How to improve government openness and accountability? What kind of public administration reform should Serbia implement to ensure high quality services to its citizens and become a successful EU member state? And how should the public and civil society be engaged in these and other policies? This programme deals with issues which are the foundation and precondition for the success of all sectoral reforms in the transition and the EU integration process.
Internal Market and
This programme researches conditions crucial for complying with the economic criteria for Serbia's EU membership. What are the possibilities for Serbia to strengthen the market economy and competition policy? Do the legal and institutional frameworks encourage economic activity and ensure the quality and product safety, as well as a high degree of consumer protection? These and other relevant questions are addressed through this programme.
Regional Policy, Energy and
How to ensure balanced and sustainable development of Serbia in accordance with European standards? This programme emphasises topics of social development, regional competitiveness, environmental protection, energy, and transportation. In these areas we especially address stakeholder participation in planning and implementing development activities, with the goal of ensuring an informed and transparent decision-making process.
Europe&Us
This programme follows the EU accession process and already views Serbia as a member state. How do current events in the EU reflect on Serbia? How should the Serbian decision-makers react to issues such as Brexit, the migrant crisis, and the future of the EU? How to best organise representation and advocacy for Serbia's EU membership? These are some of the questions we research within this programme.
We approach public policy research in a manner which takes into account relevant cross-cutting issues, such as efficiency and effectiveness, equal opportunity - gender equality, social inclusion, anti-discrimination, etc. Gradually, we're striving to include these areas into all research activities we conduct.
CEP's programme structure is comprised of four programmes and cross-cutting areas that we strive to incorporate into the activities of each of the programmes. A detailed description of programmes can be found in the submenu of this section.
WeBER: Monitoring of public administration reform in Western Balkans
Since december 2015, European policy centre implemets three-year project "Western Balkans Enabling Project for Civil Society Monitoring of Public Administration…
Competition Policy in Serbia – What is the Problem?
CEP's research project within the Think and Link Regional Policy Programme aimed to analyze issues in the implementation of competition…
Think-Act-Impact: Ensuring Improved Implementation of EU Directives on Environmental Impact Assessment in Serbia
Legal acts on environmental protection in the Republic of Serbia are to large extent aligned with the European acquis, whereas…
Serbia's pursuit of interest in the EU - Administrative, Financial and Lobbying Capacities
This research project addresses an under-researched topic of Serbian administrative, diplomatic, political and lobbying capacities towards the main EU institutions.
TRAIN program 2016: Fundamental Rights in the EU Accession Context
A special focus of 2016 TRAIN programme was on fundamental rights in the context of EU accession of the Western…
CEP Products
CEP Insight
CEP Briefs
CEP Studies
CEP Presents
CEP Discussion Paper
Reports and Other Editions
CEP Infographics
CEP Podcast
If you get tired of reading, then have a listen to our podcast. European Talks podcast is a short form conversation that aims to untangle difficult questions on various topics related to Serbia's relations with the EU and its member states, by talking to experts, diplomats, and other relevant actors. Whether you are a researcher, a politician, or just genuinely curious about the topic, European Talks podcast will provide you with valuable ideas, answers as well as new questions.
CEP Blog
CEP Blog is a platform for our staff, associates and Council members to contribute concise and informative opinion pieces on topics relevant to Serbia's EU integration process, regional or domestic developments. These posts might also be published in newspapers, magazines, or other media outlets we collaborate with, and they represent opinions of individual authors. Are you interested in what's happening in Serbia, in the Western Balkan region, or the EU? Check out our latest blog posts!
Publications focus on key public policy issues that are in the centre of CEP's programmes and mission. With our publications, we raise awareness of targeted audience, we intend to place these issues and their potential solutions on the agenda of decision makers and to start dialogue, but also to provide expert opinion and advice. Our publications address not only decision makers, but civil society, academia, media and wider public as well.
