After a two-year standstill, European integration has moved from a dead end. At the Intergovernmental Conference in Brussels on December 14, Serbia opened Cluster 4, which refers to the Green Agenda and Sustainable Connectivity. Civil society organizations gathered in Coalition 27, which deal with environmental protection, assessed the opening of Chapter 27 as an expression of the EU's intention to motivate Serbia to essentially and practically dedicate itself to reforms of the environmental protection system, rather than as a result of Serbia's real progress. Undoubtedly, the most demanding and expensive cluster in the accession negotiation process has been opened, which includes four chapters: Chapter 14 - Transport Policy, Chapter 15 - Energy, Chapter 21 - Trans-European networks, and Chapter 27 - Environment.
A long and slow road to the European Union
Serbia's path to the European Union started with the submission of membership applications, back in 2009. We received the candidate status in March 2012, while the Accession Negotiations were officially opened on January 21, 2014.
Negotiations were opened following the negotiation methodology adopted by the EU at the opening of accession talks with Montenegro in 2012. According to this methodology, the accession talks were organized within 35 negotiating chapters. Each chapter opens and closes individually. Negotiations were conducted in the format of the Intergovernmental Conference.
On February 5, 2020, the European Commission adopted a new methodology for conducting accession negotiations with countries in the accession process. The goal of the new Methodology was to give a breath of fresh air into the process, as well as to provide more: credibility, political leadership, dynamics, predictability, as well as positive and negative conditions in the process. The methodology defines that the goal of the process is full membership and prepares candidates for it. The great novelty brought by the Methodology is that the negotiating chapters are grouped into six clusters. All chapters within the cluster will be opened together (in groups) but will be closed individually as before (no change of approach at closing). Thus, the chapters remain the key format within which negotiations are conducted, as all documents (screening report, negotiating positions, benchmarks) are adopted in the chapter format.
However, the new Methodology will change the dynamics of the reform activities of the candidate countries that will conduct negotiations after Serbia and Montenegro. Candidates will need to focus on all chapters within one cluster at the same time, to open any of them. This leads to limiting the ability of the candidate government to choose what they want and what they will not do because they will have to do either all chapters from the cluster at once or will not open any chapters. As of December 2021, Serbia has opened 22 of the 35 chapters. The chapters are arranged in different clusters, while Serbia has fully opened Cluster 1 - Fundamentals and Cluster 4 - Green Agenda and Sustainable Connectivity.
In the field of environmental protection, from 2016 until today, Serbia has shown a "certain level" of readiness every year for the adoption and implementation of the acquis communautaire. On a scale of 1 to 5, this would be a score of 2. As for progress, in 2016 and 2018, Serbia achieved "some progress" (on a scale of 1 to 5, this would be a score of 3), while from 2019 The European Commission assessed Serbia's progress as "limited progress". In school, it would be a grade of 1+ or 2-, depending on whether the teacher is kindhearted or not. The tasks that we had to fulfill over the years were mostly the same: 1) to improve the administrative and financial capacities of state bodies and institutions (primarily the Environmental Protection Agency); 2) to make more efforts and increase efforts in the implementation and enforcement of regulations to close unsanitary landfills and improve recycling and waste management, improve air and water quality, prepare for the establishment of a network of Natura 2000 protected areas and 3) to implement the Paris Agreement we have signed to prepare an integrated National Energy and Climate Plan which will harmonize our climate ambitions until 2030 with the public policies of the European Union.
In the field of energy, Chapter 15, the situation is similar. Since 2016, the European Commission has assessed Serbia as "moderately prepared", which would be grade 3. Serbia's progress in energy reforms has slipped from "some progress" in 2016 and 2018 to "limited progress". However, the latest report from the Commission states that Serbia has made "good progress", which would be a score of 4. The recommendations of the European Commission have been repeated year after year: 1) a complete separation of production and other activities within Srbijagas to develop the competitiveness of the gas market; 2) full implementation of energy market integration measures following international agreements and 3) strengthening the capacity of state bodies to implement reforms, improve and promote energy efficiency, establish a market price of electricity that reflects the actual cost of production. In the last few years, the European Commission has added recommendations to the main recommendations regarding the transition to green energy, planning to replace coal-fired power plants with renewable energy sources, and adopting a National Energy and Climate Plan, which will ensure Serbia's compliance with the Western Balkans Green Agenda, which we accepted through the signing of the Sofia Declaration in November 2020). Chapter 15, unlike Chapter 27, had criteria for opening and they referred to the reforms that Serbia must do before the conditions for opening Chapter 15 are met. The criteria were for Serbia to develop an action plan that would regulate minimum stocks of oil and petroleum products, as well as to adopt a legally binding unbundling plan in the gas sector to ensure the competitiveness of the gas market. Serbia has met these criteria, thus creating the conditions for the opening of Cluster 4.
