Bankwatch

Home > Archives for Press release

Press release

Landmark deal ends 28-year Bulgaria motorway dispute with agreement to protect Kresna Gorge

The agreement recognises both the importance of completing this remaining segment of the motorway and the ecological significance of the Kresna Gorge — part of two Natura 2000 sites and an area of exceptional biodiversity vital to the conservation of Europe’s nature. 

As a sign of good will, civil society members of the Save Kresna Gorge coalition have also withdrawn their legal appeals related to the construction of the final section of the motorway, leading to the closing of ongoing court cases. 

The agreement outlines each party’s commitments and marks tangible progress in permanently and fully redirecting transit traffic away from the Kresna Gorge. The existing I-1 (E79) road, which currently runs through the gorge, will be retained for local use only.

Struma motorway between Sofia and Thessaloniki is part of the core network of European roads under the TEN-T Regulation, which links major cities and nodes, and must be completed by 2030. 

Andrey Ralev, Biodiversity Campaigner at CEE Bankwatch Network – ‘By reaching this historic agreement, Bulgaria now has a clear path to meet the requirements of the TEN-T Regulation and ensure that the Struma motorway complies with the core network criteria. Keeping the motorway within the Kresna Gorge would have made such compliance impossible. Now it is up to the European Commission to support this solution, which aligns with both EU transport policy and the protection of biodiversity under Natura 2000.‘

Contacts:

Andrey Ralev, Biodiversity campaigner, CEE Bankwatch Network,  andrey.ralev@bankwatch.org 

Desislava Stoyanova, Economic justice campaigner at Environmental association Za Zemiata, Bulgaria – desislava@zazemiata.org 

Notes for editors:

The construction of this section of the Struma motorway has been closely monitored under the Council of Europe’s Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention) since 2001. At its 44th meeting in December 2024, with the support of the Convention’s Secretariat, a convergence of views was reached between the Bulgarian authorities and the complainants regarding the Kresna Gorge.

The Standing Committee recommended that the Bulgarian authorities prioritise technically feasible solutions that route the western lane of the Struma motorway — in the direction from Sofia towards Greece — outside the Gorge.

Following the Committee’s decision, the Bulgarian Council of Ministers adopted a formal roadmap for completing the Struma motorway (Decision No. 62/12.02.2025). As part of this roadmap, preparations are under way to commission a study identifying an alternative route outside the Kresna Gorge for the western lane, including requirements to avoid significant impacts on species and habitats within the Kresna and Kresna–Ilindentsi Natura 2000 sites.

The motorway received significant funding from the European Union. The ‘Operational Program Transport 2007-2013’ funded the construction of sections 1, 2, and 4, as well as the preparation of section 3 through Kresna Gorge.

Vulnerable households at risk: Central and eastern European countries struggle to finalise national social climate plans

Despite regional challenges, the Estonian and Polish governments are ahead of the curve, having already published their draft plans. The Estonian plan prioritises the housing sector, dedicating 76 per cent of its Social Climate Fund allocation to building renovations and social housing, with 21 per cent going to public and demand-based transport services. Poland’s draft plan dedicates up to 37 per cent of its allocation to direct income support, 39 per cent to housing measures, and 21 per cent to public transport. 

Governments in Romania and Latvia are showing signs of good practice through early stakeholder engagement and transparency. Romania’s plan is expected to include support for heat pumps, building insulation, and energy communities, while Latvia’s government is exploring, among other interventions, renovation of social housing, demand-based public transport, electric vehicle and bike leasing schemes. The Slovakian government is set to prioritise investments in energy efficiency and public transport, with the largest allocations going to family house renovations, social housing and crisis facility upgrades, and apartment renovations. 

But elsewhere, red flags are flying. The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria have fallen silent, with no draft plans, no structured public consultations, and unclear investment strategies. Likewise, the Italian government has yet to reveal any details on its plan, leaving civil society and municipalities in the dark.  

On the critical issues of energy communities and decentralised solutions, only the Romanian and Polish governments have shown strong commitment. Poland’s government is set to launch a pilot programme aimed at establishing around 80 municipal- and civil society-led energy communities. Encouragingly, the introduction of these measures – absent from the initial draft plan – is the direct result of recommendations by Polish civil society. 

