Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The EU Accession Negotiations - Handbook PDF
The EU Accession Negotiations - Handbook PDF
2
About Regional Environmental Network for Accession (RENA)
The Regional Environmental Network for Accession (RENA), which started in 2010, aimed to
provide the enlargement countries with a framework to establish, strengthen and improve their
capacity to deal with the challenges of implementation. RENA has been very successful in fostering
and facilitating dialogue at a regional level but additionally between the region and EU Member States.
Over the past three years, RENA has provided assistance in priority areas for the enlargement
countries, including in the areas of legislative approximation, horizontal legislation, nature
protection, water management, inspection and enforcement and climate change. Besides the
technical knowledge, RENA encouraged and fostered the establishment of regional networks
of experts for the different policy areas with the aim of sharing the information, best practices
and expertise.
RENA was funded by the European Union and managed by the European Commission, DG
Environment.
RENA was implemented by a consortium of companies led by Hulla&Co Human Dynamics KG.
As leader of the consortium, Human Dynamics built on the experience and knowledge gained from
nearly 20 years of public sector consulting. Human Dynamics is focused primarily on institutional
strengthening and capacity building in technical assistance projects with a mission to assist in
solving environmental and climate problems globally. With partners and clients in all regions of the
world, at international, national, regional and local levels, Human Dynamics promotes thoughtful
planning, sensitive implementation and, most importantly, consultation with, and involvement of,
the people affected by the changes.
This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of
this publication are the sole responsibility of the consortium led by Hulla&Co Human Dynamics
KG and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.
Consortium led by Hulla&Co Human Dynamics KG seeks to ensure that information contained in
these pages is accurate. However, no liability or responsibility is accepted arising from reliance upon
the information contained in this publication.
4
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS Vasile Puca
(A Handbook)
CONTENT
INTRODUCTION 8
ABBREVIATION LIST 10
CHAPTER 1 - The European Union A Continuous Process of Negotiation 13
1.1. The Contemporary International System 14
1.2. International Negotiation 15
1.3. European Negotiation 16
1.4. Accession Negotiations to the European Union 18
CHAPTER 2 - EU Institutions 21
2.1. The European Commission 23
2.2. The Council of the European Union 24
2.3. The European Council 26
2.4. The European Parliament 27
2.5. The European Court of Justice 29
CHAPTER 3 - EU Policies 31
3.1. Internal/Single Market 33
3.2. Competition 37
3.3. Economic and Monetary 37
3.4. Common Agriculture Policy 38
3.5. Environment Policy 39
3.6. Commercial Policy 40
3.7. Justice and Home Affairs 43
3.8. Foreign and Security Policy 43
CONTENT 5
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
6
Vasile Puca
ANNEXES 154
BIBLIOGRAPHY 206
CONTENT 7
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
INTRODUCTION
The idea of publishing this Handbook took shape during the training sessions organised by
RENA (Regional Environmental Network for Accession) in a few Western Balkans countries
with financial support from the European Commission (DG Enlargement). One of the
objectives of these meetings was the transfer of know-how regarding the EU accession
negotiations experience from the states of the 5th enlargement wave towards the acceding and
candidate countries of South-East Europe.
Participants in the training sessions dealing with EU accession negotiations were largely
government representatives, non-governmental organizations, journalists and experts from
the Western Balkans. Mainly, the training consisted in negotiation exercises and simulations
addressing specific issues. Environment was the topic opted for. One of the main concerns
of the training was the understanding of the process of EU accession negotiations. Working
on the preparatory phase and the actual development of accession negotiations by chapters
against the background of the EU enlargement and integration dynamics was a good
opportunity to develop specific skills to the participants. A strong emphasis was placed on
enhancing individual and teamwork capacities in using data and technical support.
This Handbook is in response to the concern felt during the training sessions to provide
participants with theoretical background and specific case-studies intended to outline the
framework of EU accession negotiations while enhancing the efficiency of simulations
and exercises. Designed as a theoretical and methodological tool for the understanding and
preparation of EU accession negotiations, this material is intended to support institutional
players already involved or those who are to begin new negotiation rounds, as well as political
representatives, the media and citizens who wish to learn about the process of EU accession
and about integration in the European Union. Notwithstanding, this Handbook is a useful tool
in the hands of students in European Studies and International/European Negotiations and
the public at large.
8
Vasile Puca
The structure of this Handbook was designed as a guide for participants in negotiations for
accession to the EU. It can be extremely resourceful in developing negotiating skills, such as
agenda-setting and prioritization, using information, choosing tactics and preparing proper
strategies, building-up relations with partners and collaborators and so on.
By providing resources for the understanding of specific processes and the development of
the required skills in EU accession negotiations this Handbook is elaborated for the purpose
of learning of European negotiations in order to gain access and manage operations on the
Single Market and to allow EU Member States, third parties, companies, NGOs and citizens
at large to achieve their interests.
I am very grateful for the input of the project manager, Rua Radovi, Mihail Dimovski key
expert of RENA project, of Mdlina Ivnic (DG Environment) and of Simon Mordue,
Allan Jones (DG Enlargement) from the European Commission. Particular thanks go to
my colleagues at the Center for International and European Negotiations of the Faculty of
European Studies of the Babe-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca. The entire text of this
handbook is the responsibility of the author, and it doesnt reflect the views of any governments
or European institutions.
INTRODUCTION 9
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
LIST OF ABREVIATION
ABBREVIATION ENTITY
Best Alternative to
BATNA
Negotiation Agreement
CAP Common Agriculture Policy
Coordinated community
CATS for Police and Judicial
Cooperation (Criminal Matters)
CFI Court of First instance
Common Foreign
CFSP and Security Policy
COM European Commission
Political and
COPS Security Committee
CoR Committee of Regions
Committee of Permanent
COREPER Representations
CP Common Position
Council of Senior
CSCS Civil Servants
DCP Draft Common Position
DG Directorate General
EC European Community
ECJ European Court of Justice
European Coal and
ECSC Steel Community
Council of Ministers for
ECOFin Economic and Finance Affairs
10
Vasile Puca
European
EEC Economic Community
European Economic
EESC and Steel Community
Economic and
EFC Financial Committee
European Institute of
EIPA Public Administration
European and
EMU Monetary Union
EP European Parliament
Economic and
ESC Social Committee
EU/E.U. European Union
European Job
EURES Mobility Portal
European Union
EUSR Special Representative
Former Yugoslavia
FYROM Republic of Macedonia
Government
GPA Procurement Agreement
HR High Representative
Intergovernmental
IGC Conference
Justice and
JHA Home Affairs
Member of
MEP European Parliament
Ministry of
MFA Foreign Affairs
LIST OF ABREVATION 11
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
North Atlantic
NATO Treaty Organization
Non-Governmental
NGO Organization
Organization for Economic
OECD Cooperation and Development
PM Prime Minister
Regional Environmental
RENA Network for Accession
QMV Qualified Majority Vote
Stabilization and
SAA Association Agreement
SAI Supreme Audit Institution
Special Committee
SCA on Agriculture
SEA Single European Act
SEM Single European Market
SGP Stability and Growth Pact
TEU Treaty on European Union
ToA Treaty of Amsterdam
ToN Treaty of Nice
ToL Treaty of Lisbon
UN United Nations
US United States
VAT Value Added Tax
12
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 1
An answer to globalism could be the integrative process, and this will progress only to a regional
scale. Meanwhile, the actors (state or non-state) find themselves in the situation of adopting
certain decisions in order to manage the effects of global interactions. This - although the fact that
criticism related to the decision making process as being largely restricted to elites continues to
be present - develops almost exclusively through competition, rather than through representative,
participatory or democratic means (Baylis&Smith, 2001). Recognizing the reality of the complex
interdependence which determines specific behaviors (Arnett, 2002), from an individual to an
organizational level, the international actors have to face the challenges of all types of global
interactions, developing a continuous international management. David Held admits that the
institutionalization of global processes may be difficult, but he finds that the decision-makers
could promote effective means of resolving global issues, such as the development of a set of
criteria, norms, institutions and negotiation arenas (Held, 2005). In addition, the evolution of
the international environment will generate the professional and scientific concerns (including
the academic ones) regarding international management. According to Hodgetts and Luthens,
14
Vasile Puca
Thus, international negotiation has become an almost daily concern of every international
actor, one of the most efficient means of attaining optimal solutions for the increasingly complex
problems that we are facing under the circumstances of the globalization phenomenon.
Professor Paul Meerts noted that todays European Union is an enormous international
negotiation process, within a multilateral framework (Meerts in Puscas, 2003). This negotiation
process has followed the groundwork of Schumans scheme until today.
16
Vasile Puca
The literature on European negotiation has been enriched especially since the last
decade of the past century. Certainly, the end of the Cold War, the major challenges
of globalization and the progressively more visible tendencies of the European Union
of imposing its legal recognition within the international system have stimulated
theoretical and casuistic debates regarding European negotiation. Without any doubt,
the most applied academic and political discussion on the subject of European
negotiation was due to the internal reforming tendencies of the European Union
(institutional and political), as well as the project of its extension in Central and South-
Eastern Europe. In 2000, the Journal of European Public Policy dedicated a special
issue to the European negotiations, the authors making interesting contributions to
the theory of negotiation and proposing negotiation analysis for the most important
aspects of the European policies. Paul Meerts and his contributions went even
further, and created, in 2004, a systematic and comparative analysis on the European
negotiation (Meerts&Cede, 2004). Ole Elgstrm and Christer Jnsson approached the
concept and the practices of European negotiation from a procedural perspective,
that of networks and institutions (Elgstrom&Jonsson, 2005) In recent years, the focus
was on the descriptive and procedural analysis of the European negotiations, such as
the intergovernmental conferences and treaties (Beach, 2005) or on the power aspects
and leadership in the European negotiations (Tallberg, 2006). The provocative studies
published by Franz Schimmelfennig (2005) in the area of European integration and
EU Enlargement are truly very useful for the assessment of political methods applied
in Brussels and Member (States0, including the European negotiations. The recent
book published by Christina J, Schneider (2009) shows the role of European/accession
negotiations in the European politics. In the last decade, the French periodical
Negotiations issued several contributions on this topic and Lempereu&Colson
published a historical analysis on the European negotiations (Lempereu&Colson,
2008). Finally, the training centers of European negotiations have proliferated
(Brussels, Vienna, Maastricht etc.) and EIPA even published, in 2004, a Handbook
for the European Negotiator (Lavedoux et al., 2004). And, of course, the enumeration
may continue.
Mentioning this recent debate regarding the European negotiation, we must point out that it reflects
what the authors call as a new era of negotiations, which means a very different world from the one
in which H. Kissinger used the term for the first time (in the 70s). To the new international context, it
is mandatory to add the three worlds that compose the European arena of negotiations:
(a) borders (spaces and territories);
(b) layers (different objectives and various authorities);
(c) networks (connections, communications).
All these represent, according to Michael Smith, the new European space of negotiation (Smith,
2000). Consequently, the same author asserts that European negotiation must not be seen only as a
process, but also as a system of negotiation. For such a perspective, as M. Smith claims, European
negotiation is not only international, but also strongly conservative (Smith, 2000). And, because
we mentioned the European negotiation considered as a process, we will add that Elgstrm and
Smith align with those authors who perceive the European negotiation as a continuous activity,
an inter-bureaucratic and political multilateral marathon. But the procedural character is also given
by the fact that the European negotiation is a process of communication where the actors send
signals from one to the other to influence the expectations and/or the values of another party
(Jnsson, apud Elgstrom&Smith, 2000). In addition to these characteristics, the study of the two
authors adds the following ones: the diversity of contexts and negotiation opportunities, the
diversity of actors and preferences and the diversity of systemic analysis. But, most convincingly,
in order to perceive the European negotiation as a system, one can invoke the arguments of the
interdependence of actors, the regularity of interaction and the (formal or informal) presence of
rules and institutions. Therefore, such multi-level negotiations (European negotiations) are highly
institutionalized and permanent, the multiple parties have distinctive roles, formal negotiations are
connected to the informal ones, creating a link between both the internal levels and sectors, as well
as between the internal and external negotiation of the European Union.
For the Member States, the accession negotiations had a significantly different form, as compared to
the other negotiations of the European Union on the international stage (Friis&Jarosz-Friis, 2002).
The states which aspired to European Union membership considered the accession negotiation
18
Vasile Puca
period to be a trust building process between the negotiating parties, so that a mutual perception
was established regarding the way each candidate will be capable to cope with the accession
challenges (Inotai, 2001). The political, economic, journalistic and academic environments in
the European states, and not only those, had paid special attention towards the content and the
progress of the accession negotiations. Each of these environments tried to explain and project
their interests towards these negotiations, thus the attitudes and the communication paradigms
had evolved during the last decade, at one point creating the perception that the process of
enlargement was one of the most predominant activities of the European Union. Although it has
also been said, at least during the mandate of the Prodi Commission, the purpose was to achieve a
coherent enlargement and to deepen (by internal reforms) the integration to the European Union.
For that reason, nowadays we benefit from an extremely rich scholarly and journalistic literature
on the accession negotiations.
Many comments from the beginning of the accession negotiations, in the last enlargement
wave, emphasized the disproportionate power ratio in negotiations. Andres Inotai wrote that
the accession negotiations took place between parties as unequal as can be (Inotai, 2001), this
imbalance being the result of several factors: the Union represented one of the worlds most
powerful economic groups; they always negotiated the accession with one single country, even
though there were more states negotiating at the same time; besides the fact that all accession
negotiations took place in Brussels, the candidate states were the ones which had to come first
with their positions and only after that they followed the position of the European Union. Other
authors directly stated that the accession negotiations, even though were based on the win-win
formula, were characterized by a high degree of asymmetry (Friis&Jarosz-Friis, 2002). Lykke and
Anna Friis show that the European Union is an actor with a very high negotiation power, while
the candidate state is out of the loop, soliciting to enter the Club; The Member States are more
knowledgeable about the acquis the object of the accession negotiations - than the candidate
state. And because the accession negotiation is, in fact, a double negotiation, the advantage is
enormous for the European Union, because it may constitute a pressure on the candidate state
(The Presidency has the possibility to present a certain common position of the Member States,
which the candidate state may intent to modify, but knowing that, it means taking a high risk and
that it is time consuming).
The accession negotiation to the European Union has three fundamental characteristics (Bollen et al., 2000):
1.) it is a process of discovery = the two parties inform each other about what they want, what
they intend, what they offer (information is, therefore, an essential negotiation instrument);
2.) it is a strategic interaction = the parties seek to influence each other, to shape their behaviors
in order to obtain the best possible results;
3.) it is an exchange process = each party tries to configure the behavior of the other by offering
something or making certain concessions.
We close this section by emphasizing that the Chief Negotiator has the task to provide the
adequate data of accession preparation and to present them in a suitable position. Starting from the
information preeminence and its veracity, but also from the domestic and external contextuality,
the Chief Negotiators leads the negotiations according to the established strategies and tactics.
While the Chief Negotiator is expected to formulate the positions of the candidate state and to
demonstrate the capacity of a complete and rapid compliance of the acquis, the negotiators of the
Council and Member States seek the most adequate harmonizing formulas.
!
the contemporary international system entered a prolonged transitional phase;
the international actors have to face the challenges of all types of global interactions;
the international negotiation become an almost daily concern of every international
actor, one of the most efficient means of attaining optimal solutions for the increasingly
complex problems that we are facing under the circumstances of the globalization
phenomenon;
the European negotiation must not be regarded only as a process, but also as a system of
negotiation;
the accession negotiation could be considered a trust building process between the
negotiating parties, so that a mutual perception is established regarding the way each
candidate will be capable to cope with the accession challenges.
20
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 2
CHAPTER 2 - EU Institutions 21
2.1. The European Commission 23
2.2. The Council of the European Union 24
2.3. The European Council 26
2.4. The European Parliament 27
2.5. The European Court of Justice 29
EU INSTITUTIONS 21
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
EU INSTITUTIONS
Most of the studies of the EU concentrate and describe what happens in and through the
special institutions of the EU, located in Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg: the European
Commission, the Council of the EU, the European Council, the European Parliament (EP) and
the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
The EU has grown out of three originally separate Communities (ECSC, EEC and
Euratom), each with its own institutions. These were formally merged in 1967. The main
elements originally consisted of:
A collective executive of sorts European Commission;
A collective forum for representatives of member governments the Council (of Ministers);
A mechanism for binding arbitration and legal interpretation the European Court
of Justice (ECJ);
A parliamentary chamber the European Parliament (EP originally Assembly),
with members elected from political parties of the member states.
In addition, the Economic and Social Committee (ESC) provides a forum for consulting other
sectors of society. Later, in the 1990s the Committee of the Regions (CoR) was created to allow
for consultation with local and regional authorities.
The institutional design is subject to periodic revision, latterly with increasing contention (Wallace,
Pollack, Young, 2010). The importance of EU institution is one of the most debated issues by
the scholars of European studies (see details in Beach, 2005). The EU institutions matter in the
intergovernmental negotiations, on both treaty reform and enlargement of the Union, being able
to influence the outcomes of the major negotiations of the EU. In the supranational context of
the EU framework, the leadership of EU institutions has been essential in the integration process,
despite the weak formal role they played in intergovernmental negotiations. EU institutions matter
in European negotiations (Beach, 2005) because:
They have strong resources and informational advantages;
They have a reputation for impartiality and expertise;
They have a privileged institutional position;
They are very helpful in technically complex negotiations;
They have a valuable ability in complex negotiation situations;
They can mediate in distribution and intensity of governmental preferences;
They can present appropriate leadership strategies for the negotiating context.
22
Vasile Puca
The Commission:
Exercises its responsibilities collectively; the Commissioners constitutes a college - their
decisions and proposals to the Council and the EP have to be agreed by the entire college,
voting (if necessary by simple majority) in its weekly meetings;
Is chaired by a President, chosen under the Treaty of Nice (ToN) by qualified majority vote
(QMV) in the European Council and subject to approval by the EP;
The commissioners, each responsible for a policy portfolio, are nominated by member states
governments, endorsed by the Council, subject to the approval by the EP, which can lead to
names being withdrawn;
It is organized into Directorates-General (DGs), named after the main areas of policy activity;
Its powers vary widely between policy domains (e.g. regarding competition policy, it operates
many of the rules directly, in other domains it drafts the proposals for legislation, which then
have to be approved by the Member States governments, etc.);
It has the exclusive power of initiative, which gave the opportunity to be the agenda-setter,
thus having an entrepreneurial role;
Its resources includes:
the capability to build up expertise;
the potential for developing policy networks and coalitions;
the opportunity to help the governments of the Member States to resolve their own
policy predicaments.
It needs regular channels for consultation and cooperation with relevant national offices (a
network of advisory, regulatory and management committees has developed to provide these
channels);
It has to compete for influence with other EU institutions and with the governments of the
member states (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010).
EU INSTITUTIONS 23
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
It is:
An institution with collective functions;
A product of the member governments;
Its members are usually ministers from incumbent governments of the member states, but
ministers who attend meetings depending on the subjects being discussed, and on how the
individual governments choose to be represented (Wallace);
Passes EU laws;
Coordinates the broad economic policies of the EU Member States;
Signs agreements between the EU and other countries;
Approves the annual EU budget;
Develops the EUs common foreign and (defense) policies;
Manages coordination between courts and police forces of Member States (see the Council
of the European Union website). The structure of the Council of EU could be figured as follows:
Table 2.1.: The structures of the Council (after Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010, p. 76).
24
Vasile Puca
The meetings of ministers are prepared by national officials in the committees and working
groups of the Council. The most important of these has been the Committee of Permanent
Representatives (Coreper), composed of:
The heads (Coreper II) of the Member States Permanent Representation in Brusels;
Deputies (Coreper I) of the Member States permanent representations in Brussels.
These both COREPER meet at least weekly to agree with the items on the Council agenda and to
identify those that need to be discussed by the ministers.
Numerous working groups constitute the backbone of the Council and perform the detailed
negotiation of policy. Their members come from the Permanent Representations or national
capitals. 70% of Council texts are agreed in working groups, another 10-15% in Coreper or other
senior committees, and the rest of 10-15% are left for the ministries meetings.
The Council:
Spends much of the time acting as the forum for discussion on the response of Member
States governments to the Commission proposals;
This implies a continuous negotiation, in order to establish a consensus;
The formal rules of decision-making vary according to the policy domain (Wallace, Pollack,
Young, 2010):
EU INSTITUTIONS 25
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
99 Unanimity;
99 Qualified majority voting (QMV);
99 Simple majority;
The number of votes are according to countrys population as follows:
99 Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom 29
99 Spain and Poland 27
99 Romania 14
99 Netherlands 13
99 Belgium, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary and Portugal 12
99 Austria, Bulgaria and Sweden 10
99 Denmark, Ireland, Lithuania, Slovakia and Finland 7
99 Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg and Slovenia 4
99 Malta 3
TOTAL: 345 Votes
When votes concern sensitive topics such as security and external affairs or taxation -
decisions by the Council have to be unanimous. This means that one single country can veto
a decision (see Council of EU website: www.consilium.europa.eu/).
In some policy domains, the Council is the decision-maker of last resort:
Agriculture;
New policy JHA and CFSP.
What is the style of the Council bargaining or deliberations?
In some policy areas there are sharp disagreements and tough strategic bargaining (particular
when new regimes are at issue);
in other policy areas, as policy-making becomes more routinely or when the issues are more
technical, there is evidence of a more deliberative style (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010).
26
Vasile Puca
Its President is elected by a qualified majority. The Presidents term of office is two and a
half years, renewable just once (see European Council website: www.consilium.europa.eu/);
Historically, once every semester a meeting was held in the country of the presidency, but
under the new terms of ToN sessions are held in Brussels since the 2004 enlargement;
The national delegations are restricted to : president or prime minister, foreign minister,
finance minister (sometimes); there are parallel meetings of representatives of other
ministers and officials, depending on the preoccupations of the moment;
It is left to solve the periodic major arguments about EU revenue and expenditure;
It became the key forum for determining treaty reforms in the closing stages of
Intergovernmental Conferences (IGCs);
It could be seen as the main staging posts in the development of policy;
The level of its activity has expanded, reflecting an increasing preoccupation of the national
politicians to take control of the direction of EU;
It exercises explicit political leadership in the EU process (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010);
The decisions of the European Council are taken by consensus; in some cases, it adopts
decisions by unanimity or by qualified majority, depending on what the Treaty provides for
(European Council website: www.consilium.europa.eu).
EU INSTITUTIONS 27
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
The 7th legislature of European Parliament began in 2009 and will last until 2014 (5 years):
2009 elections produced 736 members, but 753 under the ToL, which represent 27 Member
States and 500 European millions citizens;
There are 7 political groups:
99 European Peoples Party (Christian Democrats);
99 Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats;
99 Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe;
99 Greens/ European Free Alliance;
99 European Conservatives and Reformists;
99 European United Left/Nordic Green Left;
99 European of Freedom and Democracy Group;
20 parliamentary committees (between 24 and 76 members in a committee);
It is an important legislative partner to the Council;
It has a real impact on more detailed rule-setting;
The increased political standing of the EP is likely to enable it to influence the policy
process as a whole rather more in the future (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2012).
28
Vasile Puca
Table 2.2.: The Powers of European Parliament (after Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010, p. 83)
EU INSTITUTIONS 29
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
!
European Commission is a secretariat and a proto-executive in the EUs institutional system;
The Council of the European Union is an institution with collective functions, a
product of the member governments;
The European Council consists of the Heads of State or Government of the Member
States, together with its President and the President of the Commission. The High
Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy takes part in its work;
European Parliament has legislative, budgetary and control competencies and it is
composed from MEPs;
European Court of Justice is like a supreme court, able to provide an overarching
framework of jurisprudence, and to deal with litigation, both in cases referred via the
national courts and those brought directly before it.
30
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 3
CHAPTER 3 - EU Policies 31
3.1. Internal/Single Market 33
3.2. Competition 37
3.3. Economic and Monetary 37
3.4. Common Agriculture Policy 38
3.5. Environment Policy 39
3.6. Commercial Policy 40
3.7. Justice and Home Affairs 43
3.8. Foreign and Security Policy 43
EU POLICIES 31
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
EU POLICIES
Policy-making in the EU is particularly complex and distinctive. Nonetheless, it can be fruitfully
studied by drawing upon the insights taken from the analysis of policy-making within states and
cooperation among states.
