Download DOC - Europa.eu

EUROPEAN COMMISSION
MEMO
Brussels, 29 November 2012
NEW ENVIRONMENT ACTION PROGRAMME to 2020 –
questions and answers
Why do we need a new EAP?
Global trends and challenges such as population dynamics and rising consumption in other
parts of the world are making some environmental issues more pressing than ever - from
resource and land use, to climate change. This makes it ever more important to address
environmental problems at EU and at global level. The European Environment Agency's
2010 report on the State of Europe's Environment (SOER 2010) also shows that despite
progress in some areas, the EU is not on track to meet many environment-related targets
and objectives. We need to make the environment more resilient to present and future
risks and changes, such as those linked to climate change and resource scarcity. The
proposed action programme aims to ensure the EU addresses these risks and also takes
the opportunities that they can present.
Better implementation of existing laws and strategies across our Member States was
clearly identified as one important area of work best undertaken within a comprehensive
framework of a new EU Environment Action Programme. Another was to address negative
environmental impacts in various sectors and activities– such as construction, product
design, food production and energy and transport – and with horizontal polices, such as
taxation and removal of environmentally harmful subsides. Finally, it is becoming very
clear that investments in environment and natural capital are investments in our future
growth. There is a strong case that a framework in which the EU and its Member States
share the responsibility for delivering results needs to be adopted at the EU level, as part
of an effective, coherent approach. This will also ensure that environment policy makes a
strong contribution to the EU's Europe 2020 agenda for smart, sustainable and inclusive
growth.
What are the main environmental problems of today?
Biodiversity loss and the degradation of ecosystems and the services they
provide: Natural capital plays an essential role in ensuring that our environment is
resilient in the face of pressure, for instance from climate change, and that our economy
remains competitive. Nearly 18 % of the EU's territory and 4 % of its seas are now
protected as part of the Natura 2000 network, yet Europe's natural capital continues to be
degraded and depleted. The EU failed to reach its target of halting biodiversity loss by
2010. Soil degradation is accelerating and land use change continues to be a major driver
of ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss in the EU.
MEMO/12/908
Climate change: Over the past decade, the EU has reduced its greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions and is on track to meet its Kyoto Protocol commitments. Significant progress
has been made towards meeting targets on energy efficiency and on promoting energy
use from renewable sources. However, global and European cuts in GHG emissions are far
from sufficient to keep average world temperature increases below 2°C. The impacts of
climate change are already being felt across Europe and have implications for human
health and wellbeing, as well as for the health of species and ecosystems and the
functioning of ecosystem services. Although some regions of Europe are more seriously
affected than others, all will face consequences of some kind and the effects will be
unevenly distributed, with young and old, poor and ill being at greatest risk.
Waste: There has also been some progress in the EU to tackle challenges related to waste
and unsustainable use of natural resources. Member States have increased waste
management and recycling efforts and some are global leaders in waste recycling
technology. However, these achievements are not equally spread amongst sectors and
countries, and several waste streams continue to grow. On average only 40% of solid
waste in the EU is re-used or recycled, with the rest going to landfill or incineration.
Natural resource management: Although the EU has succeeded in bringing about a
relative decoupling of resource use, emissions and waste generation from economic
growth in some areas, absolute decoupling remains a challenge and consumption patterns
are largely unsustainable.
Water: Quantity and quality – which are inextricably linked – are an increasing cause for
concern. Water quality has improved, but progress has been mixed and challenges
remain. Water stress is becoming a widespread problem, and supplies need to be
guaranteed for both human needs and for ecosystems to continue to deliver their services.
Air quality: Air pollution has declined in the EU, but not enough to achieve good air
quality in all urban areas. Exposure to particulate matter and ozone (O3) remain of
concern, linked to a loss of life expectancy, acute and chronic respiratory and
cardiovascular effects, impaired lung development in children, and reduced birth weight.
Many citizens live in areas where air quality breaches European limit values. Air pollution
continues to cause more than 350,000 premature deaths in Europe each year and the
estimated annual costs in terms of health expenditure or days of work lost through illness
run to billions of Euros.
Chemicals: Our knowledge about chemicals is increasing as a result of the reform of EU
chemical legislation. But EU citizens are still exposed to multiple pollutants and chemicals,
which can lead to long-term damage to human health. Of particular concern are persistent
and bio-accumulative substances, endocrine-disrupting chemicals and heavy metals.
Significant knowledge gaps remain in relation to nanomaterials and combination effects of
chemicals.
2
What is new in this programme? Is the Commission proposing new
legislation?
The new programme aims to create a shared understanding of the state of Europe's
environment, the challenges we face and the opportunities we have. We want to secure
the commitment of Member States and the European Parliament to a limited number of
priority objectives and what it takes to achieve them. It provides an overarching
framework for action on objectives that have to be decided collectively by all EU Member
States and Institutions. This is a necessary condition for fleshing out detailed concrete
responses subsequently.
Past programmes tended to focus on specific environmental issues in isolation. The new
approach is to consider how these issues are inter-related and how improvements in one
area can deliver multiple benefits not only for the environment but also for the economy
and society.
