1

A Framework for the 7th Environmental Action Programme

Submission from Ireland

  2

1. Introduction

In the period since 1973 Environmental Action Programmes have been a key vehicle for advancing environmental improvement in the European Union. Despite failures to achieve desired outcomes in some areas, the Programmes have provided strategic policy focus and direction and the actions identified have served to significantly advance the environmental and sustainable development agendas. In the last four decades a comprehensive regulatory framework has been established which brought about significant improvements in the quality of air and water, helped protect natural capital, and transformed the way we deal with waste management, climate change and various forms of pollution. As the most recent report on the European Environment1 shows, European greenhouse gas emissions have decreased; the share of renewable energy sources has increased; air and water pollution indicators have shown considerable improvement while materials use and waste generation, although still increasing, are growing at a slower rate than the economy. As the Final Report2 for the Assessment of the 6th Environment Action Programme also notes an EAP can provide a useful reference point at national, regional and local levels from which to defend environmental policy against competing policy demands, to secure appropriate funding and to provide certainty for business as to future policy developments. These programmes have also acted as a driver to strengthen environment policy at all levels within the Union itself while also facilitating the development of innovative practice which also has been a positive influence in the wider international arena.

For all the positive progress made, formidable challenges remain. In some areas environmental targets have not been achieved e.g. the 2010 target set to halt biodiversity loss and secure natural capital and ecosystem services. There is also a more marked complexity and global dimension to the challenges faced by the EU; the loss of biodiversity and climate change was often driven by the availability of cheap natural resources. The EU remains dependant on the import of raw materials to support its economic growth and this has created competitive pressures in the Union and increased vulnerabilities arising from uncertainty in supplies of material inputs. A significant amount of the environmental impact of the EU is borne by countries outside it and these factors place added emphasis on the need to successfully advance the Europe 2020 initiative and, specifically, the dedicated flagship initiative on resource efficiency.

2. Role and Framework for the 7th EAP

Under Article 192(3) of the TFEU general action programmes setting out priority objectives to be attained shall be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council. In that context, the question is what value-added role can a new EAP usefully play in the emerging and increasingly complex policy environment in which the EU finds itself?

The natural environment plays an important role in the welfare of the individual and society. Environmental degradation through pollution of air and water, noise, uncontrolled use of chemicals, loss of biodiversity and other environmental factors are contributing to public health problems within the EU.    It is crucial that the 7EAP provides a framework, which is                                                             1 The European Environment – State and Outlook 2010. 2 The Sixth Community Environment Action Programme, Final Assessment, COM (2011) 531 Final of 31.08.2011 

  3

designed to ensure that human health aspects are duly taken into account in the different environment policies.

The requirement to integrate environmental protection requirements in the definition and implementation of other EU policies is an important principle of EU policy-making, as stipulated by Article 11 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

With the advent of Europe 2020 in particular, its flagship initiatives and the strategies published under it, there are many published policies on the environment and linked policy issues. While Europe 2020 and in particular the Resource Efficiency flagship initiative will spearhead the advancement of sustainable development in the EU, the 7EAP represents the environmental strand of Europe 2020 and regard must also be had to the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (EU SDS) with its underpinning principles that influence and shape policies in all sectors. Many policies have overlaps and there may be a role for the EAP to act as a bridge between EU SDS and Europe 2020 and other policies. This ‘bridging’ role could be the most appropriate policy space for the new EAP, allowing for the integration of the various EU strategies and the development of coherent, cross-cutting approaches, providing policy orientation and operationalising key policies such the Low Carbon and Resource Efficiency roadmaps, waste and water management. Policy responses to climate change must address a range of issues both in relation to mitigation and adaptation. The next EAP could provide a platform for identifying synergies and interlinkages with other policy areas and tackling policy conflicts and trade-offs.

A more holistic view which integrates horizontally across sectors and along the life cycle is needed to avoid shifting environmental burdens from one sector to another. The valuation of natural capital and ecosystem services, in particular in the context of costs and benefits to other sectors, has been recognised as a valuable tool that should be used more widely

The gap analysis carried out as part of the final assessment of the 6th EAP provides sound basis to advance the preparation of the new EAP while the various sets of Conclusions3 adopted by the Environment Council on the EAP and the linked EU Resource Efficiency Strategy provide political guidance as to scope, content and priorities that need to be addressed.

Given its broad remit under the Treaty the next EAP can also be effective in tackling the environmental implementation gap that currently confronts us, prioritising areas for financial support and in improving communications and have an awareness raising role, both within the EU itself and with the wider global community.

The setting of targets, milestones, broad policy goals or objectives should be dealt with in this context and unnecessary duplication of existing targets such as those contained in the Roadmaps should be avoided, with the emphasis on developing a set of measures that can advance the various environmental priorities over the 10 year time horizon of the Programme. Clear indicators will be required across the range of areas prioritised to monitor

                                                            3Improving Environmental Policy Instruments – Council Conclusions of 20 December 2010 Towards a 7th EU Environment Action Programme – Council Conclusions of 11 October 2011 Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe – Council Conclusions of 19 December 2011  

  4

and measure progress under the Programme,[including those which measure more short term targets] as part of a mid term review of the 7th EAP.

Life Cycle Thinking is an appropriate approach to be taken in attempting to meet the objectives of sustainable development. Indicators taking a life cycle perspective are capable of comprehensively capturing and helping to reduce the links between consumption and production, as well as between resource use, environmental impacts and waste generation. The 7EAP should prioritise the continued development of life cycle-based indicators that can quantify and measure progress towards sustainable development. Such indicators must be scientifically proven, while conforming to international standards and EU recommendations.

