The floods in Kraljevo, the dying bees in Kikinda, the water with the addition of arsenic in Zrenjanin, the Danube, which still generously accepts all the untreated sewage water of Belgrade, the November’s air - all this will tell us that environmental protection in Serbia is of key importance. How well do we know that?

The first wave of reactions to the latest European Commission report on Serbia's progress on European integration path has passed. We saw that this report is a fun item for the Prime Minister, almost unimportant fiction for the president, but for the media and the judiciary the final confirmation of reality they live in. Reactions were most often caused by parts of the Reports relating to the judiciary, corruption, freedom of expression and the media, the rule of law, foreign policy and human rights. All, indeed, "fun" themes.

However, the first wave of reactions has circumvented a chapter that is important to all of us. The chapter on which our health depends, on which depends whether we will have water and whether this water will be safe for us, depending on how we will breathe air, how long and in what kind of environment we will live - Chapter 27, the one that relates to environmental protection and climate change. And while in the previous years it was said that this chapter is complicated, expensive, and that it is almost impossible to adopt and apply the EU acquis in this chapter, this year the reaction to this chapter is missing. None of the officials, neither the media nor the public. It seems that even to the European Commission this year it is out of focus. They even forgot to put it in the contents of the Report.

Photo: Report's content, Chapter 27 missing

What does "limited progress" mean?

All you can read in the Report on Chapter 27 is just not "fun". The progress in this chapter is assessed as "limited." On the scale of the assessment of progress made by the Commission, the lowest transition score is "no progress". The next scale rating is "some progress". Limited progress is somewhere between the fact that we have not progressed and that we have made some progress.

Limited progress means - it's not that we did not do anything, but what we did was ... well, it's not quite something. It's not something certain.

For comparison, in the previous report, the progress in Chapter 27 was assessed as certain. This time - uncertain.

This uncertainty is evident when comparing the text of the previous and this report. We will find almost the same sentences, estimates and recommendations. And it will not be entirely clear to us what this limited progress makes.

The key recommendations of the European Commission are identical to that of last year: improve administrative capacity, improve inter-institutional cooperation, set up the Green Fund on healthy grounds, improve enforcement, close non-sanitary landfills, work on reducing the amount of waste that you produce, invest in recycling, better monitor air quality and better manage nature and waters, apply the Paris Agreement and prepare for climate change.

Polluted air? Who cares…

The new report differs from the previous one by several adopted regulations, although there is still no progress in what actually improve the living conditions - in the application of regulations. The difference also is that the new report has failed to give a harsh assessment of the different aspects of environmental protection that they pointed out to us last year, although in most cases it was not stated how we applied the key recommendations and improved the areas previously pointed out by the Commission.

For example, in the new report there is no estimate of the worrying air quality that Serbian citizens are exposed to. However, it was not said what we did to improve air quality. It seems that the past winter and the heating season were an illusion, and that we were collectively deceived when we felt like  we could not breathe. Ti seems like the EU no longer considers it as a problem. Or at least it does not point it.

Is it because it does not matter, or some other things are more important – the question remains open.

Similar is the situation with other areas of Chapter 27.

In the area of horizontal legislation, it is reiterated that a strategic environmental impact assessment for all important public policy areas is necessary, not just for the environment. In the previous report, it was specified that a strategic assessment should be done for the National Emission Reduction Plan (NERP). In the new report, the NERP is not mentioned, nor is the strategic assessment that was carried out for this document in 2018 beyond the Law on Strategic Environmental Assessment.

In the area of water quality management, non-compliance with standards is said to be one of the main causes for concern, such as arsenic cases. It is not said that citizens of Zrenjanin, for example, do not have drinking water due to this mismatch for nearly 15 years.

In the area of nature protection, only a new clue emerges that every development of hydro power plants must be in line with environmental regulations, thus the Commission criticizes the local practice of constructing mini-hydroelectric power stations that has been compiling news columns in the last year.

And where does that leave us?

If we judge by the European Commission's assessment, in uncertainty.

If we judge by domestic officials, we should not worry, it is certain that the environment is irrelevant.

If we judge by our own experience, the air will certainly tell us in November.

Floods in Kraljevo will tell us. Dying bees in Kikinda will tell us. The water with the addition of arsenic in Zrenjanin will tell us. The Danube, which still generously accepts all the untreated sewage water of Belgrade, will tell us.

Perhaps we should listen to ourselves and our own sense? And we should look for what is guaranteed by the legal system - not the European Union but the Republic of Serbia: the certainty of a healthy environment in which we are healthy and safe. And a country in which we can certainly live, and where our progress and life are not limited.

Photo: canva.com

Mirjana Jovanović, Belgrade Open School