Brexit Vol.3 – Johnson's story
Serbia Design Report 2018–2020
Notable commitments include transparency of media funding, amendments to the access to information law, and proactive publication of information. Effective…
Problems and obstacles in access to justice in enforcement procedure from the perspective of consumer protection
Specifically, the identification of problems and obstacles faced by consumers and civil society organisations in the field of enforcement should…
Local Finances and the Environment
Serbia is facing serious challenges in the field of environmental protection and harmonizing its standards with those of the European…
Gender Issues in the Western Balkans
The importance of gender equality in the enlargement process has been emphasised in various EU documents, while the European Commission's…
To boycott or not to boycott, that is the question now
Nataša Vučković, member of the Parliament and executive director of…
Croatia will not block Serbia during its Council Presidency, on the contrary!
The cover photo of this blog is a typical picture…
CEP News
Stay up-to- date with the latest news about our activities, as well as with other insights and information from the events we organise, topics we initiate, and partnerships we create and foster!
In this section, we announce our upcoming events organised either independently or in collaboration with our partner organisations. Find info on the topics of events, speakers, location, and time. See you at one of our events!
Official announcement: WeBER 2.0 has begun!
We are proud to inform you that the WeBER Project…
The Future of Think Tanks and Policy Advice in the Context of Democratic Crises
Throughout the world, think tanks are operating against a backdrop…
Since our establishment, not only has the number of our projects increased, but they also continued to grow in scope, number of partner organisations and donors who have supported us, as well as in the influence these projects achieved. In this section, see our current projects and those we previously carried out and whose results we continue to strengthen.
Constituencies for Judicial Reform in Serbia
From January 7th 2019 until January 6 2022, European Policy…
About CEP
CEP team is consisted of highly qualified and renowned experts in the fields of European Law, Public Administration, Political Science, International Relations, and other areas of social sciences and humanities. Robust social capital in the form of seasoned management and expert associates, along with promising junior team members, all contribute to CEP evolving as an organisation capable not just of conducting research, but also achieving a tangible impact in the decision-making sphere.
External Associates
Our external associates are reputable and prominent individuals working in various areas of public life, relevant to our research topics. They work as independent experts, or are hired by the public, private, and civil sector in the country and abroad. They contribute to the European Policy Centre (CEP) by providing expert advice and comments on our projects, publications, and research, by writing articles that are published on our website, or through short-term expert assignments to our projects.
Governing Board is the executive body of the Association, which is in charge of implementing CEP's goals. The Governing Board manages CEP's work at the strategic level and makes decisions to achieve goals of the organisation.
CEP Council
The Council members include distinguished national and international experts, high-level representatives of the renowned national institutions, academia and international and multi-lateral organisations. Council will be entrusted with an advisory and steering role in shaping the CEP strategic and program framework and providing recommendations for its further development. Simultaneously, the Council should contribute to the further advancement of research methodologies and capacities in the individual programme areas of CEP, as well as support the wider outreach of CEP's research results among key stakeholders and the public in general.
European Policy Centre is a non-governmental, non-profit, independent think-tank, founded in 2011 by a group of professionals in the area of EU law, EU affairs, economics and public administration reform, with a shared vision of changing the policy making environment in Serbia for the better – by rendering it more evidence based, more open and inclusive and more substantially EU accession driven.
Srđan Majstorović President of CEP Governing Board
European Policy Centre (CEP) is proud to announce that Srđan Majstorović was elected as the Chairman of the Governing Board
From crisis to opportunity
Harnessing the potential of the French proposals for the benefit of the Western Balkans
Milena Lazarević
Over the past couple of days, the discourse on the Western Balkans' EU accession has been dominated by discussion of the (in)famous French non-paper, finally explaining the thinking behind the changes in the enlargement methodology announced earlier by President Macron. Ever since France blocked the opening of accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania at October's European Council meeting, criticising and even bashing French proposals for reforming EU enlargement policy has been a popular sport within the expert and think-tank community in the EU and the region at large. Enraged by this act and bolstered by a subsequent wave of misinformation about what the French really want (with claims, for example, that France would propose a sort of a privileged partnership instead of actual membership), the policy community (or at least the Twitter policy community) has greeted the non-paper with loads of negativity.
