The European Union has invested €527 million into a flagship fund aimed at linking the Western Balkans more closely with the bloc's transport network, but a new audit reveals that Brussels has struggled to oversee how that money is spent. The European Court of Auditors (ECA) published its findings on Tuesday, just days after the EU-Western Balkans summit in Montenegro, raising questions about the effectiveness of one of the EU's most strategically important investment programmes in the region.
The audit, covering the period from 2015 to mid-2025, examined 12 specific road, rail, and waterway projects worth €341.6 million across Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Serbia. The ECA found that the European Commission frequently disbursed lump-sum grants that far exceeded the actual progress made on the ground, weakening its ability to use funding as leverage to ensure compliance and keep construction on track.
Reliance on International Lenders
In a critical assessment, the auditors noted that the Commission has increasingly relied on international financial institutions to oversee the implementation of transport projects. While these projects generally address key infrastructure needs, the Commission's own monitoring systems were found to be limited. Project information was often out of date, delays were inadequately reported, and the systems failed to provide a complete picture of progress.
“In terms of EU enlargement, well-developed infrastructure is a step towards meeting the bloc’s accession criteria. The Western Balkans’ transport projects are progressing too slowly to connect the region to the EU this decade,” said Laima Andrikienė, the ECA member in charge of the report. “The Commission should improve the selection, monitoring and sustainability of projects and enhance the visibility of EU-funded transport projects in the region.”
The auditors recommended that the EU executive require financial institutions to provide evidence of how they assess and mitigate implementation risks, including issues such as insufficient project developer capacity, conflicts of interest, or lack of beneficiary ownership.
Delays and Incomplete Networks
Every project examined by the ECA experienced delays, with some running more than two years behind schedule. In several cases, designs had to be revised after construction had already begun, while permitting problems and administrative bottlenecks further slowed delivery. Of the 43 transport investment grants approved in the four audited countries, only six had been completed by mid-2025.
Several rail projects remain unfinished, and some completed infrastructure risks remaining underused because connecting sections funded by other donors have yet to be built. The auditors acknowledged that EU funding has supported projects that would strengthen regional links and advance integration with European transport corridors, but they raised concerns about whether the Commission has sufficient tools to determine in real time whether those ambitions are being translated into results.
The report suggests that the challenge is no longer simply financing infrastructure, but ensuring that Brussels can effectively track what happens after the money leaves its accounts. The ECA expects its findings to improve the way the Commission selects, monitors, and reports on EU-funded projects under the Western Balkans Investment Framework.
This audit comes as the EU seeks to deepen ties with candidate countries and expand its influence in the Western Balkans, a region seen as central to the bloc's enlargement ambitions. The EU-Western Balkans summit in Montenegro earlier this week highlighted the momentum behind enlargement, but the audit underscores the need for more rigorous oversight to ensure that investments translate into tangible progress. For more on the summit's outcomes, see our coverage of EU Enlargement Gains Momentum as Western Balkans Summit Opens in Montenegro.
The findings also resonate with broader concerns about infrastructure financing in the region. As the EU tightens scrutiny of external investments, such as Chinese port investments, the need for transparent and effective monitoring of EU funds becomes even more critical.
