, includinginfections and allergies.

BiodiversityKosovo is exceptionally rich in plant and tree

species considering its relatively small area. To date,approximately 1,800 species of vascular plant specieshave been confirmed through field collection, andbotanical experts believe that the actual number iscloser to 2,500. The Kosovo and Albania Academy ofSciences recently compiled a list totalling 1,141 vascu-lar plant species found in the combined area of the twocountries. About 150-200 plant species that grow inKosovo are found only in the Balkans, and 13 arefound only in Kosovo.

Kosovo’s plant diversity is the result of a complexinteraction of physical factors that create a great varietyof habitat conditions for plant growth. Diverse combi-nations of soil type, elevation, and microclimate pro-vide a wide range of plant habitats. The factors thatcreate favourable conditions for plant diversity inKosovo also explain the high level of faunal diversity

within this relatively small area: There are believed tobe 46 mammal species in Kosovo, many with regionalor global conservation importance. Amphibians andreptiles have received less scientific attention thanother groups, but common species of frogs, salaman-ders, lizards, snakes, turtles and tortoises are known.

The current Protected Area System (PAS) coversslightly less than 5 percent of Kosovo land, includingone national park, 38 natural monuments and two pro-tected landscapes, classified according to IUCN’s pro-tected area designation criteria. The bulk of this area isin Sara Mountain National Park. A proposed newnational park would more than double the PAS area,almost reaching the internationally accepted norm of10 percent of protected land area.

Sara Mountain National Park is Kosovo’s onlydeclared national park and covers approximately39,000 hectares in the Sara Mountains on the borderwith the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,encompassing land from four municipalities. The parkwas legally created in 1986 and has since been nomi-nated as a World Heritage Site, though this nominationis in limbo due to uncertainty over Kosovo’s politicalstatus. The former administration also proposedexpanding the park by 80,000 hectares into the moun-tains to the south. The former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia has been reluctant to discuss coordinatingmanagement with its adjacent national park because ofthis uncertainty.

Sara (which can be translated as “cursed”) Moun-tains National Park, was created to protect the out-standing plant and animal biodiversity in these moun-tains as well as the physical beauty of its forests, moun-tain peaks, rivers, and alpine lakes. It is intended to beaccessible for scientific study, education, and summerand winter tourism. The biodiversity of the Sara Moun-tains has both Balkan and Mediterranean characteris-tics, making it exceptionally rich in flora and fauna,including endemics and rare species.

The area’s most prominent geological feature is thespectacular 6-kilometer Rugova Canyon of the Mbush-tria River, which links the lowlands up to the sub-alpine area via a winding road along the river. TheRugova Canyon was declared a Protected Nature Mon-ument in 1988 by the Peje/Pec Municipal Assembly,but has not been managed or protected in a systematicway. The MESP has proposed that the Bjeshket eNemuna/Prokletije National Park cover 50,000hectares, including Rugova Canyon and the surround-ing mountains to the border of Montenegro and Alba-nia. This proposal was conditionally approved by theresolution of the Kosovo Parliament in mid-April 2003.

Natural monuments and protected landscapes aredeclared by municipal assemblies and managed bymunicipal governments. There are currently 38 natural



monuments covering a total of 4,867 hectares, and twoprotected landscapes covering 1,681 hectares. Mostexisting monuments are caves, water features or indi-vidual trees that have local significance because oftheir size, odd shape, or history.


In 2003, the ministry developed the Kosovo Envi-ronmental Strategy adopted by the government in July2004. The main priorities of the government in the fieldof environment for next 10-year period are:

• completion of legislation for environmental protec-tion, in harmony with existing conditions in Koso-vo, gradual fulfilment of EU standards, and efficientimplementation of extant legislation;

• establishment of competent capable institutionscomplete with human capacities and equipped toimplement environmental policies, beginning withdecision-making, monitoring, supervision andinspection institutions;

• provision of necessary financial and economicinstruments for environmental protection in harmo-ny with economic development, and quick estab-lishment of eco-funds;

