• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

Bankwatch

  • About us
    • Our vision
    • Who we are
    • 30 years of Bankwatch
    • Donors & finances
    • Get involved
  • What we do
    • Campaign areas
      • Beyond fossil fuels
      • Rights, democracy and development
      • Finance and biodiversity
      • Funding the energy transformation
      • Cities for People
    • Institutions we monitor
      • European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
      • European Investment Bank
      • Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
      • Asian Development Bank (ADB)
      • EU funds
    • Our projects
    • Success stories
  • Publications
  • News
    • Blog posts
    • Press releases
    • Stories
    • Podcast
    • Us in the media
    • Videos
  • Donate

Home > Archives for EU funds and biodiversity

EU funds and biodiversity

Даниел Попов: Стъпването върху стабилен подход спрямо НАТУРА зоните плаши някои хора

July 20, 2022

От коалиция nnДа спасим Кресненския пролом твърдят, че скандал ще отпуши АМ Струма в района на Кресненския проломnn. Защо?nnОт …


It’s time to put an end to EU funding of fossil gas

June 27, 2022

While EU households and industry face months without heating, exorbitant energy bills and insecurity, EU funds are driving an increase in the demand for gas in the region, a Bankwatch analysis of Modernisation Fund spending shows.


EU investments: voice of the public must be heard!

June 16, 2022

Member States are currently making important investment decisions to address the multitude of crises we are facing. This money has the potential to transform our economy, yet the challenges to ensure it meets this potential are high. The EU’s unprecedented COVID-19 recovery package should be spent wisely and in a transparent manner. Yet it is for the moment far from open, and it is unlikely this will change any time soon.


On the (long) road to recovery: Poland’s plan greenlit

June 14, 2022

Poland’s recovery plan has finally been endorsed by the Commission after over a year of negotiations. Despite multiple declarations from government officials that talks would finish quickly, the plan worth EUR 35 billion was put on hold for an extended period of time because of the Commission’s concerns about the rule of law in the country. Is Poland’s recovery plan a wasted opportunity? Not necessarily, but it is not a fully-used one, either.


Behind the ‘green recovery’: How the EU recovery fund is failing to protect nature and what can still be saved

June 2, 2022

This report prepared by CEE Bankwatch Network and EuroNatur, shines a spotlight on the implementation of recovery funds, and reveals a series of harmful reforms and investments for biodiversity set to be financed in nine central and eastern European Member States (Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Poland, Romania and Slovenia). 


Il ripristino della biodiversità deve essere parte integrante della transizione energetica europea

May 4, 2022

In vista della pubblicazione della comunicazione RepowerEU da parte della Commissione europea, in una dichiarazione congiunta, BirdLife, …


A step in the right direction: Bulgaria’s recovery plan improved after lengthy negotiations

April 28, 2022

After one year of negotiations, at the beginning of April, the European Commission finally endorsed the sixth and final version of Bulgaria’s recovery plan. According to the Commission, nearly 60 per cent of the projects included in the plan support the green transition of the country, which is the highest percentage among all the recovery plans approved so far.


How to win energy sovereignty and avoid a gas trap in Poland

April 11, 2022

Poland’s energy policy has to change urgently in the face of the war in Ukraine. EU funds must finance Poland’s transformation for energy security and sustainability. There is no return to the business as usual when it comes to energy policy.


Breaking down the ‘do no significant harm’ principle

April 7, 2022

This briefing aims to explain the ‘do no significant harm’ principle and how it has been used in the Recovery and Resilience Facility. It also raises concerns over the long-term risks and implications of applying the ‘do no significant harm’ principle


Applying the ‘do no significant harm’ principle in practice: examples of reforms and investments under national recovery plans that will cause harm to the environment

March 8, 2022

This joint letter, prepared by CEE Bankwatch Network, EuroNatur, WWF and ReCommon, raises concern about the application of the EU’s ‘do no significant harm’ principle under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). The letter is accompanied by a seri


« Previous Page
Next Page »

Footer

CEE Bankwatch Network gratefully acknowledges EU funding support.

The content of this website is the sole responsibility of CEE Bankwatch Network and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.

Unless otherwise noted, the content on this website is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 License

Your personal data collected on the website is governed by the present Privacy Policy.

Get in touch with us

  • Bluesky
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • YouTube