The proposal recognises that most of the elements needed to achieve the priority
objectives identified are already in place, but that additional efforts are needed to improve
implementation, the evidence base for policy, the investment framework and integration
into other policies and sectors. Where policy gaps are identified, the proposal suggests
what is required to fill them, without going into prescription of detailed instruments. Some
initiatives are already under preparation within the Commission, for example to unlock the
potential for green products and ensure a more comprehensive approach to climate
change adaptation in Europe. Others are clearly best taken by the Member States
themselves.
How can you justify this concern for the environment in the
present climate of austerity?
Protecting natural resources means saving money – implementing EU environment law is
cost-effective. Studies show that when factors such as health costs are taken into account,
non-implementation actually costs more than implementation. Nature protection too can
pay major dividends. Benefits related to the implementation of the Natura 2000 network
in France, for example, have been calculated to exceed the costs by a factor of seven
(costs were calculated at €142 per hectare and year). Green infrastructure is an even
better example. A programme to restore several wetlands in the Danube river basin will
cost €183 million but will retain vital adaptive ecosystem functions and will likely lead to
earnings of €85.6 million per year.
Just by removing tax-related fossil fuel subsidies 21 Member States expenditure could be
decreased by over €25bn. Other benefits include reduction of GHG emissions and the
pollution associated with fossil fuel use, leading to cleaner air and water. Phasing out
favourable treatment of company cars in 16 EU Member States could bring another €24bn.
Moreover, such a move would unlock funds for financing clean technologies and increase
eco-innovation.
3
Full compliance with EU waste policy in the coming years could create an additional
400.000 jobs and increase the annual turnover of the waste sector by €42 billion.
Eliminating landfilling and ensuring that incineration is limited to waste that cannot be
recycled could increase the benefits to around 520.000 jobs and €55 billion.
Phasing out dangerous chemicals, for instance, has significant environmental and health
benefits. Prudent assumptions from 2006 are that the total health benefits, including
avoidance of sickness due to better knowledge about chemicals, would be in the order of
magnitude of €50 billion over the next 30 years. The total cost to industry for testing,
assessing and the phasing out of substances is estimated to be €4-5 billion in total.
Air policy is another example: many EU citizens live in areas where the air quality
breaches European limit values. The estimated annual costs in terms of health expenditure
or days of work lost through illness run to billions of Euros.
Why an EAP to 2020, and not for ten years as in the past?
The timeframe of the programme is aligned to the multi-annual financial framework 20142020 and other key strategies, including the Europe 2020 Strategy, to ensure its timely
implementation. At the same time, the 2050 vision serves as a reference point for longerterm action, beyond 2020. The final evaluation of the 6th EAP concluded that in some
cases its ten-year timeframe proved too long for policy areas in which scientific evidence
was developing quickly (e.g. climate change or biodiversity), while in others (e.g. waste or
chemicals) it proved to be too short to be able to assess improvements on the ground as a
result of measures included in the Programme, due to the long timeframe for their
adoption and implementation.
Why isn't the proposal
Communication?
for
a
Decision
accompanied
by
a
As with the 6th EAP, the Commission's proposal for the new EAP is in the form of a
Decision to be adopted by the Council and the European Parliament. However, while the
6th EAP Decision proposal was accompanied by a Communication from the Commission,
which set out the context and justification for the proposed priority areas and actions, this
time everything is set out in a self-contained Decision text. The proposal is accompanied
by a full Impact Assessment. Over the coming months the European Parliament and the
Council will agree the priority objectives that will guide policy development up to 2020,
and the reasons for that choice.
4
How did the Commission select the 9 priority objectives?
The Commission drew on the vast amount of work in this area, including what it has done
itself in recent years, the European Environment Agency's report 'The European
Environment – State and Outlook 2010' and OECD's outlooks. The Commission also
considered input from a wide range of stakeholders, including responses to a public
consultation on the future programme, and the official views of the other EU Institutions.
This led first to the identification of three themes – natural capital, green economy and
health – that form three thematic priority objectives. Conserving and restoring our natural
capital is an important part of transforming Europe into a competitive and sustainable
economy, and is fundamental to the overall resilience of our society. Measures to improve
resource efficiency and reduce greenhouse gases can deliver growth and jobs whilst
tackling environmental problems and reducing the risks associated with excessive use of
natural resources. And tackling environment-related health problems and working with
nature to improve the living conditions of EU citizens and safeguard them from changes
brought about by climate change and other pressures will benefit health and wellbeing and
secure long-term prosperity.
We also identified what needs to be done and by whom in order to deliver results required
under those three areas, which is the four priority objectives that form an "enabling
framework". They focus on full implementation of existing policies and legislation, on
ensuring that policy decisions are taken on the basis of sound evidence, on adequate
private and public investments in support of environment and climate change policy, and
on the effective integration of environmental concerns into other policies.
Finally, two further priority objectives were clear: first setting out the importance of acting
on the urban dimension – sustainable cities - and second the global dimensions of EU
environment policy. The latter also fully reflects the EU's commitments arising from the
outcome of the 2012 Rio+20.
How will the programme improve environmental integration?