Enlargement remains a key policy of the European Union, allowing it to better address global
challenges and pursue its strategic interests. The Council of European Union observes closely
the key policies for each acceding country and then takes the decision to open the accession
negotiations. (http://www.diplonews.com/feeds/free/13_December_2012_217.php).
European policy-making
The policy-making process is commonly depicted heuristically as a policy cycle: a self-
conscious simplification of a complex phenomenon in order to facilitate our understanding. The
policy cycle is usually depicted as commencing with an issue being put on the political agenda:
It becomes an issue of concern (agenda-setting);
Once a decision has been taken to address a particular issue, it is necessary to formulate
specific proposals for action (policy formulation) and
Decide what course of action to pursue, or not (policy decision);
If a policy decision is taken, then the policy must be put into effect (implementation);
The policy cycle emphasizes that the story does not stop with the policy implementation, but
they intend that effects of policies should often feed back into the policy process;
The last step is the evaluation.
32
Vasile Puca
EU POLICIES 33
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
In addition, with respect to the new approach and home country control, the SEM
blurred the distinction between positive and negative integration by setting only minimum
common requirements.
These different modes of integration have profound political implications as they both affect who
are the key actors in the policy process and shape their relative influence:
Table 3.1.: The significance of different modes of market integration (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010, p. 117).
34
Vasile Puca
The better regulation agenda is an effort to reduce the adverse impact of regulation on the
competitiveness of European firms. It involves efforts to modernize existing legislation by
making it simpler through consolidation, codification or repeal.
In the Report to the President of the European Union A New Strategy for the Single Market At
the Service of Europes Economy and Society, written by Mario Monti (May 9th 2010), the three
challenges that internal market has to face were underlined:
(1) The first challenge comes from the erosion of the political and social support for the market
integration in Europe. There are also two reinforcing trends present:
Integration fatigue eroding the appetite for more Europe and for a single market;
Market fatigue with reduced confidence in the role of market.
(2) The second challenge comes from uneven policy attention given to the development of the
various components of an effective and sustainable single market. Some difficulties comes
from the unfinished business on two other fronts:
The expansion to new sector to accompany a fast changing economy;
The effort to ensure that the Single Market is a space of freedom and opportunity that
works for all citizens;
(3) The third, as if the single market challenge comes from a sense of complacency that gained
strength in the past decade, as if the single market had been really completed and could thus
be put to rest as a political priority. The Single Market was perceived as being yesterdays
business. The attention shift away from the single market was further strengthened by
the need to concentrate the EUs political energy on other challenging building blocks of
European construction: monetary union, enlargement and institutional reform.
EU POLICIES 35
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
The development of a Single Market is a continuous exercise (COM, (2012), 573 final, Single
Market Act II). The economic and financial crisis has generated additional challenges and has
emphasized the need for fundamental reform. The economic crisis is also a social crisis, because
of the significant number of European citizens living in poverty. The Single Market is a tool to
achieve the European high competitiveness of social market economy.
The Single Market Act (COM, (2011), 206 final) set out twelve elements to further develop the
Single Market. These are:
Open domestic rail passenger services to operators from another Member State to improve
the quality and cost efficiency of rail passenger services;
Accelerate the implementation of the Single European Sky to improve safety, capacity,
efficiency and the environmental impact of aviation;
Improve the implementation and enforcement of the third energy package and turn cross-
border markets that benefit consumers into a reality;
Develop the EURES portal into a true European job placement and recruitment tool;
Boost long-term investment in the real economy by facilitating access to the long-term
investment funds;
Modernize the EU insolvency rules to facilitate the survival of businesses and present a
second chance for entrepreneurs;
Support online services by making payment services in the EU more efficient;
Reduce the cost and increase efficiency in the deployment of high speed communication
infrastructure;
Make electronic invoicing the standard invoicing mode for public procurement;
Improve the safety of products circulating in the EU through better coherence and
enforcement of product safety and market surveillance rules;
Give all EU citizens access to a basic payment account, ensure bank account fees are
transparent and comparable, and make switching bank accounts easier.
As a consequence of the Single Market, new relationships have been established between public
and private actors at the EU level and between actors operating at the national and European levels.
The SEM also reduced the dependence of many economic actors on national policy. The scope
for national policy-makers to control economic transactions on their territories has become more
limited and will remain limited as long as the transnational legal regime of the EU holds together
(Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010).
36
Vasile Puca
3.2. Competition
It is one of the most important tools of the Single European Market;
Is concerned with setting standards of conduct rather than with obtaining tangible goals, and
is anchored in the principles of free-market capitalism;
The character and the role of competition policy have therefore been controversial across the
EU and in individual Member States;
Its enforcement has a differential effect across the very varied economic systems ranging
from highly liberalized markets to those where the state has played an important role in the
economy (the Central-South-Eastern countries which stated to embrace capitalism only in
the 1990s);
European competition policy is broad and includes antitrust, merger control, and the control
of the state aid (subsidies to industry);
Its overall trust has been to press for the liberalization of markets on every front.
There are five components of the European competition policy, each of which relies on specific
legal powers:
1. A prohibition on agreements between firms that limit competition;
2. A prohibition on the abuse of a dominant position by one or more large firms;
3. The control of mergers which creates a dominant position;
4. The control of aid given by a Member State to a firm or a category of firms;
5. The liberalization of measures by Member States in order to favor domestic utilities and
infrastructure industries.
The competition policy has a special place in the European policy matrix because it defends the
essential mobilizing principle of the EU, the Community interest in economic efficiency secured
through the creation of a common market (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010).
EU POLICIES 37
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Member States have also agreed to coordinate their budgetary policies and structural reforms
and to speak with one voice on international macroeconomic issues. The coordination of
these policies is within the Council of Ministers for Economic and Financial Affairs (Ecofin);
Member States have imposed limits on government borrowing under the Stability and Growth
Pact (SGP) and agreed to coordinate structural reforms through the Broad Economic Policy
Guidelines (BEPGs);
It is a high-stakes experiment in the new modes of EU policy-making as far as both economic
and monetary decision-making rely on the alternatives to the traditional Community method.
The CAP long conjured up images of medieval strongholds. Traditionally in the hands of a
closed policy community, it invariably took on the guise of an impenetrable fortress built by
38
Vasile Puca
There are four main actors involved: European Commission, EP, Council of Ministers and Court
of Justice. Outside the institutional set-up there are the environmental interest groups.
The Commission started several initiatives to improve implementation and enforcement. The
Commission also introduced a more rational handling of complaints and infringements,
prioritizing structural and costly problems as well as intensifying proactive measures by offering
guidelines, interpretive documents, and training initiatives to increase implementation capacities
on the ground;
The Commission has started reforms in the choice of proposed policy instruments: EU adopted
a number of environmental framework directives that aim both to avoid overregulation and to
generate greater coherence of EU regulation;
EU POLICIES 39
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
EU policy-makers are aiming at better policy integration in two senses: several measures pay
attention to the combined effects of pollution on different environmental media (air, water and
soil), and the interdependency between these media;
So, the three policy challenges are: implementation, diversification of instruments and integration.
40
Vasile Puca
An interesting figure proposed by Walace, Pollack and Young (2010), describes the EU
decision-making process for multilateral trade negotiations prior to the Treaty of Lisbon:
Fig. no. 3.1: EU decision-making process for association agreements (after Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010, p. 393).
EU POLICIES 41
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Table no. 3.2.: EU decision-making process for anti-dumping measures (after Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010,
p. 395).
42
Vasile Puca
The fragmentation of cooperation in JHA is also reflected in the multiplication of actors dealing
with its development, both inside and outside formal EU structures. The decision-making in
justice and home affairs after Maastricht is well designed by Wallace, Pollack and Young (2010):
Initially justified in limited terms as compensatory measures to the abolition of internal
border controls, cooperation in JHA, now metaphorically framed as the creation of an area
of freedom, security, and justice, has been elevated to a central objective of the EU;
Beyond these symbolic steps, integration in these sensitive fields of state sovereignty remains
constrained by multiple tensions and difficult compromises;
Among these tensions, the relationship between integration through increased harmonization
and centralized EU structures, on the one hand and through enhanced coordination of
national structures, on the other, remains unsettled.
EU POLICIES 43
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
There is a little agreement on what a EU common foreign policy should be about. National
political cultures differ widely on appropriate international roles. Intensive transgovernmentalism
therefore remains the dominant mode of policy-making, with institutional development and
capability-building emerging painfully from response to external crises.
Since the entering in force of the Treaty of Lisbon (December 1st, 2009), European Union is a
juridical international actor, has a European External Action Service, and concentrates its foreign
policy under the leadership of a High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs
and Security Policy(HR), on the following areas:
Common foreign and security policy;
Development and cooperation Europe Aid;
European neighborhood policy;
Global challenges;
Non-proliferation and disarmament;
Crisis response;
Human rights;
Humanitarian aid;
Cooperation with industrialized countries;
International and regional organizations;
Conflict prevention, peace building and mediation.
The European Union (EU) currently has ten Special Representatives (EUSRs) in different countries
and regions of the world. The EUSRs promote the EUs policies and interests in troubled regions
and countries and play an active role in efforts to consolidate peace, stability and the rule of law.
The EUSRs support the work of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and
Security Policy (HR), in the regions concerned. They play an important role in the development of
a stronger and more effective EU Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and in the Unions efforts to
become a more effective, more coherent and more capable actor on the world stage. They provide
the EU with an active political presence in key countries and regions, acting as a voice and face
for the EU and its policies .
The policy-making process is policy cycle, composed from: agenda-setting, policy
formulation, policy decision, implementation, feed-back, evaluation;
The players in the European policy process are: politicians, bureaucrats, and interest groups;
For accession negotiations, the most important policies are: Internal Market, Competition,
Economic and Monetary Union, Common Agriculture Policy, Environment Policy,
Commercial Policy, Justice and Home Affairs and Foreign Policy and Defense.
44
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 4
A decision is not the same as a policy: action (or inaction) by public authorities facing choices
between alternative courses of public action. When any choice is made, the result is a decision. All
policies are a product of decisions about what to do, how to do it, and how to decide what to do.
Decisions are the building blocks of policies.
European Union is a unique system of multi-level governance. The term governance is rarely defined
very clearly. It could be defined as the imposition of overall direction or control on the allocation of
valued resources. Synthetically, it is the result of a mix of factors: political leadership, state-society
relations, institutional competition, electoral politics, etc. (Nugent, Paterson, Wright, 1999).
European Council;
Super- governments in IGCs; Endorse white paper on
History-making
systemic European Court of internal market
Justice
Council; COREPER;
European Parliament Agree directives to create
Systemic Policy-setting (under co-decision/ an internal market for
ordinary legislative motorbikes
procedure)
46
Vasile Puca
Following Allison models of decision-making, there are three competing models of decision-
making:
Intergovernmentalism (with Member States controlling decision-making);
Pressure politics (with decisions determined by grass-roots, interest group and parliamentary
pressure);
Elite networks.
48
Vasile Puca
Only a minority of legislative decisions are taken by ministers in the Council, with most
reached by consensus among officials;
Even when QMV applies, the Council tends to seek consensus whenever possible, so that the
models of procedures, such as minimumwinning coalitions, appear to provide a poor guide
to understanding daily practice in the Council even in those policies in which voting occurs
(Hayes-Renshaw, Wallace, 2006).
Bargaining models:
Perform better at predicting decisions (Schneider et al., 2006);
Policy is agreed through a process of identifying an outcome that makes none worse off
or through the use of issue linkage, inducements or threats (Putman, 1988); bargaining
outcomes, whether among Member States, among coalition partners, or in industrial relations,
are expected to reflect the relative power of the actors, which, in turn, is shaped, by their best
alternative to negotiated agreement (BATNA);
A particular variant of bargaining analysis is Fritz Scharpf s (1988) joint decision trap, in
which there is no solution that all veto players prefer to the status quo;
In international negotiations = highly institutionalized settings, of which EU is a prime
example, cooperation is facilitated because the participants are aware that they will be interacting
repeatedly in the future and as their experience of successful cooperation accumulates (Peters,
1997). This can generate diffuse reciprocity, in which governments acquiesce in the short
run in the expectations of favorable consideration of their concerns at some point in the
future (Keohane, 1986);
Being able to accommodate diffuse reciprocity may be one of the key reasons why bargaining
models are better at predicting policy-making in the EU than procedural models, which are
blind to iteration (Schneider et al., 2006).
50
Vasile Puca
The formal powers of the EUs institutions and the decision rules in the Council matter
because the more actors there are that can block a decision (veto players), the harder it is to
reach an agreement;
Fig. 4.1.: Chart of the EU decision-making procedure (source: A Handbook of EU-related Issues.
Chapter 27-Environment, Skopje, 2012, p. 123).
If there is to be an agreement, it must be acceptable to all veto players, which means that it
must accommodate the concerns of the actor that is least enthusiastic about change.
52
Vasile Puca
of mutual recognition on the basis of ECJs Cassis de Dijon ruling (Alter and Meunier-
Aitsahalia, 1994).
Three crucial implications emerge from the analysis of policy implementation in the EU:
1. The impact of EU decisions, in terms of both costs and associated political and administrative
challenges, varies among Member States (Borzel, Risse, 2007);
2. The Member States adopt very different national policies in order to implement common
EU policies;
3. The Member States do not always comply with EU rules (Wallace, Pollack, Young, 2010).
54
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 5
56
Vasile Puca
Fig.no. 5.1.: A micro-model of the EU negotiation process (after Conceicao-Heldt, 2002, p. 19)
58
Vasile Puca
During the EU negotiation process, stakeholders change their initial positions into the positions
they endorse in the final stage; the position shifts occur frequently because of compromise
and exchange: The compromise solution then approximates an outcome that optimally
weights the different interests of all actors involved and the exchange deals involve one
actor shifting its position on one issue in the direction of other actor, in exchange for a shift
in the position of the other actor on the other issue towards its position(Arregui et al., 2004);
Moravchik and Vachudova (2003) underlines the aspect of asymmetrical interdependence
of EU negotiations, and the fact that specific interstate concessions and compromises tend
to reflect the priorities of the EUs core countries, and disproportionately the most powerful
among them, even as more peripheral countries benefit as much or more overall.;
Former French minister for European Affairs, JeanPierre Jouyet argues in favor of a dynamic
convergence of national interests and European interest as being the first rule of European
negotiation (Lempereur&Colson, 2008). According to Alain Lempereur (Lempereur&Colson,
2008), the characteristics of successful European negotiations are:
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Dr.Bernard Rudolf
Bot suggests ten commandments for the European negotiator (see Meerts and Cede, 2004):
60
Vasile Puca
Fig. no. 5.2.: EU enlargement: formal accession process (after Scheneider, 2009, p. 17).
A process of discovery (the two sides inform each other about what they need or
what they offer);
Strategic interaction (the two sides seek to influence each other and shape each others
behavior for the purpose of achieving the best possible outcome for themselves);
A process of exchange (each side tries to shape the others behavior by offering or
conceding something).
62
Vasile Puca
The European Commission is the Guardian of the Treaties and must make sure that the
agreements are in line with the EU legislation = the screening report recommend to either
open the negotiations or to require certain conditions (opening benchmarks should be first
met); the progress reports published by Commission serve as a reminder of the fields where
reforms are still required;
The Commission takes care of monitoring of negotiation processes and the fulfillment of
assumed commitments = DG Enlargement has the technical tools to do that, and the Member
States are in the political lead; the Commissions role is to identify acceptable compromises
both to Member States and candidate state;
EU institutions have an important role in accession negotiations (the Commission, for ex.,
providing draft negotiating positions and the European Parliament having to approve the
Accession Treaty, only Member States and candidate countries are formal parties to the
accession negotiations (Beach, 2005);
The duration of the accession negotiation depends on the speed of internal preparation of the
candidate country, but also due to political reasons in the Member States (Tamminen, 2012).
Sedelmeier (2010) said that accession negotiations might not necessarily lead to accession;
The accession negotiation is a political and diplomatic process, which influences the
international relations, changes the international institutional architecture, also provides
diplomats with new options, tools and means, and expands the supranational level with its
own interests, rules and constraints;
Accession negotiations have several purposes (Nicolaides et al., 1999):
To adjust the Treaties in order to account for the participation of new members;
To adjust the secondary legislation in order to make it applicable to the new
members;
To define, if necessary, exceptions to the general Treaty principles;
To determine the number, length and nature of transitional periods;
To set the applicants contribution to the Community budget and to define any
other budgetary arrangements;
To suggest the size of the allocation of structural and cohesion funds and any
other forms of EU financial assistance;
To define the timing and nature of participation of the new member in the
common policies;
To determine any necessary adjustments to the common policies;
To consider any other measures to Europeanization process.
The final outcome of accession negotiations can be shaped in the following manner:
a) The use of legal and/or technical arguments, proving that the candidate country fulfills all
benchmarks, criteria and commitments taken during the negotiation stages;
b) Promoting mutual interest - each side tries to persuade the other;
c) Use of power - when the legal/technical arguments are unsuccessful and the appeals to
mutual interest go unheeded, the party tries to impose conditions on the other side or to deny
something that other side wants - it does not mean the use of physical force (Nicolaides et
al., 1999).
64
Vasile Puca
Copenhagen European Council, the Union should be capable of absorbing new members,
while maintaining the momentum of European integration;
The enlargement should strengthen the process of continuous creation and integration in
which the Union and its Member States are engaged;
The acceptance of the rights and obligations by a new Member State may give rise to
transitional measures and technical adjustments, but these cannot, under any circumstance,
imply changes to the rules or policies of the Union;
Negotiations with the different applicant countries will be conducted on the basis of the
same principles and criteria, but separately and according to the individual merits of each
applicant country;
According to the Enlargement Strategy agreed by the December 2006 European Council,
which suggested the new approach of accession negotiations, and the institutional changes of
the Treaty of Lisbon, the current principles governing the accession negotiations include several
distinctive sentences, such as:
The shared objective of negotiations is accession. By their very nature, the
negotiations are an open-ended process whose outcome cannot be guaranteed
beforehand.
In the field of CFSO, the High Representative is responsible, in close liaison with
the Member States, and the Commission where appropriate.
Negotiations are opened on the basis that /the candidate country/ respects and is
committed to promoting the values on which Union is founded, referred to in Art.2
TEU, namely the respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule
of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to
minorities.
In the case of a serious and persistent breach by /the candidate country/ of the
values on which the Union is founded, the Commission will, on its own initiative
or on the request of one third of the Member States, recommends the suspension
of negotiations and propose the conditions for eventual resumption. The Council
will decide by qualified majority on such a recommendation//The European
Parliament will be informed.
An overall balance in the progress of negotiations across chapters should be ensured.
Given the link between the chapters Judiciary and fundamental rights and Justice,
freedom and security and the values on which the Union is founded, a s well as their
importance for the implementation of the acquis across the board, should progress
under these chapters significantly lag behind progress in the negotiations overall, and
after having exhausted all other available measures, the Commission will on its own
initiative or on the request of one third of the Member States propose to withhold
its recommendation to open and/or close other chapters, and adapt the associated
preparatory work, as appropriate, until this imbalance is addressed.
Enlargement should strengthen the process of continuous integration in which the
Union and its Member States are engaged. Every effort should be made to protect
the cohesion and effectiveness of the Union.//The pace of enlargement must take
into account the Unions capacity to absorb new members, which is an important
consideration in the general interest of both the Union and /the candidate country/.
Parallel to the accession negotiations, the Union will continue its civil society
dialogue//with the aim of bringing people together and ensuring the support of
citizens for the accession process.
In order to strengthen public confidence in the enlargement process, decisions
will be taken as open as possible so as to ensure greater transparency. Internal
consultations and deliberations will be protected to the extent necessary in order to
safeguard the decision-making process, in accordance with EU legislation on public
access to documents in all areas of Union activities. (Accession Document, CONF-
ME 2, AD23/12,27 June 2012).
The EU negotiation principles with Montenegro attach the importance to the conditionality
of the Stabilization and Association Process, the commitment to good neighborly relations,
the development of closer regional cooperation, and the request to resolve any border
disputes in conformity with the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes.
66
Vasile Puca
The rules and procedures govern the decision-making process in the EU, including
intergovernmental conferences (IGCs);
The requirement of agreement with the Parliament constitutes a very important procedural
aspect of European negotiation;
Rational choice institutionalism, sociological institutionalism, and realism help us to understand
the institutional design in the European negotiations, and the organizations, procedures,
norms (according to rationalist approach of norms in European negotiations, the deviations
from formal rules is interpreted as an informal institution designed to facilitate decision-
making through vote trading (Klein 2008, in Tallberg, 2008).
2. Chapters with negotiating problems of a limited significance: Customs Union, Company Law,
Information Society and Media, Public Procurement, Foreign Security and Defense Policy,
Financial Control, Regional Policy and Structural Instruments, External Relations, Judiciary
and Fundamental Rights;
3. Chapters with some serious sectoral policy concerns: Free Movement of Goods, Intellectual
Property, Financial Services, Taxation, Competition Policy, Social Policy and Employment,
Establishment and Freedom to Provide Services, Energy, Transport, Common Fisheries
Policy;
4. Chapters with some major negotiating problems: Agriculture and Rural Development, Food
Safety, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Policy, Environment, Justice, Freedom and Security, Free
Movement of Workers, Free Movement of Capital, Finance and Budget, Institutions (Sigma
Papers 37, 2007).
The candidate country will participate in the Economic and Monetary Union (as a member
state) with a derogation;
In the area of justice, freedom and security, the membership status implies the acceptance in
full of the entire acquis, including the Schengen acquis;
The candidate country must ensure, in all areas of the acquis, a strong management capacity
of institutions, administration, judicial system in order to implement the acquis and European
policies effectively in good time before accession;
According to Nicolaides et al. (1999), the subjects which were perceived to be difficult are
those requesting the definition of the transitional periods or derogations, those which were
perceived to affect fundamental national preferences or characteristics, important national
economic, commercial or social interests;
The same Sigma analysis remembers that in the current accession negotiations opening
benchmarks will apply to many chapters, including to so-called easy chapters(ex. the
chapter on the Judiciary and Fundamental Rights where there is relatively little to negotiate,
but EU may require serious improvements before allowing the chapter to be opened (Sigma
Paper 37, 2007);
The substantive accession negotiation starts after the Council has adopted a EU Common
Position which is delivered by the Presidency to the candidate country.
68
Vasile Puca
the formal negotiating sessions take place in the IGC, and the more significant sessions
are those at the deputy level, between the Permanent Representatives of the EU Member
States and the Chief Negotiator of the candidate country.
Stages:
A. First stage of the accession negotiation is a multilateral screening process. During the
screening process the Commission and the applicant country undertake a chapter-by-chapter
examination of the acquis. The analytical study of the acquis facilitates its future transposition
within the national legislation, as well as showing the potential problems, which may arise
during the accession negotiation. The screening process also analyzes the candidate countrys
institutional structure, thus providing guidance as to its re-shaping or strengthening in order
to ensure the implementation of the acquis. There is and a bilateral procedure of screening
process, when the EU officials inform the authorities of a candidate country about the acquis
content and implementation.
(Source: neighbours.populari.org/.../guidelines-chapt...)
The assessment of the screening process is drafted by the Commission and presented as a
screening report to the Council of the EU. The screening report constitutes the basis upon
which the accession negotiation is formally opened on the particular chapter.