Overall, however, the trend is for a lack of transparency and preparedness. This risks delaying support to the very people who need it most, with low-income families in parts of eastern Europe already spending up to 14 per cent of their income on energy alone. 

While there is no one-size-fits-all solution, a set of overarching recommendations can help guide Member State governments towards more effective and equitable national social climate plans – plans that safeguard vulnerable households, foster public trust, and unlock the significant potential of the clean energy transformation. In addition, governments must institutionalise structured and meaningful stakeholder engagement, increase local and regional capacities, and ensure that resources reach the right beneficiaries in line with the EU’s long-term climate, environmental, and social goals. 

Just as Member State governments are expected to finalise their plans, the transposition of the EU’s upcoming Emissions Trading System (ETS2) is set to begin, with emissions reporting starting in 2025. Yet countries like the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Poland, and Estonia are openly pushing for postponement. But delaying the rollout of ETS2 without delivering robust national social climate plans will leave millions without a safety net and jeopardise Europe’s climate goals. Because ultimately ETS2 isn’t just about putting a price on carbon – it represents a commitment to leave no one behind. Only by aligning ETS2 with the Social Climate Fund can we turn this commitment into reality – ensuring that social protection keeps pace with Europe’s climate ambition. 

Anelia Stefanova, strategic area leader for energy transformation at CEE Bankwatch Network: ‘National social climate plans are the clearest indicator of governments’ intent to deliver on the promise of a just transition. Understanding who is involved in shaping the plans, how they are developed, and who ultimately benefits is key to determining whether the Social Climate Fund will bring justice, social security and well-being – or become a missed opportunity. While some governments are moving forward, others are treating the deadline as a distant suggestion. Meanwhile, vulnerable households – especially in central and eastern Europe – are already feeling the pressure of high energy prices. The EU’s climate ambition and its funding instruments must go hand in hand with social justice. We need action, clarity, and honesty. And we need it now.’ 

Maike Kirsch, policy advisor at E3G: ‘National social climate plans are a crucial new instrument to ensure that the benefits of Europe’s emerging clean power system reach those who need them most. Targeted and inclusive support is essential for the energy transition to help reduce existing inequalities and lack of public trust. By defining vulnerability more effectively, investing in structural solutions, and scaling proven measures, Member States can make the Social Climate Fund a game-changer. With the right focus and political will, the successful development of the plans is well within reach – cutting emissions, lowering bills, and strengthening support for a fair and competitive energy future.’ 

Read the full report ‘Climbing together: Is the Social Climate Fund working for those who need it most?’ 

Joint NGO statement: New EU budget must ensure dedicated funds for environmental protection and just transition in the Western Balkans

68 civil society organisations have today issued a joint statement calling on the EU to ensure dedicated funds for environmental protection and just transition of coal-dependent regions in the Western Balkans in the post-2027 EU budget.

So far, there has been no dedicated EU funding for coal-dependent communities in the region, but funding for environmental protection and civil society has mostly been provided through the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA). Yet it now seems that the EU’s support for the Western Balkans in its 2028-2034 budget will no longer include IPA.

Instead, EU funding for the countries would rely almost entirely on a conditions-based system similar to the EU’s Recovery and Resilience Facility and the Western Balkans Reform and Growth Facility. These involve disbursing funds to the countries’ budgets based on the implementation of various reforms. In parallel, infrastructure projects proposed by the countries are funded through the Western Balkans Investment Framework (WBIF).

Davor Pehchevski, CEE Bankwatch Network – It’s welcome that the EU is exploring new ways to advance rule of law and environmental protection in the Western Balkans, but it’s too early to know whether the Reform and Growth approach works here. The evidence so far isn’t encouraging, as the countries’ Reform Agendas include very few environmental actions. It’s reasonable to continue testing this approach, but not for it to cover almost all EU funds.

Mirjana Jovanović, Belgrade Open School – Complying with EU environmental legislation is the most challenging part of accession, and just transition of coal regions is already late. So the EU needs to support these, along with civil society, irrespective of how well the Western Balkan governments are performing generally. Funding must be consistent, predictable, and bound to specific projects. It cannot wait for government reforms that may never materialise. 

