Decarbonisation is closely linked to social changes that can lead to significant positive impacts and revitalise society. However, if poorly managed, it can also result in substantial disruption. In the Czech Republic, as in many other countries, the greatest challenges have arisen in regions with a long-standing dependence on the coal industry, in this case the northwestern and eastern parts of the country.
The Just Transition Fund is one of the mechanisms launched by the EU to help regions reliant on fossil fuels shift towards climate-neutral economies. The fund is unique in that it is the first EU financial instrument to address both social and climate concerns simultaneously. More importantly, the fund is set up to allocate money to the most vulnerable regions, embracing the core principle of the EU’s cohesion policy. Running until 2027, the fund has allocated EUR 1.64 billion to Czech regions facing serious socio-economic challenges.
Even though the Czech just transition pathway has often been shown as a model example of the just transition in action, its full potential has yet to be unleashed. According to the results of a 2023 interim report evaluating the benefits of European funds at the regional level, Czech regions with structural issues have utilised EU funds far less efficiently than the larger, more developed regions.
The success of the just transition hinges on providing support for small and medium actors, encouraging the participation of local communities, and making meaningful investments that add value to the local economy and improve quality of life – all while aligning with the EU’s climate goals. While it’s commendable that the fund excludes investments in fossil fuels, such as gas infrastructure, and promotes local participation, there are still lessons to be learned from how the fund has been allocated thus far. So what areas can the Czech Republic improve on? And how can the country capitalise on the next repetition of the Just Transition Fund, if established as part of the post-2027 EU budget?
During the preparation of the Territorial just transition plan it has been designed that large strategic projects should use about half of the fund. Having a list of miscellaneous specific projects aimed to bring about significant transformational impact seemed to be risky from the very beginning. This approach, while seemingly efficient for utilising the funds quickly, has created another set of problems. There are concerns in relation to the transparency with which these projects have been selected and evaluated, and the limited participation of the public. This in turn has created a sense of distrust among local communities of the potential for these projects to be truly transformative or benefit the local population.
Even though evaluators may have objections to the projects during the several steps of the evaluation process, the task is evident: the success of the strategic flagship projects has an overarching effect on the overall progress of the programme. This ties officials down, making them prone to pressurised decisions. Furthermore, decisions without inclusive input often results in poor outcomes, which is why civil society and local communities must become more involved.
To ensure the next iteration of the Just Transition Fund is successful, the current procedure related to the strategic projects should not be repeated. If the Czech Republic insists on continuing strategic projects, the process must improve. Firstly, these projects should directly address the specific needs of affected communities, identified through comprehensive discussions with a wide range of stakeholders. If they don’t meet these criteria, these projects should be scrapped. Secondly, these projects should be designed to enable small and medium-sized enterprises as well as non-governmental organisations to become beneficiaries. To this end, calls for proposals should be announced well in advance and widely disseminated to ensure maximum participation. Thirdly, the selection and evaluation processes should be conducted transparently, meet predefined criteria, and involve stakeholders representing diverse sectors of business and society.
To gain a better understanding of local needs, we need in-depth discussions with mayors from the municipalities affected. Civil society must also come on board and be empowered in the planning process, build partnerships with non-governmental organisations, participate in official regional platforms, and partner with social and educational experts from the very beginning.
Finally, we should also retain aspects of the fund that have worked well. For instance, the cross-sectoral nature of the fund makes it easier to identify solutions and collaborate in the pursuit of common goals, such as supporting primary and secondary schools in structurally weak areas. Interdisciplinary cooperation, transparency and inclusion can only be beneficial in the long run, enriching discussion, informing the planning process, and creating a fairer and more sustainable future for people in transition.