We see that Serbia's progress in reforms of the energy and environmental protection system has stagnated until this year, and that homework has mostly been repeated, which means that we have not done it. However, the teacher was kindhearted, and Serbia opened Cluster 4, and thus Chapter 15 and Chapter 27. However, the most difficult part of the job is yet to come, because the goal is: to close these chapters. To achieve that, it is necessary not only to adapt but also to successfully apply and implement the highest standards and public policies in energy and environmental protection.
Chapter 27 - What we have(not) done so far?
Serbia has made the most significant progress in the field of climate change with the adoption of the Law on Climate Change in March 2021. However, for the implementation of the Law, it is necessary to pass over ten bylaws. Without them, the Law cannot be implemented and practice remains a dead letter on paper. The Law on Climate Change also envisages the development of a low-carbon development strategy and a program of adaptation to changed climate conditions, no later than two years after the adoption of the Law. It is interesting to know that the Draft Strategy for Low Carbon Development was drafted, that the public debate on this document ended in January 2020 (one year before the adoption of the Law), but that this document was never adopted. For that reason, Serbia still has no goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions that are in line with the goals of the European Union, to which we have committed ourselves by signing the Green Agenda for the Western Balkans.
From year to year, one of the basic recommendations of the Commission was that Serbia should implement the Paris Agreement. Reporting on the implementation of the Paris Agreement is done through the National Determined Contributions (NDC), which are submitted to the United Nations and which communicate the state's contribution to meeting the objectives of the Paris Agreement. Serbia submitted its first NDC to the UN in 2015, and it amounted to a 9.8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990. With an unclear methodology and a non-transparent way of adopting this document, this remains our only adopted goal in the field of climate change, even though we were obliged - like all other countries - to update it by September this year. The problems we face every year show that it is not a matter of simply fulfilling the obligations arising from the process of joining the European Union, but of the urgent need of Serbia itself. Serbia's main challenge when it comes to climate change is great vulnerability due to its consequences. We see this every summer when droughts destroy agricultural yields; or in spring and autumn, when we have excessive amounts of precipitation, so torrential floods occur that destroy the road and other infrastructure. Another problem of Serbia is excessive dependence on coal in energy production. In the still valid documents of the Republic of Serbia, we state that coal is the domestic, reliable, and available energy resource that we will use in the next 50-60 years. However, in the previous days, we could see that the coal from which we will produce energy and have a secure supply - is not in thermal power plants. Footage of tailings, which is delivered to thermal power plants and cannot produce energy, is coming to us from thermal power plants and coal mines. So, this is a practical demonstration exercise from which we should conclude that relying solely on coal as the main source of energy is dangerous and unreliable. It is unserious and unacceptable that the stability of the energy system depends on the weather, and we will agree that the snow that fell is not nearly as big a trouble as we remember. Therefore, we need an alternative, domestic, and reliable energy sources that we can rely on when there is no coal, as there has been in recent days.
Nature protection is in the year that is behind us marked by the problematic process of drafting the Law on Amendments to the Law on Nature Protection. In April 2021, civil society organizations sent a request to the Ministry of Environmental Protection to suspend the drafting process due to numerous violations related to the drafting procedure, public involvement, and content that is unclear, and in some cases solutions that are contrary to nature protection goals. Among numerous problematic solutions, the most significant is the one related to the construction of small hydropower plants. Namely, the Ministry stated that the key reason for passing the amendments to the Law was the impact of the construction of small hydropower plants in protected areas and that the amendments to the Law prohibit this practice. However, the text that the public had the opportunity to see allows the construction of small hydropower plants in protected areas, under insufficiently clear circumstances when the Government declares a project a project of general interest and national importance. Given that the criteria for determining the general interest and national importance are not transparently defined, there is an opportunity for a broad interpretation of these terms and space for further construction of small hydropower plants in protected areas. Due to all the shortcomings that marked the drafting of the Law on Amendments to the Law on Nature Protection, civil society organizations initiated a social dialogue with the Ministry of Environmental Protection, and the draft law was not adopted.