The groups also emphasise the need for significant improvements in the Reform and Growth approach, including meaningful, timely and effective public consultation on the planned reforms and investments; the inclusion of more environmental reforms, including dissuasive penalties for legal breaches, and a focus on rule of law, environmental and social improvements rather than economic growth per se.

The Commission is expected to present the next financial framework in mid July 2025, ending months of speculation on its scope and structure.

Contacts

Pippa Gallop
Southeast Europe Policy Officer
CEE Bankwatch Network
pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org
+385 99 755 9787

 

This activity is part of the “Green Agenda Navigator” project supported by the European Union. The project is implemented by the Belgrade Open School in cooperation with six regional partners: the Aarhus Centre Association, Eco-Team organization, Eco-Z organization, the Center for Environmental Research and Information Eko-svest, the Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albania organization and CEE Bankwatch Network.

Central Asia: environmental groups and scientists call on international financial institutions to preserve key freshwater bodies and stop supporting destructive hydropower projects

On the International Day of Action for Rivers, the organisations stress that the rapid development of hydropower projects in the region threatens to fragment its unique river basins, disrupt critical natural habitats and lead to human rights abuses. Despite existing safeguards for UNESCO World Heritage sites and other protected areas, increasing international finance for large- and small-scale hydropower plants could severely damage the region’s rivers.

If all planned hydropower projects are implemented, the vast river basins of Central Asia will hardly retain any unfragmented natural river habitat.  

In December 2024, the World Bank and AIIB approved financing for the Rogun mega-dam project in Tajikistan – dubbed the ‘largest dam in the world’ – which would displace 60,000 people and affect the unique floodplain ecosystems of the Tigrovaya Balka Nature Reserve, a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Kyrgyzstan recently declared an ‘energy emergency’ to enable the construction of hydropower projects throughout the country, including within the Western Tien–Shan World Heritage Site. 

In 2025, a renewables auction scheme in Kazakhstan supported by the EBRD will be misused to support 500 MW of new hydropower projects. While the EBRD, ADB and IFC are supporting a strategic environmental and social assessment of renewable projects in Uzbekistan, a presidential decree plans for 21 new large hydropower plants. And state-owned company UzbekHydroEnergo has identified 250 prospective sites for small hydropower plants under public-private partnerships in a country with 85 per cent desert or semi-desert.  

A map of key freshwater bodies of Central Asia published this month highlights the most threatened rivers. They were identified during more than two years of research involving some of the region’s top biodiversity and hydrology experts. 

With more than 300 existing sizeable dams in the region and more than 200 new ones planned or under construction, there is an urgent need to protect the key rivers left untouched during the Soviet era. 

Andrey Ralev, Biodiversity Campaigner at CEE Bankwatch Network – ‘While the middle and lower stretches of Central Asia’s Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers are seriously disrupted, leading to the Aral Sea crisis, their mountain tributaries still hold unique biodiversity. Development banks should endorse their protection, rather than financing destructive hydropower plants’, says Andrey Ralev, Biodiversity Campaigner at CEE Bankwatch.  

Evgeny Simonov, international coordinator of the environmental coalition Rivers without Boundaries – ‘Often in Central Asia, the construction of dams and reservoirs is presented as inevitable, a kind of forced measure to preserve water resources. However, global experience tells us that such an approach is extremely ineffective from an economic point of view and often has the most destructive consequences from an environmental point of view.’

Katharine Lu, senior manager at Friends of the Earth US – ‘Our research indicates an immense toll on riparian communities and ecosystems amidst the climate and biodiversity crisis. International banks therefore need to step away from blindly supporting hydropower build out and consider lower impact, decentralized energy options.’

Contacts:

Andrey Ralev, Biodiversity Campaigner | CEE Bankwatch Network
andrey.ralev@bankwatch.org

Eugene Simonov
International Coordinator |  Rivers Without Boundaries
simonov@riverswithoutboundaries.org

Katharine Lu
Senior Manager | Friends of the Earth US

Tanya L. Roberts-Davis
Senior Energy Campaign Manager (SEA Program) | International Rivers

Dustin Schaefer
Team Lead – Multilateral Financial Institutions | Urgewald e.V.