B. The second stage of accession negotiation is a bilateral one (Beach, 2005), between the
Commission (having a mandate from the Council) and the candidate country. During this
stage, the Commission analyzes the transposition and implementation status of the directives
in each of the chapters, by the candidate country. Both Commissions and candidate countrys
views are written in the so-called Position Papers (the candidate country submits its position
and the EU adopts a common position);
70
Vasile Puca
Negotiation positions include a description of the compliance with the acquis and its
implementation. The negotiation positions are particularly important for the candidate
countries, regarding the transition periods and derogations. In addition to the negotiating
positions presented by a candidate country, the EU institutions may also require additional
information regarding a particular subject or even entire chapter. The negotiating position
may also be amended in different cases;
A so-called Draft Common Position (DCP) is prepared by the Commission in order to reply
to the candidates negotiation position (Nicolaides et al.,1999). The DCP is then discussed
with the Member States (in the Enlargement Working Group of the Council) in order to
achieve a common negotiating position for all Member States. This common negotiating
position is drafted unanimously as a Common Position (CP) and is transmitted to the
candidate country (the Presidency presents the CP to the Ambassadors - i.e. Permanent
Representatives of Member States- and the Chief Negotiator/Minister of candidate country
in so-called negotiating conference).
C. The final stage of accession negotiations is dedicated to the substantive bilateral negotiations
between the governments of the EU member states, represented by the Presidency and
the candidate country. According to Beach (2005), this stage of accession negotiations dealt
with transitional periods, the financial package and date of entry. When a candidate country
approaches the conclusion of negotiating all chapters, the outcomes of the negotiations
are incorporated in a draft Accession Treaty, which states the conditions pertaining to the
accession of the candidate country to the EU.
CHAPTER 6
72
Vasile Puca
Though public and media attention directed at the EU generally focuses on history-making
decisions (Peterson and Bomberg, 1999) and European Council summitry, what happens in
Brussels represents only a small part of the efforts that national governments put into each stage
of the bargaining game (van Keulen in Meerts and Cede, 2004) with the EU.
Taking into consideration the context of EU negotiation institutions, there is the expectation that
the states should adopt organizations, procedures, and norms in order to meet the EU institutional
models =>how functionally efficient or balanced are these in terms of distributional implications.
The Council of EU and the European Council are the main EU negotiation institutions.
The Council
As a negotiation body, as an institutional model;
Addresses issues such as: negotiation style, coalition formation and leadership;
Can be seen through the functional theories of international regimes;
Constitutes a permanent negotiation forum Milzow (2008) says that the
Member States negotiate intensively themselves the issues related to the accession
negotiations;
Reduces the transaction costs of bargaining;
Distributes information among the parties;
Contributes to a convergence of expectations;
Extends the scenarios of the future;
Provides states with a powerful rational for its establishment and maintenance
(Tallberg, 2008);
The prescription that Presidencies should be neutral and impartial, should
act as honest brokers is not confirmed by the general literature of Council
chairmanship.
74
Vasile Puca
An important feature of the negotiation process: coordinating the interests and actions of the
four types of internal actors:
Political;
Economic;
Social;
Civil society.
Be more efficient;
Have fewer conflicting and redundant programs;
Utilize scarce resources more rationally in order to achieve their policy goals (Kassim et
al,2000).
A current approach in what concerns political coordination was, in the case of several former
candidate countries, the creation of European Integration Committees headed by the Prime
Minister (Estonia, Poland) or by the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Czech Republic). Alternately
a higher role would be granted to the Prime Ministers Office in general, or to the various
coordination bodies (lead by secretaries of state: Hungary, Slovenia).
76
Vasile Puca
As a general rule, the coordination process within the Member Sstates and the candidate country,
would be assumed by major institutional actors (internal decision-makers). The latter must:
Be able to efficiently manage accession preparations;
Present a high degree of relevance in front of external actors (Member States, other candidate
countries, European institutions).
Increases the overall efficiency of the negotiation process - optimal when the functional utility of
the institutional negotiation structure is attained. To this effect, the following elements are to be
taken into account:
The types of inter-ministerial management;
Institutional authority;
External credibility;
The effectiveness of external-internal communication.
An implicit accession requirement for all candidate countries is a direct institutional adaptation
as a result of the co-coordination of EU affairs and the implementation of its policies. Thus,
before becoming full members of the EU and before having their own say in the shaping of
the EU, candidate countries must incorporate EU policies into their respective laws and adapt
institutionally (Annex no. 4).
78
Vasile Puca
Coordination arrangements:
State of EU affairs systems, 2003 (Dimitrova and Maniokas, 2003):
80
Vasile Puca
Parliament
Main coordinating Other important
Country involvement,
institution coordinating bodies consultative bodies
European Integration
Council European
Affairs Bureau Council of senior officials;
(follows the European Foreign Affairs European Affairs
Latvia Integration Bureau) Ministry together with the Committee
subordinate to the Secretariat
PM and to the State
Chancellery
European Committee European affairs
Lithuania under the Government Committee
of Lithuania
National Council for
Committee for European Integration
European Integration
Poland consultative body under
headed by the Minister PM with 7 consultative
for European Affairs sub-councils
MFA, department for
coordination of EU
policies, Cabinet Office
Slovakia (since 1998),
Interministerial
Coordination Group
Ministry of Foreign
GOBA, special body Affairs adopting
under the Prime
Slovenia negotiation positions;
Minister in the
Government Office GNT consultative
group of 9 Experts
82
Vasile Puca
6.4. Parliament
Considerable variation in the scope of national parliamentary participation in the EU (van
Kreulen in Meerts and Cede, 2004) according to the constitutional structure and political
practices typical to each member state;
In the 1990s most parliaments established subcommittees for European affairs which have
kept the national parliaments up to date about EU initiatives.
99 Remarks: due to the volume, urgency and technicality of EU policy making parliamentary
involvement is, at an early stage, minimal.
99 Parliamentary discussions - limited to issues with great constitutional or budgetary
implications (treaty changes, enlargement).
However:
Concerning the cooperation in the field of foreign and defense policy and justice and home
affairs, the national parliaments hold a mandate (due to the requirement for unanimity).
99 Criticism: the lack of expertise and background knowledge often hinders a sound
assessment of the proposed legislation by the members of national parliaments.
99 Several initiatives from the part of national parliaments in order to increase their
engagement as to what happens at the level of the European Union, such as the creation
of the Conference of European Affairs Committees of EU is Parliament (consultation
group comprising MEPs and members of national parliaments).
In the accession negotiations with the EU, the coordination of interests also means involving and
respecting the interests of all citizens (gaining their support for the fusion) (Puca, 2006).
Public opinion polls and other instruments: used for assessing the support of citizens for the
integration process,
99 Serve as a basis for further improvements of communication strategies and for increasing
the level of public participation;
99 They must focus on increasing support, realizing public inhibitions regarding certain issues;
99 Specific messages and themes for specific target and support groups must be identified
in order to address negative attitudes within target groups and spread the information
At a national level, organized interests and nongovernmental lobby groups participate in the
domestic coordination of EU affairs (van Keulen in Meerts and Cede 2004).
Social partners are informed about EU initiatives; their opinion is asked on new economic
and social initiatives;
NGOs play an important role in local community development and in initiatives that promote
public participation (Puca, 2006).
In order to make a valuable contribution to a countrys accession to the EU, NGOs must:
99 Possess organizational capacities including legitimacy, consistency, sustainability and
credibility,
99 Have adequate staff with competitive skills,
99 Actively take on their role within communities/constituencies.
99 Trade unions - usually involved in the accession process aiming at: achieving greater
transparency on the costs and advantages related to the process of European integration.
99 Tendency: today, many interest groups = organized at a European level/associated
with transnationally - organized lobby groups (circumventing the process of preference
formation by national governments) (van Keulen in Meerts and Cede, 2004).
84
Vasile Puca
The National Delegation of the candidate country is headed by a Chief Negotiator coordinating
the drafting of the position papers and all the other documents involved in the process, their
implementation, and the work done by sectoral delegations (Puca, 2006). The contribution
of the Chief Negotiator to developing the bargaining power = the ability to force other side to
deviate from its optimum (Annex no.5).
The Chief Negotiator approaches the accession negotiations looking at the outcome of
negotiations and taking into consideration the basic characteristics of negotiations =>the
interaction of the two sides take place at two different levels:
Technical level - negotiations take in consideration a given set of rules, criteria, benchmarks;
Political level issues within a certain policy are resolved without reference to the rules
applying to that area.
He/she must be able to use both the argumentation and persuasion, to use information and
analyze it, in order to establish clearly ones own position and options and to understand the other
sides position.
It is the role of the Chief Negotiator to judge realistically the vulnerabilities of his/her Negotiating
Team and to take risk if he/she wants to maximize his/her country benefits.
The applicant country is not a powerful actor in this accession negotiations, it does not have the
capability to force the EU to accept its bargaining game =>the Chief Negotiator must act to
further attain the objective of gaining admission to the Union.
Primary aim of the negotiations: demonstrating a candidate countrys capacity to adopt and to
implement the EU law (as this is a determining factor concerning each candidates ability to meet
all other criteria for membership).
The negotiator task is to find out whether the chosen options of each side have led to a balanced
solution; to find the way of reaching the convergence of choices.
Given the fact that upon joining the European Union, new Member States are required to adopt
the aquis communautaire, during the negotiation process, the Negotiation Team must demonstrate
that their respective country has the ability to transpose each of the 35 chapters of the acquis into
the national law.
EU (early days) - national diplomats negotiated (with each other / with EU officials) on the
behalf of their government.
Low levels of pluralism, fragmentation, interdependency;
Decentralized governments, private companies, NGOs almost absent from the arena
(exception: social partners) ;
Machinery of ordinary decision-making: less interdependency;
Arenas of negotiation= very different: limited openness; run by diplomats themselves:
99 The people inside the Commission, European Parliament and Council could orchestrate
Europe by negotiating informally, quietly and, avoiding opposition, indirectly; in short,
they could negotiate diplomatically (Midlemans, 1995);
99 Diplomats: liked [the challenge of secondary legislation and] slaloming along and
between the posts of procedures, positions and people (reactive) or placing the posts
86
Vasile Puca
according to where their national interest lay (proactive). So called implementation they
considered as low politics to be delegated to the Commission and more or less to
the experts. Diplomats believed they possessed political expertise rather than technical
expertise. They had a better idea of how to play than what to play. (van Schendelen in
Meerts and Cede, 2004).
Institutions govern European/accession negotiations and matter for outcomes;
All three approaches rational choice, institutionalism, sociological institutionalism !
and realism are important theoretical tools for making sense of the institutions
of European negotiations, but also show complementarities;
the design of negotiation institutions in EU is a good context for assessing the
viability of international institutional design.
CHAPTER 7
88
Vasile Puca
Strategy and tactics come into negotiations in several ways=>two ways are extremely important:
a. the nature of the negotiating partys association with the other stakeholders in the relationship
(one-off interaction or a long-term relationship);
b. differences between the negotiating partys goals in undertaking the negotiation and the
specific methods used during the negotiations.
A negotiation that is part of a long-term relationship is a very different one. If one side is not in
a position of absolute power, the long-term view means that win-win is a golden opportunity
(Clegg, 2000).
A major strategic task in negotiation is to be very well prepared and to have movement (without
movement you havent negotiated). Flexibility is essential for negotiation and this means knowing
which way its safe to move, and which way it isnt.
A lot of work goes into planning, and plans are to support the negotiation process but a plan
doesnt mean constraints for a negotiator.
If a negotiation starts as a one-off transaction, it may meet a lot of variables which ask to manage
the negotiation wider picture, or going from a single deal to a strategic agreement.
A negotiator must know very well his/her side, but he/she also must know the other side(s)/
stakeholders. It is strategically essential to set targets, and to be convinced that the matter of
negotiation is not only black and white (Clegg, 2000).
Time is a very important strategic factor in negotiation. It can be beneficial to the emotional side
of negotiation (good negotiation requires both intuition and logic).
Bazerman and Neale (1993) point out the fact that no ones strategy is perfect for all situations,
and the effectiveness of the strategies varies with the level of trust between parties. Generally,
the negotiation strategies are about how to collect and evaluate information, how to cope with
different perceptions of other parties (including the public opinion), how to use the perceptions,
and how to go beyond simple trade-offs to create truly integrative agreements.
The Program on European Negotiation of the European Institute of Public Administration (see
Lavadoux et al., 2004) emphasizes the following issues related to negotiation strategy and tactics:
90
Vasile Puca
Strategy:
a. Define a clear objective;
b. Identify stakes and interests;
c. Plan positioning and moves;
d. Set attitude and climate;
e. Build argumentation;
f. Prepare for tactics.
c. Positioning and moves (e.g. How far and fast should you go?)Attitude and climate:
I cannot be wrong
My solution first
Trust me, I know what is good for you
Lets compromise
Tactics:
A.
The good and the bad guy;
The smokescreen;
The phoney offer;
The sphinx;
Hardball (hairchested);
The nibble;
The foot in the door.
B.
Playing on Information: 99 Good or Bad guy;
99 Scounting around; 99 Divide and conquer;
99 Enigmatic Sphynx or blanket; 99 Connivance.
99 Feign ignorance; Playing with pressure:
99 Secret confidence; 99 Withdrawal;
99 Leaking. 99 Painting it black;
Playing with time: 99 Hairychested;
99 Marathon discourse and smokescreen; 99 Calling in the bosses.
99 Stewing; Playing with the agenda:
99 Columbo; 99 False trail;
99 Sawing off or Bombarding. 99 Nibbling;
Playing with people: 99 Canceled appointment;
99 Jack in the box; 99 Foot in the door.
When we are talking about EU accession negotiation strategies, we must take in consideration the
strategies of the European institutions, Member States and candidate states. Landau (in Meerts
and Cede, 2004) said the Commission also pursued its own strategy, using issues of fragmentation
and complexity as an opportunity to capture more power and to gain more involvement in this
92
Vasile Puca
policy area. Coalition building and interstate bargaining represent the interest of the Council.
Among Member States there are major players and net payers, and they must have a say in building
coalitions or designing the most important European policies.
Hughes et al. (2004) did prove that the logic of EU conditionality is not a uniformly hard rule-
based instrument, but rather is highly differentiated, its interpretation depending on the content
of the acquis, the policy area, the country concerned, and the general political context. Accepted
as a rules-based prescriptive essence, and as a coercive instrument (especially by the Commission),
the political conditionality of membership was high politicized many times and operationalized in
a selective manner (Hughes at al., 2004), ambivalence and ambiguity being often evident. Perhaps
for this reason, the Commission proposed a new concept of the track record and benchmarks,
emphasizing the importance attached to the implementation of the agreement itself (the case of
the Stabilization and Association Agreement).
EU conditionality assumed one basic premise: that it exists and works because there is a power
asymmetry which enables the Commission to impose the adoption of the acquis as a precondition
of their entry to the Union (Hughes et al., 2004). From this perspective we may understand
the assumption that the policy interactions and power relations between EU and the candidate
countries are shaped by the conditions of membership (Hughes et al., 2004).
Sedelmeier (2006) points out two distinctive sets of conditions for joining the EU:
1. general conditions (the Copenhagen criteria);
2. concrete terms of accession (formulated during the negotiation process).
Hughes et al. (2004) presents two main categories of conditionality:
a. formal conditionality (the publicly stated preconditions, like the Copenhagen criteria);
b. informal conditionality (includes operational pressures and recommendations to achieve
particular outcomes during interactions with the candidate states.
The conditionality offers EU the effective means to influence changes in the applicant countries
and to comply with the EU policies. But the EUs influence depends on the credibility of
conditionality, and such credibility depends on the signals of the EUs actors, related to the
requirements for accession. Currently, the EU has extended conditionalities both beyond the
signing of the Accession Treaty and even after the accession date (Sedelmeier, 2010).
94
Vasile Puca
Intra-European trade has been seen a major stimulus to Europeanist sentiment. Research
studies argue that the popular support for European integration correlates positively with level of
intra-European trade, and the attitudes toward integration reflect economic, cultural or political
concerns and not trans-national affinities per se (Jones et al., 2004). And, in broad terms, the
argument is that the support for the accession to the EU is a function of benefits derived from
membership (so-called impact of accession/integration/: Respondents in Member States are
more likely to support the accession of candidate countries that are relatively important trading
partners, are located in close geography proximity or share a common border (Jones et al., 2004).
Enlargement can be successful only if it is a transparent process that has the democratic support
of the citizens of the Member States and the candidate countries. The EUs fifth enlargement
experience has shown that much more is needed from the Member States and candidate states
to inform media, labor unions, market structures and different NGOs. A wide-ranging dialogue
is needed to make the challenges and benefits of the enlargement process clear, to diffuse
misconceptions where they exist and let citizens know their concerns are being taken seriously.
The realistic approach of the conditionalities/criteria to be fulfilled, as well as future and needed
reforms => is meant to avoid a too rosy picture of the EUs membership short-term effects
(Summa, 2008). In particular the accession of new member states needs public understanding
and support in order to be successful and sustainable. This is challenging now, in an environment
where, notably in the context of the on-going financial and sovereign debt crisis, the role of
public bodies is increasingly questioned. As in other policy areas, the public expects to see tangible
evidence of the effectiveness of EU enlargement and its transformational power for those
countries concerned as well as the added value for the EU as whole.
Strategy and tactics come into negotiations in several ways;
A negotiator must know very well his/her side, but he/she also must know the !
other side(s)/stakeholders;
Negotiations strategies: competitive, collaborative, avoiding, accommodating;
The importance of accession criteria that must be fulfilled in order to join the EU;
Enlargement can be successful only if it is a transparent process that has the
democratic support of the citizens of Member States and candidate countries.
CHAPTER 8
96
Vasile Puca
of the candidate country and - very important - the contribution it can make to the
common interest of the EU;
5. The capacity of candidates public administration to enforce the EU rules and policies;
6. The treatment provided to other candidate countries;
7. The precedents set by previous accession negotiations.
Remark: Professor Nicolaides advises the candidate countries to take the point
no. 4 very seriously, because it appeals to the mutual interest/the common interest
and it signals the candidates approach to the accession negotiation.
The Position Papers are very important with regards to transition periods and derogations,
since the quality of the argumentation will determine the positive or negative decisions of
the EU;
The domestic political situation and the maintenance of population support for accession
must be in minds of both the Government and the Negotiation Team (defending the vital
national interest);
For contextual reasons, the countries of Eastern enlargement wave did not follow the
precautionary principle =>it would be advisable to be taken in consideration for the future
enlargement negotiations (see Annex no.3).
98
Vasile Puca
99 Impact assessment of the financial resources of the candidate country in order to assume
these changes;
99 Impact assessment of the administrative capacity and new institutions/agencies in charge
to implement the acquis;
The background dossier should contain both the point of agreements and the points of
disagreements from major domestic sources of opinion and analysis.
Remark: The EU did not establish a standard format for such structure of Position
Paper. In practice, there are several similarities between the negotiation positions prepared
by candidate countries, but they do differ in scope and also with regards to the methods
which candidate favors in arguing its way to accession (see Annex no. 6).
Some general guidelines of the structure of a Position Paper are very useful in the preparation
stage to be followed by all line ministries and integrative institutions of a candidate country,
because the ministries should formulate precise proposals and provide sufficient reasoning
that can serve as concrete basis and factual arguments for negotiations =>the final version
of the Position Paper must be written by the Negotiating Team under the authority of the
Chief Negotiator.
A Position Paper for accession negotiation, in general, includes the following parts:
A. The general summarized position of the candidate country on the negotiating chapters acquis
(in this section, a synthetic exposure of the exemptions requested can be made);
B. Candidates detailed position on the acquis in the respective field, with a distinct indication of:
The equivalent in the national legislation of the acquis already taken, or the provisions
that are most significant;
Timing and modalities of implementing the acquis that has not yet been adopted.
C. Presentation of the institutions of central government or otherwise required by the acquis of
the matter:
Existing institutions - in the case that statistics will be presented to prove the efficiency
of the operations and the main measures to increase their efficiency;
100
Vasile Puca
If necessary, a schedule and action plan/measures to create new institutions that are still
required for implementing the acquis.
D. Arguments for the transition periods or derogation in the area of negotiated chapter, where
there is such a request.
Advisable:
Should provide very precise proposals and reasons for these proposals;
Imprecise or insufficiently reasoned proposals might create the impression that the candidate
country does not really know what it wants;
Important that the candidate country leaves the perception that it is fully in control of every
situation presented in the Position Paper;
The Position Paper is a formal document, so the writing style should reflect this fact;
If a Position Paper lacks precision, negotiations may be delayed, the Member States will
demand clarifications and the process of internal coordination must start all over again before
negotiations can really begin.
As professor Nicolaides (1999) pointed out, it is important to:
Keep papers short and well structured (headings, etc.),
Define precise position/request,
Explain fully your own situation/capacity,
Justify position/request (as provided by the existing acquis).
102
Vasile Puca
2. Could you accept a shorter derogation that can be extended after you enter the EU?
3. Could you propose objective means of deciding later on whether extension is
necessary?
and decisions regarding the temporary derogations are taken by the Council Drafting
Committee. The agreements achieved by the Member States in the Working Group
open the way to get the common position on behalf of all Member States. The
Presidency communicates the Common Position (CP) to the Chief Negotiator of the
candidate country in the negotiating conference.
When all compromises and concessions were achieved, the Member States might
agree on communicating to the candidate state the CP about the provisionally closing
of a negotiating chapter (so-called chaptology says that each chapter remains
provisionally closed till the end of the game).
! The positions of the candidate country for each of the negotiating chapters are
drawn up and sent to the Presidency of the Council as Position Papers;
Background dossier contains the proposals, measures, commitments, programs
discussed with political parties, local administration, social partners in order to
request for transitional periods.
104
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 9
There are three types of flexibility in the accession negotiations (Sigma Paper 37, 2007):
A. Permanent derogations;
B. Temporary derogations and transitional arrangements;
C. Technical adjustments.
The exemptions of new Member States from implementation of all approximate 100,000 pages
of acquis communautaire or a particular policy reflects the balance between allowing applicants
some time to adjust their policies and the desire to accept only those applicants whose policies are
already stable and in harmony with the EU (apud Plumper in Schneider, 2009).
Definitions (euabc.com):
Transition: A transition period is a negotiated number of years during which the EU obligations
do not apply (temporary exemption from implementation of the acquis).
Remark: The accession document of the Ministerial meeting opening the IGC on the Accession
of Montenegro to the EU (29 June 2012), stated that transitional measures are limited in time
and scope, and accompanied by a plan with clear defined stages for application of the acquis.
The same document adds: For areas linked to the extension of the internal market, regulatory
measures should be implemented quickly and transition periods should be short and few; where
considerable adaptations are necessary requiring substantial effort, including large financial
outlays, appropriate transitional arrangements can be envisaged as part of an ongoing detailed and
budgeted plan for alignment. In any case, transitional arrangements must not involve amendments
to the rules or policies of the Union, disrupt their proper functioning, or lead to significant
distortions of competition.
Derogations: imply that a rule is not binding for a certain country. For certain countries there are
derogations from parts of the treaties. There are also opt-outs from parts of the adopted policies.
106
Vasile Puca
Remark: not popular in the EU. The Commission wants laws to be identical across the whole of
Europe.
Technical arrangements are generally undertaken by the Commission and do not give rise to
problems.
Remark: typically, the change would be the addition of a specifically protected name - food and
drink products- from the candidate country to the list of protected geographical designations.
for the previous year officially, CAP framework statistics are unavailable for the new
Member States;
99 Structural policy programs: the initial receipts/payments imbalance typical to new
Member States: redressed by a temporary and declining credit mechanism;
The EU itself may request a gradual introduction of the new Member States into the
Community programs as well as an incremental application of its laws in order for the
Community to be able to adjust at its turn to the enlargement.
Examples:
99 In order to temporarily protect their interests from the potentially harmful competition
of new members, EU farmers as well as steel workers used to request that the principle
of free trade be applied gradually;
99 Luxembourg: 10 years restriction in what concerns the inward movement of Portuguese
workers (countries that entered the EU after its founding were subjected to similar
restrictions).
Transitions and derogations:
Generally sought after when a country expects to have difficulties in implementing the acquis:
99 Political issues;
99 Social issues;
99 Economic issues.
Remark:
99 Negotiation strategy: during accession negotiation a country should avoid focusing its
demands only on transitions and derogations (risk of becoming a less desirable partner):
99 Asking for exceptions from the rule because compliance costly: negative attitude;
99 Asking for assistance in order to enable compliance: positive attitude (possible
assistance programs: trainings, programs supporting adaptations, improving existing
capital/infrastructure etc.);
99 Another way of avoiding making difficult adjustments as well as asking for derogations:
adaptation of the acquis (immutable in theory) e.g. In the accession negotiations of
Austria, Finland, Norway and Sweden: the Union agreed to review its own standards with
respect to environment, health and safety issues in order to raise them to the level of the
candidate countries .
