Co-funding of environmental investments is also a common scheme in Slovenia. Under the arrangement, the government supports environmental projects of businesses for up to 30 percent of their total investments. Projects are chosen based on a public tender. Between 1991 and 1994, annual co-funding increased from USD 1.7 million to USD 4 million. The main condition of co-funded projects is that they must ensure direct reduction of emissions.
Total spending on environmental protection in Slovenia was approximately 1.0 percent of the gross domestic product in 1994, and it decreased to 0.8 percent of GDP in 1995 and 1996. As shown in Table 5.2, annual environmental expenditures amounted to USD 147 million in 1994, 150 million in 1995, and 148 million in 1996.
| TABLE 5.2: ENVIRONMENTAL EXPENDITURES, 1994-1996 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Year | Environmental Expenditures (mln USD) | Share of GDP |
| 1994 | 146.6 | 1.0% |
| 1995 | 150.4 | 0.8% |
| 1996* | 147.6 | 0.8% |
*estimated Source: Spring Report 1997, IMAD, based on SORS, Ministry of Finance, EcoFund of the Republic of Slovenia and IMAD estimates. |
||
Environmental investments from the private sector will also increase significantly due to provisions in the privatization law that allow companies to reserve long-term funds for investments in environmental protection.
The EcoFund operates as a nonprofit financial organization and provides soft loans on preferential terms for environmental projects on the basis of public announcement. The tendering procedures are defined according to the priorities of the Environmental Protection Act and the National Environmental Protection Program, which will be launched in 1997. The Fund is mainly dedicated to air pollution abatement, phasing out of ozone-depleting substances, municipal infrastructure development and industrial pollution reduction programs. The EcoFund has been fully operational since 1995, but significant spending was undertaken only in 1996, when total revenues were USD 13.9 million and expenditures were USD 10.3 million.
| TABLE 5.3: TOTAL ECOFUND REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (MLN USD) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1994 | 1995 | 1996* | |
| Total revenues | 1.2 | 10.5 | 13.9 |
| Total expenditures | - | 0.6 | 10.3 |
* estimated Source: The Slovenian Environmental Development Fund, 1997 |
|||
| TABLE 5.4: FUND EXPENDITURES BY MEDIA | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1995 | 1996* | |
| Air | 100% | 57% |
| Water | - | 29% |
| Waste | - | 14% |
* estimated Source: The Slovenian Environmental Development Fund, 1997 |
||
In May 1996, the World Bank granted the EcoFund a USD 20 million loan for projects to reduce air pollution and a USD 3.5 million loan to set up the Geo-Information Center. Currently, the PHARE Programme is considering awarding the EcoFund a grant of ECU 5 million, which would be made available for environmental investments.
The main problems facing the EcoFund are a lack of capital and high interest rates (6 percent plus the rate of inflation). Another problem with the EcoFund commonly stated by businesses is the long time it takes authorities to make a decision regarding an application for funding.
In particular, surface and groundwater has deteriorated over the past decades, mainly due to agricultural run-off, discharge of untreated municipal and industrial wastewater and pollution caused by the numerous industrial and municipal waste disposal sites. The quality of drinking water is generally low, and there is little treatment of wastewater in Slovenia. Improvements and investments are expected over the next few years. Waste management is a particular area of concern because of the growing amount of untreated industrial and municipal waste and because of leakage from unregulated and illegal dump sites.
The energy sector was once the largest area of concern, and high priority was given to flue gas desulfurization at power stations. In 1994, air pollution control programs accounted for more than 70 percent of environmental spending. Although these programs have since been successful, power plants and increasing urban traffic are still the main sources of air pollution, especially around Ljubljana. Furthermore, acid rain has become a problem, and soil pollution has been caused by the extensive use of pesticides and fertilizers.
Most of the environmental decisions made in the past were based mainly on political grounds without any comprehensive strategy or direction. The National Environmental Action Plan, which will be launched this year, should help focus environmental efforts and give a more focused outline of national environmental priorities.
The breakdown of environmental spending for 1994 is shown in Table 5.5. Figures for 1995 and 1996 were not available because of ongoing reorganization at the Slovenian Statistical Office. However, a new system to track environmental spending has already been started and will be implemented in 1998.
| TABLE 5.5: BREAKDOWN OF ENVIRONMENTAL EXPENDITURES BY MEDIA, 1994 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Total investment for Environmental Protection (mln USD) | 147 | |
| Air pollution | 71% | |
| Water and wastewater | 9% | |
| Waste | 18% | |
| Other | 2% | |
Source: The Statistical Yearbook of Slovenia, 1995 |
||
The general structure of environmental legislation follows the pattern of the Slovenian legal system, and its hierarchy of legal sources begins with the constitution, followed by basic environmental legislation (e.g. the Environmental Protection Act of 1993) and subordinate regulations and decrees covering individual aspects of environmental protection. A legislative framework regarding air and water pollution is already in place. Although the government has recently adopted a waste strategy, there is still a lack of legislation covering waste management. In general, secondary legislation on the implementation and enforcement of existing regulations is lagging behind.
The most important state bodies involved in environmental legislation are the Parliament, which passes the basic legislation; the Ministry of the Environment and Regional Planning, which is responsible for regulatory measures and control; the Environmental Protection Council, which adopts positions, informs the public, etc.; the Institute for Environmental Protection, which was established within the Ministry of the Environment and Regional Planning; and the local authorities, which deal with environmental protection issues on the local level.
Slovenian officials are putting great effort into harmonizing national environmental legislation with EU standards, but gaps still remain, especially in sectoral and enforcement legislation. Also, there is not enough information available regarding the degree of compliance with recent legislation. It is known, however, that levels of compliance are still below the EU norm in many key areas, such as the industrial and energy sectors in municipal and hazardous wastes. The country's efforts to force compliance with regulations have focused mainly on water quality and have neglected many other important areas, including product-related directives as well as waste directives. In the future, more attention will also need to be paid to the agricultural sector, which poses significant environmental threats; to creating directives to deal with air, waste and water; to the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) directive; and to establishing funding sources for projects related to water, air and waste management.
In addition, the following institutions operate as part of the Ministry of Environment: the geophysics administration, the surveying and mapping authority, the nuclear safety administration and the hydro-meteorological institute.
Administration of environmental regulations in Slovenia is carried out on the national level and on the local level, which is made up of 147 municipalities. No public administration exists on the regional level, although there are 58 regional administrative units which operate as links between the national and the local authorities and which perform some local administrative tasks.
The Nature Protection Authority also deals with many environmental issues. For instance, its Water Management Department consists of eight subdivisions, one for each major watershed. The Nature Protection Department has seven regional offices that operates as technical supervisory bodies for local authorities. In addition, the Inspectorate for Environment and Physical Planning has established nine offices for environmental inspections and another 12 for the inspection of physical planning.
The main function of local authorities related to the environment are the protection of air, soil and water resources; the regulation and maintenance of water and power supply facilities; the protection against noise and the provision of facilities for the collection and disposal of waste in urban municipalities; and the preservation of natural and cultural monuments of local interest.
Finally, there are several independent or semi-independent scientific institutes which play a major role in environmental protection. These include the Josef Stefan Institute, the Water Management Institute and the National Chemical Institute.