Notes for editors

More information about the need to protect Central Asian rivers: https://bankwatch.org/project/central-asian-rivers 

The map of key freshwater bodies in Central Asia can be found at: https://arcg.is/0fDfGP0

Rivers without Boundaries and CEE Bankwatch Network have also published a toolkit for activists entitled How to interact with development banks lending to hydropower projects in Central Asia.  This toolkit provides local NGOs and community leaders with detailed instructions and real-life examples on how to use accountability mechanisms of international finance institutions to defend their environmental rights and develop meaningful dialogue on infrastructure projects being considered for financing. The toolkit can be found in English or Russian.

Environmentalists hope that the GIS model they have developed – while not a substitute for individual biodiversity assessments – will be in demand not only by specialists, but will also be used by potential investors to select projects with the least impact on the environment.’

EU budget gap holding back municipal waste reform and decarbonisation in central and eastern Europe

The report, released today, analyses the utilisation of EU waste management funding in nine central and eastern European countries: Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia and Poland. It finds that many of these countries are lagging far behind optimal waste management practices, especially in biowaste separation and recycling, largely due to a lack of targeted funding for higher-tier waste management solutions, such as waste prevention, reduction and recycling.

While the 2014–2020 investment period saw improvements in recycling and landfill reduction, progress in reducing methane emissions from landfills has been slow and remains a challenge due to inefficient diversion of biowaste from mixed waste streams [1]. In 2020, 27 per cent of the EU’s total methane emissions came from the waste management sector, with landfills being a major contributor. Decarbonising the waste sector will require more targeted investment in biowaste treatment, methane-capture technologies and the circular economy, including targeted support for local authorities for improving biowaste collection and recycling systems, including funding for local communication and human resources.

The 2021–2027 budget for waste management and the circular economy is 39 per cent higher than in the 2014–2020 period and more progressive, prioritising prevention, minimisation, sorting, reuse and recycling. Notably, 60 per cent of the total allocation is dedicated to household and industrial waste management, primarily in recycling. This shift towards more sustainable and resource-efficient practices is reinforced by the new cohesion policy funding rules and the ‘do no significant harm’ principle under the Recovery and Resilience Facility, which restrict funding for incineration and landfill projects, steering investments towards higher-tier waste management solutions.

Saša Jovanović, Cities for People Campaign Leader at Bankwatch: ‘While a 39 per cent increase in planned budgets for waste management and the circular economy across nine central and eastern European countries for the current funding period sounds encouraging, real results will depend on how timely and efficiently the countries use them. Case studies from the 2014-2020 funding cycle, such as the new biodegradable waste management infrastructure in Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria, or biowaste management on the island of Krk, Croatia show that proactive municipalities and regions can find the way to manage their waste sustainably, with special emphasis on diversion from landfills and proper treatment of biowaste, the largest single component of municipal solid waste.’

Iva Dimitrova, Economic Justice Campaigner at Za Zemiata: ‘Biowaste management remains a major challenge across central and eastern Europe, with only 10 per cent of municipal waste separately collected as biowaste in 2020. In Bulgaria, the situation is even more alarming, with just 3 per cent collected, leaving the vast majority to decompose in landfills and release methane. Urgent investments are needed in separate collection infrastructure, combined with economic incentives like increased taxation on landfilling and incineration and the implementation of pay-as-you-throw systems to reduce landfilling and encourage waste prevention.’

Marko Košak, Zero Waste Cities Programme Coordinator at Zelena Akcija: ‘Progressive cities in Europe are showing that efficient biowaste management is possible, and that EU-funded projects can play a valuable role. Unfortunately, ministries in EU countries responsible for this financing could be much more effective in distributing funds and helping municipalities achieve their goals for reducing landfill biowaste.’

Janek Vahk, Zero Waste Europe’s Zero Pollution Policy Manager: ‘Landfill methane is one of the most potent climate threats, yet EU funding for waste management is still falling short. With landfills responsible for 27 per cent of Europe’s methane emissions, urgent investment is needed to scale up biowaste collection, composting, and pre-treatment technologies like biological treatment to stop methane generation at source. Without decisive action, we risk missing our climate targets and allowing waste to accelerate the climate crisis.’