Implementation plans:
Requests for transitional measures need to be justified by detailed implementation plans
ensuring that compliance with the acquis will be reached (http://ec.europa.eu);
Both the requests and implementation plans should be accompanied by a timetable for the
1
1
v. 4th Enlargement Summary: http://aei.pitt.edu/1560/1/4th_enlarge_summary_results.pdf;
108
Vasile Puca
Transitional measures according with eutransition.eu, the typical transitional measures were
in the following main domains:
Agriculture, Land Market Reform and Environment Related Issues:
99 Environment;
99 Food Safety;
99 Land Administration and Cadastre;
99 Renewable Energies.
Economic Reforms (Transition to a Market-Based Economy):
99 Domestic Financial Systems;
99 Liberalization of Prices, Trade and Foreign Exchange;
99 Macro-Economic Stabilization;
99 Private Sector Development;
99 Privatization of State-Owned Enterprises;
99 Reform of Public Finances;
99 Trade Development and Regional Integration;
99 Employment, Labor and Social Protection (Social Reforms).
99 The post-Cold War period: Central and Eastern European countries as well as the Baltic
States struggled for independence and began to successfully govern their young countries;
99 The 12 most recent members of the EU all needed transitional periods in order to fully
adapt to the EU economic, judicial and social framework.
Length of transitional periods: varies, subject to negotiations (from the EU point of view:
should be kept as short as possible; the candidate countries are interested in obtaining long
transitions);
Greece: five years;
Spain and Portugal: seven-year transitional period (for certain sensitive issues - ten years);
More recent members: one year to nine years (average period of about three years).
9.2. Derogations
Types of derogations (Nikolaides: 1998):
Most derogations granted by the EU temporary (room for manoeuvre for the prospective
member):
99 Not pre-determined (in terms of length);
99 May be granted for a fixed and short period of time (no formula for what fixed and/or
short represents);
99 Length varies in relation to the adjustment having to be made (estimated difficulty and
extent);
99 If necessary, some derogations may be prolonged;
NB: though EU has only accepted temporary derogations, there is one exception: Malta, who
gained a permanent derogation on the purchase of second homes on the island (euabc.com)
=>permanent derogations have been agreed in rare cases.
Defined in terms of:
99 Products (e.g. apples),
99 Sectors (e.g. banking),
99 Standards (e.g. environmental measures),
99 Factors of production (e.g. workers),
99 Tax measures (e.g. VAT rates or exempt activities),
99 Regions (e.g. certain islands),
99 Area of operations (e.g. amount of re-insurance by foreign companies on domestic
territory),
99 Business practices (e.g. establishment of companies),
110
Vasile Puca
Obtaining derogations:
Not granted lightly;
99 Cases of evident need:
a. needs must be quantifiable or
b. proven to represent matters of: vital national interest; traditions; important social policies
(heaviliy impacted by the adoption of the acquis);
99 Not granted in matters of fundamental freedoms of the internal market as
deviating from such basic principles would change the character of the European Union;
99 However: a Compensatory derogations may be given even in such circumstances as
the EU may itself ask for transitional arrangements for aspects such as the movement of
workers/trade of agricultural products etc.
Easier to obtain when the issues at stake are of major importance to the prospective member
but of minor importance to the EU (ex. Marketing of moist tobacco in Sweden, illegal in the
rest of the EU);
99 However: these are rare situations candidates must usually argue very convincingly
their cases in order to obtain any derogation;
99 The most powerful argument: the existence of a precedent: exceptions granted to any
other existing member provided in the treaties (some restrictions on the freedom to
trade, move and establish for certain specific reasons: protection of national security/
public morality- very few/narrowly defined/must be applied in a non-discriminatory
manner) and in secondary legislation (much more numerous Member States must be
very familiar with EU legislation and jurisprudence);
Every case is, however, unique - EU practice does not always offer useful precedents:
negotiation very important;
The prospective member must:
99 Be able to explain the manner in which adopting the acquis would cause irreparable
damage to its welfare- reduction of national standards/economic activity etc.;
99 Prove that costs related to the immediate adoption of the full acquis are too high and that
derogations are the only way of avoiding them;
99 Demonstrate that the derogation is not contrary to the general principles of the EU;
99 Indicate the precise way in which that derogation is beneficial (raise the standards of
living/levels of prosperity/reduce social and regional disparities etc.);
99 Prove that the requested derogation does not impact on trade and competition inside
the EU;
99 Quantified evidence helpful;
NB: On all requested exceptions: hard bargaining process to be expected;
Important steps for preparing the request of transitions/derogations in a negotiating
position (Nikolaides, 1998):
1. Understanding the acquis:
Examining all relevant provisions in the treaties;
Analyzing the relevant secondary legislation;
Searching for relevant jurisprudence;
2. Understanding ones own situation:
Reasons for which compliance with the acquis is likely to cause problems;
Nature and magnitude of the problems;
Analyzing potential solutions other than derogations.
3. The existence of certain exceptions/safeguards in treaties or in the secondary legislation:
Method in which they have been used/invoked in the past by older members.
4. The granting of various exceptions/safeguards in past accession negotiations:
Finding similar problems encountered by older members;
Analyzing the exceptions granted to them;
Analyzing the possibility of using similar arguments;
Assessing ones own negotiating power accordingly.
5. Formulating ones position and request:
Permanent or temporary derogation requirement estimating the time length;
112
Vasile Puca
NB: The EU accession negotiations with Croatia were opened on October 3rd 2005 and concluded
on June 30th 2011. Croatia is set to join the EU on July 1st 2013. In line with the negotiating
framework, a certain number of transitional periods and derogations have been agreed, limited in
time and scope.
114
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 10
The accession to the European Union is a matter decided by all Member States (unanimity).
Everybody knows that the juridical equality of states is one thing, and that certain Member States
are more influential in the decision-making process. There are also Member States which are very
closely associated with the candidate countries. Both Member States and candidate countries are
very much concerned to demonstrate that they serve their own vital national interests. Especially
when negotiating the financial package and the content of the Accession Treaty many negotiators
talked about bloody negotiations. This is because the so-called difficult chapters are not
discussed at the end of the process, the negotiation of these chapters starts at the beginning and
is pursued for several years.
Final deals emphasize Schneiders approach of distributional conflicts and discriminatory
membership theories when the gains and losses of enlargement are (re)distributed among present
EU Member States and future Member States. From such a point of view the outcomes of the
accession negotiation are explained by the ability of all involved actors to locate these deals and
coordinate on their specifics (Schneider, 2009).
There are authoritative opinions saying that the governments of the candidate countries have
fully agree with the accession criteria because they focused on issues directly related to gaining
EU money (Summa, 2008) - structural funds, agricultural subsidies a.s.o. - in order to accelerate
economic processes, to become functioning market economies. My advice to future candidate
countries is to prepare a lot of risk analysis and market research studies before entering the
final deals of accession negotiations; to consult the business interests, trade unions, NGOs, all
economic and social partners for gathering all the necessary information for governments in order
to provide the most accurate impact studies to their negotiators.
Of course, during the final stage of accession negotiations the Commission has the opportunity to
play a skillful broker and a trusted mediation role. The Commission is expected to frame proposals
likely to obtain the approval of all Member States.
116
Vasile Puca
The results of the financial package negotiations: - presented and assessed from the two points of view:
Short-term perspective;
Long-term perspective (after the countrys accession):
99 Establishes the basis for the countrys participation in the negotiations about the new
financial framework;
99 First occasion on which the candidate country takes part in negotiations as a full
member this is when a genuine reallocation of funds between old and new Member
States takes place for the first time.
Remark: complexity of interests - negotiations are rendered extremely difficult:EU relations
with Central and Eastern Europe illustrate the difficulty of constructing a consistent policy when
the spheres of interest of the members differ so greatly (Mayhew, 1988).
Several phases:
The announcement of a common financial perspective by the Commission: a document
defining the basic framework for discussion about the main financial aspects related to the
accession of candidate countries to the EU:
99 Agriculture and rural development,
99 Structural funds,
99 Regional policy,
99 Contributions to EU Budget,
99 Other issues;
The Commission comes out with its proposal for the distribution of funds between the
Member States.
Remark: during this phase the candidate country strives to explain its position concerning the
financial side of negotiations and justifies the proposals it sets forth concerning its own financial
requirements/issues;
EU Member States adopt their official positions on the financial package of negotiations;
Efforts in the direction of attaining public finance goals (short and long-term) lobbying for:
99 Increasing the amount of lump sum payments,
99 Limiting to the greatest possible extent the potential public finance risks related to the
countrys accession to the European Union.
The candidate country - to ensure, in a timely manner, that the required capacities and structures
for the sound management and effective control of Community financial instruments are in place
in accordance with the acquis.
The protection of the EUs financial interests - to be kept in mind by the candidate
country.
Although enlargement negotiations share a number of similarities with other negotiating
activities with non-members they are qualitatively different in form and content. As
Graham Avery (1995) has summed up, accession is about how a non-member is to join
the Union, and apply for the rules of the Union. It is not aimed at an agreement between
the Union on the one hand and an external partner on the other, as the normal case in
international negotiations, but at the way in which an applicant country will function as
a member. The negotiations are not about future relations between us and them but
rather about relations between future us. (Landau in Meerts and Cede, 2004).
Remarks:
1. In the context of the EU budgetary discipline policy, Article 29 of the current Inter-
Institutional Agreement foresees that if a new Member States accedes to the European
Union during the period covered by the financial framework, the European Parliament
and the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, will jointly adjust the financial
framework to take account of the expenditure requirements resulting from the outcome
of the accession negotiations;
2. If the financial package requires adaptation after the conclusion of the negotiations, a
procedure would need to involve the candidate country/acceding country as appropriate
in this decision-making.
Financial Packages the chapter 33 (Financial and Budgetary Provisions) is related to all other
financially relevant chapters, in particular chapters 11 (Agriculture) and chapter 22 (Regional Policy).
1
2
Inter-Institutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on
budgetary discipline and sound financial management, (2006/C 139/01) 14 June 2006.
118
Vasile Puca
This chapter also covers the financial allocations for Croatia as a Member State. The amounts
and arrangements agreed are set out below. Croatia will also participate in the EUs other
actions and programs (internal policies) - from its accession. As there exist no pre-allocated
envelopes by Member State for this other expenditure, specific amounts for Croatia are not
fixed and are therefore not included in the Accession Treaty.
120
Vasile Puca
Remarks: The duration of negotiations: according to the speed of reform and alignment with
EU laws by the candidate country.
The duration of negotiations can vary starting at the same time as another country does
not represent a guarantee of concluding at the same time.
3
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/steps-towards-joining/index_en.htm
The Accession Treaty4: incorporates the results from the negotiations on various subjects
(negotiation chapters)
Arrangements,
Transitional periods,
Technical conditions etc.
Language:
Drafted in English;
Subsequently translated in the languages of all Member States (old and new),
Remark: The Treaty - equivalent in all the languages.
122
Vasile Puca
Prepare a lot of risk analysis and market research studies before entering the final
deals of accession negotiations; !
Consult the business interests, trade unions, NGOs, all economic and social
partners for gathering the necessary information for governments in order to
provide the most accurate impact studies to their negotiators;
The candidate country has to ensure, in a timely manner, that the required
capacities and structures for the sound management and effective control of
Community financial instruments are in place, according to the acquis.
CHAPTER 11
124
Vasile Puca
The current strategy of EU enlargement emphasizes on the EUs integration capacity and
the Commission underlines three areas where action is needed to ensure a totally successful
enlargement of the Union (Sigma Paper 37, 2007):
Ensuring that the candidate countries fulfill the commitments taken during the negotiation
period;
Ensuring support from EU citizens for the enlargement;
Ensuring that the Unions institutions, policies and budget sustain all the challenges created
by the enlargement.
Effective capacity to implement and enforce the rule and objectives of EU is relying on the
administrative capacity of a new member state. Phedon Nicolaides (1999) is right when he says that
without such a capacity, a new member, even with the best of intentions, would demonstrate that
legal acceptance of these rules does not automatically translate into ability to enforce them. The
administrative capacity refers to all means which enable a member state to reach these objectives:
Legal framework;
Organizational(administrative) framework;
Available resources;
Performance assessment procedures.
In order to speed up the accession negotiation process, a candidate country has to determine the
quality of its administrative capacity in each area of the acquis communautaire, and to persuade
the Commission and Member States that there is that capacity (Annex no. 9).
The accession negotiation process is about joining the EU and giving a candidate country the
opportunity to reach the maximum level of benefits. Because being a member of EU means
determining its rules, complying with them and using them to get advantages, we can define the
effective membership (Nicolaides, 2003) to mean:
Ability to influence those rules in line with the European interest;
And its own national interests;
Enforcing the rules vigorously;
Using all opportunities provided by the Single Market;
Maximizing the effects of implementation of the European policies and absorption of EU funds.
126
Vasile Puca
systems and a clear accountability system, to provide civil servants with the necessary freedom of action.
b. Accountability systems:
In its assessment of administrative capacities in the candidate countries, the EU has placed
much emphasis on the development of capacities for internal and external financial control,
as one element of the creation of new accountability system;
Accountability systems are a crucial element of capacity development in relation to EU
membership, in particular since the overwhelming majority of EU policy implementation is
controlled nationally;
The development of internal financial control and external audit capacities has been strongly
advocated and supported by the EU;
The question that may arise is whether there is a move towards the creation of modern, well-
balanced accountability systems, including administrative, political, judicial and quasi-market
accountability mechanisms.
Table 11.1. Dedicated structures for EI-related decision-making (after A.J.G. Verheijen, 2000, p. 36)
The location of European secretariats has been a problematic issue in many candidate states,
creating turf wars over control of the EI secretariat between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and institutions concerned with management of internal aspects of EU affairs;
Traditionally, EU secretariats in most Member States are located within the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs;
Other ministry
or independent
Integrated part
Place of the main Ministry of Foreign administrative
of the Center of
secretarial units Affairs unit reporting
Government to the Center of
Government
Table 10.2.: Institutional location of EI secretariats (after A.J.G. Verheijen, 2000, p. 37)
128
Vasile Puca
The development of capacities within line ministries to manage EU affairs has been an uneven
process in candidates states;
Generally, ministers have created special units for EU affairs, but there is significant variation as to
the tasks and formal position of such units;
In many cases and instances EI units often are not sufficiently integrated in policy development in
the line ministries, and have only limited abilities to ensure that EU-related obligations are met;
In general, European Integration issues were not well integrated in daily routine of line ministries at
the beginning of accession process.
There are three key aspects of administrative reform;
Often civil service legislation, where adopted in candidate countries, has not !
been fully implemented, or has not been used as an instrument to further the
development of a stable and professional civil service;
Due to lack of investment in the development of indigenous training institutions,
training is little more than a potential catalyst for administrative development;
There is a lot of work to be done on the rationalization of administrative structures
and policy processes and the development of a modern accountability system;
The development of dedicated systems for the management of EU affairs.
The main issues in relation with the general quality of the public administration include:
The development of an impartial and professional administration;
The development of a training system;
Adequate policy development and policy co-ordination capacities;
An effective accountability system (with particular emphasis on the system of Internal and
External Financial Control);
The extent to which special structures and procedures have been put in place to manage
EU affairs.
An interesting system for assessing the administrative capacity is the SIGMA baseline, which
covers 6 core areas:
Policy-making and co-ordination machinery;
Civil service;
Financial management;
Public procurement;
Internal financial control;
External audit.
Each of these 6 areas was developed in consultation with the EU.
Statutory authority for the SAI to audit all public and statutory
funds and resources, including EU funds
Meeting requirements set out in INTPOSAI auditing standards
Necessary operational and functional independence
External Audit Reporting: regularity, fairness, timeliness, proper counterpart in the
parliament
Awareness of EU accession process requirements
Capacity to upgrade quality of external audit
Legal status of civil servants
Legality, responsibility and accountability of public servants
Impartiality and integrity of [public servants
Efficiency in management of public servants and in control of
Civil Service staffing
Professionalism and stability of public servants
Development of civil service capacities in the area of European
Integration
Inclusion of sound budgeting principles in the Constitution,
Organic
Budget Law and/or related laws
Balance between executive and legislative power
Exact definition of the scope of the State Budget and efficient
arrangements for transfers to extra-budgetary funds
Medium term expenditure framework
Public Expenditure A logical, sequential and transparent Budget process, set out in
Management System clearly defined rules
Effective arrangements for the Budget management of Public
Investments
Effective monitoring mechanisms for budget implementation
Common classification for accounting and reporting, compatible
with concepts related to the disbursement of EU funds
Capacities for upgrading the Public Expediture Management
system
130
Vasile Puca
The enlargement process provides the opportunity to create the necessity of re-thinking the
administrative capacity requirements to EU membership:
The creation of an administrative acquis;
The redefinition of the relation between the Commission and the Member States.
Re-defining the relations between the Commission and Member States administrations:
The relation between Commission and Member States administration remains a core-
periphery relation;
A review of the role of Commission and the member state administration in EU policy
implementation and a re-definition of the patterns of interaction between them is therefore
a necessity.
An active and intensive process of coaching, persuasion, advice and assistance
offered to the candidate states;
There is a need to enshrine and supplement this mutual trust as well as to review
and adapt the way EU functions to the requirements of an enlarged Union;
There is a need to adopt a set of minimum standards that administrations of
member states should meet, based on shared administrative values;
It is necessary to have a hierarchical, legalistic mode of operation to a co-operation
networking system.
132
Vasile Puca
Application includes the practical steps taken by the relevant authorities to put rules into
effect;
Compliance the act of conformity, encompasses those actions undertaken for the purpose
of conforming with the obligations imposed on them by those to whom the rules or the
practical measures are addressed;
Enforcement can be pursued with the aid of intelligent procedures.
The candidate countries will have to devote a substantial amount of their budgetary resources to
comply with the requirements of EU membership for example for cleaning up their environment,
improving the quality of their drinking water, regulating their telecoms operators, reinforcing their
border control, training their civil servants, etc.
The candidate countries need to understand the efficiency considerations enter the decision-
making equation at two different levels:
1. Trade-offs effectiveness and efficiency;
2. Trade-offs does not exist because efficient measures are a subset of effective measures.
The commission has based its assessment of the performance on the following criteria:
Inadequate transposition;
Poor quality transposition;
Different transposition methods;
Uneven enforcement;
Discriminatory application;
Legislative gaps;
Overcomplicated rules.
It has to be noted the fact that - these criteria are neither defined further in much detail, in
the documents. These criteria refer largely to the end result of implementation.
134
Vasile Puca
It is important to determine what sets the pre-integration state of equilibrium with restricted trade.
Internal commitments matter both to the initial formation of a custom unions, common market,
a.s.o., and to the continued success of any integrationist project after being established.
The process of integration begins to roll when policy outcomes are packaged in
the right way, so as to give the right incentives;
The ideal partner country is the one that offers the most attractive market to the
!
potential supporters of trade liberalization;
External commitments between partner countries are adhered to when internal
commitments are adhered to.
Integration works when there are domestic groups to counterbalance the actions
of opponents and when the domestic political bargains can also be adhered to.
The heart of the problem related to the implementation of common policies deviates from the
intention or spirit of that policy; it is also due to the fact that domestic policy-making essentially
decomposes the processes that provided the package which made integration possible.
136
Vasile Puca
CHAPTER 12
Even though, the literature from the field of European negotiations contains many study cases
which could be taken as examples for the accession negotiations (for example, for the Romanian
case - Vasile Puca, Negotiating with the European Union, 1, 2003). Our handbook choose to
present the case of Croatia for the chapter 27 - Environment, because this is the most recent in
the framework of the accession negotiation to the EU.
This example of negotiating the accession to the EU was taken from the following source:
www.good-neighbours.org, without any modifications of the text printed by publisher:
138
Vasile Puca
Adopting EU aquis
140
Vasile Puca
Environmental Governance:
Croatian Institutions and Legislation
With a population of 4.4 million, the Republic of Croatia is a unitary democratic parliamentary
republic. The structure of its public administration is not overly complicated; one president and
one prime minister, a government that in 2000 had 19 ministers in charge of particular sectors of
activity with the help of four deputy prime ministers. On paper, Environmental protection had
started in Croatia as early as 1990 with the Constitution (December 22, 1990) which includes an
obligation to protect the environment and nature and ensures the right of citizens to a healthy
environment. In October 1994, the Law on Environmental Protection (EPL) was adopted.
This, along with the Constitution, was the legal basis for regulating environmental protection
in Croatia, and any other environmental by-laws had to be in line with the fundamental law. It
was the mother of all laws addressing environmental issues. Adopted in 94 and revised in 99,
it took into consideration EU directives, the experience of developed countries and universally
accepted principles of environmental protection. Fortunately, the large majority of regulations on
environmental protection in Croatia had been harmonized with the two. Additionally, National
Environmental Strategies and Action Plans were already geared to fit within the framework of
relevant EU Directives. During the 1990s Croatias environmental institutional structure lacked
clear mandates and competencies. A single authority in charge of environmental policy did not
exist. Instead, there were multiple ministries and institutions in charge of specific aspects of the
environment. Coupled with a lack of cooperation between state institutions, this led to a very
inefficient institutional setup regarding environmental issues. Prior to 2000 the structure changed
a lot. The changes in competencies can be seen in the table below:
142
Vasile Puca
The Croatian Parliament played an important role in the process of EU integration. The Parliament
established a special working body, the National Committee for Monitoring the Accession
Negotiations of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union, which was given considerable
powers.The Committee was agreed upon by the Prime Minister at the time, Ivo Sanader, and the
leader of the social democrats, Ivica Racan, who was the first head of the Committee.
Based on the rules and procedures, the head of the Committee needed to be from a political party
in opposition. The Committee also had an obligation to approve each of the negotiating positions.
Any negotiating position or change of the negotiating position could not be sent to Brussels without the
approval of the National Committee, which the National Committee had to approve unanimously... In
effect, it has veto power over the entire EU accession process of Croatia. A NO vote stops the process,
only one NO vote...This was of course a big risk, but in our case, I think it paid off... To speak quite
honestly, you have to be careful: the people who are in the Committee can disagree politically, but they have
to agree on the fact that they want their country to become a member of the EU. There cannot be any kind
of mavericks who will use their position in the committee to score political points here or there, playing
short-term political games. If you have a sufficient number of people in opposition and Government who
are seriously dedicated to this goal, then it is very useful... (Vesna Pusic, Chairman of the National
Committee for Monitoring the Accession Negotiations)
The National Committee consisted of 15 Parliament members and 4 outside members without
voting rights who most often came from the academic community, employers associations and
trade unions. The National Committee, led by the Chairperson of the Committee, held regular
consultations and exchanged information with the President of the Republic of Croatia,
the President of the Government, the President of the Croatian Parliament, as well as other
negotiating bodies.
Vladimir Drobnjak, Head of the Croatian Negotiating Team, shares his opinion of the Committee:
I think it was the first time applied in this specific format in Croatian negotiations and we are recommending
all the countries that are following us to embrace this idea...It proved to be extremely valuable... I think that
it keeps the Government confident that it has full backing from the Parliament, because this is the best way
to receive support across the political line and without the support this work is impossible.
To better prepare and facilitate the coming negotiating process, the Government of the Republic
of Croatia adopted a decision to establish a structure for accession negotiations with the EU on
April 7, 2005. The Decision defined the organization and competences of the newly established
bodies that form the structure for negotiations and which are entitled to sign the Accession Treaty
once the negotiations complete.
It was a challenge in the beginning and I think, I would say, the success of the process of technical
negotiations depends very much on this initial phase, when you decide how to set up the Negotiating Team
and who to choose for the Negotiating Team. We had this, I would say, wide approach whereby we did not
only include people from the government, from the official sector, but also people from the private sector. If
nothing else than as observers, so that they can inform their constituencies what changes will come through
the screening process.
