This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52011SC1467
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT /* SEC/2011/1467 final - COD 2011/0405 */
The Treaty on European Union (TEU) in its article 8 provides for developing by the European Union (EU) of a
special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area
of prosperity and good neighbourliness at the EU’s borders, founded on the
values of the Union and characterized by close and peaceful relations based on
cooperation. This dedicated article was introduced by the Lisbon Treaty and
emphasises the growing importance of the EU relationship with its neighbours. The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was
developed in 2004 and is addressed to 16 partners to the East and South of the
EU’s borders, namely to Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia,
Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, the Republic of Moldova, Morocco, the occupied
Palestinian territory, Syria, Tunisia and Ukraine. Within the ENP the EU offers
the neighbours a privileged relationship, building upon a mutual commitment to
values such as democracy and human rights, rule of law, good governance, market
economy principles and sustainable development. The policy also provides for
political association and deeper economic integration, increased mobility and
enhanced people-to-people contacts. The ENP is supported through a dedicated
instrument, the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), which
covers the 16 above-mentioned partner countries as well as the Russian
Federation.
1.
Problem definition
A number of important developments have
taken place since the launch of the ENP, including deepening of relationship
with the partners, launch of regional initiatives and democratic transition
processes in the Southern Neighbourhood. The evolving relationship and changing
political context called for a review of the ENP. As a result, a new ENP vision
has been developed as outlined in the Joint Communication of the High
Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the
European Commission “A new response to a changing Neighbourhood”, adopted on 25
May 2011. This new approach provides notably for greater support to partners
committed to building democratic societies and undertaking reforms, in line
with “more for more” and "mutual accountability" principles.
2.
Analysis of subsidiarity
In
neighbourhood countries where alignment to EU rules and standards is one of the
key policy objectives, the EU is best placed to deliver this assistance. Some
specific support can only be provided at EU level, such as promoting
progressive economic integration in the EU internal market, access to the Schengen
space or participation in EU programmes. Thus the EU is the leading cooperation
partner in most of the ENP countries, a role widely recognised by Member
States, International Financial Institutions and other donors. Helping the EU
neighbours to align with EU policies, rules and standards is a key driver for
reforms in the ENP partner countries. With 27 Member States acting within common
policies and strategies, the EU alone has the critical weight to respond to
global challenges. The action of Member States can be limited and fragmented,
with projects which are often too small to make a sustainable difference in the
field. Streamlining the work of Member States through the EU enables better
coordination and makes EU work more effective. At a time of budgetary restrictions, when
several Member States have chosen to exit entire sectors of cooperation and withdraw
from supporting certain countries, the EU is able to play an active role in
promoting democracy, peace, stability, prosperity and poverty reduction in its Neighbourhood.
In this context, it makes more sense than ever from a purely economic
perspective to channel aid at EU level where a real difference can be made.
Working with the EU is also cheaper. Administrative costs are lower than the
average administrative costs of the principal donors for bilateral aid.
3.
Objectives of eu initiative
The European Neighbourhood Policy aims at establishing
an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness at the EU’s borders, notably
through an enhanced political association, economic integration and close
cooperation in a number of sectors. In the period 2014-2020 these objectives
will continue to be supported by the EU through a dedicated financial tool, the
European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI). The ENI will provide the bulk of
funding from the EU budget to the partners. In order for
this instrument to achieve the ambitions of the new ENP vision, a number of
specific objectives of the regulation, resulting from the evolving context,
lessons learned and evaluations, will need to be met, notably: ·
applying the principles of “more for more” and “mutual
accountability in line with the renewed ENP policy, encouraging neighbouring
countries to further engage in reforms; addressing the
complexity and length of the programming of EU assistance in order to
streamline, shorten and better focus the process; ·
streamlining the scope of the instrument with
the appropriate balance between the flexibility of the instrument and its focus
on the policy objectives and key areas of cooperation; ·
adapting implementation provisions and improving
coherence across external action instruments; ·
improving provisions for the Cross-Border
Cooperation to facilitate effective and fast implementation of the programmes; ·
promoting closer linkages with EU internal
instruments and policies, including through strengthened cooperation with
relevant Commission services at the programming stage and, where relevant, through
mechanisms allowing for possible pooling of funds from internal and external
headings of the EU budget; ·
responding to the evolving relationship with
Russia by amending provisions on Russia’s eligibility to the ENI funding,
reflecting the specific status of Russia as both EU neighbour and strategic
partner.
4.
Policy options
The impact assessment reviews four options:
·
Option 0: "No
EU action"; the EU discontinues its
financial support through a dedicated instrument for the Neighbourhood; ·
Option 1: "No
change"; cooperation with the countries concerned remains strictly in
the framework of the existing ENPI Regulation, used as the baseline scenario
during the analysis ; ·
Option 2: "Adapting
the current set-up"; the future legislative proposal should be based
on the current ENPI Regulation with a number of modifications, responding to
the new policy context and specific objectives identified, option 2 also
contains a number of different sub-options on specific problems raised; ·
Option 3: "Tabling
a completely new instrument" with a different
geographic scope and focussing on objectives broader than or different from those
of the ENP.
5.
Assessment of impacts
The current set up (Option 1 –
"baseline-scenario") offers assistance in a broad range of areas
leading to a number of positive economic, social and environmental impacts in
partner countries. Nevertheless, these impacts in the above-mentioned sectors
could still be improved with more flexible mechanisms and more innovative
approaches, e.g. concerning pooling of funds or the use of innovative financial
instruments. Discontinuing EU action (Option 0) would substantially reduce
impacts in all three areas, and endanger the sustainability of the impacts
achieved so far; it would also negatively affect overall EU relations with the
ENP partners. With a modified instrument (Option 2) the positive economic, social
and environmental impacts achieved through the current set-up would be further
enhanced; moreover further positive impact is expected notably on governance,
through the application of the “more for more” principle. Option 2 thus has the
highest positive impacts. Tabling a completely new instrument (Option 3) would have
negative impacts notably on the coherence of EU action with the ENP objectives
and would thus affect the credibility of the EU in the region. Moreover the assessment of impact also
focussed on the necessity and value added of EU action, as compared to action
by Member States only.
6.
Comparison of options
Based on the analysis and weighting of the
different impacts (global, economic, social, environmental), Option 0 and
Option 3 have not been considered as viable options that would allow for having
the highest positive impacts and meeting the objectives of the revised ENP . Option
2 would have the highest positive impact and offers the best potential to adapt
the current cooperation framework to the new policy context, ENP objectives and
challenges identified through evaluations and lessons learned. Option 1 would
be the second-best option allowing for preservation of positive impacts,
without however providing for meeting the objectives of the new ENP vision nor
for addressing challenges and specific problems identified within the current
set-up. The preferred option is therefore Option 2.
7.
Monitoring and evaluation
As the new ENI will be an enabling
Regulation establishing the essential elements and the basis for EU
intervention, the specific cooperation objectives and actions for each country
and region will be defined at the programming and implementation stages, including
the expected results. Specific indicators will be identified at that moment,
taking into consideration the particularities of the action in question.