• gradual increase of access to clean potable water,sewage systems and waste treatment systems, andsupport to programmes for recycling of blackwaters and waste;

• establishment and functioning of an environmentalmonitoring network throughout Kosovo with priorityto major industrial pollutant “hot spots” in Kosovo;

• rational use of natural resources such as soil, water,minerals and forest, with special attention paid toendangered species and orientation towards renew-able resources;

• expansion in area and protection of natural heritageareas and those with special natural value, togetherwith an increase in capacity for efficient manage-ment in accordance with the Rio Declaration;

• development of long-term education programmes,public awareness campaigns and support for envi-ronmentally focused scientific projects;

• support for the import of clean technologies inKosovo in starting phases of new industries andrestarting of existing industry; and

• application of the concept of energy efficiency inall sectors of energy use.


An environmental fund does not exist, nor is it fore-seen in the framework environmental law adopted in2003. The main opposition to creation of an eco-fundcame from the Ministry of Economy and Finances afterseveral initiatives from the Ministry of Environment andSpatial Planning. This caused stagnation in the processof forming economic instruments for environmentalpollution. In 2005, the Ministry of Environment beganwork on the draft law on environmental funding, withwork expected to continue into 2006.

Environmental legislation inherited fromYugoslavia that is not discriminatory to any ethnicgroup in Kosovo is declared valid for Kosovo, eventhough none of it is currently implemented, monitoredor enforced. This also means that no measures forfinancing environment from economic instruments areembodied in the environmental legislation. No infor-mation is available on the extent to which environmen-tal subsidies have been used or the potentially negativeenvironmental impact caused by subsidies in other sec-tors such as transport, agriculture and energy. Econom-ic instruments, such as air-emission non-compliancefees, water effluent charges, water pollution non-com-pliance fees, sewage charges and municipal waste usercharges are being incorporated into the new environ-mental legislation that is being drafted in Kosovo.

Legislation does not offer enough incentives to eco-nomic enterprises to pay more attention to environ-mental protection during their activities, especiallyregarding the use of clean technologies or better con-trol of existing technologies with regard to pollutionprevention.

Based on the strategy document approved by thegovernment, priorities in the field of economic instru-ments are:

• establishment of a fund for environmental protec-tion (i.e. an eco-fund);

• drafting a register of measures for successful imple-mentation of economic instruments;

• undertaking a study of possible effects of politicalpackages, especially bills of expense for reducingpollution in each sector, consequences and legisla-tion; and

• thorough consultation with interested parties forthe sake of increasing ecological awareness andbusiness ethics.



EU-Kosovo Relations: theStabilisation and AssociationProcess

The European perspective of the Western Balkansas confirmed in the Thessaloniki Declaration and theAgenda for the Western Balkans of June 2003 is alsoopen to Kosovo.3 The Stabilisation and AssociationProcess Tracking Mechanism (STM) initiated by theEuropean Commission in spring 2003 is designed tofacilitate Kosovo’s progress in the SAP and thus bringKosovo closer to the European family. The EuropeanPartnership published in June 2004 formulates — as anoverarching recommendation — the implementation ofstandards.

Kosovo adopted its Action Plan for the Implementa-tion of the European Partnership Priorities in January2005 and provided the commission with progressupdates in April, June and September 2005.

The renewed European Partnership for Serbia andMontenegro in 2005 also includes a section on Kosovoand a separate plan addressing the priorities concern-ing Kosovo should be developed under the authorityof the United Nations Interim Administration in Kosovo.

EU AssistanceSince 1999, community assistance to Kosovo has

been provided under a variety of instruments includinghumanitarian aid, exceptional financial support andfinancing to Pillar IV of UNMIK. Since 2000, the CARDSprogramme has been the main financial instrument forKosovo, with programmes mainly implemented by theEuropean Agency for Reconstruction.