The setting of an overarching 2050 target for climate change has demonstrated a powerful motivational force for action. In framing the EAP consideration could be given to similar approaches to biodiversity and resource efficiency. In this regard, the EU has also agreed a 2050 vision for EU biodiversity and the ecosystem it provides. Final Assessment of the 6th EAP highlighted that an agreed vision setting out the key objectives should be the starting point for further EU action to tackle global and regional environmental problems. The 7th EAP, therefore, needs to shape a vision of transitioning towards a more sustainable, low carbon, resource efficient future which improves quality of life and wellbeing for Europe’s citizens. This graphic illustrates the integrated and phased transition that will be required to fully implement a green economy.

International

The 7th Environmental Action Programme

Environmental Protection A Resource Efficient Greener Economy Well Being & Sustainable Environment

IntegrationPhase 3

Phase 2

Phase 1

Innovation ImplementationNow

• Implementation of Existing Legislation

Expanded Networking

• IMPEL• Judiciary• Ombudsman

Functions

• Stand Alone Directives

Citizen Participation

• Implementation• Governance

• Framework Directives / Clustered Approaches

Operationalise Roadmaps• Low Carbon Economy• Resource Efficiency (incl Natural

Resources)• Energy

Planetary Boundaries

Effective Leveraging of Sectoral Policies & Funds (CAP / CFP / Cohesion / Research) through

• Cross compliance type linkages;

• Conditionality; • EU Semester Reporting• Integrated LIFE Projects

• Use of Market Based Instruments• Use of Open Method of Co-

Ordination

International Environmental Policy

• UNFCCC• Biodiversity• IMO• Montreal

Resource Use Limits

Green Economy (incltaxation based) & Green Growth

Policy Coherence & Integration

• Recasting / Updating Targets / Setting Limit Values / Strengthening Instruments (e.g. EIA)

• Known Legislative Gaps

• Unknown Emerging Issues

• Focus on Symptoms / Effects on Environment

• Focus on Drivers / Causes of Environmental Harm • Risk Based

Projections• Linear

Incremental Projections

Science Based Targets

• Biodiversity• Resource

Efficiency

Changing Production & Consumption Patterns (incl Absolute Limits)

Signalling of future legislative intent

Green Public Procurement

Research• Eco System Services• Carrying Capability• Consumer behaviour• Development of Standards

Eco Design & InnovationLifecycle

Approach & Indicators

• Food• Transport• Buildings

Emerging Issue Policy (e.g. Hazardous Substances

Green Infrastructure

Standardised Processes

• Data Capture• Monitoring• Inspections

• Validation of Existing Targets & Strategies

Vision

Valuation• Natural Capital• Ecosystems

Integrated Knowledge Base & Harmonised Definitions

Strategic Spatial Planning inclenvironmental impacts (e.g. Minimize Transport Needs)

Innovation Partnerships

Existing Legislation• RoHS• WEEE• PIC

Post Kyoto Framework for Climate Change

Food & Nutrition Security

Alignment with MilleniumDevelopment Goals

  5

A Framework for the 7th EAP

A focused 7th EAP can best be achieved within a clearly developed framework and this paper seeks to identify the key priority areas for such a framework. Four areas are identified and these are Integration, Innovation, Implementation, and International.

3. Integration

3.1 Transitioning to a Green, Resource Efficient Europe

The EEA European Environment: State and Outlook 2010 Report has identified that a fundamental reason hindering progress on the environment has been the failure to mainstream environmental objectives into economic and sectoral policies. The Europe 2020 Strategy also acknowledges that the environmental challenges cannot be separated from the financial challenges. It is of paramount importance that the 7th EAP provides a clear message on these fundamental linkages between resource efficiency, sustainability and competitiveness in order to fully engage the economic and social sectors.

Growth, including green growth, should be seen as a means towards environmental sustainability and broader societal wellbeing and not as an end in itself. Growth and jobs do not of themselves confer environmental legitimacy; what is required is an integrated approach which puts the environment firmly at the interface with the economic and social elements of sustainable development.

To be successful, it is crucial that the 7th EAP can demonstrate that environmental protection can contribute positively to the economic and jobs programme. In this manner, a 7th EAP can provide a key framework for action in advancing the resource efficiency and green economy agendas. Existing policies under Europe 2020 and sustainable development principles that underpin environmental policies and actions in the Union reflect worldwide efforts to promote greener growth and the green economy which is also highlighted as one of the two key themes for the Rio +20 process. The 7th EAP can accelerate the process of placing EU economies on a more sustainable green growth path.

The OECD Strategy Towards Green Growth provides a practical framework and recommendations to help Governments to identify the policies that can help achieve the most efficient shift to greener growth. These policies would focus for example on green jobs, green taxes and regulatory approaches, fiscal consolidation and green technologies. The Strategy also highlights the need to foster ownership through a high degree of co-ordination between Ministries (i.e. Environment, Energy, Transport, Agriculture, Economics, Finance and the Office of the Prime Minister), regional government, local government and other stakeholders in order to identify the mix of policy instruments most suited to local conditions.

The prospects for Europe's environment are mixed, but there are opportunities to make the environment more resilient to future risks and changes. These include unparalleled environmental information resources and technologies, ready-to-deploy resource accounting methods and a renewed commitment to the established principles of precaution and prevention, rectifying damage at source and polluter pays. The available knowledge from the scientific community recognises the complexity of environmental problems and the inter-

  6

linkages between them. This knowledge must be presented in a form that will enable it to be fully mobilised (i.e. understood and acted upon) in order to clearly and widely communicate the indisputable evidence that business as usual is no longer an option. The development of an integrated knowledge base must be prioritised so that arrangements for the continuous assessment of the environment can be put in place – rather than the current system of periodic reporting to the EU on a 3 to 5 year cycle. There is also scope for further harmonisation of definitions used in environmental legislation to allow a true comparative assessment on the implementation of environmental legislation across EU-27.