If adopted, the programme will require that policy initiatives at EU and Member State level
include environmental and climate-related conditionalities and incentives where relevant,
and that that ex-ante assessments of the environmental, social and economic impacts of
these initiatives are carried out on a systematic basis.
Why are there no new quantified targets for 2020?
Targets are an important tool in setting the agenda for change. They focus efforts and
provide the private sector with clarity on the long-term direction of policy-making. In
many environment policy areas specific targets for the period up to 2020 already exist and
are part of current legislation. Where this is the case, they are recalled in the new EAP and
the emphasis is on fully implementing agreed policies and legislation to achieve them.
However, there are some areas where new targets may be helpful and others where new
scientific evidence suggests that existing targets may be out of date. These targets will
need to be developed on the basis of robust methodologies and statistical data and
supported by impact assessments. In these cases, the new EAP aims to secure agreement
on the need for new or updated targets, which would then be developed over the course
of the programme.
5
How does the new EAP relate to other strategic documents such as
the resource efficiency roadmap, the low-carbon economy
roadmap, the biodiversity strategy 2020?
The new EAP provides an overarching framework for recent environment policy initiatives.
It draws on inter-linkages between them to deliver multiple benefits and strengthen the
contribution of environment and climate change policy to the achievement of the smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth agenda of the EU 2020 Strategy. It does not replace
these initiatives or delay their implementation.
How will the programme help reduce the global impact of European
consumption?
Prioritising action to improve sustainable consumption and production in the EU will help
alleviate pressure on the environment in the rest of the world. In particular, it is proposing
that targets be set for reducing the overall environmental impact of consumption,
especially in the food, housing and mobility sectors, which are responsible for around 80%
of these impacts. The Commission will also consider how to further improve the
environmental performance and resource efficiency of products as part of its review of
existing product legislation.
What do you plan to do in the field of climate change mitigation?
The Commission has highlighted the need to strengthen the EU Emissions Trading System
(EU ETS) and has taken two important steps to address the growing supply-demand
imbalance of emission allowances in the market. As an immediate first step to address the
rapid build-up of the surplus of emission allowances, the Commission made a formal
proposal to revise the auction time profile and postpone ("back-load") the auctioning of
900 million allowances in the third phase of the EU ETS starting in 2013. As a second step,
the Report on the state of the European carbon market1 sets out a range of possible
structural measures that can be taken to tackle the surplus. Strengthening the EU ETS is
necessary to achieve the 2°C global warming limit objective as set out by Heads of State
and Government.
As to the sectors not covered by the EU ETS, such as transport, buildings, infrastructure
and agriculture, it is essential for Member States to closely monitor the situation and to
put in place the necessary policies and measures as soon as possible because changes
take time. The Commission continues to support Member States to reach their climate and
energy targets through EU-wide measures that are currently being implemented or are in
preparation, such as the Energy Efficiency Directive, the proposal to increase EU climaterelated expenditure to at least 20% of the 2014-2020 EU budget, the emission
performance standards for cars and vans for 2020, the review of the F-Gas regulation and
the implementation of the 'NER 300' demonstration programme.
1
COM (2012) 652, The state of the European carbon market, 14 November 2012.
6
What do you plan to do about adaptation to climate change?
While mitigation is absolutely necessary to limit the impacts of climate change to a
manageable degree, even the most ambitious emission reductions pathways, in line with
the 2°C target, would not lead to any reduction in temperature increases beyond the
business-as-usual scenarios before at least the 2040s to 2050s below the business-asusual scenarios. Adaptation is therefore a must to help the achievement of all our policy
objectives, including sustainable green jobs and growth.
Building on the achievements of the Adaptation White Paper, the EU Adaptation Strategy,
due in 2013, will provide a more comprehensive approach to climate change adaptation in
Europe. The main objective is to stimulate the development of adaptation policies at
national, regional and local level, in particular by facilitating the exchange of good
practices and co-ordination. The strategy aims also to increase knowledge on climate
change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation and to mainstream adaptation into other
policies, strategies and programmes at EU level.
What are the plans for a climate policy framework beyond 2020?
It is essential to start preparing the 2030 policy framework, as most current investment
decisions focus beyond 2020. Business needs clarity on the long term. The Commission
Work Programme for 2013 indicates that next year the Commission will be working on
proposals to provide a long-term perspective on how the EU will move ahead from its
2020 climate and energy targets. A new climate and energy framework for the period up
to 2030 will enable us to meet the 80-95% greenhouse gas emission reduction objective
in 2050 and foster long term competitiveness, security of supply and sustainability.
How do you engage internationally to close the gap towards an
emission pathway compatible with the 2 degrees target?
The EU wants to ensure that an ambitious legally binding global climate agreement
covering all countries is adopted by 2015 and comes into force by 2020. This timetable
was agreed at the Durban climate conference in December 2011. As also agreed in
Durban, further measures to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions before the end of
the decade need to be taken in order to keep the goal of holding global warming below
2°C within reach. As part of the transition to the future global climate agreement covering
all countries, the EU has committed to join a second commitment period of the Kyoto
Protocol starting on 1 January 2013.
7