But let's not dismiss its ideas just because we don't like the way they've been delivered. To understand the essence of the proposal, we should work to separate the scent of "French arrogance" surrounding the process from the actual analysis of the non-paper. After gaining a bit of context from discussions with various French officials over the past weeks, I would dare argue that these proposals – even if quite general in this first draft – present an opportunity for the Western Balkan region to benefit from a substantively improved accession process. Moreover, the fact that this initial proposal reflects a number of papers and recommendations made in the previous years by think tanks and experts from the region (as well as those highly experienced with the region's EU accession) gives hope that behind these proposals is indeed a genuine wish to improve the process. As the French officials have repeated several times in the past few weeks, the idea is to change the process from a "box-ticking" exercise, plagued by reform window-dressing, into a truly transformative process, supporting socio-economic convergence and providing tangible benefits for the region's citizens.
Firstly, one needs to acknowledge the fact that the non-paper clearly reiterates "full and complete accession" as the final objective of the process. Therefore, there should be no more speculation that the Western Balkans would be offered a substitute for membership or that EU enlargement to the region is dead.
Next, the non-paper presents a more gradual pathway towards membership. The rationale behind this principle is twofold. First, by allowing candidates to accede to EU policies in a step-by-step manner (possibly through several policy blocks, for which a potential structure is provided in an annex), the moment of actual accession would be rendered less intimidating – particularly for member states. In a way, member states would gradually get accustomed to the participation of new countries in EU affairs. Second, gradual accession would allow candidate countries to "practice membership" in a manner of speaking. As Western Balkan countries' officials would be allowed to take part in Council deliberations (without voting rights), they would progressively "socialise" and learn how to function within the complex EU policymaking system.
I made a similar, though more ambitious, proposal over a year ago in my discussion paper "Away with the Enlargement Bogeyman," published by CEP Belgrade. Therefore, at this point, I need to point out a few reservations I have after reading the French non-paper. My proposal was based on the idea that candidate countries would be allowed to cross a key milestone towards membership earlier in the accession process by signing tailored accession treaties stipulating gradual access to EU policy areas based on a clear roadmap and upon meeting specific conditions for each "layer" of membership. The French proposal, however, lacks clarity on the legal context of the proposed "gradual accession." The devil will, clearly, lie in the details. If candidate countries are still to remain just that, up to the final point of meeting all the prescribed (and stringent) criteria (the second main principle in the non-paper), I fear that instead of practicing membership, the region will just be given a toy to keep itself busy for years or even decades to come. Without signing accession treaties (or at least specific sectorial treaties), the European Court of Justice will not have jurisdiction over any of the matters covered by the proposed policy blocks, leaving to question whether anyone will take such participation seriously. What is needed for the further elaboration of this basic principle of the French proposal is a serious legal analysis, laying out options and ways forward, along with impact assessments for all of the options.
The second grand principle the French non-paper proposes is about "stringent conditions." Rather than introducing a new concept, I read this principle to mainly reiterate the need for basing advancement on clear and objective indicators of progress. Assessing this progress also needs to be objective and credible (i.e. trusted by member states), which we can read as a warning for the European Commission, the main author of the countries' monitoring reports, considering that the non-paper also underlines that member states should review its evaluations. There are two notable issues in this segment of the proposal. Firstly, while an increased reliance on various international methodologies is essentially positive, this suggestion leaves out the region's civil society, which has been heavily involved in monitoring domestic reforms and whose impact on the European Commission's monitoring reports has grown over the years, making them more objective and outspoken in describing reform deficiencies. Secondly, the non-paper mentions "tangible economic and social convergence" as an objective that needs to be met before final accession. Whether this is a proposal to introduce a fully new membership criterion or not remains to be seen, but we need to be very careful here. To my knowledge, Central and Eastern European countries have achieved most of their convergence with the rest of the club post-accession, as EU membership has boosted their economic performance. Asking Western Balkan candidates to converge first and only then potentially accede might just mean creating an unsurmountable obstacle – one that defies the very logic of the benefits of accession.