Resource Efficiency and the Green Economy are the key policy responses to the challenges outlined above. The underlying environmental problem is that we have exceeded the resilience of the environmental system by pursuing growth beyond the natural environmental limit. We need to return to the level of resource use that the planet’s carrying capacity can support. Unsustainable consumption and production patterns are driving environmental degradation, so policies to tackle this issue are required. This could include providing absolute measures and limits on the volume of resources such as water/land to be exploited. The emphasis needs to be remodelled to cover inputs as well as outputs. Resource efficiency should also embrace all natural resources, including land, air, water, biodiversity, and ecosystem services.

Economic and environmental performance must go hand in hand. The natural environment is central to economic activity and growth, providing the resources we need to produce goods and services, and absorbing and processing unwanted by-products in the form of pollution and waste. Environmental assets contribute to managing risks to economic and social activity. Environmental sustainability is an essential requirement for food production and will present a particular challenge in the decades ahead in an era when there will be an even greater need for “food and nutrition security” i.e. the availability of nutritious food and access to it.

The resource efficiency roadmap underpins such an overall approach by addressing horizontal issues such as food, transport and buildings, and as such should form an integral part of the 7th programme. It should also endorse the lifecycle approach to resource use including the internalisation of externalities. The EAP could identify priority actions and policies to enable the milestones of the Resource Efficiency Roadmap to be delivered.

3.2 Urban Environment

The urban environment is critical to the achievement of growth and employment – the major function of cities is to provide a successful platform for people to trade, produce, communicate and live. Worldwide some 50% of the population resides in urban areas, accounting for an estimated 75% of total energy consumption and 75% of total carbon emissions, with an estimated 70 % of the global population being likely to live in cities by 2050. Cities occupy just 2% of the world’s land surface, although their environmental impacts extend far beyond these physical boundaries due to demands for energy, resources and outlets for waste management.

  7

Currently some 75% of the European population lives in urban areas, with around 85% of the Gross Domestic Product of the European Union being generated in cities. The trend towards urbanisation in the EU continues to increase with more than 1,000 km² being taken every year for housing, industry, roads or recreational purposes and it is estimated that the proportion of population living in urban areas within the EU will have increased to 80% by 2020. It is difficult to see how the radical transition required to deliver the milestones/objectives of the Roadmaps on resource efficiency and low carbon to 2050 can be achieved unless real progress is made in our cities. Well-designed and properly managed urban environment can provide real opportunities for the advancement of the sustainable development and resource efficiency agendas. The 7EAP can provide added value in making the urgent changeover to resource efficiency and the green economy, particularly since there are long investment lead-in times.

Given the range and interlinkages that arise in relation to the urban environment this topic could provide a basis for the type of ‘bridging’ policy role that Ireland is suggesting for the next EAP in this document.

The Communication from the Commission on the final assessment of the 6th EAP concluded that the Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment does not appear to have had a significant impact with respect to the 6th EAP objective of improving the quality of the urban environment.

The optimum pathway for this transformation to resource efficiency and the green economy is by placing a strong priority on sustainable urban living and smart city planning, including non-carbon energy production, water treatment, waste recycling etc. These priorities should be provided within a strong framework of integrated and strategic spatial planning, which is linked to environmental policy and should therefore factor in the environmental impacts of land-use changes and the required links with the broader planning and assessment frameworks. This will also require the development of network infrastructure which is suitable for next generation technologies, especially in areas such as energy, water, transport and communications. This approach provides outstanding potential to significantly increase the performance of buildings, infrastructure and urban environments. Recent research4 has shown that the economic pay-back period for major decarbonisation measures in large cities is just c. 4 years. Accordingly, capital expenditure on low carbon solutions makes absolute economic sense and can provide a commercially attractive return on investment.

The introduction of such “Green City” measures will at the same time improve the environmental living conditions for urban dwellers in terms of increased availability and access to recreational areas, as well as providing significant reductions in air emissions, noise emissions, pollutants and levels of traffic congestion. There are examples, such as Berlin, of successful integrated approaches to reducing both local air pollution and noise levels. The next EAP can incorporate new measures that will further advance the urban environment and green city agenda while at the same time respecting the constraints arising from limits on EU competency and subsidiarity.

                                                            4 http://www.lowcarbonfutures.org/  

  8

3.3 Low-carbon Transportation in the Urban Environment

Well-connected and designed neighbourhoods facilitate effective provision of public transport. The transition to low-carbon transportation through a modern, resource-efficient mobility system should focus on the urban dimension of transport and be based on a smart, integrated transport and energy infrastructure. It should optimize resource efficiency while reducing environmental and health impacts. In particular, minimization of the basic transport needs should be prioritised through the integration of land use and transportation planning.

Green Infrastructure, climate change and adaptation are obvious areas where leadership at the EU level will be required in the context of the next EAP. This work could draw on initiatives such as the OECD’s Green Cities Programme which seeks to assess how urban green growth and sustainability policies can contribute to improve the economic performance and environmental quality of metropolitan areas and thus enhance the contribution of urban areas to national growth, quality of life and competitiveness. Traditional urban areas are particularly vulnerable to climate change, as extreme climatic events are accentuated with the predominance of soil sealing, leading to greater escalation of temperatures as well as severe flooding due to increased storm water run-off. Unless action is taken, climatic changes are expected to lead to considerable adverse impacts in cities. The EAP can identify actions and priorities to drive the EU Climate Adaptation Strategy which is due to be published by the Commission in 2013.

