ENFANTS TERRIBLES

CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Economic prosperity and sustainability are not mutually
exclusive objectives. Indeed, the green energy transition
represents a remarkable opportunity for European businesses
and society. Moreover, scientific studies 234 provide clear
evidence that the long-term financial efforts for pursuing the
transition to a green economy are clearly lower than the longterm
costs caused by carbon pollution.
In this regard, CEE countries have to change their investment
priorities. This includes the accelerated uptake of renewable
energy and energy efficiency measures and the immediate
provision of adequate clean infrastructure. The transition to
a low-carbon economy also requires significant investment
in research and development in order to stimulate ecoinnovation
in much-needed green technologies.
The alarming conclusions that we draw from the EU funds’
spending plans paint a clear picture: Climate action in Central
and Eastern Europe is scant, sketchy and short-sighted; the
path to development outlined by Member States in Central and
Eastern Europe is business-as-usual, maintaining a dirty and
expensive energy mix. Investments focus on big infrastructure
projects, like in the transport sector, with countries allocating
millions to roads, all the while ignoring the environmental
risks and challenges associated with these types of projects.
Alongside the welcomed and relatively-higher allocations
for energy efficiency, fossil fuels will continue to receive EU
support in a number of ways, both directly and indirectly.
It is clear that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe may
lose much of the transformative potential of the substantial
amount of EU funds that should, at the end of the day, foster
a decentralised, decarbonised model of a circular economy. In
spite of some positive developments, it is difficult to imagine
how the planned investments will provide the sort of certainty
and leverage that investors need to commit to renewables and
other clean energy solutions.
The operationalisation of climate change mitigation as a
horizontal principle requires that all actors are encouraged
to take actions that contribute to climate objectives, even
if this falls out of their core mandate or if climate change
is not directly linked to these objectives. To enable this,
incentives, implementing rules and procedures must be in
place that make these actors take climate into account. It
requires awareness-raising and capacity-building among
key actors.
With EU funds often the main source of public infrastructure
development funding, the countries in this analysis are
missing out on the opportunity to catalyse the shift to a
renewable-based, resource-efficient economy that will allow
them to meet Europe’s long term clean energy targets, thus
undermining joint European efforts to promote prosperity
and halt climate change.
In light of our analysis, Bankwatch and Friends of the Earth
Europe are asking the European Commission and Member
States to change course during the MFF mid-term review at
the latest, changing those spending plans that undermine
a future-oriented, forward-looking EU investment and
development policy.
234 Since the 2006 Stern review’s assessment of the ‘Costs of Inaction‘ (http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTINDONESIA/
Resources/226271-1170911056314/3428109-1174614780539/SternReviewEng.pdf) a large number of scientifc publications attest to these calculations,
see e.g. http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=11, http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ljohnson/the_high_cost_of_climate_chang.html, http://www.
economistinsights.com/sites/default/files/The%20cost%20of%20inaction.pdf
154 ‘Climate’s enfants terribles: how new Member States’ misguided use of EU funds is holding back Europe’s clean energy transition’