SF / CF Institutional Set-Up in Malta

a perspective of

the

Malta Environment & Planning Authority

Sergei Golovkin, Projects Coordinator

Krista Falzon, Environment Protection Officer

ENEA

MC

GRDP

MA

RPC

MEPA

NCSD

State Aid

Contracts

Paying Agency

Equality

SMSC Agri-Fish

SMSC Employment

SMSC Tourism

SMSC Environment

SMSC Transport

EU Commission

Ministry

Social Partners

PSC

Intermediary Bodies

Environmental Authority

Applicants

Payment rules

Written Guidance

Financial Rules

Red tapeImpact Assessments

Monitoring Indicators

N+2 = ??

Appraisal methods

Projects Viability

Programme Timeframes

National Priorities

Selection Criteria

Institutional Capacity

State of the Environment

Project Stakeholders

Publicity Requirements Managing Authority Procurement rules

Co-financing Permits Consultations

Strengths

• Proximity: all key players are near – easy communication

• Knowledge: strong skills base within MEPA• History: good track record on EIAs & well-

developed land use policy• Information: sound IT base• Awareness: strong public expectations from

the Funds

Weaknesses

• Economies of scale: is it worth the trouble?• Finance: limited allocation of funds• Resources: limited HR & institutional

capacity• Culture: lack of sensitivity for environmental

concerns• Direction: lack of strategy on environment• Perception: environmental concerns are

seen as an added cost, not an asset

Opportunities

• Improve / capitalize on communication• Apply SEAs• Promote the use of ICT for integration• Still in time to influence EU guidelines &

regulations• Use of technical assistance for

capacity-building• Share experience with other MS

Threats

• Money spent on bad projects

• Lack of time & “parallel programming”

• Weak evaluations

• Lack of coordination amongst different Funds

• Narrow recognition of the roles of EAs within the proposed regulations

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

grdp@mepa.org.mt