3.4 Integration and Financing

As noted in the Final Assessment of the 6th EAP, environmental improvements will increasingly depend on a mix of public and private sector funding. It is likely that increased conditionality will become associated with funding (e.g. cohesion funding fully conditional on complete transposition of environmental acquis; LIFE + funding conditional on enforcement proceedings against relevant infringements).

As was also noted in the Final Assessment of the 6th EAP, there is a need for better alignment of the EAP process with that of the EU budget. By the time the 7th EAP is adopted, decisions on the MAFF, including the CAP, CFA and Cohesion will have been decided for the period to 2020. This needs to be addressed for future iterations of all of these areas in order to ensure that the financing issue can be dealt with in a meaningful way at an early stage in the preparatory process.

3.5 LIFE programme and Integrated Projects

The 7th EAP should give further legislative underpinning to the LIFE programme, and particularly its emphasis on integrated projects. Specifically, the 7th Programme should refer to the need for LIFE Integrated Projects to feature strongly in the partnership contracts and operational programmes prepared by Member States. LIFE Integrated projects have the potential to leverage significant funds from other funding sources and in so doing achieve impact on a far greater regional scale and embed good environmental practices into other sectors.

  9

4. Innovation

4.1 The next EAP needs to begin with a practical orientation regarding the kinds of innovative tools and instruments needed to close the implementation gap and to address policy coherence and integration. The innovative potential of funding mechanisms such as the LIFE programme and Market Based Instruments should be fully developed. To avoid duplication, its approach to resource efficiency should be focused on delivery mechanisms, setting out a range of measures and instruments to achieve a resource efficient economy.

We also need to be able to demonstrate the business case for saving costs through following a resource efficient agenda. Reduction in resource use should be focused particularly upon non renewable resources rather than renewables (e.g. solar power). What we are really looking for therefore is a decoupling of resource use and growth. We need to seek business buy-in and encourage this key sector to take its responsibilities seriously and to endeavour to innovate in a sustainable manner. Business, including SMEs, needs to understand the potential environmental impact of their actions and be encouraged to take a life-cycle-thinking approach in their decision making.

It must be recognised that the promotion of innovation is ultimately dependent upon entrepreneurial confidence in the policy and legislative framework. Accordingly, innovative thinking is also needed among the institutions and the management systems to allow the market the latitude to develop the necessary capacity for improved resource efficiency. The 7EAP should avoid over-prescriptive policy requirements and should establish milestones that will allow sufficient scope for innovative approaches to meeting the required performance levels.

The 7th Programme can support appropriate fiscal measures, including the Green Economy through positive tax discrimination for energy generated from renewable sources, and through shifting taxation away from productive labour engagement and towards environmentally harmful practices. It should seek to broaden the focus of the green economy beyond the pursuit of efficiencies.

Policy development in these areas should be supported by a programme of research into emerging areas such as ecosystem services, carrying capability, consumer behaviour, as well as the identification of the key constituents of ‘standard of living’ and ‘quality of life’. Research findings should be designed to enable an informed choice by individuals as to how they can act in a manner to ensure that their basic needs can be best fulfilled.

4.2 Sustainable Consumption, Resource Efficiency and the Environment

A key priority will be the high level goal of altering current unsustainable consumption behavior in the EU. The absolute decoupling of economic growth from the consumption of resources remains as an enduring challenge which, if not tackled, will result in failure to meet targets and milestones set in the Roadmaps under Europe 2020. Such targets will remain elusive unless real progress is achieved in altering consumption behavior.

  10

The consumption of goods and services is a major driver of global resource use and associated environmental impacts. Global growth in trade means that environmental pressures and impacts from European consumption are increasingly being felt well beyond Europe’s borders. Food and drink, housing, mobility and tourism are responsible for a large part of the pressures and impacts caused by consumption in the EU. Profound behavioural change in private and public consumption patterns will be required to supplement gains achieved through better technology and improved production processes.

The 7th EAP can accelerate the type of transformational change required to advance the sustainability and resource efficiency agendas. Priority areas that can be addressed in the EAP include Food Waste, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), and the use of Market Based Instruments.

4.3 Food Waste

UNEP reports that enough food for 10 billion people is already produced, but between one third and one half of this food is either spoiled or discarded as waste. The raw materials consumed and the food produced is thus harvested in a very inefficient way. Within the EU it is reported that the level of non-agricultural food waste amounts to some 180 kg per capita in 2006, much of which is suitable for human consumption. Overall, non-agricultural food waste is forecast to increase by c. 40% within the EU-27 in the period to 2020. Reductions in food waste would result in considerable cuts in the use of natural resources (including clean water, fertile soil, ecosystem services from biodiversity), petrochemicals and other mineral inputs (e.g. phosphates). The potential resource savings are significant, with food waste responsible for 3% of greenhouse gas emissions within the EU-27 in 2008. Household food waste and manufacturing food waste account for some 45% and 35% respectively of this total. Reducing waste and increasing efficiency in agricultural and food systems can contribute to securing global food and nutrition security now and in the future

The Resource Efficiency Roadmap targets a reduction by 50% of the edible food wastage in the EU by 2020. This target is realistic given the scale and nature of the food wastage, but will require the systematic introduction of policy measures in the manufacturing, food service/ retail and household sectors.

There are already some innovative initiatives in operation for minimising food waste such as the social redistribution of unsold food by retailers, manufacturers, distributors and agricultural co-operatives. All these initiatives should be strongly encouraged and the scope of the activities formalised and broadened, while ensuring the integrity and safety of the food supply chain.

Specific measures on the prevention and beneficial use of food waste that could be usefully applied to the various sectors include improved data collection and management systems for food waste, as well as awareness programmes, research and development, preparation of sectoral Guidance Notes and training programmes in relation to food waste. In this regard, the European Retail Forum for Sustainability is preparing an “Issue Paper” on waste minimisation, which will be very important in prioritising the prevention of food waste.

