Regional Cooperation Council International Roundtable on Protection and Sustainable Use of Trans-boundary Waters in South East Europe, 15-16 December 2011, Zagreb, Croatia

1. Roundtable on Trans‐boundary Water
ou dtab e o a s bou da y ate
Management
Miroslav Kukobat
Miroslav Kukobat
Senior Expert on Energy and Infrastructure
Regional Cooperation Council
Zagreb
Z b
15‐16 December 2011

2. South East Europe is moving forward
• The SP SEE (1999) ‐ reconciliation, stability and good neighbourly
relations
• The RCC as the operational arm of the SEECP (major political
framework for regional cooperation) ‐ enhance regional
cooperation on the path towards European and Euro‐Atlantic
h h d d l
integration
•R i
Regional cooperation – k
l ti key prerequisite of the EU enlargement
i it f th EU l t
policy and complementary segment of national European policy
agenda
agenda
• Keeping the regional approach – benefits
• Laying ground for the resolution of remaining issues and
Laying ground for the resolution of remaining issues and
developing a new image.

3. Evolving role of the Regional Cooperation Council
• As a new, regionally owned organisation the RCC represents the region,
supports and initiates regional cooperation ‐ 13 SEE beneficiaries
• The RCC operates under the political umbrella of the SEECP. Its
objectives, working methods and priority areas for action are defined by
objectives, working methods and priority areas for action are defined by
the Statute and other documents adopted at Annual Meetings and
endorsed by SEECP Summits
• A th
As the main focal point for regional cooperation, the RCC:
i f l i tf i l ti th RCC
a. supports economic and social
development and related reforms
p
b. promotes the region’s European and
Euro‐Atlantic integration of which
regional cooperation is an essential
regional cooperation is an essential
part
c. links the region with donor
community in areas with a regional
dimension

4. Membership (47)
• Members from the South East Europe (Albania, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, The Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia Moldova Montenegro Romania Serbia
Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia,
Slovenia, Turkey) and UNMIK on behalf of Kosovo in accordance
with the UNSC Resolution 1244 (13)
• European Union, represented by a representative of the High
Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
and a representative of the European Commission
• Donor countries (Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark,
Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Norway,
Poland, Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United
States) (20)
• I t
International organizations/institutions (C E C
ti l i ti /i tit ti (CoE, Council of E
il f Europe
Development Bank, EBRD, EIB, European Parliament, OECD, OSCE,
NATO, SECI, UN, UNDP, UN ECE, World Bank) (13)

5. RCC Programming Role – complex inputs
CC og a g o e co p e puts
5+1 priority areas: Economic and Social Development, Energy and
Infrastructure, JHA, Security Cooperation, BHC and Parliamentary
Cooperation
Cooperation
4 categories of beneficiaries: EU members, candidates, potential
candidates and a country covered by EU Neighbourhood Policy
candidates and a country covered by EU Neighbourhood Policy
Diversified players: beneficiaries’ institutions, regional initiatives,
EU, IFIs, other international organizations, individual donor
countries, CSOs, private foundations, business sector, local
communities networks etc
communities’ networks etc.

6. RCC Platform Result of a
RCC Platform – Result of a
Broad Consultative Process
Civil Society
Organizations
International
Businesses
Organizations
National
Donors
Administrations
Regional RCC SEECP
initiatives
Platform

7. RCC –
RCC ITWRM
Regional cooperation in ITWRM currently limited due to different
reasons – EU accession; ensure protection, sustainable and fair use of
TWR avoiding conflicts and promoting development
RCC SWP 2011 2013: Integrated approach (territorial, multi sector,
RCC SWP 2011‐2013: Integrated approach (territorial, multi‐sector,
multi‐stakeholder, multi‐level),`bottom‐up` approach, innovative
financing schemes, SEDRI – (EU SDR)
International Workshop on Transboundary Water Resources
International Workshop on ``Transboundary Water Resources
Management in South‐Eastern Europe,`` Sarajevo, 18 ‐ 20.05.2009
(i) institutional and legal settings for cooperation
(ii) multipurpose use of water resources
(iii) climate change adaptation
(iv) preparations of the 2nd assessment of transboundary waters
(i ) ti f th 2 t ft b d t
under the UNECE Water Convention
Ministerial ``Combating CC in SEE``, Sarajevo, 14.11.2008 ‐ CCFAP/A,
IPCC estimates (by 2100, temp↗2.2‐5.1°C, precipitation↘27%)
IPCC i (b 2100 ↗2 2 5 1°C i i i ↘27%)
Roundtable on fundraising activities for ISRBC projects, Sarajevo, 17
May 2011

8. RCC – ITWRM
ICAM‐RBM process, (ICPE&ECPD)
p ,( )
‐ Network of Observing Systems in the Adriatic Region ‐ by Maritime
Biology Station, Piran, Slovenia
‐ The HEART of Adria: Heritage, Environment, Archeology and Tourism ‐
by University of Primorska, Koper, Slovenia
‐ Integrated Management of the Sava River between Krško and Zagreb ‐
by Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning and Water Science
Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia
I tit t Lj blj Sl i
‐ Contribution of the SME and entrepreneurship sector to the
Development of Sava‐Danube Region ‐ by Institute of Economic
Development of Sava Danube Region by Institute of Economic
Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
RCC raising the awareness on the political level of the need to
RCC‐raising the awareness on the political level of the need to
develop efficient trans‐boundary cooperation and sustained political
support for long‐term cooperation

9. EC‐RCC MB IPA Programming Process
EC RCC MB IPA P i P
Statistics; Justice, Freedom and Security; Public Administration Reform; Cultural
Heritage and History; Human Rights and Minorities and Vulnerable Groups;
Infrastructure; Environment and DRR; Private Sector Development and
Investment Climate
SEE EU
Countries
Countries’ interests
Regional
Interests
National
Interest
MBIPA
National National
Interest
I t t Interest
Cross‐border Cooperation

10. Successful Projects Criteria
Competing projects
C ti j t
Interest explicitly expressed by a few regional countries
Concrete, quick and visible results
C t i k d i ibl lt
Obvious added value and regional impact
Feasibility (technical and financial) with clear identification of
F ibilit (t h i l d fi i l) ith l id tifi ti f
realistic sources and modes of financing
Removing obvious bottlenecks and financially not very much
Removing obvious bottlenecks and financially not very much
demanding
Recognition of common problems, preparation of shared
Recognition of common problems preparation of shared
projects in order to find jointly solutions
Q
Quick and visible results – to be presented to the public in
p p
order to maintain support and facilitate replication

11. Thank you
y
miroslav.kukobat@rcc.int
miroslav kukobat@rcc int
Ph. +387 33 561707
Mob. +387 62 341515