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

FIGURE 26: Number of projects on the PEIP lists in 2007 and 2009 by sector
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2007 2009
Source: REC national PEIP lists
at their own expense and do not therefore require assistance from national or international
environmental institutions and funds. In the waste sector, the number
of projects on the priority lists related to the remediation of hotspots also declined.
These projects had a high level of national importance and, in many cases, have already
been successfully implemented.
Croatia moved forward in terms of both the number of projects with significant
progress and the total funds secured for these projects. As an EU candidate country,
most of the funds for project preparation came from the IPA. Funds for actual
implementation came from the earlier Phare and CARDS programmes. These were
supplemented mostly by earmarked state funds. The IPA accreditation process was
challenging but provided experience that enhanced capacities for project preparation
at national, regional and local level.
Other countries relied mainly on bilateral donors and IFI funding, as national
funds available for environmental investments are generally scarce. Among the IFIs,
Kf W applied the practical and stimulative approach of the benchmarking and selfassessment
of PUCs as a precondition for loans, which proved beneficial for project
preparation and for increasing reform capacities, especially at the local level.
Figure 25 shows that the biggest decrease in the net number of projects took
place in Albania in the 2007 to 2009 period. During this period, six projects were
C H A P T E R 8
P R I O R I T I S AT I O N O F I N F R A S T R U C T U R E P R O J E C T S — T H E P E I P L I S T S
Waste Water Air
S T R AT E G I C M O V E S 191