  11

In addition, regulatory measures may be warranted in relation to the prevention, separate collection and environmentally beneficial treatment of food waste e.g. The Commercial Food Waste Regulations in Ireland.

The 7th EAP could also look at fostering best practice based on experience in Member States. In Ireland, for example, information on food waste prevention is provided through an EPA website www.stopfoodwaste.ie . This site offers very simple, practical tips on how to avoid the main causes of food waste, as well as providing detailed particulars on the important techniques of food waste management.

4.4 Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)

The concept of ‘producer responsibility’ is now well embedded in EU waste management legislation, policy and practice. These initiatives have proved successful in boosting recycling of waste streams, notably in the case of packaging waste,.through the implementation of practical, workable and cost-effective arrangements by individual businesses, However, there is a need to build on the experience of producer responsibility with regard to the contribution it can make to waste prevention and minimisation, the reduction of negative environmental impacts, and more efficient use of resources.

The OECD defines Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) as an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle, thereby extending responsibility beyond the waste phase .and providing producers with a direct financial incentive to incorporate environmental considerations in the design of products. It addresses upstream issues in relation to resource selection and product design and seeks to integrate price signals related to the environmental characteristics of products and production processes throughout the product chain, encouraging designers to select materials that are readily amenable to reuse or recycling. This focus on design is already incorporated in EU legislation on End-of-Life Vehicles and the WEEE and RoHS Directives. It can play an increasingly important part in the integrated approach to waste prevention now being pursued.

Article 8 of the Waste Framework Directive allows Member States considerable latitude to develop measures to encourage producers to take responsibility for their products, including those products not already covered by EU Directives, as some Member States have done already. EPR measures may encourage, inter alia, the development, production and marketing of technically durable products that are suitable for multiple use, the provision of publicly-available information on the re-use and recycling of their products, as well as the financing of take-back obligations and environmentally sound recovery and disposal of products once they become waste

The 7th EAP should include a series of actions and priorities aimed at advancing the EPR concept in Member States. Discussion is invited on the part EPR might play in assisting in the design of products which minimise negative environmental impacts.

  12

4.5 Market Based Instruments

The use of economic and market-based instruments such as landfill taxes, environmental levies, pay-by-use and deposit/refund, is widespread in the EU, partly driven by the EU itself and the OECD who have for a number of years encouraged taxes on pollution. Market based instruments do not always achieve the desired objectives e.g. internalisation of costs and effective behaviour change. They are often designed and implemented on a case-by-case basis and at low rates and do not always appear to be part of a broader strategy on environmental tax reform. In some instances, new levies may be aimed at raising revenue rather than creating an environmental incentive. Where levies are well designed and targeted, case studies show that even quite small changes in price/cost can send strong signals as to desired behaviour.

Economic instruments have an overall efficiency for society as they can achieve environmental objectives and targets at relatively low cost. Their introduction is sometimes premised on the existence of negative environmental externalities i.e. cost that are absorbed by society in general rather than by the particular producer or consumer of the product. When the costs of pollution or resource use are not reflected in the prices, market inefficiencies result in excessive production or consumption of products that impose social costs. Where environmental costs are fully internalised into the price of a product or activity, a reallocation of resources in the economy occurs according to fair and efficient prices. Where instruments are applied they must be well targeted with a clear environmental objective, carefully designed and pitched at the correct level in order to have optimum effect.

The operation of landfill levies for waste and the plastic bags levy (and related ring-fenced Environment Fund) are examples of successful economic instruments in Ireland and this could be further explored - knowledge sharing and the development of best practice models could be considered. Strengthening Directives on environmental impact assessments and environmental liability could also help to promote more sustainable investment patterns.

4.6 Innovative Financing

If there is a need for better alignment of the EAP process with that of the EU budget as indicated in 3.4 above, innovative approaches to financing, such as incentivising investment in clean technologies, are also required. The internalisation of pricing for goods and services through a more robust application of the Polluter Pays Principle could provide additional financial resources, for example the framework directives on water and waste management provide the type of structure where this can be further developed. The 7th EAP could also provide indications of flanking measures required (e.g., phasing out of harmful subsidies etc). The introduction of positive subsidies and the gradual phasing out over the longer term of those that are environmentally harmful could be the subject of pilot projects with a view to fully assessing the likely impacts. This process will be required in shifting the emphasis on taxation away from labour.

  13

4.7 Creative Partnerships and Alliances

Smart and sustainable cities recognize the need for creative partnerships between business and public authorities to advance technological development though ambitious demonstration and testing programmes, which are designed to validate advanced energy-efficient and low-carbon technologies and strategies. Such an approach can foster economic, organisational and social innovation, such as the development of smart energy supply and demand systems, integrated solutions in the areas of active buildings, heating and cooling, electricity networks, ICT solutions, as well as alternative fuels and clean and energy efficient transport. Commercialisation of successful initiatives of this nature will result in the transformation of cities into low carbon, citizen-friendly urban areas. The forthcoming Communication from the Commission on a Smart Cities and Communities Initiative as well as the EU European Green Capital initiative (www.europeangreencapital.eu) should provide a useful framework for such endeavours.

Several EU cities, including Dublin, have been actively engaged in developing Smarter Cities and green city initiatives. City networks provide local authorities with support, and with a forum for the exchange of information with other cities. International dialogue, co-operation and dissemination on the development and exchange of innovative technologies is essential so that this body of knowledge can be provided to all relevant stakeholders. A Best Practice Guideline could be compiled, providing information about appropriate legal, economic and other instruments and policies designed to help all key actors and accelerate the transformation to a green economy, enabling the sharing of experiences of green economy policies. It would be essential to match the particular experiences to the individual country-specific requirements for advice and guidance.