When it comes to water quality, we have not seen any significant progress in the past year. All key problems remained the same, and the most significant issue still is that less than 15% of municipal wastewater is treated, and the rest is discharged directly into rivers and lakes, without any treatment. Serbia has an enormous job on the construction of about 300 wastewater treatment plants, and the European Commission says that greater transparency is needed in the planning and selection of investments in the environment, as well as in their management. Diplomatic vocabulary actually says that there is a high risk of corruption in the process of building a wastewater treatment plants. During the summer of 2021, the public was surprised by the Draft Law on Amendments to the Law on Waters, which entered the Parliament in urgent procedure, without a public debate. The public was not able to participate in the drafting of this proposal, nor was it informed in any way about the drafting of law that is essential for the preservation of water as a public good and a key resource for all citizens of Serbia. Among other things, the proposal provided for the introduction of a "direct agreement" mechanism for leasing publicly owned water land for the use of river sediments and for the installation of floating structures (rafts). This example shows that this is a substantial change in the decision making procedure on the management of public goods, without public participation. In this way, the space for corruption was additionally widened, and the principle of transparency and public procurement in the management of water, a resource that is the most important public good - was eliminated. Over 40 civil society organizations appealed for the withdrawal of this document from the procedure and asked that the citizens of Serbia are consulted on the issue of water management, as the most important public good, through a referendum. More than 75,000 citizens have signed a petition asking for a referendum. In the epilogue, the National Assembly adopted the Law, but it was not signed by the President of the Republic. The draft Law was not adopted, the Government withdrew it from the procedure. However, the fight for water was not finally won, despite the announcements that a new law will be written.
Waste management has also been marked by a turbulent year, despite which there has been no real progress. We saw the consequences of systemically inadequate waste management most obviously during the summer, when several landfills in Serbia were on fire. During the autumn, the public was surprised by another non-transparent process of adopting the Waste Management Program for the period from 2021 to 2024. Due to numerous irregularities, and above all the effective restriction of the public to participate in this process, civil society organizations and the professional public demanded a repetition of the public debate. The autumn was also marked by amendments to the Law on Waste Management, which was at a public debate in October and November. During that time, Serbia still has over 3,000 illegal unsanitary landfills, and the percentage of municipal waste recycling is unacceptably low.
The European Commission assessed that Serbia has achieved a good level of harmonization with the EU acquis in the field of air quality. However, the public sees air pollution as a burning problem, and this is confirmed by official reports of the institutions. In 2020, the number of cities and agglomerations that have excessively polluted air increased to 15, which means that over three million citizens of Serbia breathe unhealthy air. According to the report of the European Environment Agency, 14,600 people die prematurely in Serbia every year due to high air pollution, primarily due exposure to PM2.5 particles. Despite the alarmingly bad air quality, which was also pointed out by the European Commission, Serbia was five years late with the national plan for resolving this issue. During 2021, the Ministry of Environmental Protection prepared the Air Protection Program in the Republic of Serbia for the period from 2022 to 2030 with an Action Plan, and the public had the opportunity to see the document at the end of November. The program brings some good solutions, but it has one key flaw: achieving the goals of improving air quality depends on the implementation of the National Emission Reduction Plan, which Serbia has not implemented since 2018, which is why the Energy Community Secretariat initiated dispute settlement procedure against Serbia. If the National Emission Reduction Plan is not implemented, and there are no indications that it will, and emissions from thermal power plants continue to exceed the set limit values, the citizens of Serbia will have many more years with polluted air, and the Air Protection Program will remain - only letters on paper.
Industrial pollution is closely related to air pollution. When it comes to this topic, in the latest report the European Commission marked the Kostolac B thermal power plant as the largest European pollutant with sulfur dioxide, which, despite having a desulphurization system, still emits enormous amounts of sulfur dioxide. This area was also marked by sudden legislative activity before the end of the year. In November 2021, the National Assembly adopted amendments to the Law on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control, thus postponing the deadline for polluters to obtain integrated permits from December 31st 2020 to December 31st 2024. The law entered the Parliament by urgent procedure and without public debate. Facilities that are among the biggest polluters in Serbia, such as thermal power plants, copper smelters, ironworks, and cement plants, have the obligation to obtain an integrated permit. The law was originally adopted in 2004, and at that time it was estimated that there were 227 plants that needed to obtain an integrated permit. Since 2004, only 46 polluters have obtained an integrated permit and reduced their pollution to legal limits. Other polluters continue to work as before, without sanctions. We can see the consequences of this in the air quality reports of the institutions of the Republic of Serbia. For example, sulfur dioxide emissions in 2020 were six times higher than allowed, and nitrogen oxide emissions were twice as high as allowed. No one was and will not be held accountable for that, because the Government, instead of sanctioning polluters who did not respect the Law, extended the deadline for another three years.