I should say here that the true meaning of the second principle will also depend on the final design of the third key principle. Discussing "tangible benefits," the non-paper offers the possibility of making structural funds available to candidate countries. Experts (such as Dusan Reljic of SWP and, more recently, Pierre Mirel, Honorary Director General at European Commission) have written and spoken about the benefits of such support to the countries of the Western Balkans for a couple of years now, especially in terms of closing the development gap with the EU. When reflected in the context of the possible convergence criterion discussed above, this tangible benefit would need to be feature more strongly in proposals for reforming the enlargement methodology. Rather than mentioning them as a mere possibility, access to structural funds should be intrinsically linked to the "stringent conditions" principle. Several caveats regarding rules of access and anti-corruption mechanisms to avoid possible misuse of these funds would need to be attached to this part of the proposal. Some of these caveats are recognised in the non-paper, whereas others have been elaborated by the experts referenced above.
The fourth principle concerns the "reversibility" of the accession process. Based on my discussions in Paris, I believe that French officials don't necessarily see this principle as introducing something completely new to the process, but rather strengthening and enforcing the instruments that have already been available. We do need the process to be more reactive to the situation on the ground, with clearer consequences when authorities in the region fail to uphold even the most basic democratic and rule-of-law standards. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with this part of the proposal. In fact, if applied properly towards Turkey, it could prove very useful for the Western Balkan region at large, considering that much of the opposition to enlargement in EU member states is linked to the Turkish accession process.
The non-paper also proposes an improved political governance of the process, including annual European Council meetings with Western Balkan heads of states or governments. Such meetings would be very helpful in keeping enlargement high on the EU's political agenda, while at the same time further supporting the region's convergence with the mainstream EU policy priorities (for example, environment and climate change, and migration policy, among others). What needs to be kept in mind is the adverse "glorification" effect of high-level interactions between EU and WB political leaderships. As argued convincingly by Wunsch and Richter in their paper "Money, Power, Glory" earlier this year, such interactions have been construed by Western Balkan governments as endorsements of their domestic actions. Therefore, increased interaction at the political level should also be accompanied by a clearer decoupling of support for our countries' EU accession processes from support for local leaders and their often-questionable governing practices. In fact, what is needed in the accession process going forward is increased clarity about who is responsible for reduced progress or backsliding, in line with the reversibility principle.
As I said above, the devil will be in the details. Whereas the non-paper offers the bones of a reformed enlargement methodology, the Commission will need to develop it in totality, including the policy packages (referred to as stages of the process). Along with working out legal intricacies, the final proposal should take special care to make the process more motivating for Western Balkan political leaderships, through both the carrots and the sticks introduced on the way. I would even go so far as to propose setting accession target years based on merit for each of the countries, re-assessed with every monitoring report, with conclusions provided on whether the country has moved forward or away from meeting its targets. If progress is not made, the target year would be duly changed.
And finally, a decisive factor in either backing or blocking the French proposal may be support (or lack thereof) for it from the Western Balkan region itself. Rather than imposing a new methodology on the region from the top down, this is a much-needed opportunity to work together with those actors from the region most concerned with the true transformation of our countries into credible and capable future member states. By harnessing this potential and building trust in the region's societies, France as well as other member states worried about the basic values of the Union can finally put those members on the spot who only pay lip service to supporting enlargement.
The Killing of Soleimani
Four things citizens want to see in the future service delivery policy in Serbia
Letter to Macron: Details matter for enlargement reform
A "Geopolitical" Commission – What's in the Name?
European Policy Centre
Đorđa Vajferta 13
office@cep.org.rs
Copyright © 2017 European Policy All Rights Reserved
Powered by Mint22 Studio