A total of EUR 51 million was allocated for Kosovoin 1999-2003 for environment. Water supply acrossKosovo was in poor condition in 1999; with joint fund-ing from Germany’s Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau(KFW), the agency replaced 35 kilometres of pipes andmodernised over a dozen pumping stations to improvethe supply of water in the Pristina and Mitrovica

regions, home to 550,000 people. The agency is alsoworking with the water companies and relevant institu-tions to strengthen management and ensure that fundsare invested efficiently and transparently.

The EC has provided several thousand new rubbishbins, modernised dumpsites and trucks that not onlycollect waste but also compact it into a more manage-able load. Municipal waste sites are now managedlocally and several new landfills built to EU standardswill steadily reduce the overall number of rubbish sites,and ensure that waste will be disposed of in a sanitaryand controlled way. The EC has also stepped up a pub-lic awareness campaign that stresses the importance ofprotecting the environment.

A priority within the European Partnership is to “pre-pare a comprehensive environmental action plan partic-ularly relating to public health issues, with a view toapproximating the EU acquis.” The Multi-Annual Indica-tive Programme 2005-2006 (MIP) identifies the need toprovide further institutional development support to thewater and waste sectors in Kosovo. The development ofregional consolidated utility companies is a recommen-dation from the STM. The standards for Kosovo statethat the PISG and municipalities must ensure availabilityof basic public services, such as utilities, without dis-crimination to all communities in Kosovo.

CARDS Annual Programme 2004 for Kosovo allo-cated EUR 2.5 million for institutional support for envi-ronmental management, and the CARDS Annual Pro-gramme 2005 allocated approximately EUR 3 millionfor further institutional development of the water andwaste sectors.

Relations with International Financial Insitutions

The IMF has provided significant technical assis-tance since 1999. At the request of donors, IMF staff isassisting authorities in designing a macroeconomic pol-icy programme, including selective quantitative andstructural targets that staff could subsequently monitor.

Short-term priorities• To prepare the adoption and implementation of legis-

lation on environmental impact assessment in linewith the EU acquis;

• To prepare a comprehensive environmental actionplan, particularly relating to public health issues,with a goal of approximating the EU acquis;

• To prepare activities to increase public awareness andcivil society participation in environmental matters.

Medium-term priorities• Adopt and implement the environmental action plan

with a view to approximating with the EU acquis;

• Implement and support activities to increase publicawareness and civil society participation in environ-mental matters.

ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES IN THE 2005 EUROPEAN PARTNERSHIP’S



This would not only underpin the credibility of theenvisioned programme, but also facilitate the availabili-ty of donor support.

In Kosovo, the World Bank has so far had noinvolvement in the environment. A recent World Bankpoverty assessment, however, highlighted a number ofenvironmental risks to the population associated withindustrial pollution, contaminated food and deforesta-tion. Through the next Transitional Support Strategy,the World Bank plans to integrate environment issuesinto its programmes of support.

Due to the unresolved status of Kosovo, EBRDactivities remain limited. The difficulties the bank facesinclude the failure of UNMIK to confirm the legal statusof EBRD, the public sector’s low borrowing capacity,and very fragmented decision making regarding privatesector development. The World Bank will thereforefocus on working with local banks and on assistance tothe SME sector, both of which are in close cooperationwith the EAR. In the infrastructure sector, the bank willcontinue to assist authorities in the implementation of amodern regulatory regime in the telecommunicationssector that reflects best international practices, and willengage in dialogue to identify areas in the energy sec-tor for potential technical cooperation that may lead toinvestments.

REReP Priority AreasState of Legal, Political and Institutional Framework

The Assembly and Government of Kosovo shallensure the protection of the environment by issuingstrategic documentation and programmes, laws andprogrammes for environmental protection in specialareas, provided that such strategic documents and pro-grammes shall be in conformity with other provisionsof the law on the environment. Approved laws by theAssembly in the field of environment are:

• the Law on Environmental Protection 2003;

• the Law on Air Protection 2004;

• the Law on Water 2004;

• the Law on Nature Protection 2005; and

• the Law on Waste Management 2005.

Currently in process are a draft law on noise protec-tion, and a law on ionising radiation.

The Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planningprovides environmental protection within the scope ofits responsibilities as specified in UNMIK Regulation2001/19 and amended by UNMIK Regulation 2002/5,which defines this ministry. Two main structures exist

within the ministry.First is the Department of Environment. A munici-

pality may, to the extent it is specifically required orauthorised to do so by the present law, or a provisionof a subsidiary normative act issued pursuant to thepresent law, exercise responsibility for those environ-mental matters originating or likely to originate withinsuch municipality, if such matters can be handled, con-trolled, prevented, financed or managed by suchmunicipality itself.

The Kosovo Environmental Protection Agency(KEPA), established pursuant to law, is an institutionthat, under the authority of the ministry, carries outadministrative, professional, supportive, scientific, andresearch tasks in the fields of environmental protection,biodiversity, nature protection zones, and hydro-mete-orology. The structuring of the KEPA is in process.

The Environmental Inspectorate is responsible forcarrying out the tasks which have been specificallyassigned pursuant to the Law on Environmental Protec-tion Reg. 2003/9 and secondary implementing acts pur-suant to the law.

The Environmental Inspectorate supervises the sus-tainable management of natural resources (e.g. air,water, land, forests, mineral resources), publicresources of nature (e.g. land or territory, waterresources, coastal waters) and natural resources of spe-cial value (e.g. geodiversity, biodiversity, wild animalsand plant life according to habitat).

The tasks, responsibilities and competences of theEnvironmental Inspectorate are regulated by Administra-tive Directive 2/2004, signed by Kosovo’s prime minister.

State of Environmental Civil SocietyIn Kosovo today, relatively few environmental

NGOs are active. Many existing environmental NGOswere dissolved during the conflict, with activities takenup by some local authorities, such as in the municipali-ty of Podujeve, which declared it would become thefirst ecological town in Kosovo. Today, the picture ofthe environmental movement in Kosovo is gettingclearer. Local environmental NGOs have establishedthe electronic network of environmental NGOs knownas Sharri.net, which possesses its own website, and thecoalition for introduction and implementation of theAarhus Convention.

Lack of environmental awareness is generally themain obstacle to developing environmental civil soci-ety in Kosovo. Public participation is underdeveloped— even in local decision making and environmentalimpact procedures — and public awareness and initia-tive with regard to environmental decision making isextremely low. This problem is exacerbated by a lowlevel of capacity within UNMIK and PISG to educate



the public on key environmental issues, as well as highpressure on various international organisations current-ly operating within the territory to produce fast resultsat the expense of environmental considerations andpublic involvement in the organisation’s activities.


Regional cooperation has been significantlyenhanced over the past years; the most notableprogress was reached through cooperation under theStability Pact. UNMIK and PISG have increased theirparticipation in a wide array of Stability Pact initiativeswhich benefit Kosovo and promote regional integra-tion. UNMIK has signed a free trade agreement withAlbania and is in the process of negotiating with fur-ther partners.

Kosovo has actively participated in REREP activities.With the exception of regional activities under REReP,the undefined status of Kosovo has resulted in theabsence of specific environmental projects. There areideas for cross-border peace parks between Albania,Montenegro and Kosovo (Bjeshket e Nemuna), butthese must be developed further.


In Kosovo, the following factors affect the state ofenvironment and human health: access to drinkingwater and sanitation; dust and heavy metals; othertypes of industrial pollution; and heavy traffic.

Only 44 percent of the total population has accessto the water distribution system, and in rural areas thisfigure is a mere 8.4 percent. Other problems are insuffi-cient chlorine for use in water disinfection, and no pro-tected drinking-water sources. Health risks related todrinking water contamination include all waterbornebacteriological diseases, especially diarrhoea.

Kosovo does not have a wastewater treatment sys-tem. Only 28 percent of the population has access to asewage system, with most of these in urban areas. Forthe rural population, drinking water from wells is conta-minated by wastewater in many cases, resulting in a highincidence of gastrointestinal tract infectious diseases.