The end of 2021 brought the long-awaited amendments to the Law on Environmental Impact Assessment and the Law on Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment, which harmonize the area of horizontal legislation in environmental protection with EU law. In December, drafts of the two laws were in public consultation, after five years of waiting. The presented solutions should improve the processes of public participation in environmental decision-making, as well as the quality of assessments and strategic environmental impact assessments. Whether this will really be the case will depend on the text that will be adopted in the end, and much more on how the laws will be applied.
Chapter 15
The EU acquis in the field of energy regulates: security of energy supply, issues of the internal energy market, use of renewable energy sources, energy efficiency, as well as issues of nuclear energy.
The most significant progress has taken place in the energy sector in 2021. Firstly, Serbia has met the criteria for opening this chapter by adopting an action plan on emergency oil stocks (this plan refers to security of supply of oil and oil products, with mandatory minimum oil reserves of 61 days of average daily consumption, if supply disruptions occur). Next, we adopted an action plan on gas unbundling, which separates the distribution and trade of gas from transport and storage, thus meeting EU requirements regarding market transparency and competitiveness.
At the beginning of the year, Serbia adopted new laws in the field of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency, and amended the laws on energy and mining, which brought additional harmonization with the EU acquis. The new Law on the Use of Renewable Energy Sources partially transposes the provisions of EU law, and creates preconditions for the development of the RES market, enables citizens and companies to produce electricity for their own consumption and to become producers and consumers (prosumers). The new legal framework facilitates the establishment of energy cooperatives, but many issues remain unclear. For example, the concept of a renewable energy community under the new Law on Renewable Energy Sources is not in line with the Law on Cooperatives, which actually allows energy cooperatives to produce and sell energy. Therefore, it is necessary to wait for the adoption of bylaws that will further regulate the democratization of energy system. However, the share of RES in final consumption in Serbia still remains low. With a 21.4% share of RES in 2019, it is far below the target of 27%. Serbia still relies predominantly on fossil fuels, and above all on coal. We could see the impact of this public policy on security of energy supply in December 2021, when due to lack of quality coal, the work of six thermal units of the thermal power plant "Nikola Tesla" was interrupted, and over 30,000 citizens were left without heating and electricity. This further confirms that we need reliable, alternative, affordable and domestic renewable energy sources.
The new Law on Energy Efficiency should improve the situation in this area, especially bearing in mind that the energy intensity in Serbia is four times higher than the EU average. In practice, this means that goods produced in Serbia require four times more energy than those produced in the EU.
One of the key recommendations of the European Commission is the adoption of the National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP). This document should harmonize the energy and climate policy of Serbia with the policies of the EU until 2030 and enable the achievement of climate neutrality by 2050. In 2018, the Energy Community passed recommendations and guidelines for the development of the NECP, with a plan to complete the NECP by the end of 2020. Serbia was late and started preparing the Draft in April 2021. Civil society organizations have warned that the public is not involved in the making of the Draft, and that it is crucial to reach a social consensus on this document, given that structural changes that await all sectors of society on the path of energy transition. In order to open the process of drafting this document to the general public, civil society organizations organized public consultations at which the invited representatives of the Ministry of Mining and Energy presented the course and plans for the adoption of the NECP.
When it comes to MP1 nuclear energy, Serbia has yet to complete the adoption of an agreement between the European Atomic Energy Community and third countries on the timely exchange of information in the event of a radiological emergency (ECURIE). The end of the year brought new changes in the political will for the construction of nuclear power plants, considering that after the return of the President of Serbia from Russia, the participation of the Russian company Rosatom in the construction of a nuclear power plant on the territory of our country was mentioned in the public. Although Serbia has a moratorium on nuclear power for 30 years, more and more officials can be heard that they consider turning to this energy source.
We have a lot of work to do, in all areas and chapters. Whether Serbia will be successful in that or not, citizens will be able to easily assess in everyday life. When we have clean air with a reliable supply of available energy, clean and healthy drinking water, we will know that we are ready to close the chapter. And to reach that goal, it is necessary to consistently implement all adopted regulations and plans, transparently and legally, in the interest of all citizens. In a word, the rule of law is needed.
Mirjana Jovanović, Marko Pajović, Lazar Jovčić, Ognjan Pantić, Bojana Džulović, Branislav Cvetković
The text was originally published in the 79th issue of the Bulletin on Negotiations.
Photo source: Freepik.com