Innovation partnerships should also be actively supported through the 7th EAP. Starting with the currently planned Innovation Partnership for Water, the programme should identify areas for subsequent partnership development as a means of advancing environmental goals but also of integrating environmental concerns into other sectoral agendas and funding streams.

4.8 Science & Technology

The 7th EAP should promote the integration of environmental considerations into policy making in other areas through linking activities in research and development and eco-innovation to sustainable economic growth. This should be supported by the development of a set of suitable indicators, building on existing work in this area by both the EU and OECD. There is a growing recognition of the need for much greater attention to be focused on developing an integrated policy approach between research and innovation. In this context, the flagship initiative - the “Innovation Union” - has recently been elaborated, highlighting the need for continued investment in key areas of education, research and innovation coupled with targeted reforms and the removal of barriers to a successful European research and innovation area. This Communication also acknowledges that public trust in scientific and technological breakthroughs to provide a favourable investment environment requires sound regulatory frameworks based on scientific evidence and citizen engagement. All of these developments must influence the objectives, design and shape of policy for research, innovation and sustainable development into the future.

  14

Other strategies, e.g. Horizon 2020, Europe 2020 strategy, have highlighted the important role that research plays in helping Governments to deliver on policy objectives, including policy targets linked to EU and other international obligations. Natural capital is central to economic activity and growth and needs to be used in a sustainable manner, with policies informed and supported by suitable research, to secure sustainable growth in the long term. Life-cycle-thinking is an important element in an increasing number of instruments that are intended to enhance sustainable consumption and production. Among these instruments are eco-design and eco-labels, as well as carbon footprinting, environmental management and life cycle-based indicators for monitoring sustainable consumption and production. Analysis on this basis can enable producers and consumers to be better informed and it may encourage them to take into account the longer-term environmental, social and economic impacts associated with the supply, use and end-of-life phase of goods and services. However, it must be recognised that life cycle costs are difficult to quantify in a transparent, objective and scientifically robust way. Further research is needed in these areas. Innovation for a Sustainable Future – The Eco-innovation Action Plan (EcoAP) focuses on all aspects of eco-innovation and is intended to address innovation bottlenecks, policy concerns and sustainable production. The plan will develop strategies and co-ordinate action in areas such as supporting demonstration projects, developing new standards, mobilising financial instruments to support services for small and medium-sized enterprises, and promoting international co-operation. A particularly important element of the EcoAP is the commitment from the Commission to undertake a screening of the regulatory framework in the environmental area with a view to the identification of possible gaps, the review of existing rules and the implementation of new rules in order to provide a coherent legislative framework that promotes eco-innovation.

The Communication on Integrated Industrial Policy also highlighted the need for standards to become an integral part of research and policy development from the outset and the need to address consumer concerns early so as to create a vibrant market for innovative goods and services. Much is being done to support and promote R&D and eco-innovation across Europe and the 7th programme should endeavour to pull all of the strands of action together and set out measures to assess the effectiveness of these programmes and enhance the synergies between them in terms of sustainable economic growth and job creation (e.g. activities supported under LIFE, EcoAP, Horizon, Bioeconomy initiatives, etc). The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development Report found that agricultural knowledge, science and technology

‘can contribute to radically improving food security and enhancing the social and economic performance of agricultural systems as a basis for sustainable rural and community livelihoods and wider economic development. It can help to rehabilitate degraded land, reduce environmental and health risks associated with food production and consumption and sustainably increase production’.

It is important that the EU invests in agricultural research including alternative production systems and ways of reducing the greenhouse gas intensity of the sector. Knowledge transfer will be an essential mechanism to ensure that research outputs reach the global farming community and result in changes in agriculture and agricultural practice that

  15

minimise the environmental impact of agriculture, promote food security and contribute to sustainable development.

5. Implementation

Implementation of EU legislation with a view to achieving better environmental outcomes is a key priority. Inadequate implementation and enforcement of EU environmental legislation has been highlighted as a significant limiting factor in the achievements of the 6th EAP objectives, and there is now scope in framing how the 7th EAP could improve implementation and enforcement, as part of the resource efficiency agenda.

It is suggested that the 7th EAP should focus on a limited number of important priorities such as further integrating environmental thinking into economic policy, identifying and agreeing ambitious targets for environmental outcomes, and focusing on how the EAP can contribute to better and more consistent implementation of environmental legislation “on the ground”, which has been identified as one of the main failings over the 6th EAP period. In this regard, there would also appear to be merit in reviewing the environmental acquis to ensure that the various legislative instruments are coherent with each other, as well as evaluating the implementability of individual legislative instruments. Appropriate amendments should be proposed to the acquis based on the outcome of the review.

There are also practical issues in regard to the implementation of EU legislation that may differ between Member States because of geography, governance structures, manufacturing bases etc. The EAP could identify implementation checklists for Member States when they are in the process of drafting legislation.

The EU Commission has published its proposal on implementation of environmental legislation. The Communication outlines policy options that have the potential to provide Member States with additional tools to improve the standard of implementation across EU-27. The general thrust of the Commission’s approach comprises two main strands:

How we gather, analyse and share environmental knowledge – information that will tell us whether particular EU agreed actions are being achieved in the ways intended and, if not, indicate means through which problems might be remediated. While there is already a wealth of environmental data, there is a need to develop common methodologies for its compilation, identify gaps where further data is required and how we can better use data both in implementation and policy formulation.

How we can more effectively deal with environmental problems on the ground.