Contacts:

Michaela Kožmínová, Communications Officer, CEE Bankwatch Network

michaela.kozminova@bankwatch.org

 

Janek Vahk, Zero Pollution Policy Manager, Zero Waste Europe

janek@zerowasteeurope.eu 

Mob: +32493553779

 

Iva Dimitrova, Economic Justice campaigner, EA Za Zemiata, Friends of the Earth Bulgaria

iva.dimitrova@zazemiata.org

Mob: +359 896 62 88 08

 

Seán Flynn, Media Outreach Officer, Zero Waste Europe

sean@zerowasteeurope.eu  

Mob: +32 471 96 55 93

 

Notes for editors:

[1] The total landfilled waste in the countries analysed still amounted to almost 19 million tonnes in 2020, meaning the reduction in CO2e represents less than 6 per cent compared to 2014.

Western Balkans: Environmental groups challenge Commission’s breach of Reform and Growth Facility safeguards

On 23 October, the European Commission approved the Reform Agendas of Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia (2). These include lists of reforms to be undertaken by the countries in order to access funds from the Facility, as well as proposed investment projects to be financed through the Western Balkans Investment Framework.

According to the Regulation governing the Facility (3), the Reform Agendas were to be developed ‘in an inclusive and transparent manner, in consultation with social partners and civil society organisations’. Both the reforms and investment projects have to comply with various principles such as ‘do no significant harm’ (4) to the environment and exclusion of fossil fuels.

Yet Serbia and North Macedonia’s Reform Agendas include fossil gas pipelines and power/heat plants among their proposed investment projects. And all the countries include other projects likely to cause serious environmental damage, such as the Kruševo hydropower plant in Montenegro and motorways in sensitive locations. None of the Reform Agendas included any ‘do no significant harm’ assessments, and the lists of projects were not available to civil society organisations or the wider public to comment on.  

Although CAN Europe and Bankwatch raised concerns in July about a lack of transparency and consultation on the Reform Agendas, the Commission’s Directorate General for Enlargement (DG NEAR) failed to take corrective action or to pick up the issue in its country assessments.

Pippa Gallop, CEE Bankwatch Network – ‘The Reform and Growth Facility has the potential to contribute to a sustainable future in the Western Balkans, but only if its safeguards are applied. Too often in recent years, the Commission has taken hurried, non-transparent and ineffective action and sidelined civil society in the region. The new Enlargement Commissioner, Marta Kos, must urgently turn this around. Public scrutiny and proper environmental screening of EU funds are a must.’ 

Frosina Antonovska, CAN Europe – ‘The Western Balkan countries have been more successful in developing plans and committing to climate and energy goals, than delivering them in reality, with a lack of funding as a common excuse. The Reform Agendas could be a transformative tool, but so far, the absence of transparency, inclusiveness and consistency, are hindering this opportunity. The national agendas’ priorities and related investments must adhere to environmental safeguards and public participation principles, otherwise what “reformative” approach is being promoted for the region?’

Contacts:

Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe Energy Policy Officer, CEE Bankwatch Network

pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org
Mob: +385 99 755 9787
Skype: pippa.gallop

Frosina Antonovska, Climate and Energy Policy Coordinator for the Western Balkans, CAN Europe

frosina.antonovska@caneurope.org
Mob: +389 70 913 193

Notes for editors:

  1. The groups have initiated a legal procedure through a request for internal review – a mechanism that allows NGOs and the public to challenge certain EU decisions that breach environmental law. The Council now has sixteen weeks to respond. The request can be found here
  2. The Commission implementing decision of 23 October 2024 and its country assessments can be found here.
  3. Regulation (EU) 2024/1449 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans
  4. ‘Do no significant harm’ means not supporting or carrying out economic activities that do significant harm to any environmental objective under Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852, also known as the Taxonomy Regulation. The principle was introduced as part of the European Green Deal and has been applied to various EU funds, including the Recovery and Resilience Facility.