Preparations Continue
Apart from preparation of the administrative negotiating structure, preparations in the sector itself
continued based on the recommendations listed in the European Partnership and Avis. In the
waste management sector, for example, Croatia drafted a Waste Management Strategy in October
2005 an obligation that also stemmed from the Law on Waste adopted in 2004. Here, Croats
described in detail all the areas they were falling behind in with regard to waste management. The
chapter Current Situation: Evaluation of situation problems and obstacles explicitly stated:
The waste management system is not completely functional, which is inter alia due to partial and/or
inadequate enforcement of prevailing regulations (non-respect and poor enforcement have been in fact
144
Vasile Puca
identified as a significant problem). The following difficulties have also been noted: insufficient awareness
of the legal persons that they are accountable for the waste they generate insufficient knowledge of waste
management practices and trends currently applied in the EU excessive number of unorganized, uncontrolled
and environmentally dangerous landfill sites poor application of market based principles and insufficient use
of polluter pays principleThe problem is especially acute in the sphere of hazardous wasteno disposal
site has so far been put in place for hazardous wasteAll types of waste, including hazardous waste, are
currently stored on almost all landfill sites in Croatia.
This strategy was adopted on October 14, 2005, 11 days after the official opening of the
negotiations. This strategy in detail talked about the problem with waste management in Croatia.
It estimated that there were approximately 3000 uncontrolled dumpsites, which diminished the
beauty of the natural landscape and polluted soil, water and air. It reflects on how much waste
Croatia produced (~1.2 million tons in year 2000) and how little of it was recycled: almost one half
of the construction waste ends up on disposal sites destined for municipal waste. In addition, as much
as 80% of construction waste can be reused [but] only 7 percent is actually recycled Fines for polluters
were inadequate, inspections scarce and education on the matter lacking.
Through examples such as these in the waste management sector, it can be seen that Croatia
continued to prepare itself, showing its commitment to fulfilling obligations set out in the
European Partnership and the Avis.
Screening (2005-2006)
The first part of the negotiating process is the screening of each of the 35 chapters of the
acquis. On October 20, 2005, the screening officially began.
The Screening process is one of the key stages of the accession process. This is the moment when
the Commission explains the acquis to the candidate countries, and then the countries have to use
the same language to explain where they are in comparison to the highest standard, i.e. the acquis.
In short, for Croatia, it meant looking inward and identifying all gaps that needed to be filled, as
well as identifying possible needs for transitional periods for individual chapters. For the European
Commission, screening is the opportunity to assess the readiness of Croatia for the opening of
substantive negotiations on individual chapters. Screening is conducted for each chapter of the
acquis separately. It is an extensive joint exercise involving both EU officials and the candidate
country.
Eight days after screening began, the first Intergovernmental Conference, attended by the
deputy heads of delegations/chief negotiators, was held in Brussels during which principles and
procedures for accession negotiations were agreed upon and the initial working programme based
on the programme for screening of individual chapters of negotiations was discussed.
When we went to Brussels for 10 days for the first screening, we were just listening without being
aware of the complexities of transposing the acquis. We were trying to absorb all the info thrown
at us...But, there is no magic recipe. For us, it was about understanding the acquis, which cannot be
done in one reading. It is about understanding the language and also where the flexibilities are to
adapt it to Croatias situation.
Working Groups were smaller in the beginning of negotiations but grew over time as more and
more work came up. Working Groups for the Environment Chapter initially consisted of some 30
people, but eventually the group ended up with some 109 members from the relevant ministries
and other relevant governmental bodies/agencies, business sector, business associations, NGOs,
the Chamber of Commerce, and different Agencies. Major contributions were coming from line
ministries during the screening process. Officials overseeing the process explained that the idea
was to gather as many stakeholders as possible into the Working Group. This way, all relevant
actors were well informed of the reforms that needed to occur within their industry.
146
Vasile Puca
working group members went back to Zagreb full of impressions. The next step required them
to analyze how close Croatia was to the goal of harmonization with the acquis, and subsequently
prepare presentations with that information. All the collected findings were compiled into
presentations by the Croatians that were given during the second meetings of the screening process
conducted in May 2006, between 15th and the 19th, again in Brussels, with each of the candidate
countries separately. Therefore, during the bilateral meetings, the Croatian Delegation presented
a very thorough picture of the state of the country and explained the degree of preparedness of
the country and its plans with regard to the chapter in question. Overall, 89 people from Croatia
went to Brussels to present Croatias preparedness for negotiations of chapter 27. Around half
of the participants were coming from Croatian sectorial ministries involved in the environmental
sector, and the rest of the Croatian delegation was coming from different institutions such as the
Chamber of Commerce, Environmental Fund, NGOs and other institutions. In addition, the
representatives of the Mission of the Republic of Croatia to the EU attended the presentations.
During the four working days in Brussels around 40 presentations of the condition of Croatias
environment were given to 49 EU representatives, mainly coming from the Environment
Directorate-General, and 2 DG Enlargement representatives. The information gathered in these
meetings served as a basis for member states to decide on the opening of accession negotiations
on individual chapters.
Once a chapter has been screened, the Commission will, building on its recent Opinion on Croatia,
recommend opening it for negotiations, provided Croatia is sufficiently prepared.
However, in sectors such as waste management, the Screening Report acknowledged Croatias
efforts to align with EU standards but also stressed that serious work was yet to come:
In 2005 Croatia adopted the Waste Management Strategy, according to which 21 regional waste
management centers will be built until 2025. It also foresees the closure of all island landfills and transport
of waste collected there to the chosen ports. The Croatian authorities assessed that administrative structures
for the implementation of the Directive and inspection are established both at national and local level.
Croatia expects no problems with transposition of the remaining provisions of the Directive, however, some
difficulties in the implementation phase, due to high costs of investment needed (notably establishment of
waste management centers).
The assessment phase was of crucial importance for Croatia to understand the legislation it
needed to transpose and to plan the implementation of that legislation. Most legislation, however,
was drafted and passed or amended to better fit the acquis between 2006 and 2008. By July
2007, there were 26 pieces of legislation regulating the field of waste management, of which four
were in place before 2004, three of which were passed in 2004 and three in 2005. Then in 2006
and first months of 2007, some 12 pieces of legislation were passed and another four remained
in process, to be passed later that year. After screening was completed and the Screening Report
submitted, the decision on the opening of negotiations for individual chapters, depending on the
evaluated readiness of the candidate country, was made by the Member States within the Council
of the European Union. Within the Council, the Working Group for Enlargement discusses the
screening report and determines Croatias ability to begin formal negotiations. Representatives of
all member states sit at this working group. In this meeting, member states either make a decision
to open the chapters or set further benchmarks for opening of the chapter.
The next phase included the meeting of COREPER, which made the final decision on opening
chapters, or setting benchmarks. Following COREPER decision, the EU Presidency sent a
letter to Croatia, inviting them to prepare a negotiating position or present them with opening
benchmarks. Opening and closing benchmarks are new instruments designed by the EU that were
used for the first time during Croatias accession negotiations. Benchmarks ... aim at drawing a
candidate countrys attention to the most important reforms on the path to the full alignment with the acquis.
Benchmarks usually entail the adoption of new laws, strategies, action plans or fulfillment of obligations
deriving from the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA).
According to Croatian officials, this tremendously changed the mechanics of the process. There
148
Vasile Puca
were overall 127 benchmarks: 23 opening benchmarks in 11 chapters, and 104 closing benchmarks
in 31 chapters. For the Environment Chapter, there was one opening benchmark, communicated
to the Croatian Government on April 3, 2007, in a letter from the German EU Presidency:
Croatia should present to the Commission a comprehensive plan for putting in place the necessary
administrative capacity and required financial resources to implement the environment acquis with targets
and deadlines. This plan should be coherent with the process to complete the legislative alignment and the
start of implementation
The communicated benchmark sounded familiar to the Croats. This was an area that needed a lot
more work, to both coordinate the various levels of government and all the ministries involved
in environmental protection, but also to build the capacities needed to implement the new or
amended laws. The growing frustration was shown in Mira Medics account of their response:
The opening benchmark was imposed on us. We had no idea how to develop this... Maybe the EC had
an idea what they wanted this document to look like, but they did not tell us... So, we applied an educated
guess about how many people we need on different sectors. But we were not 100% correct. Our expressed
needs were too low.... Therefore, we asked each ministry to come up with their plans for staff and their
departments. And, this worked.
The result was an extensive 300-page document describing in detail administrative and financial
capacities within the environmental sector. By February 2008, the Croatian Government had
adopted this document titled Plan for Setting up Necessary Administrative Capacities at National,
Regional and Local Level and Required Financial Resources for Implementing the Acquis.
To illustrate the magnitude of the document and reorganization that was about to take place within
the Croatian environmental sector, let us look at their plan to improve the capacities of only one
segment of environment again, the waste management sector. Most of the responsibilities in the
field of environment, more specifically waste management, fell on the Ministry for Environmental
Protection, Physical Planning and Construction (MEPPPC): legislation, drafting waste management
strategy but also issuing permits for incineration of waste or hazardous waste management. Below
MEPPPC are counties and the City of Zagreb, as well as towns and municipalities. It is this
very local level that has to implement waste management legislation since waste collection and
management is done locally. MEPPPC also monitors two agencies that have played a key role
in Waste Management in Croatia, the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund
(EPEEF) and the Croatian Environmental Agency (CEA). Through the reorganization of the
MEPPPC, a Waste Sector was established within the Directorate for Environmental Management.
The Sector consists of the following departments: the Department for Waste Management and
Department for Plans and Projects. The Department for Waste Management had ten employees,
and the idea was to hire three more by 2009. The Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency
Fund had a staff of 27 on tasks related to waste management. The plan here was to increase this
number to 30 by 2009. One department that was found deficient of staff was the Environmental
Inspection Services. As a response, the Plan foresaw hiring 22 new personnel by 2008, which
would have been an increase of 35% from the baseline of 2006. This however proved problematic,
since due to the financial crisis in 2008, the Government of Croatia had adopted a decision to
stop recruitment. This was reversed a year later with another decision allowing the hiring of more
staff if it is for the purpose of meeting EU criteria. In May 2008, the European Commission sent
a team to verify the fulfillment of the opening benchmark for the Environment Chapter and in
June 2008, Croatia was invited to present its Negotiating Position.
After we fulfilled the opening benchmarks we started preparing our negotiating positions and then we
started negotiating.
Negotiating Position
By 2008, Croatia had a very good idea of where it stood and what it still needed to do in order
to meet criteria regarding the environment. During this phase, the subject of negotiations was
the conditions under which Croatia would adopt and implement the acquis communautaire in
the respective chapter, including transitional periods, which the candidate country might have
requested.
Starting the negotiations was a key turning point, because when you start something there is also an end.
Then, it is a process where you fulfill the requirements, systematically. Then, it is a matter of planning,
how and when to do this. This is what negotiations are about. It is not that you negotiate in a way that you
can change the Union no; you must change yourself. Finally, you negotiate the timing of such changes.
Accession negotiations mean making a time schedule for your reforms.
The negotiating position, prepared in line with the screening results for Chapter 27: Environment,
served as the basis for substantive negotiations. This 90page long document could have only been
drafted once an assessment of the situation was already done and there was detailed knowledge
150
Vasile Puca
about the field, including the administrative capacities, polluters, costs etc. As a candidate country,
Croatia was the first to present its negotiating position, which in short, gave a description of what
Croatia has done so far the various EU Directives and Regulations adopted and specified the
plan and mode of adoption and implementation of the acquis, along with a description of its
institutional capacity. The only thing, which was a true negotiating position, in the literal sense of
the word, was the request that Croatia put forward to obtain transitional periods for implementing
the most difficult and costly bits of EU legislation it had adopted. Croatia initially asked for 14
transitional periods and 2 requirements for technical adjustments: for Directive on the conservation
of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, and for Directive on the conservation of wild
birds. The longest transitional period requested by Croatia was within the water sector. Croatia
asked for a transitional period for the full implementation of Council Directive on Urban Waste
Water until December 31, 2030, which referred to the deadline for construction of sewerage and
wastewater treatment systems. The next longest transitional periods (until 2020) were asked for
full implementation or application of the three following directives:
The Negotiating Position was adopted by the Croatian Government on July 10, 2008 and
presented to the EU on July 11, 2008. Five months later, the EU Council presented its opening
Draft Common Position to Croatia.
However, despite Croatias efforts towards continuity in negotiations, and willingness to fulfill all
the imposed conditions, negotiations were held back from the end of 2008 until September 2009
due to the Slovenian border dispute.
Chapter 27 was not opened because of the Slovenian blockade. Informally, the Commission told us that
we fulfilled the opening benchmark and then they told us what our closing benchmarks would be, so we could
work on it. This enabled us to finalize negotiations in time.
Therefore, Croatia continued to prepare and conduct necessary reforms in the environmental
sector so as to be prepared once the arbitrary agreement of the border dispute between the
two ex-Yugoslav countries was resolved. Moreover, it explains how it was possible that some
conditions defined in the DCP, and formally given to Croatia in February 2010, were reported as
fulfilled in the draft of the Croatian Report on the Fulfillment of Obligations under Chapter 27
in March 2010.
To fully transpose the acquis and improve the specific sectors within the chapter, especially
water and industrial pollution control, Croatia adopted a vast number of laws and implementing
legislation, during 2008 and 2009. This enabled Croatia to fulfill the first three closing benchmarks.
In order to fulfill the final closing benchmark, Croatia actively kept on working to strengthen
environmental administrative capacities. Measures were taken at all administrative levels in line
with the Plan for Setting up Necessary Administrative Capacities at National, Regional and Local
Level and Required Financial Resources for Implementing the Acquis (2008). In this sense, most
152
Vasile Puca
ministries and specialized institutions/agencies were reorganized during 2008 and early 2009 for
the purpose of strengthening administrative capacities and effective enforcement of legislation
on environmental protection. On November 4, 2009, an Arbitration Agreement between Croatia
and Slovenia was finally signed in Stockholm by both countries prime ministers as well as the
President of the EU. This enabled Croatia to continue negotiations. With the border dispute
settled and having received the Croatian Negotiating Position in July of 2008, the Commission
adopted its Draft Common Position on February 18, 2010. The Commission discussed the DCP
with Croatia at the Accession.
Conclusion
The Environmental Chapter may have been complex and large in scope, but the benefits of
adopting the environmental acquis into national legislature is irrefutable: better public health,
less damage to natural resources, promotion of tourism, support for employment and benefits,
increased economic efficiency, and lastly, social benefits through greater learning and involvement.
According to Croatian officials, the point of the integration process was not to check off boxes
and appear aligned with the EU on paper, but rather the point was to push the country towards a
more functional and regulated system. Reforms may have been conditions for joining the EU, but:
these are things that we were doing for ourselves, not for the EU. Reforms should be carried out regardless
of the EU. The EU just came as an accelerator of the entire process.
The accession process is a learning process. Chief Negotiator Drobnjak gave an interview
recently for the Croatian daily Jutarnji List where he pointed out that over 3,000 people
were involved in the accession process from the Croatian side. And that
whoever went through this process from beginning to the end came out with far more knowledge of the EU
and with far more understanding of what the EU is. They all know more today than they knew in 2005.
ANNEXES
154
Vasile Puca
Greece has failed to fulfil its obligations of Council Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste
and of Directive 2006/12/EC on waste as well as of Council Directive 1999/31/EC on the
landfill of waste. Greece has failed to draw up a hazardous-waste management plan that accords
with the requirements of the Community legislation and to establish an integrated and adequate
network of disposal installations for hazardous waste, to fulfil obligations so far as concerns the
management and landfill of waste. (Judgement available in Greek and French)
Sector(s): Waste
ANNEXES 155
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
maximum levels for pesticide residues, Commission Directive 98/51/EC concerning arrangements
for approving and registering certain establishments and intermediaries operating in the animal
feed sector, and Commission Directive 98/67/EC
Article 228 proceedings have been commenced.
156
Vasile Puca
Total number of
Date New member states member states
23 July 1951 Germany, Belgium, France, Italy 6
1 January 1958 Luxemburg, Netherlands
Denmark, Ireland,
1 January 1973 9
United Kingdom
1 January 1981 Greece 10
1 January 1986 Spain, Portugal 12
3 October 1990 Ex-DDR (reunification of Germany) 12
1 January 1995 Austria, Finland, Sweden 15
Cyprus, Estonia\Hungary, Latvia
1 May 2004 Lithuania, Malta, Poland 25
Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia
1 January 2007 Romania, Bulgaria 27
1 July 2013 Croatia 28
ANNEXES 157
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Annex no.3
158
Vasile Puca
Annex no. 4 Adapting institutions for the implementation of the accession requirements (case
of Environment chapter)
At the same time, Romania faces new challenges as it prepares to join the European Union as
a full member, with membership now anticipated in 2007. Not surprisingly, change is rapid in a
transition period. Over a 28-month assistance period, the EPIQ team has witnessed many changes
in the Ministry and in government, many of them
resulting in significant effects on the EPIQ program and the nature of its assistance and
cooperation with counterparts. These implementation challenges and constraints are summarized
below. In later sections, these constraints are discussed in more detail in the context of their direct
implications for specific tasks.
ANNEXES 159
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
State Secretary positions were established. Notably, one of the new positions, State Secretary for
European Integration, signaled the importance and commitment of the new government to fulfill
its campaign promise and press for membership in the EU.
Prior to the reorganization, the EPIQ program.s main counterparts in the ministry were the
water and environmental protection departments. With the reorganization, emphasis in the EPIQ
program shifted to the departments tasked with preparation for EU accession. Another aspect
of the reorganization concerned the local environmental agencies at the judet level. Prior to the
reorganization, these agencies were autonomous entities. As noted earlier, EPIQ had pushed for
the introduction of a system of permitting fees that would enable the local agencies to .selffinance
. a major portion of their management costs.
However, through a movement to consolidate management authority, the local agencies were
subordinated to the Ministry and renamed environmental protection inspectorates. This change
also included concomitant obligation for the ministry to provide financial support for the
inspectorates. The effect of this consolidation on the EPIQ program was to shift the emphasis
of Activity 3 from support for the system of self-financing toward greater assistance for the
alignment of permitting and licensing
procedures with EU legislation (more discussion in Chapter 6).
In the beginning of 2002, Minister Ilie was appointed as the Romanian ambassador to the Republic
of Russia and replaced by Petru Lificiu, then State Secretary for European Integration. This change
resulted in a few minor changes in the ministry.s management structure but no reorganization
or shift in priorities or EPIQ.s counterparts. Nevertheless, over the course of the task order,
there were two changes in leadership and one major reorganization. Four out of five of EPIQ.s
counterparts (chairpersons for the three working groups) were changed during the task order.
160
Vasile Puca
The process of recruiting staff at the level of director was very slow in the ministry. Several
director positions were not filled for more than six months, including the position of Director for
the Economic Policy Department. Effectively, a department could not be considered operational
until its director was in place to recruit staff. As a result, the ministry was slow to recruit staff
with economics training. This hampered EPIQ.s plans to transfer knowledge and skills in certain
analytical areas to staff in the ministry. As part of its campaign promises, the new government
pledged to downsize government. This decision had an immediate effect on the inspectorates,
whose staff was decreased by more than 10%. This downsizing policy came at a time, however,
when EPIQ perceived that the ministry needed to expand its analytical capacity to deal with
the preparations for negotiations with the EU. In the next few years, the ministry will also need
to rebuild staffs at the environmental protection inspectorates to administer the body of EU
environmental legislation.
The mix of skills and staffing shortages in the ministry has had a profound effect on the
relationship between the EPIQ team and ministry staff. The ministry has utilized the EPIQ team
more as a specialized staff than as advisors, relying on EPIQ to conduct economic and financial
analyses, draft legislation, and prepare procedures, guidelines, and manuals; in effect, to plug gaps
in the ministry.s skill set.
Beginning in 2000, the Government.s legislative reform and strategic planning agenda shifted
to the transposition and implementation of EU legislation. For MWEP, this effort focused on
implementation of the environmental acquis communautaire. The key document in this effort was
the Position Document for the Environment Chapter, which outlined the intent and timetable for
transposing and implementing EU environmental directives.
In the work plan, the EPIQ program had been structured around the theme of sustaining
institutions and financing for environment through the elaboration of realistic strategies and
policies. With the ministry focusing considerable attention on the EU accession process and the
start-up of negotiations with the EU, EPIQ was requested to more closely align its assistance
efforts to the preparation of analysis, documentation, and legislation in support of the Position
Document and other materials needed for negotiations. In addition, EPIQ concentrated a
considerable amount of its resources on the solid waste sector, as this sector was established as
the first priority in EU negotiations.
Source: Final Report Romania Environmental Policy and Institutional Restructuring, august 2003
<Internet source [www.irgltd.com/.../2003-08%20Romania%...]>
ANNEXES 161
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
162
Vasile Puca
It is to be mentioned the fact that at the base of the actions of Chief Negotiator was the
reason of realization and the reason of self-overcome. It is important to be mentioned, also,
that the actions with social value, which imply responsibility, realization, coherency and
balance, and future interactions are the ones which motivated the Chief Negotiator.
From emotional idiosyncrasies were identified positive emotions (happiness, desire,
hope, etc.) and negative emotions (sadness, discomfort, anger, etc.).
Regarding the leadership style used by the Romanian Chief Negotiator, he was
a goals motivated leader (Romanias accession to the EU), focused on problems
solving, oriented to mission, hardly changing his position or ideology. If we
take as reference point the four leadership style realized by Hermann (2001), the
Romanian Chief Negotiator belong to strategic style, th one which confronts the
constrains, but opened to information. This type of leader knows what he wants
and he will search pertinent information to reach his goals. He is courageous, but
advised when it comes about quality, in these ambitious aspirations (Romanias
accession to the EU). The strategic leader, Romanian Chief Negotiator, in
motivational reasons, belonged to the charismatic leader, focused on relations,
determining others to act. By synthetized the three dimensions, we have in the
person of Romanian Chief Negotiator, a goal-oriented leader. Adept of the
Rational Actor model of decision, the presence of rational verbal indicators shows
an attempt to decrease the influence of idiosyncrasies, but this isnt realized in a
conscious manner. By his profession, by the presence of cognitive idiosyncrasy
of learning by analogy, the Romanian Chief Negotiator belongs to this category.
After the classification of R.W. Miller and J.B. Miller, it was appreciated that Romanian
Chief Negotiator, belonged to transformational type (a new accession strategy, with a new
dynamics), with charismatic and collaborative type.
The four identified categories of idiosyncrasies, especially beliefs and reasons
framed the world vision of Romanian Chief Negotiator. In this case, it could
be appreciated that Chief Negotiator was a fine connoisseur of realities of
international relations field, mainly the external context where the process of
accession negotiations were developed, fact that explains why he was oriented to
the framing of internal and external negotiation environment and to the principle
of transparency.
It could be appreciated that in the decisional process of Romanias accession to the EU
there were influential idiosyncrasies: cognitive, social perception, motivational and
emotional.
ANNEXES 163
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Annex no. 6 The Institutional Structure of EU Accession Negotiation (source: Puca, 2006, p. 201)
164
Vasile Puca
Chapter 1
Free Movement of Goods
Derogation/Transitional Period
A transitional period until 31 December 2007 for the revision of documentation required for the
renewal of marketing authorizations for those pharmaceuticals for human use listed in CONF-SI
4/01 - deviation from Directive 2001/83 ES.
Chapter 2
Movement of Persons
Derogation/Transitional Period
Transitional period of the EU in respect to free movement of workers. The EU Member States
may maintain national measures (the same regime regarding employment of Slovene nationals as
currently in place) for two years after Slovenias accession. After two years, the Council makes a
review on the basis of the Commissions report. Only the Member States which explicitly announce
that they would like to maintain the national provisions may do so for another three years.
In the event that any Member State continues to apply the national measures, Slovenia may in
this period require another review of the Council. After five years, a transitional period may be
prolonged for the maximum of two years only by the Member States which explicitly require
prolongation in the case of serious disturbances of the labour market or threat thereof.