The Commission is developing approaches to how we can facilitate better information on the state of the environment, as well as providing a more systematic and responsive system at local level to enable local stakeholders to get access to the right information and to have a number of routes to seek resolution. Ireland supports the priority which the EU Commission is attaching to this area.

  16

5.1 Network Cooperation

One aspect which DG Environment is looking at is potential for closer cooperation between the Commission and EU networks as part of a wider effort to involve expert networks in the implementation of environmental law. There are several European networks with which cooperation has been established, such as, inspectors (IMPEL), judges (EUFJE), prosecutors (network in the phase of creation), environment agencies (NEPA) and government lawyers. The Commission is also seeking ways to collaborate with the Network of European Ombudsmen and the newly created EnviCrimeNet which is a network of national police officers specialised in environmental crime. Network cooperation can offer a valuable two-way flow of assistance and ideas. There is a role for central Ministries to facilitate the realisation of an improved implementation network and to encourage all relevant bodies and institutions to participate and share information.

However, it is questionable as to whether a Network of Ombudsmen would be the optimal fit for such a network, as the role of the ombudsman can vary substantially from MS to MS and indeed may not have the statutory powers to undertake such a role: it would be more effective for MS to be able to identify appropriate structures at a national level to coordinate such activities / cooperation.

The EAP could reference the model of the Office of Environmental Enforcement (OEE) in Ireland which was developed as part of a national response to a major compliance issue in relation to waste. Given a substantially broader remit this model could serve as the type of national focal point envisaged by the Commission. The OEE is independent of Government and has been crucial to the establishment of a strong enforcement network in Ireland, involving the various public bodies with responsibilities in this area. This network’s role is to enhance the effectiveness of all participants by sharing information and adopting a co-ordinated approach to environmental enforcement. The OEE works with local authorities and other regulators to ensure efficient use of resources and coherent enforcement of environmental law, as well as dealing with complaints in relation to environmental protection. It is clear that given its current role which is independent of Government this model could provide a good fit for the type of structure envisaged by the Commission. Further details of the role of the OEE are set out in the Annex attached to this submission.

In addition to formal networks and arrangements such as the OEE, more informal approaches at a national level can also prove valuable in promoting more consistent implementation and proactive enforcement. In Ireland, for example, an Environmental Law Implementation Group is being established, comprising representatives of the Department of the Environment and environmental non-Governmental organisations (eNGOs), to support the concerted effort to address outstanding environmental infringements and to assist in the ongoing management of EU transposition and implementation requirements. It is anticipated that this informal and regular interaction will facilitate productive dialogue and sharing of views on implementation of environmental legislation and also improve mechanisms for communication and problem-solving to better manage complaints and queries at a national level, without the need for recourse to the European Commission or other international bodies.

  17

5.2 Measurement of Progress

To sustain momentum in the development of a green economy, governments must be able to measure the progress that is being achieved under the measures being implemented. This would require the capacity to develop indicators, collect data, and analyse and interpret results to further inform and guide policy development. Robust, easily measurable and widely accepted indicators can provide indispensable signals to both producers and consumers alike. Sets of sustainable development indicators (SDIs) have been developed at international, EU and MS levels to monitor progress in advancing wellbeing under the sustainable development agenda.

The further development of SDIs should reflect:

the evolution of the EU resource productivity and key natural resources indicators, envisaged by the European Commission up to the period 2013 having regard to the work being carried out by the OECD and European Environment Agency and others;

the new EU Regulation on environmental economic accounts which has recently been introduced and which contains three modules on environmental indicators (air emissions, material flow accounts and environmental taxes) with further modules to be added.

6. International

While the EU is encountering unprecedented economic challenges, economies in Asia and the Southern hemisphere are forging ahead. It is now anticipated that China will be the biggest economy in the world by 2020. The world population is estimated to grow from 2.53 billion in 1950 to 9.15 billion in 2050, while the population in the EU (incl Turkey) is only forecast to grow from 550 million to 575 million in the same period. These population statistics reinforce the level of growth being experienced in Asia and Africa. If the demand for oil reflects the demand trends experienced in Japan during the “Tiger economy” era, the consumption of oil in China will equal that of the U.S. in a few short years, resulting in a profound impact on oil prices.

It is expected that the demand for commodities will increase correspondingly. For example, it is anticipated that there will be a 70% increase in food demand by 2050. In this regard, UNEP has highlighted that there is a lack of overall understanding of the fundamental nature of this problem, much less the emergence of globally collaborative solutions on how it will be possible to feed a population of this magnitude by 2050.

It is clear that these trends are no longer within the control of the EU and it will be necessary to devise a range of mechanisms for the EU to exert its influence in ensuring that such growth occurs in Third Countries without significant detriment to the environment.

  18

The Final Assessment of the 6th EAP has highlighted the strong global impact of the EU via its environmental legislation as Third Countries seeking to export to the EU have been compelled to modify production standards and processes in order to adopt to EU product standards e.g. RoHS. In addition, a number of Directives relating to recycling and recovery targets within the waste sector will only allow waste materials recycled or recovered in Third Countries to count for the achievement of obligations and targets if there is sound evidence that the recovery or recycling operation took place under conditions that are broadly equivalent to those prescribed by the Community legislation on the matter (e.g. packaging waste, WEEE), further incentivising the provision of environmentally sound treatment of waste in Third Countries.

The Final Assessment of the 6th EAP also advocated that the EU should promote the “green economy” at a global level, integrating environmental, social and economic aspects such as poverty alleviation. International environmental agreements can provide the stimulus for a worldwide transition to a green economy. Multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) represent mechanisms whereby the global environmental challenge of the transition to a Green Economy can be tackled within a legal and institutional framework. The UNEP Green Economy Report has highlighted the notable successes with MEAs, not only the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), but also the highly successful Montreal Protocol on the Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, which led to the development of an entire industry focused on the replacement and phase out of ozone-depleting substances. At a global level, the renewal of a post-Kyoto framework for carbon will be the single most significant factor in determining the speed and scale of the transition to a green economy. It is also crucial that the European Union is at the forefront of global and regional efforts to improve food and nutrition security including, the UN High Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis and its prioritised plan of action for addressing the global food crisis.