The many problems with urban waste collection,the non-existence of rural waste collection and the lackof sanitary landfills add to potential health risks, partic-ularly for children playing outdoors. Waste from hospi-tals and clinics end up in regular bins on the streetsand a potential source of infection.

Industrial pollution, especially pollution frompower plants, the textile industry and agriculture, is

one of the causes of respiratory diseases, which are fre-quent in municipalities such as Obiliq. Heavy traffic,notably in urban areas, is not only a cause of air pollu-tion, but also results in a large number of casualtieswhich otherwise would be avoided.

Considering its relatively small area, Kosovo isexceptionally rich in plant species. To date, approxi-mately 1,800 species of vascular plant species havebeen confirmed through field collection, and botanicalexperts believe that the actual number is closer to2,500. Several of these are known to be on the verge ofextinction or are already locally extinct mostly due tohuman activity, including the intensive collection ofmedicinal plant species. Fourteen vascular plantspecies are listed as the most directly threatened, andthe list of protected plant species includes 27 vascularspecies. Human impact on vegetation has also dramati-cally affected Kosovo wildlife: Many terrestrial speciescontinue to exist only if inhabiting the more remotemountains, while many wetland and plains species areno longer seen in Kosovo.

Biodiversity in Kosovo is threatened by severaldirect causes driven by underlying causes such asextreme unemployment rate in rural areas, where peo-ple rely more on natural resources; increasing popula-tion density; the total lack of domestic wastewatertreatment; weak enforcement of natural resource laws;and the lack of economic incentives encouraging envi-ronmentally responsible decisions. Direct threats tobiodiversity include:

• over-harvesting of fuel wood, particularly in oak-dominated forests at altitudes below 800 meters;

• over-harvesting of rare medicinal plants;

• fires in rare mountain pine forests, especially inareas easily accessible to tourists;

• illegal construction and urban expansion threaten-ing wetlands and plain habitats;

• sand and gravel mining, domestic and industrialwater pollution, and solid waste disposal as majorthreats to aquatic ecosystems in rivers; and

• use of pesticides banned in Western Europe, athreat to some species of birds, small mammals,and insects.

ENDNOTES

1 Reference to Kosovo in this document is made in the spirit ofUnited Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and shouldbe understood as a territory under UN interim administration.

2 A European Future for Kosovo, Communication from theCommission, Brussels, April 20, 2005.

3 Ibid.



REFERENCES

CIA. “Serbia and Montenegro” in The World Factbook.

EC. A European Future for Kosovo. Brussels, April 20, 2005.

EC. European Partnership with Serbia and Montenegro includingKosovo as defined by the United Nations Security Council Reso-lution 1244 of June 10, 1999. Brussels, November 9, 2005.

EC. Kosovo (under UNSCR 1244) 2005 Progress Report. Brus-sels, November 9, 2005.


European Agency for Reconstruction official website<www.ear.eu.int>.

Kosovo Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning. The Stateof Environment of Kosovo, 2003.

Kosovo Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning. KosovoEnvironmental Strategy, 2004.

Kosovo Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning. State ofthe waste in Kosovo, 2005.


World Bank. Country Environmental Analysis, Serbia and Mon-tenegro, 2003.

THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER FOR CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE (REC)

is a non-partisan, non-advocacy, not-for-profit international organisation with a mission to assist in

solving environmental problems in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). The REC fulfils this mission by

promoting cooperation among non-governmental organisations, governments, businesses and other

environmental stakeholders, and by supporting the free exchange of information and public

participation in environmental decision making.

The REC was established in 1990 by the United States, the European Commission and Hungary.

Today, the REC is legally based on a charter signed by the governments of 28 countries and the

European Commission, and on an international agreement with the government of Hungary. The REC

has its head office in Szentendre, Hungary, and country offices and field offices in 16 beneficiary

countries which are: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia,

Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia and

Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey.

Recent donors are the European Commission and the governments of Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy,

Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovenia, Sweden,

Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as other inter-governmental and

private institutions.

Environmental Snapshot of South Eastern EuropeREReP Country Profiles