Any current Member State which has decided not to apply the transitional period may invoke a
safeguard clause (in case of serious disturbances of the labour market or threat thereof) until the
end of the seventh year following Slovenias accession. Slovenia may apply to nationals from
current Member States the national measures equivalent to the measures applied by that Member
Chapter 3
Freedom to Provide Services
Derogation/Transitional Period
A transitional period until 31 December 2004 for the application of capital adequacy requirements
and the requirements concerning prudent management as set out in Second Banking Directive
89/646/EEC, and Directives 86/635/EEC, 89/299/EEC, 89/647/EEC, 92/121/EEC, 94/19/
EC for the savings and loan undertakings that were established before 20 February 1999. The
institutions in question cannot benefit from the European passport for operating in the single
market during this period.
ANNEXES 165
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Chapter 4
Free Movement of Capital
Derogation/Transitional Period
Safeguard clause until 1 May 2001 for restricting real estate trade. In the event of serious
disturbances in the real estate market in the period from Slovenias accession to 1 May 2011,
Slovenia may require of the European Commission to approve safeguard measures necessary for
eliminating such disturbances.
Chapter 7
Agriculture
Derogation/Transitional Period
Transitional period for the existing facilities for laying hens in battery cages:
-until 1 January 2004 concerning the minimum cage floor area for laying hens (Directive 1999/74/
EC)-until 31 December 2009 concerning cage construction (Directive 1999/74/EC)
A 5-year transitional period for payment of state aid in the form of area payments for the
production of oil pumpkins.
A 5-year transitional period upon accession to the EU for marketing on the territory of the
Republic of Slovenia the seeds and propagating material of some varieties of agricultural plant
species and vegetable plant species which do not meet the requirements of Directives 2002/53/
EC and 2002/55/EC or it had not been checked before entry into the national list of varieties
whether they meet these requirements. The Republic of Slovenia requests that, within a 5-year
transitional period upon accession to the EU, it would be allowed to postpone the application
on its territory of Directives 2002/53/EC and 2002/55/EC with regard to the marketing on its
territory of seeds and propagating material of those varieties listed in its national list of varieties
which have not been accepted in accordance with all the provisions of these Directives.
166
Vasile Puca
Regarding the provisions prohibiting the blending of white and red grape varieties (Council
Regulation 822/87/EEC) and provisions on minimum alcoholic strength by volume in wine
(Council Regulation 822/87/EEC, Articles 8 and 70), the blending of white and red grape varieties
is allowed for cvicek PTP wine a recognised traditional denomination (permanent derogation
for Slovenia). Its minimum alcoholic strength by volume is defined at 8.5%. This enables the
production, selling and drinking of the traditional wine cvicek, which otherwise does not comply
with the acquis.
Chapter 10
Taxation
Derogation/Transitional Period
Derogations from Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC concerning the application of a reduced
value-added tax rate for goods and services concerning consumer goods in a broader sense, or
being significant for the maintenance of national identity:
a) Preparation of meals
A transitional period concerning the application of a reduced value-added tax rate for the
preparation of meals in the period until 31 December 2007 or until the end of the transitional
period referred to in Article 28 (1) of the Sixth VAT Directive, whichever date comes first. A
declaration will be added to the Accession Treaty stating that if the transitional period referred to
in Article 28(l) of the Sixth VAT Directive does not end by mid 2007 and the relevant legislative
proposal for its termination is not at such stage to allow the termination of the said transitional
period by the end of 2007, it will request a report from the Commission to the Council on the
functioning of the transitional period granted to Slovenia. This report will have to take into account
the impact on proper functioning of the Internal market and possible adverse consequences for
Slovenian restaurant sector, in particular job losses, an increase in undeclared employment, and
the impact of price increases of restaurant services on the final consumer. Upon the expiration of
transitional period, Slovenia will introduce the standard rate in one step.
b) Construction, renovation and maintenance of all housing facilities and special buildings for the
accommodation for the disabled
A transitional period concerning the application of a reduced value-added tax rate until 31
December 2007
c) A transitional period for the preservation of derogation, in accordance with which Slovenia does not apply
ANNEXES 167
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
VAT to the services of international and intra-community transport of passengers in maritime, air and
railroad transport
This transitional period is a derogation and applies until the Council abolishes the derogation set
out in Article 28 (3) (b) of the Sixth VAT Directive in accordance with the procedure in Article
28(4) of that Directive, or so long as the same derogation is applied to any of the current Member
States, whichever date comes first.
A derogation from the provisions of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC concerning the ceiling
below which taxable persons are allowed to apply simplified procedures (special scheme) for
charging value-added tax. Slovenia retains the existing legislation which sets this ceiling at SIT 5
million (the equivalent of around EUR 25,000 at the time of negotiations) for the annual turnover
of goods and services and a ceiling of SIT 1.5 million (the equivalent of around EUR 7,500 at
the time of negotiations) in agriculture and forestry. The principle applies that exemptions do
not dispense from the general obligations, in particular in the case of SMEs involved in intra-
Community trade (including Article 9(2) transactions). Slovenia must take the necessary step to
ensure that any exemption has no adverse effects on the European Communities own resources
accruing from VAT, the basis of assessment for which must be reconstituted in accordance with
Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/98.
A transitional period for gradual alignment of the level of excise duty on cigarettes stipulated
under the new Directive on the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactures tobacco
within the maximum deadline applying to current Member States (until 31.12. 2007).
Chapter 13
Social policy and employment
Derogation/Transitional Period
Derogations from Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC concerning the application of a reduced
A three year transitional period in the area of health and safety at work with biological, physical
and chemical agents (Directives 86/188/EEC, 91/322/EEC, 98/24/EC, 2000/93/EC and
2000/54/EC) On the understanding that all the undertakings that would not fully comply with the
acquis by that date will abandon manufacturing operations, and under the following conditions:
-Slovenia will adhere to its transposition and implementation timetable;
-all Directives in respect of which the transitional periods are requested were transposed by 31
December 2001;
-between now and the end of the transitional period, Slovenia will continue to provide regularly
168
Vasile Puca
updated information on the timetable and the measures taken to ensure compliance with each
Directive.
Chapter 14
Energy
Derogation/Transitional Period
A three year transitional period in the area of health and safety at work with biological, physical and
chemical agents (Directives 86/188/EEC, 91/322/EEC, 98/24/EC, 2000/93/EC and 2000/54/
EC) On the understanding that all the undertakings that would not fully comply with the acquis by
that date will abandon manufacturing operations, and under the following conditions:
-Slovenia will adhere to its transposition and implementation timetable;
- all Directives in respect of which the transitional periods are requested were transposed by 31
December 2001;
- between now and the end of the transitional period, Slovenia will continue to provide regularly
updated information on the timetable and the measures taken to ensure compliance with each
Directive.
A transitional period in the area of oil and security of supply until 31 December 2005 concerning
the 90-day stocks of oil (Council Directive 68/414/EEC and 98/93/EC). Slovenia will gradually
increase its stocks of oil from 66-day stocks as of the day of accession, to 75-day stocks as of 31
December 2004 and to 90-day stocks as of 31 December 2005.
Chapter 22
Environment
Derogation/Transitional Period
A five-year transitional period in area of Waste management - Packaging and packaging waste until
31 December 2007 and the overall recovery rate until 31 December 2007 in accordance with the
progression of recovery and recycling targets.
A transitional measure in the area Urban waste waters with the following intermediate targets:
- as from 31 December 2008, collecting systems and treatment has to be provided in sensitive
areas in line with Articles 3 and 5 of Directive 91/271/EEC;
- as from 31 December 2010, collecting systems and treatment in line with Articles 3 and 5 of
Directive 91/271/EEC has to be provided in agglomerations with a popular equivalent of more
ANNEXES 169
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
than 15 000;
- as from 31 December 2015, collecting systems and treatment in line with Articles 3 and 5
of Directive 91/271/EEC has to be provided in agglomerations with a population equivalent
between 2 000 and 15 000.
A transitional period in the area of Integral pollution prevention and control - IPPC in the part relating
to existing installations until 30 October 2011 to the installations listed by Slovenia under the
following conditions:
- fully co-ordinated permits will be issued for these installations before 30 October 2007, containing
individually binding timetables for the achievement of full compliance;
- the general principles governing the basic obligations of the operators as set out in Article 3
of Directive 96/61/EC will be complied with by October 2007, due account will be given to
the environmentally sound treatment and disposal of waste in these installations. (a four-year
transitional period as of the date which applies for the existing installations in the EU Member
States - 30 September 2007).
170
Vasile Puca
Chapter 1
Free movement of goods
Derogation/Transitional Period
Market authorisations for medicinal products granted before accession have to be upgraded to
comply with the level of quality, efficacy and safety in accordance with the Directive. Croatia will
have to complete this upgrading of marketing authorisations and documentation for medicinal
productsat the latest 4 years after the date of accession.
About
The principle of the free movement of goods implies that products must be traded freely from
one part of the Union to another. In a number of sectors this general principle is complemented
by a harmonised regulatory framework, following the old approach (imposing precise
product specifications) or the new approach (imposing general product requirements). The
harmonised European product legislation, which needs to be transposed, represents the largest
part of the acquis under this chapter. In addition, sufficient administrative capacity is essential
to notify restrictions on trade and to apply horizontal and procedural measures in areas such as
standardisation, conformity assessment, accreditation, metrology and market surveillance.
Chapter 2
Freedom of movement for workers
Derogation/Transitional Period
- a two year period during which national measures will be applied by current Member States
to Croatia. Depending on how liberal these national measures are, they may result in full labour
market access;
- after this period, reviews will be held: one automatic review before the end of the second year
after accession and a further review at the request of Croatia. The procedure includes a report by
the Commission, but leaves the decision on whether to apply the acquis up to the current Member
States;
- the transitional arrangement should in principle come to an end after five years, but may be
prolonged for a further two years in those current Member States where there would be serious
disturbances of the labor market or a threat of such disruption;
- safeguards may be applied by Member States up to the end of the seventh year.
- Furthermore a standstill clause will apply, whereby current Member State labor markets cannot
be more restricted than that prevailing at the time of the signature of the Accession Treaty. Current
ANNEXES 171
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Member States must give preference to Croatian nationals over non-EU labor.
- Austria and Germany have the right to apply flanking national measures to address serious
disturbances or the threat thereof, in specific sensitive service sectors on their labor markets,
which could arise in certain regions from transnational provision of services.
- Under the transitional arrangements the rights of Croatian nationals who are already legally
resident and employed in a current Member State are protected. The rights of family members are
also taken into account consistent with the practice in the case of previous accessions.
- On the basis of reciprocity, Croatia may apply restrictions equivalent to the national measures
applied by the respective Member State.
About
The acquis under this chapter provides that EU citizens of one Member State have the right to
work in another Member State. EU migrant workers must be treated in the same way as national
workers in relation to working conditions, social and tax advantages. This acquis also includes a
mechanism to coordinate national social security provisions for insured persons and their family
members moving to another Member State.
Chapter 4
Free Movement of Capital
Derogation/Transitional Period
Croatia may maintain certain restrictions on the acquisition of agricultural land by EU/EEA
nationals for 7 years from the date of accession, with the possibility of a 3-year extension. This
extension may be limited to selected geographical areas particularly affected.
- Restrictions on the acquisition of real estate, with 3rd countries, which existed in Croatia on 31
December 2002, may be maintained.
About
Member States must remove, with some exceptions, all restrictions on movement of capital both
within the EU and between Member States and third countries. The acquis also includes rules
concerning cross-border payments and the execution of transfer orders concerning securities. The
directive on the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing requires banks and other
economic operators, particularly when dealing in high-value items and with large cash transactions,
to identify customers and report certain transactions. A key requirement to combat financial
crime is the creation of effective administrative and enforcement capacity, including co-operation
between supervisory, law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities. Chapter 7
Intellectual property law
Derogation/Transitional Period
172
Vasile Puca
- Community trademarks and designs registered in Member States before the date of accession
shall be extended to the territory of Croatia on the day of accession, in order to ensure equal effect
throughout the Community.
- Supplementary protection certificates (SPC) for medicinal and for plant protection products
will be applicable to any medicinal or plant protection product which, on the date of Croatias
accession, is protected by a valid basic patent and for which the first marketing authorization
was obtained after 1 January 2003 provided that an application for a certificate will have to be
submitted within six months from the date of Croatias accession.
- Croatia has agreed to set up a specific mechanism to protect the rights granted by a patent or an
SPC for a pharmaceutical product filed in a Member State at the time when such protection could
not be obtained in Croatia for that product.
- According to this mechanism, the holder, or his beneficiary, may rely on the rights granted by that
patent or SPC in order to prevent the import and marketing of that product in the Member State or
States where the product in question enjoys patent or SPC protection, even if this product was put
on the market in Croatia for the first time by him or with his consent (in practice the mechanism
protects EU patent-holders from so-called parallel import of medicines from Croatia if prices
of this medicine are lower in Croatia than in Member States). Such a specific mechanism was also
granted during the 5th enlargement.
About
The acquis on intellectual property rights specifies harmonized rules for the legal protection of
copyright and related rights. Specific provisions apply to the protection of databases, computer
programs, semiconductor topographies, satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission. In the
field of industrial property rights, the acquis sets out harmonized rules for the legal protection
of trademarks and designs. Other specific provisions apply for biotechnological inventions,
pharmaceuticals and plant protection products. The acquis also establishes a Community trademark
and Community design. Finally, the acquis contains harmonized rules for the enforcement of
both copyright and related rights as well as industrial property rights. Adequate implementing
mechanisms are required, in particular effective enforcement capacity. - Restrictions on the
acquisition of real estate, with 3rd countries, which existed in Croatia on 31 December 2002, may
be maintained.
Chapter 8
Competition policy
Derogation/Transitional Period
- Regarding the shipbuilding sector, the restructuring and privatization of the shipyards in
ANNEXES 173
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
difficulties shall be carried out in compliance with the conditions agreed with the EU. Upon
accession, the Commission will be empowered to order Croatia to recover the restructuring aid
granted since 2006 to the yards in difficulty, which have not respected these conditions. In addition,
Croatia will have to report regularly.
- On steel, upon accession, the Commission will be empowered to order Croatia to recover the
state aid granted to CMC Sisak if the company has not reimbursed them by the date of accession.
About
The competition acquis covers both anti-trust and state aid control policies. It includes rules and
procedures:
-to fight anti-competitive behavior by companies (restrictive agreements between undertakings
and abuse of dominant position);
-to scrutinize mergers between undertakings;
- to prevent governments from granting state aid which distorts competition in the internal market;
Generally, the competition rules are directly applicable in the whole Union, and Member States
must co-operate fully with the Commission in enforcing them.
Chapter 11
Agriculture and rural development
Derogation/Transitional Period
1)Horizontal issues
Direct payments
Direct payments in Croatia will be phased in over a period of ten years starting at 25% of the EU
direct payments in the first year of accession, 30% in the second, 35% in the third and 40% in fifth
year of accession and thereafter in 10 % increments (see chapter 33).
The total national envelop for direct payments per year for Croatia is EUR 373 million.
In addition, and during a period of 10 years, Croatia will receive EUR 9.6 million annually of
direct payments for de-mined land on the condition that this land is used for agricultural activities.
Complementary national direct payments Croatia can complement direct payments up to 100
% of the level of direct payments in the EU which have to be financed from the national
budget. However, during 2014, 2015 and 2016, Croatia can use up to 20% of its annual rural
development funds to finance complementary national direct payments. The contribution from
rural development funds is limited to the difference between: a) the level of direct payments
applicable in Croatia for the year concerned, and b) 45% of the level of direct payments applicable
in the EU.
After accession, Croatia will have the possibility to grant coupled direct payments for suckler cows
174
Vasile Puca
(max. 105,270 head) and sheep and goats (max. 542,651 head).
The minimum level for receiving direct payments by beneficiaries is EUR 100.
3) Rural development
In 2013, Croatia will benefit from a full year allocation under the Instrument for pre-accession for
rural development (IPARD).
In the next programming period for rural development 2014 -2020, Croatia can:
- grant a special support for semi-subsistence agricultural holdings as well as a special support to
facilitate the setting up of producer groups.
- apply a minimum contribution from rural development funds to LEADER which is half of
the contribution applicable to the other Member States (if such a requirement is set in the rural
development program 2014-2020).
- support up to 75% of the costs of investments by agricultural holdings which are intended to
improve the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources
(Nitrate Directive) during a period of four years as of accession.
4) Quality policy
Croatia can continue, for 12 months after accession, the national protection of geographical
indications and designations of origin for agricultural products existing at national level on the
day of accession.
-to scrutinize mergers between undertakings;
- to prevent governments from granting state aid which distorts competition in the internal market;
Generally, the competition rules are directly applicable in the whole Union, and Member States
must co-operate fully with the Commission in enforcing them.
ANNEXES 175
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
About
The agriculture chapter covers a large number of binding rules, many of which are directly
applicable. The proper application of these rules and their effective enforcement and control by an
efficient public administration are essential for the functioning of the common agricultural policy
(CAP). Running the CAP requires the setting up of management and quality systems such as a
paying agency and the integrated administration and control system (IACS), and the capacity to
implement rural development measures. Member States must be able to apply the EU legislation
on direct farm support schemes and to implement the common market organizations for various
agricultural products.
Chapter 12
Food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy
Derogation/Transitional Period
- Laying hens:
Laying production cycles that started before the day of accession in cages which are not compliant
with EU standards can be continued in these cages for a period of maximum 12 months after
accession. Eggs from such cages have to be identified with a special mark and can only be placed
on the Croatian market.
-Establishments:
Croatia has been granted a transitional period until 31 December 2015 for establishments in the
meat, milk, fish and animal by-products sectors in order to meet structural EU standards (EU
standards on hygiene requirements have to be fully respected). Products from such noncompliant
establishments have to be identified with a special health mark and can only be placed on Croatian
market and on markets of third countries.
- Quality of seeds and propagating material:
Croatia has been granted a transitional period until 31 December 2014 with regard to the marketing
of certain varieties of beets, cereals, oil and fiber plants, fodder plants, vegetables and seed potatoes
which have not passed yet the Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) examinations. Such
plants and seeds may not be marketed in the territory of other Member States.
-Special regime for the Neum corridor:
Products of animal origin coming from Croatia and transiting through the territory of Bosnia
and Herzegovina at Neum (Neum corridor) before re-entering Croatia via Klek or Zaton Doli,
may be exempted from the required veterinary checks. Croatia has to have fully equipped and
staffed points of entry to the north and south of the corridor in place as well as effective technical
surveillance systems to ensure efficient controls. Consignments must not be transported in open
176
Vasile Puca
vehicles via the Neum corridor and the vehicles have to be properly sealed. The transit of live
animals with the exception of pet animals through the Neum corridor is prohibited.
About
This chapter covers detailed rules in the area of food safety. The general foodstuffs policy sets
hygiene rules for foodstuff production. Furthermore, the acquis provides detailed rules in the
veterinary field, which are essential for safeguarding animal health, animal welfare and safety of
food of animal origin in the internal market. In the phytosanitary field, EU rules cover issues such
as quality of seed, plant protection material, harmful organisms and animal nutrition.
Chapter 13
Fisheries policy
Derogation/Transitional Period
- Croatian fishermen may continue to use bottom trawls in waters on depths less than 50 meters
at the minimum distance of 1.5 nautical miles from the coast until 30 June 2014. The vessels must
be registered and operate in the Western Istria region determined from the point with geographic
coordinates =44.52135 and =14.29244 with a line due north and a line due west. During the
same period and for all vessels of less than 15 meters length overall, bottom trawls may be used in
waters over 50 meters deep at a minimum distance of 1 nautical mile from the coast on condition
that all other spatial and temporal restrictions Croatia currently applies are maintained.
- The specific category of non-commercial fisheries (subsistence fishermen), i.e. the small scale
artisanal fishing for personal use needs to be phased out by 31 December 2014.
- For investments of all sizes of companies supported from the European Fisheries Funds on the
islands Mljet, Vis, Dugi otok and Lastov, a higher co-finance rate (of max. 85%) can be applied.
- Based on existing bilateral agreement between Slovenia and Croatia, a limited mutual access to
the coastal waters of the other country has been agreed between Croatia and Slovenia. The mutual
access rights will apply as of the full implementation of the arbitration award resulting from the
Arbitration Agreement between Slovenia and Croatia, signed in Stockholm on 4 November 2009.
About
The acquis on fisheries consists of regulations, which do not require transposition into national
legislation. However, it requires the introduction of measures to prepare the administration and
the operators for participation in the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The scope, the objectives
and the principles of the CFP are laid down in a framework regulation (Council Regulation (EC)
N 2371/2002). The CFP provides rules for the conservation of living aquatic resources, the
limitation of the environmental impact of fisheries, conditions of access to waters and resources,
structural policy and the management of the fleet capacity, control and enforcement, aquaculture,
ANNEXES 177
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
common organization of the market and international relations. The CFP is based on sound
scientific advice and provides a framework for data collection.
Chapter 14
Transport Policy
Derogation/Transitional Period
- For road transport, for the first 2 years following the accession of Croatia, transport companies
established in Croatia will be excluded from operating transport services exclusively within the
borders of the other Member States (cabotage), and operators established in the other Member
States are excluded from providing such services in Croatia. This transitional period can be
extended by a maximum of 2 additional years.
- In the area of maritime transport and with regard to the freedom to provide services within
Member States (maritime cabotage), public service contracts concluded before the date of
accession may continue to apply until 31 December 2016.
- Furthermore, until the end of 2014 cruise services carried out between Croatian ports by ships
smaller than 650 gross tons shall be reserved to ships registered in, or flying the flag of Croatia,
which are operated by Croatian shipping companies. In turn, until the same date, the Commission
may, upon a substantiated request by a Member State, decide that ships benefiting from this
derogation shall not carry out cruise services between ports of certain areas of a Member State
other than Croatia in case of serious disturbances of the internal transport market caused by such
operations in the areas concerned.
About
EU transport legislation aims at improving the functioning of the internal market by promoting
safe, efficient and environmentally sound and user-friendly transport services. The transport acquis
covers the sectors of road transport, railways, inland waterways, combined transport, aviation, and
maritime transport. It relates to technical and safety standards, security, social standards, state aid
control and market liberalization in the context of the internal transport market.
Chapter 16
Taxation
Derogation/Transitional Period
Croatia has committed itself to accept and comply with the principles of the Code of Conduct
for Business Taxation.
Transitional arrangements and two derogations are granted to Croatia in the field of indirect
taxation (VAT and excise duties).
178
Vasile Puca
-VAT Croatia is allowed to apply under certain circumstances a lower VAT exemption and
registration threshold for taxpayers of the equivalent of 35,000 in national currency without
any time limitation and to continue exempting international transport of passengers from VAT,
with the right to input tax deduction. Croatia is granted a transitional period until 31 December
2014 to exempt from VAT the supply of building land, with or without buildings built on it.
In consequence, the right of deduction of input tax on goods and services used as inputs in
the course of construction of buildings on the building land, will remain unchanged during the
transitional period and the current system of full right of input tax deduction applied in Croatia
for all the supplies related to the construction of buildings on building land is maintained.
-Excise Duties
Croatia has been granted a transitional arrangement to apply, until 31 December 2017, lower
excise duties on cigarettes than the minimum level set in the acquis.
About
The acquis on taxation covers extensively the area of indirect taxation, namely value-added tax
(VAT) and excise duties. It lays down the scope, definitions and principles of VAT.
Excise duties on tobacco products, alcoholic beverages and energy products are also subject to
EU legislation. As concerns direct taxation, the acquis covers some aspects of taxing income
from savings of individuals and of corporate taxes. Furthermore, Member States are committed
to complying with the principles of the Code of Conduct for Business Taxation, aimed at the
elimination of harmful tax measures. Administrative co-operation and mutual assistance between
Member States is aimed at ensuring a smooth functioning of the internal market as concerns
taxation and provides tools to prevent intra-Community tax evasion and tax avoidance. Member
States must ensure that the necessary implementing and enforcement capacities, including links to
the relevant EU computerized taxation systems, are in place.
