Strategic Moves - Regional Environmental Center for Central and ...

166
C H A P T E R 7
F I N A N C I N G E N V I R O N M E N TA L I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I N V E S T M E N T S
FIGURE 20: Environmental infrastructure commitments by recipient per capita (2005–2007)
USD
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
S T R AT E G I C M O V E S
Albania Bosnia and
Herzegovina
2005 2006 2007
Source: OECD ODA database
Croatia FYR Montenegro Serbia
Macedonia
rural development; non-agricultural alternative development; multi-sectoral education/training
and research/scientific institutions.
The largest share of funding was concentrated in the transport and municipal
infrastructure sectors, and to a lesser extent in the water and environment sectors.
Three countries — Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina — together received
approximately 70 percent of the total IFI financial assistance over the period,
with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Albania lagging significantly
behind. Montenegro and Kosovo (as defined under UNSCR 1244) benefited from
smaller amounts.
In terms of the distribution of investments for water and environment, Croatia received
the largest share of investments, followed by Serbia, Albania and Bosnia and
Herzegovina. Montenegro, Kosovo (as defined under UNSCR 1244) and the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia benefited from far smaller amounts of investment directed
to the environment and water protection. However, in per capita terms Figure
24 shows that Croatia received most allocations from IFIs for water and environment,
followed by Montenegro and Albania. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo (as defined
under UNSCR 1244), the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia re-