The cross-cutting framework as suggested in this paper can provide a systematic basis for policy coherence within the EU across the various sectors. This structured approach will provide clarity in policy making, help identify gaps in legislation and its implementation and ensure greater efficiency in the way the Unions corpus of policy is developed and delivered. Post Lisbon, this big picture approach can offer opportunities in the way in which the EU manages its external dimension and the next EAP can provide the platform for advancing environmental, green economy, climate change, biodiversity, food and nutrition security, poverty elimination and other key priorities in the international arena. The EAP could develop measures that would improve coherence between EU and international partners in relation to policy financing, technology transfer and dialogue with third countries, particularly the less developed nations. There is a need to align policies across sectors with the Millennium Development Goals. The eight goals are the world’s quantified targets for addressing extreme poverty by 2015. All UN members have committed to these targets. The EU has been successful in forging a lead role in advancing environmental improvements on a global stage. A balance has to be achieved in maintaining this role while at the same time ensuring that partner countries and regions can also move along a progressive path taking account of their capacities. There is also a need to be ever conscious of the impacts of the Union’s own policies in the external domain.

  19

Rio +20 will provide an immediate opportunity for the Union to assert its values and objectives, and willingness to engage and lead international action on the environment in a coherent approach, based on partnership, sharing of best practice and experiences between countries in a global context. Post Rio, the EAP can identify measures and policies that will further its role in the international environmental domain and look at ways it can improve outreach with the main international groupings, working closely with the European External Action Service (EEAS).

7. Communication

The 7th programme needs a unifying theme to facilitate communication and understanding, a key weakness of the 6th programme. A strong narrative would help to build a 7th programme more distinctive than the 6th. Communications programmes within the Environment area are often sectorally targeted, e.g. climate change, command and control sectors such as waste management. The ‘bridging’ role suggested for the 7th EAP presents and opportunity to focus on some crosscutting, big picture areas which can involve greater engagement with EU citizens. It is of paramount importance that the 7th EAP represents an Action Plan that is relevant to and engages all stakeholders within the EU. A renewed effort at drawing up a coherent EU message aimed at altering the current unsustainable patterns of consumption seems crucial in advancing the EU SDS and Europe 2020 agendas. This should be accompanied by social research on consumer behaviour and how it is linked to environmental issues. In the process there will be enhanced benefits for the EU’s own profile at a critical time in the history of the European Union. This needs to be complemented by an education programme. Providing a legislative underpinning for initiatives already adopted will in itself represent a strong message to all stakeholders. The programme should look to build prominence and understanding of environmental measures and initiatives among the population at large, and address any remaining information gaps. The EAP is ideally placed to fulfil this role but it is a process that will require adequate funding in order to be successful.

8. Timeframe

The Co-decision process for the adoption of the 7EAP will require time, so an end date of 2020 for the programme could be too short. 2020 could be an interim review / delivery date with the 7th programme coming to an end later between 2020 and 2030. Europe 2020 targets would be part of this process.

________________

  20

Annex

Office of Environmental Enforcement (OEE)

In addition to implementing and enforcing environmental legislation, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Enforcement also deals with members of the public who have exhausted all other avenues of complaint. Its main functions are to:

enforce the Integrated Pollution Control (IPC), Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) and waste licences that the EPA issues,

prosecute or assist in the prosecution of significant breaches of environmental protection legislation, and

monitor and report on how local authorities perform in their environmental protection functions, and help them to improve their performance.

The OEE works with local authorities and other regulators to ensure efficient use of resources and coherent enforcement of environmental law, and has the following overarching objectives:

to improve overall compliance with environmental protection legislation in Ireland, to raise awareness about the importance of enforcement of environmental protection

legislation in Ireland, to enhance Ireland’s reputation as a country with a clean and good quality

environment, to ensure that licences issued by the EPA are fully complied with, to ensure that local authorities perform their statutory functions in relation to

environmental protection, to take appropriate enforcement action in a coherent, consistent, objective and timely

manner, to promote the implementation of the polluter pays principle, and to actively

communicate its enforcement actions to all stakeholders including the general public.

Underlying the enforcement policy of the OEE are the principles of;

proportionality in the application of environmental law and in securing compliance, ensuring that the enforcement action taken is balanced with the risk posed to the environment and the costs of remedial works required;

consistency of approach in its response to pollution and other incidents, in its use of powers and in decisions on whether to prosecute;

transparency about how the OEE operates, and maintaining public confidence in the OEE's ability to regulate, and maintaining appropriate and publicly accessible monitoring records and reports etc.;

targeting of enforcement action by focusing on activities that cause the greatest environmental damage, pose the greatest environmental threats or undermine the public’s confidence in implementation of environmental legislation; and

implementation of the polluter pays principle.

  21

The OEE is committed to establishing an enforcement network within Ireland, involving the various public bodies with enforcement responsibilities. This network’s role is to enhance the effectiveness of all participants by sharing information and adopting a coordinated approach to environmental enforcement. Where the OEE and other enforcement bodies have the power to prosecute, the OEE liaises with those bodies to facilitate effective co-ordination and to avoid inconsistencies. In addition, the OEE participates in initiatives such as IMPEL, the European Union’s informal network of environmental enforcement bodies, aimed at sharing experience and developing guidance for best practice in environmental regulation.