Chapter 22
Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments
Derogation/Transitional Period
In order to ensure continuation of the ongoing multiannual operational programs under pre-
accession assistance (IPA component III and IV) after accession these programs will be considered
as programs adopted under Structural Fund/Cohesion Fund regulations. Negotiations focused
on the legislative and institutional framework, administrative capacity, programming, monitoring
and evaluation, financial management and control, eligibility and financial issues.
Croatia has been granted an extension of the eligibility end date and the deadline for automatic
de-commitment to the 31 December of the third year following the year of the annual budget
ANNEXES 179
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
commitment under its operational programs adopted under the current Structural Funds
Regulation. In line with this, other relevant provisions of the acquis (e.g. on closure of the
operational program, submission of reports) and the respective reference dates have been adapted
accordingly.
-Institutional framework
Croatia has formally designed institutional structures for the implementation of cohesion policy as
established and confirmed by Government Decision on the Strategic Documents and Institutional
Framework for the Utilization of the Structural Instruments in October 2010.
Croatias institutional framework for the implementation of EU cohesion policy builds directly
on the existing implementation structures for relevant IPA components. Croatia has adopted
Organizational Development Strategies for horizontal bodies and one per each of the operational
programs. In view of a smooth transition from IPA to Cohesion Policy, the EU will closely
monitor Croatias full and timely implementation of the government decisions related to building
up and strengthening administrative capacity and Croatias progress in bringing the capacity of all
the managing authorities, intermediate bodies and other relevant bodies to the required level in
good time before accession.
-Eligibility
All of Croatias 3 level 2 regions shall be eligible for assistance under the Convergence objective.
From the date of accession, Croatia will also be eligible for Cohesion Fund assistance.
From the date of accession, all level 3 areas along Croatias land borders and all level 3 maritime
border areas shall be eligible areas for cross-border cooperation under the European territorial
cooperation objective. All of Croatias statistical regions at level 2 will be included in a joint or
in separate groupings of regions for the purpose of transnational cooperation and the whole of
Croatias territory shall be eligible for interregional cooperation.
-Financial issues
Before any payment by the European Commission (for pre-financing or interim payments) is
made, Croatia submits to the Commission a description of the management and control systems.
The description of the implementation systems shall be accompanied by a report setting out the
results of an assessment of the systems set up and giving an opinion on their compliance with
relevant provisions of the acquis. The acceptance by the Commission of this report is a pre-
requisite for the pre-financing amount.
About
The acquis under this chapter consists of framework and implementing regulations, which do not
require transposition into national legislation. They define the rules for drawing up, approving and
implementing Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund programs reflecting each countrys territorial
180
Vasile Puca
organization. These programs are negotiated and agreed with the Commission, but implementation
is the responsibility of the Member States. Member States must respect EU legislation in general,
for example in the areas of public procurement, competition and environment, when selecting and
implementing projects. Member States must have an institutional framework in place and adequate
administrative capacity to ensure programming, implementation, monitoring and evaluation in a
sound and cost-effective manner from the point of view of management and financial control.
Chapter 27
Environment
Derogation/Transitional Period
- Horizontal legislation / climate change:
- Croatia will join the EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS) not before 1 January 2013,
when the third trading period of the EU ETS starts.
- Croatia will join the EU ETS for aviation activities as of 1 January 2014.
- Linked to the above, Croatia will join the standardized and secured system of registries foreseen
under the EU ETS on these dates.
- Croatia will have a percentage of 26% added to the annex of the EU ETS Directive, being
the increase in the percentage of allowances to be auctioned for the purpose of Community
solidarity and growth in order to reduce emissions and adapt to the effect of climate change.
These calculations are based on the provision that the community-wide quantity of allowances
as a result of the accession of Croatia will only be increased by the quantity of allowances that
Croatia shall auction.
- Air Quality:
- Croatia needs to set an exposure reduction target and an average exposure indicator for the
air pollutant PM 2,5. The reference year is the second year after the end of the year of Croatias
accession. The average exposure indicator for that reference year shall be the average concentration
of the year of accession and the first and the second year after accession. The exposure reduction
target shall then be calculated in relation to the average exposure indicator in that reference year.
- Waste Management:
- One transitional period has been granted until 1 January 2019 for Croatia to bring its landfills for
waste in compliance with the acquis requirements.
- A second derogation was granted until 1 January 2021, with intermediate deadlines of 1 January
2014 and 2017 in order to reduce the amount of biodegradable waste going into landfills.
- Water Quality:
- Croatia has a transitional period until 1 January 2024, with intermediate deadlines with intermediate
ANNEXES 181
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
targets of 1 January 2019 and 1 January 2021, to bring its treatment systems in line with the acquis
requirements as regards urban waste water.
- A second derogation until 1 January 2019 was granted during which Croatia will have to reach
certain parameters for drinking water.
- Industrial Pollution and Risk Management:
- For integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC), where installations have to reduce their
emissions of pollutants: the latest date to bring about compliance, with intermediate deadlines, is
1 January 2018. A total of 67 installations is concerned.
- Eleven large combustion plants have been granted a derogation to reduce their emissions until
1 January 2018.
- Emissions of volatile organic compounds need to be reduced for a specified list of installations
until 1 January 2016, with several intermediate deadlines. Also, the obligation for the operator
to demonstrate to that the best available techniques are being used shall for coating processes in
shipbuilding with regard to certain installations in Croatia apply only as from 1 January 2016.
The lists of installations for which these derogations hold are put into the treaty.
- Chemicals:
- For the regulation on registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemicals (REACH),
Croatia will have a maximum of six months upon accession to adapt to the registration obligation
for non-phase-in substances and to the deadlines for pre-registration of phase-in substances, 12
months upon accession for the registration of pre-registered phase-in substances and at least
6 months upon accession for sending applications for authorizations of substances on the
authorization list.
About
EU environment and climate change policies aim to promote sustainable development, shift to
a low carbon and resource efficient economy and protection of the environment for present
and future generations. Key principles are preventive action, the polluter pays principle, fighting
environmental damage at source, shared responsibility and the integration of environmental
and climate considerations into other EU policies. The acquis comprises over 200 legal
acts covering horizontal legislation (including climate change), water and air quality, waste
management, nature protection, industrial pollution control and risk management, chemicals,
noise and civil protection. Compliance with the acquis requires significant investment. A strong
and well-equipped administration at national and local level is imperative for the application and
enforcement of the acquis.
182
Vasile Puca
Chapter 29
Customs union
Derogation/Transitional Period
- provisions ensuring continued validity after accession of proof of origin issued before accession
in the framework of preferential agreements concluded by Croatia with third countries. Such a
measure is necessary in order to respect the legitimate expectations of operators;
- provisions applicable upon discharge of certain economic regimes (customs warehousing,
inward processing, outward processing, processing under customs control and temporary
importation).
- provisions concerning remission, recovery and repayment of duties. Such provisions are
necessary for the proper management of the resources.
About
The customs union acquis consists almost exclusively of legislation which is directly binding
on the Member States. It includes the EU Customs Code and its implementing provisions,
the combined nomenclature, common customs tariff and provisions on tariff classification,
customs duty relief, duty suspensions and certain tariff quotas, and other provisions such as
those on customs control of counterfeit and pirated goods, drugs precursors, export of cultural
goods as well as on mutual administrative assistance in customs matters and transit. Member
States must ensure that the necessary implementing and enforcement capacities, including links
to the relevant EU computerized customs systems, are in place. The customs services must also
ensure adequate capacities to implement and enforce special rules laid down in related areas of
the acquis such as external trade.
ANNEXES 183
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Competent Authorities
Ministry of Administration and Interior (MAI) is responsible for the elaboration of an Action
Plan for rehabilitation, modernization and construction of urban waste ater collection and
treatment system within agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e.
Ministry of Transport, Constructions and Tourism (MTCT) is responsible for the promotion
of standards and technical regulations concerning the construction and operation of the collection
systems and urban wastewater treatment plants.
National Environmental Guard (NEG) is responsible for inspection and enforcement of the
environmental legislation. Stakeholders and their responsibilities related to the implementation of
Directive 91/271/EEC are shown in Table
Stakeholder Responsibilities
Establishment of standards and water quality objectives
MEWM (Ministry Elaboration of norms for discharging conditions
of Environment and Establishment of monitoring system of the waste water
Water Management) discharges
184
Vasile Puca
MAI (Ministry of Elaboration of the Action Plan for rehabilitation, modernization and
Administration and construction of collection systems within agglomerations of more than
Interior) 2,000 p.e.
Ministry of Transport, Promotion of the standards and technical regulations concerning
Constructions and construction and exploitation of the collection systems and urban
Tourism waste water treatment plants
National
Environmental Guard Inspection and control of waste water discharges
(NEG)
National Licensing/permitting of waste water discharge from
Administration agglomerations or assimilated agro-food industry, in accordance
Romanian Waters with normatives NTPA 001/2002 and NTPA 002/2002 Monitoring
(NARW) and the quality of surface water and natural receiving waters, in which
River Basin Water urban and industrial waste water are discharged.
Directorates (RBWD)
National Authority
for Public Services
of Communal Licensing the operators for waste water treatment public services
Management
(ANSRC)
Local Public Development of the sewage systems and urban waste water
Administration treatment
Local Water and Operation and maintenance of collecting systems and urban
Sewage Companies waste water treatment plants Self-monitoring and reporting to the
(under municipal RBWD Compliance with discharging conditions
authority or state Sludge management and sludge disposal
ownership)
ANNEXES 185
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
The legal framework for authorisation in water management and water protection is represented
by the Water Law no.107/1996 (amended by Law no. 310/2004) and the Ministerial Order
no.1141/2002. According to these norms, the National Administration Romanian Waters
(NARW) and the River Basin Water Directorates (RBWD) are the competent authorities for
issuing water management permits and licenses. The water management permits and licenses are
granted by NARW through its specialized departments organized for this purpose both at central
and local level, on each River Basin Water Directorate (RBWD). The NARW has well trained
personnel for this activity.
For waste water discharges from agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e. and for industrial waste
water discharges from industrial sectors into natural receivers (as stipulated within table 4, Annex
1 - Technical Normative NTPA 011/2002) of the GD no 188/2002,) permits/licenses should
contain compliance conditions with the requirement of the Annex 1 and Annex 3 of the GD no
188/2002, namely Technical Normative NTPA-011 and NTPA-001/2002.
Waste water discharges from industrial sources are authorised in Romania since 1974.
Governmental Decision no.188/2002 - Annex to Technical Norms, Article 9 Authorization -
transposes the provisions of Article 11 of the Directive regarding the discharge of industrial
186
Vasile Puca
wastewater into collecting systems and urban wastewater treatment plants which are subject to
water permit/license. In accordance with the regulations in-force, wastewater discharge into the
aquatic ecosystems should not lead to the deterioration of the natural receivers. Before being
discharged into natural receivers, the urban waste water shall be subject to appropriate treatment
- by any process and/or disposal system, which allows the receiving waters to meet the conditions
provided by GD no. 188/2002 and by water management permits and licenses in force.
Sludge management
The water management permits and licences also refer to sludge landfilling or use that should
reduce to minimum the negative impact to environment. In addition, sludge discharging into
surface waters is banned, as stipulated by Water Law no. 107/1996, amended by Law no. 310/2004.
Currently, in Romania, the sludge from wastewater treatment plant is landfilled in urban waste
landfills. Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the
soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture was transposed in Romanian legislation by Ministerial
Order no. 49/2004 for the approval of Technical Norms for the protection of environment and,
especially, of soils when sewage sludge is used in agriculture.
Public services operators (for urban waste water collecting and treatment) monitor the discharged
effluents (self-monitoring) and report the pollutants concentrations (load), the discharged waste
water quantities and treatment technologies to the Local Water Companies and River Basin Water
Directorates (RBWD).
Technical Compliance
Water utilities
The total length of the Romanian sewage network in 2002 was 16,812 km. 51.7% of the urban
street total length had sewage system installed at the end of 2001. The water treatment efficiency
is negatively influenced by the equipment inefficiency and the sewage network losses.
The wastewater treatment plants flow rate in 2001 was 5,151.7 thousand m3/day, (out of which
5,067.78 thousand m3/day within municipalities and towns) with 73.9 thousand m3/day more than
in 2000. In Romania, there are 2,609 agglomerations of more than 2,000 population equivalent.
Out of the 2,609 agglomerations, identified according to Annex 5 of the Directive, 320
ANNEXES 187
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
agglomerations have sewage systems and 340 agglomerations have wastewater treatment plants.
The distribution of the agglomerations on each type of sewage systems and each type of
wastewater treatment plant, are presented in tables 7 and 8. Out of these 660, 2 sewage systems.
are complying with the requirements of Directive 91/271/EEC and 11 wastewater treatment
plants are in compliance only at secondary treatment level.
The agro-food industry units, which directly discharge into the receiving water and currently do
not comply with the provisions of the Directive are authorized from the water management point
of view. The water management license, which is a technical document, legally binding, contains a
compliance programme referring to the endowment, extension and upgrading works, which also
includes the deadlines by which the units must be in compliance. These compliance deadlines do
not surpass the date of accession. In case of non-compliance, the water management authority
applies penalties and if the problem persist, the water management license of these units will be
withdrawn by the date of accession and their activity will be ceased or these units will be shut
down.
188
Vasile Puca
discharged into urban sewage systems. The local water management authorities have to annually
report the data (regarding the waste water collection and treatment) to the NARW (according
to GD no. 188/2002, Annex to the Technical Norms, Article 12). Information is validated and
stored into a database and written reports.
In Romania, the National Administration Romanian Waters is the responsible authority of the
Water Integrated Monitoring System and of the specific database. Presently, the informational
system of NARW collects, processes, send, stock and disseminates data. The national network
for data transmission, in electronic format, in the field of water management is divided on 4
levels (local, county, basin and national level). The data transmission is carried out mainly by radio
transmission and also by Internet Intranet system between the data provider and the upper
decisional level.
For the improvement of the network system capacity, starting October 2004, a project will be
developed for 12 months within the PHARE 2002 Programme RO 586.04.12.04 Establishing an
informational system and a database in the field of water management, in accordance with the requirements
of Water Framework Directive. The objectives of this project are: the improvement of the data
collection quality and efficiency at different information levels, establishing the necessary works
for infrastructure modernization on upper, lower and horizontal level, between the organisational
structures of NARW. After completing this project, the conditions for EU reporting, in accordance
with the provisions of Article 15 of the Directive, will be ensured. After accession, the central
water management authority shall report the data to the European Commission. In order to
achieve this, the NARW will update its national monitoring system in 2005. A methodology for
collecting, evaluation and reporting of the monitored data will be drawn up starting with 2005,
within the PHARE project RO 2001/IB/ST-0107.04 Compliance of Romanian statistics with
European statistical system.
In accordance with Article 5(8), a Member State does not have to identify the sensitive areas
if more severe requirements regarding treatment are applied (laid down in paragraphs 2,
3, 4 of Article 5) on its whole territory.
The decision to declare the whole territory of Romania as sensitive area, as well as the results
ANNEXES 189
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
of the negotiations will be introduced in a GD, which will amend the GD no.188/2002. This
amendment will be made by March 2005.
Urban waste water from the sewage networks must be subject to a more stringent treatment,
if they are discharged into sensitive areas and if they come from agglomerations of more than
10,000 p.e., in accordance with Article 5 (2). Discharges from urban waste water treatment plants
described in paragraph 2 must satisfy the relevant requirements of Annex I B of the Directive.
Article 5 (4) lays down that more stringent treatment requirements are not necessary in sensitive
areas, if a minimum percent for the reduction of total pollutant load of 75% for total nitrogen
and total phosphor, for each of the two parameters, could be reached. Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: until 03/2005.
a Identification of the implementation steps
Identification of relevant necessary data (agglomerations of more than 10,000 p.e., status of
endowing of these agglomerations with collecting systems, conditions for collecting systems
and waste water treatment plants to achieve tertiary treatment)
The agglomerations were identified and classified depending on the population equivalent
263 agglomerations of more than 10,000 p.e. needing tertiary treatment were identified.
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 12/2004 accomplished
2. To ensure that all agglomerations will be endowed with collecting systems of urban
waste water, namely the agglomerations with a population equivalent of more than
10,000 by 31 December 2000 at the latest, and for the agglomerations with a population
equivalent of between 2,000 and 10,000 by 31 December 2005 at the latest.
a Summary of objectives
Article 3 requires Member States to ensure that all agglomerations will be provided with
collecting systems of urban waste water, namely the agglomerations of more than 10,000 p.e.,
by 31 December 2000 at the latest and the agglomerations of between 2,000 and 10,000 p.e.,
by 31 December 2005 at the latest.
For urban waste water discharging into receiving waters which are identified as sensitive areas,
Article 3 further requires to ensure that agglomerations with a population equivalent of more
than 10,000 will be provided with collecting systems by 31 December 1998, at the latest.
190
Vasile Puca
The Directive makes possible the use of individual systems or other appropriate systems that
achieve the same level of environmental protection, where the establishment of a collecting
system is not justified either because would produce no environmental benefit or would involve
excessive costs. Collecting systems shall satisfy the requirements of Annex I (A).
A list of agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e on each county, containing data about the level
of endowment with urban waste water treatment facilities and sewage networks, indicating costs
and deadlines for compliance with the provisions of the Directive is provided in the Annex 3 to
the Implementation Plan. This situation was finalized on the basis of the information provided
by the county public administration authorities. For the assessment of the current situation and
for planning the necessary investments in the field of urban wastewater collection and treatment,
the local authorities, together with the water management authorities, drew up local action plans.
The necessary investments for the sewage systems and treatment plants were selected on the basis
of cost/benefit criteria and referred to the agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e., in accordance
with the provisions of the Directive. In this respect, an agglomeration to be endowed with a
common treatment system was constituted by connecting either large and medium towns with
communes in their proximity or several communes.
The geographical and administrative conditions, as well as the population dispersion in some
communes, also lead to the establishment of the agglomeration only by conjunction of several
villages, fact that justifies the number of agglomerations: more than 2,000. Responsibility: MEWM,
MAI Deadline: 06/2002 accomplished
ANNEXES 191
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
3. To ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems of agglomerations is,
before discharging, subject to tertiary treatment or an equivalent treatment, namely for
the agglomerations with a population equivalent of more than 10,000 by 31 December
2000 at the latest and the agglomerations with a population equivalent between 2,000
and 10,000 by 31 December 2005 at the latest
a. Summary of objectives
b. Article 4 requires Member States to ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems
of agglomerations is before discharge subject to the secondary treatment or an equivalent
treatment, namely the agglomerations of more than 10,000 p.e. by 31 December 2000 at the
latest and the agglomerations of between 2,000 and 10,000 p.e. by 31 December 2005 at the
latest.
Discharges from urban wastewater treatment plants must meet the requirements provided in Table
1 of Annex I of the Directive. Discharges from urban waste water treatment plants into sensitive
areas subject to eutrophication as identified in Annex IIA must in addition meet the requirements
provided in Table 2 of this Annex. More stringent requirements than those shown in Table 1 and/
or Table 2 shall be applied where required, in order to ensure that the receiving waters satisfy any
other relevant Directives.
192
Vasile Puca
Identification of relevant necessary data (agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e., status of
endowing of these agglomerations with urban waste water treatment plants, conditions of
existing urban waste water treatment plants and treatment performances)
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 05/2003 accomplished
Development of the Action programme for rehabilitation, upgrading and construction of
wastewater treatment plants in agglomerations of more than 2,000 p.e and of the financial
strategy for their achievement.
4. To ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems of agglomerations of more than
10,000 p.e. and situated in sensitive areas are, before discharge into sensitive areas, subject
to more stringent treatment and the discharges satisfy the relevant emission standards for
nitrogen and phosphorus
a. Summary of objectives
Member States shall ensure that all agglomeration of more than 10,000 p.e. are provided with
ANNEXES 193
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
collecting systems for urban waste water discharged into receiving waters regarded as sensitive areas
by 31 December 1998 at the latest (Article 3). This urban wastewater shall be, before discharge
into sensitive areas, subject to more stringent treatment than described in Article 4.
Discharged urban wastewater shall satisfy the relevant requirements of Annex IB and Table 2 as
regards total nitrogen and phosphorus parameters. Discharges from urban waste water treatment
plants of the agglomerations of more than 10,000 p.e. which are situated in the relevant catchment
areas of sensitive areas and which contribute to the pollution of these areas shall also meet the
above-mentioned requirements. Member States shall ensure that the identification of sensitive
areas is reviewed at intervals of no more than four years. Member States shall ensure that areas
identified as sensitive in the later stage following initial identification shall meet the above -
mentioned requirements for seven years.
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 05/2003 completed
Periodical reviews and adjustments of water management permits and licences for discharges
of urban waste water into sensitive areas
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: starting with 12/2003
Drawing up of an action programme for the rehabilitation, upgrading and construction for
urban waste water treatment plants in the relevant agglomerations and of the financial strategy
for the implementation strategy for the implementation of the programme.
194
Vasile Puca
5. To ensure that those urban waste water entering collecting systems of agglomerations
of less than 2,000 p.e. are before discharge subject to appropriate treatment, namely
by 31 December 2005 at the latest
a. Summary of objectives
Article 7 requires Member States to ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems of
agglomerations of less than 2,000 are before discharge subject to appropriate treatment by 31
December 2005 at the latest.
Appropriate treatment means treatment of urban waste water by any process and/or disposal
system that after discharge allows the receiving waters to meet the relevant quality objectives and
the relevant provisions of the Directive and other Community Directives.
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 05/2003 - accomplished
Drawing up an action programme for waste water treatment in the agglomerations of less
than 2,000 p.e.
ANNEXES 195
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
6 To ensure that where waters within the area of jurisdiction of a Member State are
affected by discharges of urban waste water from another Member State, the affected
Member State notifies to the other Member State and the Commission the relevant
facts.
a. Summary of objectives
Article 9 requires Member States to ensure that, where waters within the area of jurisdiction of a
Member State are affected by discharges of urban waste water from another Member State, the
affected Member State notifies to the other Member State and the Commission the relevant facts.
The Member State concerned shall make, where appropriate, with the Commission, concerted
effort necessary to identify the discharges in question and the measures to be taken at source to
protect the waters that are affected.
Establishing the measures at source for the protection of waters that are affected
Responsibility: MEWM, NARW
Deadline: continuously
7. To ensure that urban waste water treatment plants are designed, constructed, operated and
maintained to ensure sufficient performance under all normal local climatic conditions and
that collecting systems satisfy the requirements laid down by the Directive
196
Vasile Puca
a. Summary of objectives
Article 10 requires Member States to ensure, that the urban waste water treatment plants are
designed, constructed, operated and maintained to ensure sufficient performance under all normal
local climatic conditions.
Drawing up a programme for updating the technical regulations and standards concerning
the construction and operation of collecting systems and urban waste water treatment plants
Updating the technical regulations and standards concerning construction and operation of
collecting systems and urban waste water treatment plants
Responsibility: MTCT
Deadline: continuously, starting with 2004
Issuing of new and updated water management permits and licences for construction and
operation of collecting systems and urban waste water treatment plants
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: continuously
8. To ensure that the discharges of industrial waste water into collecting systems and
urban waste water treatment plants, the discharges from urban waste water treatment
plants and the disposal of sludge from urban waste water treatment plants are subject
to prior regulations and/or specific authorisations by the competent authority
ANNEXES 197
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
a. Summary of objectives
Articles 11, 12 and, respectively, 14 require Member States to gradually ensure that the discharges
of industrial waste water into collecting systems and urban waste water treatment plants, the
discharges of waste water from urban waste water treatment plants, discharges of biodegradable
industrial waste water and the disposal of sludge from urban waste water treatment plants are
subject to prior regulations and/or specific authorisations by the competent authority.
Regulations and/or authorisations shall be reviewed and if necessary adapted at regular intervals.
Competent authorities or appropriate bodies shall monitor the discharges from urban waste water
treatment plants and the amounts and composition of sludge disposed of to surface water.
Information collected by competent authorities or appropriate bodies shall be retained by the
Member State and made available to the Commission within six months of receipt of a request.
Member States shall ensure that every two years the relevant authorities or bodies with publish
situation reports on the disposal of urban waste water and sludge in their areas and send them to
the Commission.
