1. Adam Abdulwahab Evaluation network meeting Brussels, 25 February 2010
Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy programmes co-financed by the European Fund for Regional Development (Objective 1 and 2)
Work Package 5b
“Environment and Climate Change”
Adam Abdulwahab Evaluation network meeting Brussels, 25 February 2010

2. Overview of ToR - 1 Scope: Task 1: Conceptual basis
ERDF environment, including relevant parts of CF
Climate change: exploratory
Task 1: Conceptual basis
Task 2: Environment Strategies in MS
Focus: 14 “big spenders” (ES, IT, DE, EL, PT, FR, PL, IE, UK, CZ, SK, HU, LV, FI)

3. Overview of ToR - 2 Task 3: Main Outcomes Task 4 & 5: Case Studies
Output & result Indicators
Effectiveness of major sectoral OPs (in IE, EL, SK, PT, HU, CZ)
Task 4 & 5: Case Studies
General Regional: 10
Waste management: 3
Climate change: 3

4. Conceptual Limitations
Impact of environmental infrastructure on growth is not well explored in European context
Short term vs long term
Incremental improvements

5. Financial Allocation
Environment-related interventions, : €25.5 billion (21% of total ERDF allocation)
86% in 7 MS (DE, EL, ES, FR, IE, IT, PT) and
50% to only 3 countries - EL, ES, PT
Sectors
Rehabilitation and planning (45%)
Environmental infrastructure (44%)
Environment-friendly technologies (7%)
Energy infrastructure (4%)

6. Significant Contribution to Environment…
Water supply
No. of projects: 3913
Additional population served: 14.1 million
Wastewater
No. of projects: 6211
Additional population served: 20.4 million
Solid waste
No. of projects: 2637
New capacity of waste treatment: 231,649 m3/day
Unauthorised landfills closed/rehabilitated: 964

7. …with factors limiting effectiveness…
Investments were often oversized
Financial sustainability of investments was not always ensured
With the introduction of the 'polluter pays principle', some households in poorer regions refused to connect to the network, especially in the EU-10
The four cohesion countries (EL, ES, IE, PT) delayed the introduction of the polluter / user pays principles, relying more heavily on European funds

8. …and limited short-term contribution to growth
The need to comply with European directives was the main driver of investments in environmental infrastructure. Main reasons are:
Impact of environmental infrastructure on economic development is unexplored in literature
The Commission also supported the view that an environmental measure is justified even if its only effect is environmental
Capacity problems in implementation favoured selecting projects according to maturity to be implemented, wider socio-economic impacts were less important

9. Rehabilitation and Planning
Important mainly in Objective 2 regions
Only sporadic evidence that they had strong impact on economic development
Evaluation focusing on environmental infrastructure => further analysis needed

10. Climate Change Not top priority until 2005
120 OPs supported some intervention linked to climate change, with total amount of €2.3 billion
More exploratory and smaller interventions
Mainly targeted enterprises
Create capacity for renewable energy production
Energy savings through new technologies
Data is not available whether projects really needed public investments
Wider short-term economic impacts are mixed; can lead to both increased competitiveness or decreased employment

11. Implications Institutional capacity must be seriously improved
Financial sustainability needs more attention
The “green economy” - need to move beyond environmental infrastructure
Reviewing objectives: Investing in environment is a political choice
Ensuring synergies between environmental infrastructure and economic growth

12. Thank you for your attention