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 05/2003 accomplished
Update of the existing legislation in the field of water and waste management
Responsibility: MEWM, MAI, ANSRC
Deadline: 12/2004
Issuing the relevant water management permits and licences for construction and operation
of urban waste water treatment plants
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: continuously
Periodical reviews and adaptation of the relevant legislation
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: every 5 years
198
Vasile Puca
Periodical reviews and adaptations of the relevant water management authorizations for
construction and operation of urban waste water treatment plants
Responsibility: MEWM
Date: every 5 years
8. To ensure that biodegradable industrial waste water from plants belonging to the
specified industrial sectors, which do not enter urban waste water treatment plants,
before discharge to receiving waters respect before discharge conditions established
in prior regulations and/or specific authorisation by the competent authority
a. Summary of objectives
Article 13 requires Member States to ensure that by 31 December 2000 biodegradable industrial
waste water from plants belonging to the industrial sectors listed in Annex III of the Directive,
which does not enter into the urban waste water treatment plants shall respect, before discharge
to receiving water, the conditions established in prior regulations and/or specific authorisation by
the competent authority or appointed body.
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 05/2003 accomplished
Issuing of the relevant water management permits and licences according with the
requirements of the legislation in force
The agro-food units are authorized from the water management point of view, according to the
legislation in force. Water management licenses impose discharge limits, taking into account the
nature of the discharged waste water. For the units that are not under the provisions of Directive
91/271/EEC, compliance plans, included in water management licenses, are set up; these units are
ANNEXES 199
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
obliged to comply by carrying out the measures laid down in the plans until the date of accession.
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: until the date of accession
10. To ensure the monitoring of discharged waste water, of relevant receiving waters
and of sludge disposal procedures concerning sludge arising from urban waste water
treatment plants
a. Summary of objectives
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: 03/2003 accomplished
200
Vasile Puca
Adaptation of the Methodology for the collection and evaluation of the monitored data
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: starting with 2005
As regards the Local Public Authorities, they have the responsibility of building sewage and waste
water treatment systems (the implementation of the programme of rehabilitation, upgrading and
construction of urban waste water treatment plants in relevant agglomerations; implementation
of the action programme for waste water treatment in the agglomerations of less than 2,000 p.e.)
ANNEXES 201
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Responsibility: MEWM
Deadline: for reporting - starting with the date of accession for compliance until the end of 2018
COSTS
Administrative costs
Implementation of Directive requires administrative resources mainly for the permitting activities
at national and river basin directorates and appropriate sampling and monitoring system.
Water Law no. 107/1996 (amended by Law no. 310/2004) gives the National Administration
Romanian Water the responsibility for these activities under the coordination of the Ministry
of Environment and Water Management.
It is estimated that EUR 50,000/year for permitting activities and staff will be needed. The
increase of the staff of NARW with 87 by 2007 would mean an additional EUR 198,000 for
salaries yearly, until 2007.
For the development of the monitoring system, in order to collect data and to transfer it to the
Ministry, EUR 30,000 are required for monitoring instruments until 2007. Training would be
needed for the staff, which will require EUR 100,000/year.
202
Vasile Puca
In order to estimate the implementation costs in agglomerations of more than 2000 p.e., an
cost/agglomeration model was created. The model implies the use of a databases on the current
situation, comparisons between the current expenditure for wastewater facilities (baseline) and
that required by the Directive, according to the assumptions selected (the size of agglomeration,
the level of treatment, rural or urban area).
Unit costs for construction of urban waste water treatment plants and rehabilitation /construction
of urban sewage collecting systems were assessed according to the population equivalent.
The relationship population equivalent - investment costs was checked against ongoing projects.
Depending on the size of a town and the technology type, units investment costs in urban waste
water treatment plant vary between EUR 250 (for agglomerations of more than 10000 p.e. and
tertiary treatment), EUR 120 (for agglomerations between 10000 - 5000 p.e. and secondary
treatment) and EUR 180 (for agglomerations of less than 5000 p.e. and secondary treatment).
The investments also depend on the type of upgrading. When the increase of plant capacity is
needed, additional specific assumptions are used (level of treatment, technological endowment).
The costs/p.e. for sewage systems were estimated according to the size of the agglomeration
and type of collection networks (gravity system or combined with pump stations). Extensive
investigations showed the same cost/p.e. for all categories of collection systems: EUR 160 for
agglomerations of more than 5000 p.e. and EUR 75 for agglomerations of less than 5000 p.e..
The estimated costs for the implementation of UWWT Directive are about EUR 9.5 billion
for investments, out of which EUR 5.7 billion for waste water treatment plants and EUR 3.8
billion for urban sewage collecting systems. Operating costs, for a transition period of 12 years,
are estimated about EUR 3.4 billion.
ANNEXES 203
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Financial Resources
The national sustainable development strategy in the field of public services was finalized at the
beginning of 2004.
Several measures laid down in this strategy have as purpose to establish the realistic financing
request for the works in the field of water services, as well as a credible and stable framework for
the investment planning, on the basis of some principles recognized at international level (e.g.
subsidiarity, efficiency and polluter pays).
The financial resources envisaged are: multilateral grants, loans for public service and infrastructure
investments with governmental or local guaranties, stimulation of private funds and public-private
partnerships.
The pre-accession instruments (ISPA, SAPARD, SAMTID, PHARE) are also used to finance the
works in the field of waste water sewage and treatment.
Thus:
- 23 investment projects in water infrastructure of large agglomerations (of more than 150,000
p.e.) have already been financed through ISPA in a total amount of over EUR 850 million;
the total amount for a project is more than EUR 5 million; the project proposals for other
agglomerations will allow their financing by 2010, in a total amount of approx. EUR 600
million;
- the SAPARD programme regards the financing of investment projects in the rural
environment, for small agglomerations; from the available data, by 2006, projects financed through
this financial instrument, in a total amount of EUR 277 million, will be developed (the total
amount for a project does not exceed EUR 1 million);
SAMTID Programme will support small and medium towns infrastructure development for
230 small and medium towns (with a population of 6.2 million inhabitants), by using funds
of EUR 380 million (out of which 50% are grants) for 10 years, by 2014.
Starting with the date of accession, as Member State, Romania will benefit of cohesion funds for
environmental infrastructure. On the basis of the financial assessment, for the environmental sector,
during 2007 2009, EUR 994 million will be allotted, out of which more than a half would be used
for the investments in the field of water. Funds from the state budget, local administration or private
investors will be added to the abovementioned funds, so that, during the requested transition period,
there would be sufficient financing possibilities for the investment works, for compliance.
The support of international financing institutions: BIRD (International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development); EIB (European Bank for Investments); EBRD (European Bank for
204
Vasile Puca
the direct environmental effects are more significant on the short term if the actions are
focused on large agglomerations, where important quantities of waste water are concentrated;
financial capacities can be more easily mobilized in the large agglomerations than the smaller ones;
larger investments in treatment are needed for small agglomerations, due to the particular
solutions requested;
from the technical point of view, it is easier and more rapid to extend or to rehabilitate the
sewage system or a waste water treatment plant than to build a new facility; Having in mind
the negative effects of waste water on environment from different classes of agglomerations,
it may be considered that an integrated and unitary approach is needed in the conditions of
a prudential and rational use of water resources. This means an important, constant financial
effort of Romania, together with the external support, mainly from the E
BIBLIOGRAPHY 205
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alfredson, T., Cungu, A. (2008), Negotiation Theory and Practice. A review of the Literature,
EasyPol Module, 179, [Internet source, <http://www.readbag.com/fao-docs-up-easypol-550-4-
5-negotiation-background-paper-179en>], [accessed on 15.12.2012];
Alter, K.J., Meunier-Aitsahalia, S. (1994), Judicial Politics in the European Community: European
Integration and the Pathbreaking Cassis de Dijon Decision, in Comparative political studies, 26(4),
p. 535-561;
Arnett, J.J. (2002), The psychology of Globalization, in American Psychologist, 57, 10, p. 774-783;
Arregui, J., Stokman, F., Thomson, R. (2004), Bargaining in the European Union and shifts in
actors policy positions. European Union Politics, 5(1), p. 47-72;
Bal, L. J., (1995), Decision-Making and Negotiations in the European Union (Discussion Paper No. 7):
University of Lecester, Centre for the Study of Diplomacy;
Baylis, J., Smith, S., (2001), The Globalization of World Politics. Second edition, New York: Oxford
University Press Inc. (Jan Aart Scholte, Brian White);
Bazerman, M.H., Neale, M.A. (1992), Negotiating Rationaly, New York: The Free Press;
Beach, D. (2005), Negotiating the Fifth Enlargement, chapter 8, in D. Beach, The dynamics of
European integration, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan, p. 214-244;
Bollen, J.C., Manders, T. and Tang, P. (2000), Winners and losers of Kyoto. Economic Consequences of
the Kyoto Protocol for Sectors and Regions, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment
(RIVM) and Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis (CPB), The Netherlands;
Brzel, T. A., Risse, Th., (2007), Europeanization: The Domestic Impact of EU Politics, in
Handbook of European Union Politics, (Eds.) Jrgensen, Knud Erik, Pollack, Mark A., Rosamond,
Ben J., pp. 482504, London: Sage;
Bueno de Mesquita, B., Stockman, F., (1994), European Community Decision-Making: Models,
Applications, and Comparisons, New Heaven: Yale University Press;
Ciot, G. (2012), Modelul Negociatorului (idiosincrazii in procesul decizional al politicii externe), Cluj-Napoca, Eikon;
206
Vasile Puca
Conant, L., (2007), The Politics of Legal Integration, in Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol.
45, Annual Review, pp. 45-66;
Dimitrova, A., Maniokas, K. (2003), Linking co-ordination of EU Affairs and European Policy: New
Member States in the decision-making process of the EU. Draft Paper, UN Documents, available at:
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/UNPAN018697.pdf
Last accessed: 19 December 2012;
Eberlein, B. and Grande, E. (2005), Beyond Delegation: Transnational Regulatory Regimes and
the EU Regulatory State. Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 89112;
Elgstrm, O. and Jnsson, C. (eds.) (2005), European Union Negotiations: Processes, Networks, and
Institutions, London: Routledge;
Evans. P, H.K. Jacobson, and R.D. Putnam (1993), Double-Edged Diplomacy. Berkley: University
of California Press;
Felsenthal, D.J., Machover, M. (1997), The Weightened Voting in the EUs Council of Ministers,
1958-1995: Intentions and Outcomes, in Electoral Studies, 16, p. 33-47;
Fink-Hafner, Danica. (2005), Europeanization of the core executive in the transition from circumstances
of EU accession to full EU membership. In: UNSPECIFIED, Austin, Texas. (Unpublished);
Friis, L., Jarosz-Friis, A., (2002), Countdown to Copenhagen - Big Bang or Fizzle in the EUs Enlargement
Process?, Danish Institute of International Affairs, DUPI;
BIBLIOGRAPHY 207
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Gori, Ciprian (2008), Negocierile de aderare la Uniunea European, Studiu de Caz: Romnia,
Bucureti, Editura Economic;
Hayes-Renshaw, F., Wallace, H. (2006), The Council of Ministers, 2nd edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan;
Hix, S. (2005), The Political System of the European Union, 2nd edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan;
Hix, S. (2008), Whats Wrong with the European Union and How To Fix It, Cambridge, Polity;
Hoggetts, R.M., Luthans, F. (1994), International Management, Second Edition, New York: McGraw
Hill, Inc;
Holsti, K.J. (1995), International Politics. A Framework for Analysis, 7th Edition, New Jersey:
Prentince-Hall;
Hughes, J., Sasse, G., Gordon, C. (2004), Conditionality and Compliance in the EUs Eatward
Enlargement: Regional Policy and the Reform of Sub-national Government, in Journal of Common
Market Studies, 42, p. 3;
Inotai, A. (2001), Some Key Issues in Understanding the Negotiations on Accession to the European
Union, Working Paper, No.22, Budapest: Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian
Academy of Sciences;
Jones, E., van der Bijl, N. (2004), Public Opinion and Enlargement: A Gravity Approach, European
Union Politics, p. 139-146;
Kasim H, B.G. Peters, and V Wright (2000), The National Coordination of EU Policy: The Domestic
Level. Oxford: Oxford University Press;
Keohane, R.O. (1986), Neorealism and its critics, New York:Columbia University Press;
208
Vasile Puca
Kohler-Koch, B., (1996), Catching Up With Change. The Transformation of Governance in the
European Union, Journal of European Public Policy 3, 3, pp. 359380;
Kolb, D., Williams, J. (2003), Everyday Negotiation: Navigating The Hidden Agendas in Bargaining.
San Francisco: Josssey-Bass. pp. i-24;
Kreppel, A. (2001), The European parliament and Supranational Party System: A Study in Institutional
Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
Landau, A (2004), Negotiating the enlargement in Negotiating the European Union, Paul.W.
Meerts, Franz Cede. (eds.), Palgrave Macmillan;
Lavadoux, F., Guggenbuhl, A., Best,E. (2004), Handbook for the European Negotiator, Maastricht: EIPA;
Lewicki, R. et al. (2004), Essentials of negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education;
Maniokas, Klaudijus (2001), Methodology of the EU Enlargement: a Critical Appraisal, Online paper:
www.eipa.nl/Topics/Enlargement/maniokas_paper.doc, last accessed: December 30, 2012;
Marer, P. (1994), Integrating Central and Eastern Europe into Europe, Paper presented for Conference
on European Identities, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, February 1994;
Mayhew, A (1998), The European Unions Policy toward Central Europe: Design or Drift? in C.
Rhodes, ed., The European Community in the world Community. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers,
105-125;
Mayhew, A. (2007), Enlargement of the European Union: an analysis of the negotiations for countries of
the Western Balkans, in SIGMA PAPER, no. 37;
Meerts, P. and Cede, F. (eds.) (2004), Negotiating European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan;
BIBLIOGRAPHY 209
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Metcalfe, L. (1987), Comparing National Policy Coordination; Do differences matter? Paper Ehrenstein
Colloquim, EIPA, Maastricht;
Milzow, K. (2008), National Interest and European Integration. Discourse and Politics of Blair, Chirac
and Schroeder, Palgrave Macmillan;
Monti, M. (2010), A new strategy for the Single Market. At the service of Europes economy and society,
Report to the President of European Commission, Jose Manuel Barosso;
Moravcsik, A., M.A. (2003), National Interests, State Power, and EU Enlargement. CES Working
Paper, no. 97, 2003. [Working Paper];
Nicolaides,P (1998), The Boundaries of the Negotiating Power of the Candidates for Membership of
the European Union: Some Theoretical Considerations and Practical Implications, in EIPASCOPE, 3;
Nicolaides et al., (1999), A Guide to the Enlargement of European Union (II): A review of the process,
Negotiations, Policy Reform and Enforcement Capacity, Maastrciht, EIPA;
Nicolaides, P. (2000), Enlargement of the European Union and Effective Implementation of its Rules
(with a case study on Telecommunication), Current European Issues, European Institute of Public
Administration, Maastricht, Netherlands;
Nicolaides, P. (2003), Preparing for EU Membership: The Paradox of Doing What the EU Does Not
Require You to Do, in EIPASCOPE, 2;
No, W.(2001), The impact of EU Enlargement on External Relations, notably with the US and
Russia, National Europe Center Paper, No. 8; online paper available at: http://www.unece.org/
fileadmin/DAM/trade/workshop/april2003/4Impact-EUEnlargementOnExternalRelations-
USAndRussia.pdf, Last accessed: 30 December 2012;
Peters, B.G. (1999), Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism, London: Continuum;
210
Vasile Puca
Peterson, J., E. Boomberg, (1990), Decision-making in the European Union. London and New York:
Macmillan and St. Martins Press;
Puca, V. (2003), Negotiating with the European Union: preparing the External Environment of
Negotiation, vol.3, Bucuresti: Editura Economica;
Puca, V. (2006), European Negotiations, A case study: Romanians Accession to the European Union,
Gorizia, IUES-ISIG;
Putnam, R. D. (1988), Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games,
International Organization 42, p. 427-60;
Scharpf, F. (1988), The Joint-Decision Trap: Lessons from German Federalism and European
Integration. Public Administration 66: 23978;
Schalk, J., Torenvlied, R., Weesie, J. And Stokman, F. (2007), The Power of the Presidency in EU
Council Decision-Making, European Union Politic, 8/2, p. 229-250;
Schneider, G., Steunenberg, B., Widgrn, M. (2006), Evidence With Insight: What Models
Contribute to EU Research, in R. Thomson, F. N. Stokman, T. Knigand C. Achen, (eds.) The
European Union Decides: Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, p. 299-317;
Schneider, J. (2009), Conflict, Negotiation and European Union Enlargement, New York: Cambridge
University Press;
Schout, A. (1997), The Domestic Management of European Affairs: Draining the Quagmire. Paper,
EIPA, Maastricht;
BIBLIOGRAPHY 211
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS
(A Handbook)
Sigma Papers no. 37 (2007), Enlargement of the European Union: An Analysis of the Negotiations for
Countries of the Western Balkans;
Smith, M. (1996), European Union as an international actor, in J. Richardson (ed.) The European
Union: power and policy-making, London: Routledge;
Smith, M. (2000), Negotiating New Europe: the Role of the European Union, in Journal of European
Public Policy,7: 5;
Soete, L. (2011), Europes future: fragmented implosion, or greater integration?, online paper, available
at: http://unu.edu/news/europes-future-fragmented-implosion-or-greater-integration.html, Last
Accessed: 30 December 2012;
Spangle, M.L., Isenhart, M.W. (2003), Negotiation, Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications;
Summa, T. (2008), The European Union 5th Enlargement-Lessons Learned, Report for Fellow
Program, Cambridge: Harvard University;
Tallberg, J. (2003), The Agenda-Shaping Powers of the EU Council Presidency. Journal of European
Public Policy, 10;
Tallberg, J. (2006), Leadership and Negotiation in the European Union: The Power of the Presidency.
Cambridge University Press;
Tallberg, J. (2008), The Institutional Foundations of European Union Negotiations, Paper prepared for
the workshop Negotiation Theory and the EU: the State of the Art, Dublin, Nov.14-15;
Tamminen, T. (2012), Negotiating and Deciding EU Enlargement. Critical observations on the Recent
Enlargement Debates and the EU Policies towards the Western Balkans, University of Turku, Course
booklet, first edition for Autumn Semester 2012;
Thomson, R. (2008), The Council Presidency in the European Union: Responsibility with
Power, Journal of Common Market Studies, 46/3, p. 593-617;
212
Vasile Puca
Tomozeiu,D. (2011), EU Estern Enlargement: Testing the Applicability of the PON Negotiation
Model, Paper for European Consortium for Political Research, Dublin, Aug. 30;
Van de Bos, J.J.M. (1991), Dutch EC Policy Making: A Model-Guided Approach to Coordination and
Negotiation. University of Utrecht: Dissertation;
Van Keulen, Mandeltje (2004), What happens at home Negotiating EU Policy at the Domestic
Level in Negotiating the European Union, Paul.W. Meerts, Franz Cede. (eds.), Palgrave Macmillan;
Van Schendelen, Rinus (2004), The EU as a Negotiations Arena: Diplomats, Experts, and PAM
Professionals in Paul.W. Meerts, Franz Cede. (eds.), Palgrave Macmillan;
Verheijen, A.J.C. (2000), Administrative Capacity Development. A race against time?, Scientific Council
for Government Policy. Working Paper, W 107;
Young, A.R. (2009), The Politics of Regulation and the Internal Market, in K.E. Jorgensen,
M.A. Pollack and B. Rosamond (eds.) The Handbook of European Union Politics, London: Sage,
p. 373-394;
Wallace, H., Pollack, M.A., Young, A.R. (2010), Policy-Making in the European Union, 6th edition,
The New European Series, Oxfors: Oxford University Press;
Zartman, W. I., (1976), The 50% Solution: How to Bargain Successfully with Hijackers, Strikers,
Bosses, Oil Magnates, Arabs, Russians, and Other Worthy Opponents in this Modern World, New York:
Anchor Press. Garden City;
BIBLIOGRAPHY 213
EU ACCESSION
NEGOTIATIONS Vasile Puca
(A Handbook)
Online resources:
1. Council of the European Union (2009): Council conclusions: financial package for the
accession negotiations with Croatia
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/genaff/111781.
pdf. Last accessed: December 19, 2012.
2. Negotiating Team of the Republic of Slovenia for the Accession to the European Union:
Negotiations on the Accession of the Republic of Slovenia to the European Union Completed:
Presentation and assessment of the financial package;
http://www.svrez.gov.si/fileadmin/svez.gov.si/pageuploads/docs/slovenia_accession_to_
the_EU/Negotiations_on_the_Accession.pdf -Last accessed: December 19, 2012.
3. Steps toward joining the EU: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/steps-towards-
joining/index_en.htm
4. Western Balkans (2004): Guidelines to the Acquis Communautaire: Support to promotion on the
reciprocal understanding between the European Union and the Western Balkans,
http://www.westernbalkans.info/htmls/save_pdf2.php?id=600 Last accessed December 19, 2012;
5. 4th Enlargement Summary:
http://aei.pitt.edu/1560/1/4th_enlarge_summary_results.pdf; Last Accessed: December 19, 2012
6. How to write a position paper,
http://www.xavier.edu/library/help/position_paper.pdf
7. Romanias position paper. Chapter 20 Culture and audiovisual, Conference on Accession
to the European Union, 2000,
http://abm.tobb.org.tr/duyurular/sunuslar/muzakere%20pozisyonlari/20/romanya%2020.pdf
1. http://en.euabc.com
2. http://www.eutransition.eu
3. http://ec.europa.eu
4. http://eur-lex.europa.eu
5. www.seio.gov.rs
214
Vasile Puca
215
Vasile Puca is professor at the Babe-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca
(Romania), teaching courses in International Relations and Negotiations, European
Studies and European Negotiations, Central and Eastern Europe in the XXth
Century International Relations and International Business Relations and Conflict
Management. Since 2000 he has been teaching at the International University
Institute of European Studies (IUIES) in Gorizia/Trieste (Italy). He is a Board
member of several professional organizations such as the Institute for Cultural
Diplomacy in Berlin, European University Institute in Florence, the Institute
for International Sociology in Gorizia, Foreign Policy (Romania) and Central
European Review(Budapest).
Between 1991 and 1994 he worked as a diplomat (in New York and Washington, D.C.). From December
2000 until the end of the accession negotiations with the European Union (December 2004), he was the
Chief-Negotiator of Romania and also a member of the Romanian Government. Between 2000 and 2008
he acted as a member of the Romanian Parliament.
He also acts as a consultant for several local and international companies offering expert advices on
European and international affairs.
Author: Dr. Petru Groza pentru o lume nou, ( 1985), Alma Mater Napocensis Idealul universitii
moderne (1994), Al Doilea Rzboi Mondial. Transilvania i aranjamentele europene. 1940-1944 (1995),
Cderea Romniei n Balcani (2000), Central Europe Since 1989 (2000), Pulsul istoriei n Europa Central
(1998), Relaii internaionale contemporane (2003), Speran i disperare - Negocieri romno-aliate, 1943-
1944 (2003), Universitate-Societate-Modernizare (2003), Negociind cu Uniunea European, 6 volumes,
(2003-2005), Relaii internaionale/transnaionale (2005), Sticks and Carrots. Regranting the Most-
Favored-Nation Status for Romania (US Congress, 1990-1996) / Bastoane i Morcovi, Reacordarea clauzei
naiunii celei mai favorizate (Congresul SUA, 1990-1996) (2006), European Negotiations. A Case Study: The
Romanias Accession to EU (2006), Romnia i iar Romnia. Note pentru o istorie a prezentului (2007), Relatii
Internationale/Transnationale (2007), Romnia spre Uniunea European. Negocierile de aderare (2000-2004)
(2007), Romnia: de la preaderare la postaderare (2008), Teme europene (2008), Teme europene (2008), Euro-
Topics (2009), International /Transnational Relations (2009), Managing Global Interdependencies (2010),
Europa n Criz (2011), Uniunea European. State-Piee-Ceteni (2011), Spiritul european, azi (2012).
216